Jesus was not taught by man

JESUS WAS NOT TAUGHT BY MAN
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
John 7:14-1614Notuntil halfway through the festival
did Jesus go up to the temple courts and begin to
teach. 15The Jews there were amazed and asked,
"How did this man get such learning without having
been taught?" 16Jesusanswered, "My teaching is not
my own. It comes from the one who sent me.
New Living Translation
The people were surprised when they heard him. “How does he know so much
when he hasn’t been trained?” they asked.
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES
"where Is He?"
John 7:11
B. Thomas
This question may indicate different thoughts and sentiments with regardto
Jesus as askedby different persons. It may be lookedupon -

I. AS THE QUESTION OF GENERALINTEREST.There is no doubt that
Jesus was the most interesting person of that age. His mighty works and his
wonderful teaching had excitedthe interest of the generalpublic, and had
stirred societyto its utmost depth. How many persons there were concerning
whom no question was asked!They might come and go almost unnoticed. But
not so Jesus. The generalquestionwith regard to him was, "Where is he?"
His movements were keenlywatched, and his presence or absence was keenly
noticed.
II. AS THE QUESTION OF WONDER.Although he was not at the last
Passover, still he was in the habit of attending the national feasts at
Jerusalem;and this being one of the chief, and probably rumours had reached
the city of his intention to be present and being now late, wonder would
naturally express itself by the question, "Where is he?"
III. AS THE QUESTION OF CURIOSITY. There was a large class to whom
Jesus was only a curiosity. In them he excitedno other sentiment. They stood
in the rear, watching with avidity the actions of those in front. They had
neither love nor hatred, but still were busy and interestedin the strange
phenomenon of his life, and perhaps no sentiment with regard to him would
ask the question more often and flippantly, "Where is he?"
IV. AS THE QUESTION OF DOUBT. Doubt with regardto Jesus atthis time
was very prevalent. The multitude who representedthe national idea of the
Messiahwere doubtful of him. Many of them had recently left him, and had
apparently given up the hope of his consenting to be crownedthe temporal
King of the Jews. Stillmany of them even were doubtful as to this, and the
disciples were not quite free from doubt on this matter. They still clung to the
hope, but his absence from the feast, from such a public gathering and an
advantageous occasion, wouldmake the most sanguine doubtful, and they
would impatiently ask, "Where is he?"
V. AS THE QUESTION OF HATRED. No feeling could be more present in
the question than this, especiallywhen we considerthat it was askedby the
Jews;for the dominant party were bitter, confirmed, and almost unanimous
in their hatred to him and his ministry. And in the question as coming from

them there was scarcelya spark of any other feeling but confirmed and
seething hatred. They were in a regionfar below that of curiosity and doubt;
they were in that of hatred and bloodshed.
VI. AS THE QUESTION OF SINCERE AFFECTION. Thosewho
entertained this feeling were in a small minority, still it is not too much to
think that in that vast and generallyantagonistic crowdthere was many a one
who would re-echo the question even from the lips of malice and hatred, and
send it forth filled with gratitude and love. "Where is he?" - he who healed
my sonor my daughter, he who is kind and so full of grace and truth? We
know of one, at least, among the members of the JewishSanhedrin who would
ask it as a question of love - Nicodemus. Genuine love and faith were not quite
unrepresented in the inquiries concerning Jesus atthe FeastofTabernacles.
CONCLUSIONS.
1. The wonderful power of language as the instrument of thought and
sentiments. The same words may conveydifferent feelings. Murder and love
may travel in the same vehicle. "Where is he?"
2. People in all ages make inquiries concerning Jesus Christ from different
motives and with different intentions. Their language may be almostthe same
- "Where is he?" but the motive's and intentions are different and various.
3. It is of paramount importance with what motives and intentions we inquire
for Christ. No motive nor intention is worthy of him but faith and the
salvationof the soul.
4. Blessedare those who ask with living faith," Where is he?" He will soon
appear and satisfy all their wants. -B.T.
Biblical Illustrator
Now about the midst of the feastJesus wentup into the Temple and taught.
John 7:14-16

Christ as a teacher
W. R. Attwood.
Whatevertheory men hold respecting Christ's person and work, all regard
Him as an unparalleled teacher. Fourthings distinguish Him from all His
competitors.
I. HE POPULARIZED RELIGION. The common people heard Him gladly.
What audiences He drew I When He began to teachreligion had lostits hold
on the world. People were weariedof the parodies which went by the name.
Christ taught that it was not a doctrine but a life; not a speculation, but a
love; not conversionto a sect, but change of heart; and that teaching was at
once a revelation and a revolution. What, in despair, the people had come to
regard as dreary and repulsive, He made them feel was bright and beautiful,
and so popularized religion.
II. HE REVOLUTIONIZED THINKING. It is more important to make men
think aright than to teachthem what is right. You cannot ensure their
believing or obeying your instruction, but if you can start them in
conscientious searchofwhat is good, you do them enduring service. Christ did
both, but pre-eminently He liberated the intellect and rationalized its
operations. There was plenty of colossalthinking before Christ, but it was
simply constructive speculationor destructive criticism. And when He came,
it was not as another philosopher, to build another stageysystem. Men
complain that His thinking is defective because fragmentary; but this is its
strength. When men askedfor His principles He threw in a simple sentence,
"You must be born again," "Love your neighbour," some terse, pregnant
phrase which has become the current mental coinof the leading people of the
earth. Any other teacherwould have said, "Come into my class-roomand
take my lectures; the curriculum is sevenyears." Christ could settle it in seven
minutes.
1. He initiated spontaneous judgment. Insteadof sending people to books, He
sent them to their own hearts.

2. He introduced liberty of conscience.Whoeverheard of men demanding
freedom to think and judge for themselves before He came? And yet that
freedom has been a ruling maxim of societysince. Out of these two changes
have grown infinite results, and are quite sufficient to prove that He
revolutionized thinking.
III. HE REORGANIZED SOCIETY. The liberty He vindicated involved
equality and fraternity. It is fashionable to denounce Socialism, and when it
becomes Nihilism or Communism it is a senseless burlesque. He meant that
men should serve eachother, and not that the lazy should share with the
diligent; that as there was a common Fatherhoodin Godthere must be a
common brotherhood among men. So He reconstructedsocietyonthe basis of
mutual respectand reciprocallove. This reconstructionmeant —
1. That He recruited our hopes. He came to a wearyworld. Then a few proud,
petrified men ruled, and the heart of the crowd was crushedand despairing.
The Beatitudes fell on their sadhearts like rain on a drooping flower, and they
lookedup and felt that a new chance was open to them all. So it is wherever
Christ comes now.
2. That He verified our aspirations. Mensighed for another world, but they
scarcelyknew whetheror not to look for it. He came and said, "If it were not
so I would have told you; I go to prepare a place for you."
IV. HE DIGNIFIED PASSION. Passion, whethergoodor bad, is the greatest
powerin the world. When He came it was everywhere disordered. He purified
and releasedand transformed it into affection. Up to that time men knew not
exactly what to make of the emotions implied by such words as sorrow, pain,
suffering. He gave them at once a status and vindicated their place in the
economyof God. The tendency previously was to stifle pathos, and sneerat
sentiment. He sanctifiedand employed them for the noblest ends.
(W. R. Attwood.)
CharacteristicsofChrist's teaching

Prof. Luthardt.
Wherein did its peculiar power consist? The secretofits influence lies in no
peculiar excellence ofdiction. Jesus was no poet, orator, or philosopher. It is
not the charm of poetry that attracts us, not the ingenious application which
surprises, not flights of eloquence which carry us away, not bold speculation
which evokes our astonishment. No one could speak with more simplicity than
Jesus, whetheron the Mount, in the parables, or in the high priestly prayer.
But this is the very reasonof His influence, that He utters the greatestand
most sublime truths in the present words, so that, as Pascalsays, one might
almost think He was Himself unconscious whattruths He was propounding,
only He expressedthem with much clearness, certainty, and conviction, that
we see how well He knew what He was saying. We cannotfail to see that the
world of eternaltruth is His home, and that His thoughts have constant
intercourse therewith. He speaks ofGod and of His relation to Him, of the
super- mundane world of spirits, of the future world and the future life of
man; of the kingdom of God upon earth, of its nature and history; of the
highest moral truths, and of the supreme obligations of man; in short, of all
the greatestproblems and deepestenigmas of life — as simply and plainly,
with such an absence ofmental excitement, without expatiating upon His
peculiar knowledge, andeven without that dwelling upon details so usual with
those who have anything new to impart, as though all were quite natural and
self-evident. We see that the sublimest truths are His nature. He is not merely
a teacherof truth, but is Himself its source. He cansay "I am the Truth." And
the feeling with which we listen to His words is, that we are listening to the
voice of truth itself. Hence the power which these have at all times exercised
over the minds of men.
(Prof. Luthardt.)
Though criticisedand ridiculed we must go on with our work
J. Preston.

Suppose a geometricianshould be drawing lines and figures, and there should
come in some silly, ignorant fellow, who, seeing him, should laugh at him,
would the artist, think you, leave off his employment because ofhis derision?
Surely not; for he knows that he laughs at him out of his ignorance, as not
knowing his art and the grounds thereof.
(J. Preston.)
And the Jews marvelled, saying, How knoweththis man letters, never having
learned
The originality of Christ as a teacher
P. Schaff, D. D., H. Bushnell, D. D.
We have a greatmany men who are original in the sense of being originators,
within a certainboundary of educatedthought. But the originality of Christ is
uneducated. That He draws nothing from the stores of learning can be seenat
a glance. Indeed, there is nothing in Him that belongs to His age or country —
no one opinion, taste, or prejudice. The attempts that have been made to show
that He borrowed His sentiments from the Persians and the Easternforms of
religion, or that He had been intimate with the Essence andborrowed from
them, or that He must have been acquaintedwith the schools andreligions of
Egypt, deriving His doctrine from them — all attempts of the kind have so
palpably failed, as not even to require a deliberate answer. If He is simply a
man, as we hear, then He is most certainly a new and singular kind of man,
never before heard of, as greata miracle as if He were not a man. Whatever
He advances is from Himself. Shakespeare, e.g.,probably the most creative
and original spirit the world has ever produced, and a self-made man, is yet
tinged in all His works with human learning. He is the high-priest, we
sometimes hear, of human nature. But Christ, understanding human nature
so as to address it more skilfully than he, never draws from its historic
treasures. Neitherdoes He teachby human methods. He does not speculate
about God like a schoolprofessor. He does not build up a frame of evidence
from below by some constructive process, suchas the philosophers delight in;

but He simply speaks ofGodand spiritual things as one who has come out
from Him to tell us what He knows. At the same time He never reveals the
infirmity so commonly shown by human teachers. Whenthey veer a little
from their point or turn their doctrine off by shades of variation to catchthe
assentof multitudes, He never conforms to an expectationeven of His friends.
Again, Christ was of no schoolor party, and never went to any extreme,
words could never turn Him to a one-sided view of anything. This
distinguishes Him from every other known teacher. He never pushes Himself
to any extremity. He is never a radical, never a conservative. And further,
while advancing doctrines so far transcending all the deductions of
philosophy, and opening mysteries that defy all human powers ofexplication,
He is yet able to set His teachings in a form of simplicity that accommodates
all classesofminds. No one of the greatwriters of antiquity had even
propounded, as yet, a doctrine of virtue which the multitude could
understand. But Jesus tells them directly, in a manner level to their
understandings, what they must do and be to inherit eternal life, and their
inmost convictions answerto His words.
(H. Bushnell, D. D.)
The teaching of Christ the marvel of unbelief
W. H. Van Doren, D. D.
The wisdom of Christ's teaching has proved a hard problem to infidels for
1,800 years. To this day it stands above the efforts of the mightiest and most
trained minds.
(W. H. Van Doren, D. D.)
And Jesus answeredthem and said, My doctrine is not Mine, but His that sent
Me
The teaching of Christ

I. ITS CONTENTS.
1. Concerning God.
(1)His nature — spirit (John 4:24).
(2)His character— love (John 3:16).
(3)His purpose — salvation(John 3:17).
(4)His requirement — faith (John 6:29).
2. Concerning Himself,
(1)His heavenly origin — from above (John 6:38).
(2)This higher being — the Son of the Father (John 6:17).
(3)His Divine commission— sent by God (John 5:37).
(4)His gracious errand — to give life to the world (John 5:21; John 6:51).
(5)His future glory — to raise the dead (John 5:28).
3. Concerning man —
(1)Apart from Him, dead (John 5:24) and perishing (John 3:16).
(2)In Him possessedof eternallife.
4. Concerning salvation —
(1)Its substance — eternal life (John 5:24).
(2)Its condition — hearing His word (John 5:24), believing in God (John
5:24), coming to Him (John 5:40).
II. ITS DIVINITY. Three sources possible forChrist's teaching.
1. Others. He might have acquired it by education. But this Christ's
contemporaries negatived. He had never studied at a rabbinical school.(ver.
15).

2. Himself. He might have evolved it from His own religious consciousness.
But this Christ here repudiates.
3. God. This He expresslyclaimed, and that not merely as prophets had
receivedDivine communications, but in a waythat was unique (John 5:19, 20;
John 8:28; John 12:49), as one who had been in eternity with God (John
1:1,18;3:11).
III. ITS CREDENTIALS.
1. Its self-verifying character:such as would produce in the mind of every
sincere personwho desired to do the Divine will a clearconviction of its
divinity (ver. 17).
2. Its God-glorifying aim. Had it been human it would have followedthe law
of all such developments;its Publisher would have had a tendency to glorify
Himself in its propagation. The entire absence ofthis in Christ's case was a
phenomenon to which He invited observation. The complete.absorptionof the
messengerandthe messagein the Divine glory was proof that both belonged
to a different than human category.
3. Its sinless bearer. This follows from the preceding. A messengerwhose
devotion to God was perfect as Christ's was could not be other than sinless.
But if the messengerwere sinless there could be no unveracity in His message
or in what He said concerning it. Lessons:
1. The marvellous in Christianity.
2. The insight of obedience.
3. The danger of high intellectual endowments.
4. The connectionbetweentruth and righteousness.
5. The sinlessness ofJesus anargument for His divinity.
(T. Whitelaw, D. D.)

COMMENTARIES
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(15) How knoweththis man letters?—Theirspirit is seenin that at which they
marvel. It is not the substance of His teaching that excites their attention, but
the factthat He who has never been technically trained as a Rabbi is
acquainted with the literature of the schools.(See Acts 26:24, “much
learning,” where “learning” represents the word here rendered “letters.”)He
is to them as a layman and unlearned (comp. Note on Acts 4:13), not knownin
the circles ofthe professionalexpounders—a demagogue, who deceivedthe
multitude; and they hear Him speaking with a learning and wisdom that
excites their wonder, and unlocking mysteries of which they thought that they
only possessedthe key.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
7:14-24 Every faithful minister may humbly adopt Christ's words. His
doctrine is not his own finding out, but is from God's word, through the
teaching of his Spirit. And amidst the disputes which disturb the world, if any
man, of any nation, seeksto do the will of God, he shall know whether the
doctrine is of God, or whether men speak of themselves. Only those who hate
the truth shall be given up to errors which will be fatal. Surely it was as
agreeable to the design of the sabbath to restore health to the afflicted, as to
administer an outward rite. Jesus told them to decide on his conduct
according to the spiritual import of the Divine law. We must not judge
concerning any by their outward appearance, but by their worth, and by the
gifts and gracesofGod's Spirit in them.
Barnes'Notes on the Bible
Knoweth this man letters - The Jewishletters or science consistedin the
knowledge oftheir Scriptures and traditions. Jesus exhibited in his discourses

such a profound acquaintance with the Old Testamentas to excite their
amazement and admiration.
Having never learned - The Jews taughttheir law and tradition in celebrated
schools. As Jesus had not been instructed in those schools, they were amazed
at his learning. What early human teaching the Saviour had we have no
means of ascertaining, further than that it was customary for the Jews to
teachtheir children to read the Scriptures. 2 Timothy 3:15; "from a child
thou (Timothy) hastknown the holy scriptures."
Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
15. How knoweth… letters—learning (Ac 26:24).
having never learned—atany rabbinical school, as Paul under Gamaliel.
These rulers knew well enough that He had not studied under any human
teacher—animportant admissionagainstancient and modern attempts to
trace our Lord's wisdom to human sources [Meyer]. Probably His teaching on
this occasionwas expository, manifesting that unrivalled faculty and depth
which in the Sermon on the Mount had excited the astonishmentof all.
Matthew Poole's Commentary
Having never sat as a constantdisciple at the feetof any of the Jewishdoctors,
nor been educatedin their schools ofthe prophets, they wonderhow he should
come by such knowledge ofthe law of God, as he discoveredin his discourses;
wherein he made it appear, that he did not only know the letter of the law, but
the more mysterious sense ofit, the greatmysteries of the kingdom of God.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
And the Jews marvelled,.... Bothat the matter, and manner of his doctrine; it
was such, as never man spake;his words were so gracious, andthere were
such truth and evidence in them, and they were delivered with such power
and authority, that they were astonishedat them:
saying, how knoweththis man letters? or "the Scriptures", as the Arabic and
Persic versions render it; which are called "holy letters", 2 Timothy 3:15;
according to which, the sense is, that they were surprised at his knowledge of

the Scriptures, that he should be conversantwith them, and be able to
interpret them, and give the sense and meaning of them, in so full and cleara
manner, as he did: or else the sense is, how came this man to be such a learned
man? whence has he this wisdom, and all this learning which he shows? as in
Matthew 13:54. So a learnedman is in Isaiah29:11, said to be one that , ,
"knows letters", as the Septuagint there translate the Hebrew text; but how
Christ should know them, or be a learned man,
having never learned, was surprising to them: that is, he had not had a liberal
education, but was brought up to a trade; he was not trained up at the feet of
any of their Rabbins, in any of their universities, or schools oflearning; and in
which they were certainly right. Modern Jews pretend to say he had a master,
whom they sometimes call Elchanan (o), but most commonly they make him
to be R. Joshua ben Perachiah(p): with whom they say, he fled into
Alexandria in Egypt, for fear of Jannaithe king: and one of their writers (q),
on this account, charges the evangelistwith a falsehood:but who are we to
believe, the Jews who lived at the same time with Jesus, andknew his
educationand manner of life, or those that have lived ages since?
(o) Toldos Jesu, p. 5. (p) Juchasin, fol. 159. 1. Ganz TzemachDavid, par. 1,
fol. 21. 1. & 24. (q) R. Isaac Chizzuk Emuna, par. 2. c. 46. p. 435.
Geneva Study Bible
And the Jews marvelled, saying, How knoweththis man letters, having never
learned?
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Meyer's NT Commentary
John 7:15. Οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι]as in John 7:11; John 7:18. The teaching of Jesus
produces a feeling of astonishment even in the hierarchy; but how? Not
through the powerof His truth, but because He is learned without having
studied. And with a question upon this point, they engage in conversationwith
Him, without touching upon what He had taught. The admission, indeed,
which is containedin their question, and that, too, face to face with the people,
is only to be explained from the realimpression produced upon their learned

conceit, so that they ask not in the spirit of shrewd calculation, but from
actualamazement.
γράμματα]notthe O. T. Scriptures (Luther, Grotius, and many), but literas,
(theological)knowledge, which, however, consistedin scriptural erudition.
Jesus had doubtless exhibited this knowledge in His discourse by His
interpretations of Scripture. Comp. Acts 26:24; Plato, Apol. p. 26 D: οἴει
αὐτοὺς ἀπείρους γραμμάτωνεἶναι, and the citations in Wetstein. Upon
διδάσκεινγράμματα,usedof teachers, see Dissen, adDem. de cor. p. 299.
μὴ μεμαθ.]though he has not learned them (Buttmann, N. T. Gk. p. 301 [E. T.
p. 350 f.]), perhaps in a Rabbinical schoolas Paul did from Gamaliel. The
members of the Sanhedrim do not thus speak in conformity with the author’s
representationof the Logos (Scholten);they know, doubtless, from
information obtained concerning the course ofHis life, that Jesus had not
studied; He was reckonedby them among the ἀγράμματοι and ἰδιῶται, Acts
4:13. This tells powerfully againstall attempts, ancient and modern, to trace
back the wisdom of Jesus to some schoolof human culture. Well says Bengel:
“non usus erat schola;characterMessiae.”This autodidactic characterdoes
not necessarilyexclude the supposition that during His childhood and youth
He made use of the ordinary popular, and in particular of the synagogal
instruction (Luke 2:45). Comp. Schleiermacher, L. J. p. 120 f., and in
particular Keim, Gesch. J. I. p. 427 ff.
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
15. And the Jews marvelled]According to the best MSS., The Jews therefore
marvelled. ‘Therefore’should also be inserted in John 7:16; Jesus therefore
answeredthem. S. John’s extreme fondness for this particle in narrative is
worth keeping in view.

How knoweththis man letters] Or, this fellow, as in John 6:42. Their question
is so eminently characteristic,that it is very unlikely that a Greek writer of the
secondcentury would have been able to invent it for them; he would probably
have made them too cautious to commit themselves to any expressionof
astonishment about Him. The substance of His doctrine excites no emotion in
them, but they are astounded that He should possess learning without having
got it according to ordinary routine. He had never attended the schools ofthe
Rabbis, and yet His interpretations of Scripture sheweda large amount of
biblical and other knowledge. Thatdoes excite them. In Acts 26:24, ‘much
learning doth make thee mad,’ the word there translated‘learning’ is the
same as the one here translated ‘letters.’
Bengel's Gnomen
John 7:15. Γράμματα,letters)i.e. [literary] studies. ForHe was teaching, John
7:14.—μὴ μεμαθηκώς, withouthaving learned) He had had no occasionfora
school. It was the very characteristicofthe Messiah.[180]
[180]To teachand preach, without human “learning,” as the anointed
Prophet—E. and T.
Pulpit Commentary
Verse 15. - The Jews therefore marvelled, saying, etc. "The Jews,"as
elsewhere,meanthe ruling and learned class, the men of power and weightin
the metropolis, who must have heard his teaching. The immediate effectof the
appearance and words was greatastonishment. In spite of themselves, they
are moved by the command he manifested over all the springs of thought and
feeling. The point of their astonishment is, not that he is wise and true, but
that he could teach without having been taught in their schools. How doth this
man know letters? (not the "Holy Scriptures," ἱερα γράμματα, norπάσας
γραφάς, but simply γράμματα, literature, such as we teachit; cf. Acts 26:24).
He can interpret our oracles;he is acquainted with the methods of teaching,
though he has not learned - has never satin any of our schools. Saulof Tarsus
was brought up at the feet of Gomaliel. And ordinarily a man was compelled

to undergo a lengthened noviciate in the schools before he was allowedto
assume the office of a teacher. The inherited wisdom of the past is in the great
majority of cases the basis of the most conspicuous teaching of the most
original and unique of the greatsages.The "Jews"were sufficiently
acquainted with the origin and training of Jesus to be astonishedat his
knowledge ofthe interpretations of Scripture and other wisdom. "This tells
powerfully againstall attempts, ancient and modern, to trace back the wisdom
of Jesus to some schoolofhuman culture" (Meyer). The attempts to establish
a connectionbetweenthe teaching of Christ and the hidden wisdom of the
Zendavesta, or esoteric utterances ofBuddha, or even the traditionary
teaching of the Essenes, orthe Platonizing schools ofAlexandria or Ephesus,
have failed. The mystery of his training as a man in the village of Nazareth is
one of the evidences given to the world that there was an unknown element in
his consciousness. He had not even the advantage of the schools ofHillel or
Gamaliel. His ownwondrous soul, by much pondering on the genuine
significance ofthe Scriptures, is the only explanation to which even his
enemies can appeal. Jesus knew the meaning, heard the murmuring of their
surprise on this head, and so we read -
PRECEPTAUSTIN RESOURCES
WILLIAM BARCLAY
The criticism was that Jesus was quite uneducated. It is exactlythe same
accusationthat was made againstPeterand John when they stood before the
Sanhedrin (Acts 4:13). Jesus had been to no rabbinic school. It was the
practice that only the disciple of an accreditedteacherwas entitled to expound

scripture, and to talk about the law. No Rabbi ever made a statement on his
own authority. He always began: "There is a teaching that..." He then went on
to cite quotations and authorities for every statementhe made. And here was
this Galilaeancarpenter, a man with no training whatever, daring to quote
and to expound Moses to them.
Jesus couldvery well have walkedstraight into a trap here. He might have
said: "I need no teacher;I am self-taught; I got my teaching and my wisdom
from no one but myself." But, instead, he saidin effect:"You ask who was my
teacher? You ask what authority I produce for my exposition of scripture?
My authority is God" Jesus claimed to be God-taught. It is in fact a claim he
makes againand again. "I have not spokenon my own authority. The Father
who sent me has himself given me commandment what to sayand what to
speak" (John12:49). "The words that I sayto you I do not speak on my own
authority" (John 14:10).
CALVIN
Verse 15
15.And the Jews wonderedThose who think that Christ was receivedin such
a manner as to be esteemedand honored are mistaken; for the wonder or
astonishment of the Jews is of such a nature, that they seek occasionfrom it to
despise him. For such is the ingratitude of men that, in judging of the works of
God, they always seek deliberatelyan occasionoffalling into error. If God
acts by the usual means and in the ordinary way, those means which are
visible to the eyes are — as it were — veils which hinder us from perceiving
the Divine hand; and therefore we discern nothing in them but what is
human. But if an unwonted power of God shines above the order of nature
and the means generallyknown, we are stunned; and what ought to have

deeply affectedall our sensespassesawayas a dream. For such is our pride,
that we take no interestin any thing of which we do not know the reason.
How doth this man know letters? It was an astonishing proof of the power and
grace ofGod, that Christ, who had not been taught by any master, was yet
eminently distinguished by his knowledge ofthe Scriptures;and that he, who
had never been a scholar, should be a most excellentteacherand instructor.
But for this very reasonthe Jews despise the grace of God, because it exceeds
their capacity. Admonished by their example, therefore, let us learn to
exercise deeperreverence forGod than we are wont to do in the consideration
of his works.
Verse 16
16.Mydoctrine is not mine. Christ shows that this circumstance, which was an
offense to the Jews, was rathera ladder by which they ought to have risen
higher to perceive the glory of God; as if he had said, “When you see a teacher
not trained in the schoolof men, know that I have been taught by God.” For
the reasonwhy the Heavenly Father determined that his Son should go out of
a mechanic’s workshop, rather than from the schools ofthe scribes, was, that
the origin of the Gospelmight be more manifest, that none might think that it
had been fabricatedon the earth, or imagine that any human being was the
author of it. Thus also Christ chose ignorantand uneducated men to be his
apostles, andpermitted them to remain three years in gross ignorance,that,
having instructed them in a single instant, he might bring them forward as
new men, and even as angels who had just come down from heaven.
But that of him who sent me. Meanwhile, Christ shows whence we ought to
derive the authority of spiritual doctrine, from Godalone. And when he
asserts thatthe doctrine of his Fatheris not his, he looks to the capacityof the
hearers, who had no higher opinion of him than that he was a man. By way of
concession, therefore, he allows himself to be reckoneddifferent from his

Father, but so as to bring forward nothing but what the Father had enjoined.
The amount of what is stated is, that what he teaches in the name of his Father
is not a doctrine of men, and did not proceedfrom men, so as to be capable of
being despisedwith impunity. We see by what method he procures authority
for his doctrine. It is by referring it to God as its Author. We see also onwhat
ground, and for what reason, he demands that he shall be heard. It is, because
the Fathersent him to teach. Both of these things ought to be possessedby
every man who takes upon himself the office of a teacher, and wishes that he
should be believed.
STEVEN COLE
Jesus is true and righteous because He taught God’s truth (7:14-17).
Jesus did not go up to the feastwith His brothers to make a grand entrance,
because the people wanted to make Him a political king. But sometime in the
midst of the feast, He went into the temple and beganto teach. A crowd
quickly gatheredaround Him. Probably, the charge in 7:15 is coming from
the Jewishleaders and addressedto the people listening to Jesus (R. C. H.
Lenski, The Interpretation of John’s Gospel[Augsburg Publishing House], p.
541). Their “astonishment” did not mean that they were favorably impressed
by Jesus’teaching. Rather, they were amazed at His audacity to take on the
role of a religious teacherin the temple when He lackedthe proper credentials
from the Jewishauthorities. They were trying to discredit Jesus in front of the
crowdby alleging that “this man” (a derogatoryterm) purports to be learned,
but He has never been educatedin our schools. Johnis againusing irony:
Here are these proud Jewishleaders calling the eternalWord who createdthe
world (1:1-3) an uneducated fellow (Morris, p. 405)!

Jesus responds to their challenge by asserting (7:16), “My teaching is not
Mine, but His who sent Me.” Jesus is saying, “I don’t need your educationand
humanly-conferred degrees becauseI am speaking truth directly from the
living and true God who sent Me here to teach.” In spiritual matters, the ideas
of philosophers and religious teachers are mere speculation. Such thinkers
have not come from God and they can only guess atwhat He is like. But since
Jesus came from God, He could authoritatively teachus about God, man, sin,
and how we can have eternallife.
I’ll saymore on 7:17 in a moment, but for now note what Jesus says about
how a person canknow whether His teaching originated with Him or with
God: “If anyone is willing to do His will, he will know of the teaching, whether
it is of God or whether I speak from Myself.” When you’re witnessing to an
unbeliever about Christ, you should challenge him to read the gospels, paying
attention to the teaching of Jesus. But many have read and even studied the
gospels and come awayas unbelievers. The keyis to tell the unbeliever, “As
you read, tell God that if He will show you that Jesus is true, you will be
willing to obey Him.” If the personcomes to the gospels as a scoffer, he will
read them and go awaya scoffer. If he comes with a willing heart to obey
God’s will, then God will show him the truth about Jesus.
C. Jesus is true and righteous because He soughtGod’s glory (7:18).
Jesus continues (7:18): “He who speaks from himself seeks his own glory; but
He who is seeking the glory of the One who sentHim, He is true, and there is
no unrighteousness in Him.” When Jesus came to this earth, He voluntarily
laid aside the glory that He had sharedwith the Fatherfrom all eternity and
took on the form of a slave, becoming obedient even to death on the cross
(Phil. 2:6-8). He is now risen, ascended, and restoredto His rightful full glory
at the Father’s right hand (John 17:5). He will come againin power and glory
to judge the living and the dead.
But when He was on earth, Jesus’aim was to glorify the Father. He states that
this, not rabbinic credentials from the accreditedschools, is the test of a true
teacher. That is true of all who purport to teachGod’s truth: If a man glories
in his academic degreesand seeksto exalt himself, he is not a true teacherof

God’s truth. When you have any idea of the righteousness andmajesty of
God, you’ll be painfully aware ofyour own inadequacy and unworthiness.
You’ll cry out (Ps. 115:1), “Notto us, O Lord, not to us, but to Your name
give glory because ofyour lovingkindness, because ofYour truth.”
Thus Jesus is true and righteous because He was sent here by God, He taught
God’s truth, and He soughtGod’s glory. Finally,
W HALL HARRIS III
Verses 15-18 dealwith the question of authority. Jesus does notteach from his
own authority but speaks onbehalf of the One who sent him. If Jesus had
claimed to be his own authority, or said he did not need a teacher, he would
have been discredited. Rabbis cited authorities for all significant statements.
Likewise, Jesuscites his ownauthority: the Fatherwho sent him.
There is irony here too:when the Jewishleaders come face to face with the
Word become flesh—the pre-existent Lovgo", creatorofthe universe and
divine Wisdom personified—theytreat him as an untaught, unlearned person
(verse 15)!
Our Lord’s Defense of Himself
John 7:14-24
Dr. S. Lewis Johnsoncomments on Jesus'first exchange in John's Gospelwith
the Jewishleaders in opposition to him.
SLJ Institute > Gospelof John > Our Lord’s Defense ofHimself

Listen Now
Audio Player
00:00
00:00
Use Up/Down Arrow keys to increase ordecrease volume.
Readthe Sermon
Transcript
[Audio begins]We’re turning to John chapter 7 and reading for the Scripture
reading verse 14 through verse 24. John chapter 7 verse 14 through verse 24.
In the messagelastweek, in which we began the 7th and 8th chapters of the
Gospelof John, reference was made to the fact first, that these two chapters
belong togetherand second, that they gather around the ministry of the Lord
which had to do with the feastof tabernacles.And we divided up the two
chapters very simply according to that, pointing out that in verse 2 of chapter
7 John writes, “Now the Jews feastoftabernacles was athand.” In other
words, that was a sectionthat had to do with things that transpired before the
feast. Then in verse 14 through verse 36 we have things that transpired during

the feast. Verse 14 begins now about the midst of the feast. And the final part
of chapter 7 and chapter 8, have to do with things that occurred on the last
day of the feast. Verse 37 says, “In the lastday that greatday of the feast
Jesus stoodand cried saying,” so we’re dealing then with a part of the Gospel
of John that has to do with things that transpired at the feastof tabernacles.
This division that we’re looking at now, from verse 14 through verse 36, is a
division that contains three themes. First of all, our Lord justifies his ministry,
that’s what we’ll look at this morning. Following that, he gives a declaration
of his origin. And finally, he discusses briefly his departure from this world.
So now let’s turn to verse 14 and we read verse 14 through verse 24 in which
our Lord provides us with a defense of himself and his ministry,
“Now about the midst of the feastJesus went up into the temple, and began to
teach. And the Jews marveled, saying, How knoweththis man letters, having
never learned? Jesus answeredthem, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but
his that sent me. If any man will do his will, (this by the way, more accurately
rendered is if any man wills to do his will) he shall know of the doctrine,
whether it be of God, or whether I speak ofmyself. He that speakethof
himself seekethhis own glory: but he that seekethhis glory that sent him, the
same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him. Did not Moses give you the
law, and yet none of you keepeththe law? Why go ye about to kill me? The
people answered”
Now this word in the Authorized Version translated“people” is a word that
really means multitude, and you can see from this that there are several
groups of people here. There are people, and then there is a multitude, there
are Jews, there are disciples. Now this group, the multitude, evidently are
those who also had come up to the feastof tabernacles from various parts of
the country, and consequentlythey did not know about the plotting of the
Jews againstourLord’s life. That accounts for their answerin verse 20, “The
people answeredand said, Thou hast a demon: who goethabout to kill thee?
Jesus answeredandsaid unto them, I have done one work, and ye all marvel.”
Now remember in chapter 5 we had an accountof the healing of the impotent
man when Jesus was in Jerusalem, and there it was saidthat he had
committed a sin because he had healed someone onthe Sabbath day. The man

had takenup his bed and had begun to walk and others had seenhim. It was
contrary to Sabbath tradition to carry one’s bed on the Sabbath day and so
consequentlyhe was regardedas having done something that had broken the
Law of Moses. OurLord refers back to that here,
“I have done one work, and ye all marvel. Mosestherefore gave unto you
circumcision; (not because it is of Moses,but of the fathers;) and ye on the
Sabbath day circumcise a man. If a man on the Sabbath day receive
circumcision, that the law of Moses shouldnot be broken; are ye angry at me,
because I have made a man every whit whole on the Sabbath day? (literally, a
whole man whole) Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous
judgment.”
A passagethat reminds us of the famous passagein 1 Samuel chapter 16 and
verse 7 when the Lord said unto Samuel as he was making selectionofa king,
“Look not on his countenance or on the height of his stature, because I have
refused him, for the Lord seeth not as man seeth for man lookethon the
outward appearance but the Lord lookethon the heart.” Judge not according
to appearance, but judge righteous judgment, Jesus said.
The subject for this morning is “Our Lord’s Defense ofHimself.” Except
among New Testamentscholars,there is very little question concerning the
divine claims of the Lord Jesus Christ. One reads the New Testament, notices
the things that are said by him, and comes very quickly to the conclusionthat
the Lord Jesus claimedto be very God of very God, as well as acknowledging
and claiming to be very man of very man. And yet at the same time, our Lord
had to defend himself constantly. There are many indications that Jesus made
divine claims for himself. True, he did not say, “I am God.” But then he said
things that are equally as strong, and in fact are much more vivid. He told
parables for example, about which there could be no question whatsoever.
For example, in the 12th chapter in the Gospelof Mark, this parable is also
recordedin the Gospelof Matthew, he tells the story of, “A certain man who
planted a vineyard, who seta hedge about it, who digged a place for the
winefat, who built a tower, who let it out to husbandmen, who went into a far
country” expecting that they would tend for his vineyard and that he would

obtain grapes in due season. Whenthe time came for the grapes to come he
sent to the husbandmen who were supposedto be caring for the vineyard a
servant in order that he might receive the benefits from his vineyard. They
took the servantand beat him and senthim awaywith nothing. He sent
another servant to them, “athim they caststones, they wounded him in the
head, they senthim back shamefully handled” so the Lord said. “And then he
sent another; and this one they killed. And man others; beating some and
killing some. Having yet therefore one son, his wellbeloved,” the ownerof the
vineyard “senthim also at last unto them, saying, They will reverence my son.
But those husbandmen said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us
kill him, and the inheritance shall be ours.” Now anyone listening to that
particular parable would gatherthat the Lord Jesus is claiming to be the one
beloved Son of the Father. And furthermore, that he claims to be the heir and
that all other men who were sent were simply slaves. He stands higher than
other men as a son does to a slave, and furthermore is an heir.
Later on in that same gospel, also recordedin the Gospelof Matthew, the
Lord Jesus in the context of the secondcoming makes the statement that as
far as the secondcoming is concernedhe does not know the precise time of the
day that the Lord shall come. He says, “Butof that day and that hour
knowethno man, no not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but
the Father.” Now if you examine those statements that he makes there very
carefully you will that it is a remarkable statementof the preeminence of the
Lord Jesus overall other men. He says, “Ofthat day and hour no man
knows.” Jesus is not a man “nor the angels” but the Son, not even the Son,
only the Father. So here we have a picture of something like a ladder; on the
lowerlevel, on the lower rung man, then angels, then the Son. Someone might
say, “But at leasthe makes himself subordinate to the Father.” Yes he does,
for a time, because he was the mediator. And being the mediator, he
relinquished the voluntary use of his divine attributes for a time, and did the
will of the Fatherin order to carry out the mediatorial work. But lestthere be
any question about whether the Son is equal to the Father, later on in that
same Matthean gospel, whenthe disciples are sent out, the Lord Jesus said
that they are to go into all the four corners of the earth and they are to baptize
men, after teaching them, in the name, singular, of the Father, of the Son, and

of the Holy Spirit. And so the Sonis greaterthan men. He is greaterthan
angels. And he makes it very plain that he stands upon the same plain as the
Father. In spite of this, men wonder about the Lord Jesus Christ’s claims for
himself. Sometimes modern scholarshipwill make the claim that Jesus never
claimed to be God. Well the facts are quite different.
In Matthew chapter11 and verse 27 the Lord Jesus said, “All things are
delivered unto me of my Father:and no man knoweththe Son, but the
Father; neither knowethany man the Father, save the Son, and he to
whomsoeverthe Son will reveal him.” This may be the most important
Christologicalpassagein the whole of the New Testament, and some of the
most amazing of our Lord’s sayings are found right here.
ProfessorKarl von Hauser, the German professorof church history at the
University of Yanna many years ago, and one of the ancestorsofDietrich
Bonhoeffer, once saidconcerning this text that it is a thunder bolt from the
Johannine blue. British scholars have said it’s a thunder bolt from the
Johannine sky. But notice what Jesus says. He said, “All things are delivered
unto to me of my Father. No man knows the Son, but the Father; nor does any
man know the Fatherexcept the Son, and he to whomsoeverthe Son will
revealhim.” In other words, the Lord Jesus makes the claim that he alone
truly knows the Father. And furthermore, he says that all men who know
something of the Father truly are indebted to him, because, “Noman knows
the Fatherexcept the Son, and he to whomsoeverthe Son wills to revealhim.”
In other words, you can never know the Father exceptit should be the direct
will of God the Son.
Now it’s amazing in the light of these magnificent sayings that Jesus makes of
himself, both directly and indirectly, that he had to defend himself constantly.
Downthrough the years, others taking the place of the Lord Jesus as disciples
of him, have had to defend the Lord Jesus Christ.
Now this is one of the defenses that the Lord makes of himself that we are to
look at this morning. I guess that if we were looking for some passagein the
Gospelof John in which we have an illustration of John 1:11, this would be
one of the passagesto which we turn. Remember in John chapter1 and verse

11 it states, “He came unto his own, and his own receivedhim not.” It was
preeminently fulfilled here. We don’t know the outline of our Lord’s teaching
that he gave in the city of Jerusalemat the feastof the tabernacles. We do
howeverknow its outcome, for later on in this same chapter, when men are
sent out after him, they report, “Neverman spake like this man.”
One of the things that has always interestedme through the years is Bible
teaching. And I’ve always been interested in Bible teachers, particularly those
of the past that I did not have an opportunity to hear. If I have ever through
the course ofthe years come into contactwith someone who heard some well
known or outstanding Bible teacherwho was someone that I had never heard,
it’s always ofinterest of me to ask them, “Whatdid you think of his teaching
and his ministry?” One man, some years ago, who told me that he had heard
G. Campbell Morganinterested me and so I askedhim, “Wellwhat was your
impression of G. Campbell Morgan?” I remember his comment. He thought
for a few moments and he saidvery quietly, “He spoke as one having
authority.” Using the words that were used of the multitude after they had
heard him give the Sermonon the Mount, “He spoke as one having authority
and not as the scribes.” He did not sayRabbi Shemi says this, Rabbi Hilial
says this, but he spoke out of an experience of the Lord God that was unique.
Now we read here, later on, that “Nevera man spoke like this man.” One of
the reasons thatwe don’t have much interest in Bible teaching today is
because we don’t have many Bible teachers who teachsomething like that. I
don’t want to make any indirect claims for doing that either. I remember a
story about Billy Sunday, the eccentric evangelistwho lived in Winona Lake.
Just a few weeksago I againsaw his home there. He used to relate a story
about a man who was a well knownvillage atheist who was seenrunning
vigorously to a burning church building intent on helping those who were
trying to put out the fire. A neighbor observedhim and knowing his atheism
said somewhatfacetiously, “Wellthis is something knew for you; I’ve never
seenyou going to church.” And he said, “Wellthis is the first time I’ve ever
seena church on fire.” [Laughter] Well perhaps that’s part of the difficulty
with us today. We don’t really have individuals who love Bible teaching and
who love to teachthe Word and the result it we don’t have much interest in
the things of the Lord along those lines.

Well, our Lord we read went up to the feastof tabernacles and he beganto
teach. I saywe don’t know precisely what he taught. We know how he
defended himself, but we don’t know what he was teaching when he went up
and taught in the temple, “the Jews however, marveledand said, How
knoweththis man letters never having learned?” Now one might getthe
wrong impressionfrom the Authorized Version rendering “how knoweththis
man letters” as if he really didn’t know the alphabet, but that of course is not
what is meant. This term grammata, which is used here, is a term that refers
to simple writings, and usually it refers to Scriptural writings and surely in
this case must refer to them. Earlierin the Gospelof John, in the 47th verse,
Jesus has said, “But if ye believe not Moses’writings how shall ye believe my
words?” “Moses’writings.” “How knoweththis man writings, never having
been taught?” How does he know the Scriptures as he does, he has not, it’s
clear, satat the feet of the rabbis. This is the word that is used of the Apostle
Paul when Festus says to him, “All your study is driving you mad Paul.” So,
how does this man understand the things that he understands when he has
never been taught by our rabbis? Now putting it in modern language it would
be, “How is this fellow able to teachand understand the truth of God so well
when he doesn’thave a degree from one of our accreditedinstitutions?” Now
they spoke it very contemptuously, because that’s the meaning of this
expression“this man.” “How knoweththis fellow letters, having never
learned?”
Arthur Pink said in one of his books, “Educationis an altar which is now
thronged by a multitude of idolatrous worshipers.” Thatis true, and that is
true in our evangelicalcirclesas well. If we devoted as much time to the
mastery of Scripture as we have to the mastery of literature about the
Scriptures we would be much better off.
Dr. Chafer, at Dallas Seminary, used to speak aboutthe doctor’s degree along
this line. He’d say there were “three kinds of people.” He said there were
“those who didn’t need any doctor’s degree, they getalong very well without
one.” He didn’t saythis because this was before the days of Billy Graham, but
he’s a goodillustration of it. He doesn’t have any degree from any theological
seminary, but he manages to get along fairly well. Then Dr. Chafer would say,
“There are some men who are helped by a doctor’s degree.” And then with a

smile he would say, “There are many who cannotget along without one.”
[Laughter] Then he occasionallywould say, “You know, I hear that there are
some evangelists going aboutwho don’t have a doctor’s degree.” Some ofyou
don’t even understand what he meant by that. [Laughter] Doctor’s degrees
were a dime a dozen, there’s hardly a one who doesn’t have one, but
knowledge ofScripture how different that is.
Now I don’t want to say anything againstsound education, but it’s
insufficient. It’s goodso far as it goes, but it’s insufficient. The Lord Jesus is
the perfectillustration of the fact that the significant thing, the most
important thing, the thing that should have our priority, is the knowledge of
the Word of God if we are to be an effective minister of its truth.
Billy Sunday, at his ordination, was askeda question which he could not
answer. It was a question regarding one of the church fathers. Well Mr.
Sunday had been a baseballplayer and consequentlyhis training was very,
very shallow. He didn’t know anything about this church father, and after
awhile he replied with a twinkle in his eye, when it was obvious that he was
stumped, he said, “Well, to tell you the truth, I’ve never heard of him, he
never played on my team.” [Laughter] And they smiled, they gave him some
other difficult questions, but finally one of the men said, “Let’s go aheadand
recommend this fellow for ordination, he’s already won more souls than the
whole bunch of us put together.” “How knoweththis man letters, having
never been taught?” why it’s clearif one reads Isaiahchapter 50 how he did
know. He knew because he had aloud himself to be taught by the Father, and
he was taught the Word of God.
When the apostles begantheir preaching after the death and resurrectionof
the Lord Jesus Christ, it’s very interesting to read the accounts in the Book of
Acts of the impressions that they made. The writer of the Book of Acts says,
“Now when they saw the boldness of Peterand John and perceivedthat they
were unlearned and ignorant men” or better uneducated and untrained men,
“they marveled and they took knowledge ofthem that they had been with
Jesus.” Unlearned, untaught, untrained, but nevertheless they were possessed
of a boldness which men recognizedas having come ultimately from the Lord
Jesus himself. The Apostle Paul who was trained by the rabbis, sitting at the

feet of Gamaliel, nevertheless found it important to say to the Galatians that
the gospelthat he proclaimed was one that he had not learned from men, that
he had not been taught, but he had receivedby divine revelationfrom the
Lord God himself. I like the statementthat the psalmist makes in Psalm 119
and verse 99 and verse 100, “I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my mediation. I understand more than the ancients,
because I keepthy precepts.” Let us not forget that.
When they lookedat the Lord Jesus Christ and observed him they said, “How
does this man understand Scriptural learning when he has never been
taught?” Well of course they didn’t know, but he had been taught, but his
teacherwas a better teacherthan the teacherby whom we are taught in
theologicalseminaries. He was taught by God the Holy Spirit. Now he makes
his reply to that. He says first of all, “My doctrine is not mine, but it belongs
to him that sent me.” The Jews had the idea that teaching could come from
only two sources;it caneither come from the school, andso they would ask,
“What rabbi has he studied under?” like we would say today, “Is he a Dallas
man, or is he a Trinity man, or is he a Grace man” or in other words, “From
what seminary does he come?” orit comes from oneself, but there was
another alternative. And the other alternative was that the teaching came
from God. Now our teachers could learn a whole lot about by this. How does
this man know Scriptural learning, having never learned? “My doctrine is not
mine, but it belongs to him that sent me.” It comes from God.
That reminds me of an old story about an individual who was a well known
unbeliever. And he attended a service just like this, and in the service he was
converted. Word came to the preacher and he was overjoyed. The edge of his
joy however, was somewhatdulled when he askedthe individual what it was
in his sermon that finally came home to him. He said, “Wellit wasn’t your
sermon it was your text.”
I sometimes have people say to me after I finish, “That was a greatsermon.”
Well I know better than to believe that. I used to play in golf tournaments.
And when I would win a match people would come around and say, “Boythat
was great.” WhenI lost one I couldn’t find my friends. [Laughter] The same
thing is true about life. When you do something great, well you’re great.

You’re the same fellow, but when you don’t do it nobody pays any attention to
you whatsoever. Whenpeople come up to me often and say, “Thatwas a great
sermon” I frequently reply, “It’s a greattext.” And that accounts for great
sermons most of the time. Great texts, texts that strike home to people, those
are the texts that make for greatsermons. Now some preachers like to go and
take the great texts and preach only the greattexts. Mr. Pryor makes us here
in Believers Chapelpreach all of the texts; greatand not so great. And so we
must do that in order to be systematic. Now I’m just kidding, he doesn’t really
make us do that at all, but that’s what we try to do. It is the text that’s the
important thing, not the preacher, not the way that he says things, it’s the
text. It’s the truth, as the Holy Spirit takes ofthe things of Christ and shows
them unto us. The Word and the Spirit, these things make for spiritual
results.
There’s also a story of an Indian. I like this one too. He was a Christian man.
He attended a service in a particular church and the sermon didn’t have very
much spiritual goodin it at all, but it was very loud. And so someone asked
him what he thought of the sermon. He said, “Well, high wind, big thunder,
no rain.” [Laughter] If you’d like to hearsermons high wind, big thunder, no
rain, turn on the TV, 700 Club, or some of the others who speak overour TV
screenconstantly, high wind, big thunder, very little rain. There are some
exceptions of course, but nevertheless that characterizes so much of the
preaching of our time.
Jesus saidthe reasonthat men listened to him and they thought that it was the
knowledge ofScripture that they were hearing, but he had never been taught,
was it wasn’this own doctrine. It did not come from himself; it came from the
one who senthim. It was the Father’s teaching. Now he then gives us an
internal test of knowledge, “Ifany man will do his will,” or “If any man wills
to do his will, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God, or whether I
speak of myself.”
This has been misunderstood because in the Authorized Version, for one
possible misunderstanding, it almostsounds as if a man should go out and do
his will. And then having done his will he will come to know of the doctrine.
Now that is not what our Lord is saying. He’s not saying that his can only be

learned by those who are expert in theologicalnicetieseither. He’s not saying
that one must do some ethical work, and having done some ethical work God
will then introduce him into the knowledge ofthe truth. No, no, that’s not
what he means at all. Really what he says is, “If any man willeth to do his
will.” Stress rests upon “wills” to do his will.
Now if you’ve followedalong in the Gospelof John at all you will know that it
is impossible for anyone to will to do God’s will apart from a previous work of
the Holy Spirit. ProfessorC. K. Barrett, in a very incisive and correct
comment has said, “A free human decisionabout the claims of Jesus is
impossible.” “No man cancome to me,” Jesus said. One must be drawn by the
Father. One must be given by the Father. How is it possible then for anyone to
will to do his will? Well the only way it is possible for anyone to will to do his
will is if first God has workedin his will to will to do his will. “No man can
come to me exceptthe Father which hath sent me draw him.” As Paul says in
Romans 8:7-8, a text I’ve quoted now one hundred and three times in this
audience, “The carnal mind is enmity againstGod: it is not subject to the law
of God, neither indeed can be. So that they that are in the flesh cannot please
God.” What is the work of God? Well the preceding chapter has said very
plainly, the work of God is to believe on him who he has sent. That’s what our
Lord means when he says here if any man willeth to do his will. He’s talking
about the work of faith, which is something produced in men by the work of
God. That’s the internal test.
There is a beautiful story. I think it’s one of the finest of the stories that I’ve
seenor read about in a long time, and frankly I had forgottenabout it, but
some years ago I made reference to this particular story. There were two
Roman Catholic missionaries who went to Tibet, a hundred and twenty-five
or so years ago. Theywent there to carry on some evangelistic activity, as they
understood evangelistic activity, and they went to Lhasa, the capital of Tibet,
and they setup their shop there. They had a little chapel and they of course
took their breviaries, and they had their devotions daily in their little chapel.
And they also had in their chapela coloredpicture of the cross ofJesus Christ
with the Lord Jesus hanging upon the cross. There was a man who had gone
there from the province of Yunan in China. He was a physician and he was an
individual who happened to wander by the place where they had their little

chapel. This man was known in the city of Lhasa as the Chinese hermit. He
was only of about thirty years of age. His hair was alreadywhite. He spent all
of his time visiting the poor, or visiting the sick. And after visiting them he
would go home and study, and he would study until late at night. He did not
have much relationship with the people of the community other than that.
They calledhim the Chinese hermit. He slept very little. He only ate one meal
a day, and the meal that he ate was generally barley meal. The result was that
his appearance was thin and emaciated. And it just so happened as they
carrying out their little devotions he happened to wander by the chapel,
lookedin and saw the coloredpicture of Jesus hanging on the cross.
And as they finished, he went up to them without the usual oriental words of
complement. He plunged right into what he had upon his mind. He said,
“What’s the meaning of that picture?” And that gave the two men an
opportunity to explain to him something of the ministry of the Lord Jesus
Christ. They talked about his cross, andabout the reasonfor the picture, his
hanging upon the cross. Theysaid the man stopped, and he beganto look at
that picture in their presence and he lookedat it for one half an hour without
saying a single word. Then they noticed that some tears beganto form on his
face. And then he fell down upon his knees, he struck the ground three times
with his head and he arose crying out, “This is the only Buddha whom men
ought to worship.” And with that he turned to the men and he said, “You are
my masters, take me as your disciple.” God the Holy Spirit had evidently
shined into the heart of this man who evidently had been prepared by the
Holy Spirit, and through the simple words of the Catholic missionaries he had
come to an understanding of what it meant for someone to die on the cross for
human sin.
There’s an external test Jesus says, it’s the glory of God. “He that speakethof
himself seekethhis own glory, but he that seekethhis glory that sent him the
same is true and no unrighteousness is in him.” This is a generaltestof
teaching. What is the trend of teaching? Is it behold the church, then it’s
hardly likely that it is of the Lord. If it is behold the preacher, it’s hardly
likely to be that of the Lord. If it is behold the gifts, the supernatural gifts of
he Holy Spirit, like the healers, it’s unlikely that it is the teaching of God. Is it
behold Jesus Christin his crucifixion, ah, that’s the messagethatthe Apostle

Paul gave, “I determine not to know anything among you save Jesus Christ
and this one as crucified.” As the saviorfor human sinners, that’s what we
preach. If that’s characteristic ofour ministry it’s much more likely to be
ministry that is approved of God.
Now at this point our Lord turns to a brief apologyfor his actions. The
backgroundis the healing of the impotent man, as I mentioned, on the
Sabbath day, and the objections that some of the Jewishmen had to it. Well
here is proof that they are not willing to do his will, “Did not Moses give you
the law and yet none of you keepeththe law, why go ye about to kill me?”
These are the individuals incidentally, who teachand preach that we are not
to kill, but they are seeking to kill him. They break the law in circumcision
and in plotting againsthim, he might say. “The people answeredand said,
Thou hast a demon, who goeth about to kill thee? Jesus answeredand said
unto them, I have done one work and you all marvel.” Now I want to give you
a little lessonin theology, for this was a lessonin theology. He didn’t saythat,
but that’s of course what lies in the background. He said, “You’ve forgotten
something about the law that you claim to reverence. Do you not remember
that in the law itself it is saidthat when a person is eight days old and a male,
he is to be circumcisedeven if it is the Sabbath day.” So in the law itself it is
written that certainthings are more important than the Mosaic Law. Being
part of the law, some parts of it are more significant than other parts. And
circumcisionis to take place even if it’s on the Sabbath day. “Mosestherefore
gave unto you circumcision, not because it is of Moses, but of the Father’s.” It
beganwith Abraham. “And ye on the Sabbath day circumcise a man. If a man
on the Sabbath day receive circumcisionthat the Law of Moses shouldnot be
broken, are ye angry at me because I have made a man every whit whole on
the Sabbath day?” In other words, if a ceremonialtype of the new life in
Christ, not in the Decalogue originally, overrode the Decalogue, how much
more the actualantitype of the new life in the healing ministry of the Lord
Jesus Christ shall override those Mosaic traditions that you think are law.
J. C. Ryle, the British preacher said, “Is it then just and fair to be angry with
me because Ihave done a far greaterwork to man on the Sabbath than the
work of circumcision. I have not wounded his body by circumcision, but I
have made him perfectly whole. I’ve not made a purifying work to one

particular part of him, but I’ve restoredhis whole body to health and
strength. I’ve not done a work of necessityto one single member only, but a
work of necessityand benefit to the whole man.” They’re obviously
condemned by their own law. And so Jesus concludes his defense by saying,
“Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment.”
Reminding us of the famous statementin Samuel, as I mentioned in the
reading of the Scripture, “The Lord seethnot as man seeth, for man looketh
on the outward appearance, but the Lord lookethon the heart.”
Summing it up, what does our Lord say? Wellhe says it’s necessaryfor a man
to have a willing heart, “If a man willeth to do his will, he shall know of the
doctrine whether it be of God or whether I speak ofmyself.” The necessityof
the willing heart is the important thing. From whence comes a willing heart?
A willing heart comes from God. “No man, no man,” he said in chapter 6 and
verse 44, “cancome to me except the Father which hath sent me draw him
and I will raise him up at the lastday.” It is absolutely essentialif a man
comes to Christ to have a willing heart, but we cannot have of ourselves a
willing heart. How do we get a willing heart? We go to God about the willing
heart, that’s how.
And so I say to you in this audience, Jesus said, “No man can come to me
exceptthe Father which hath sent me draw him.” If that brings home to you
your lost condition and that you cannot come of yourself, flee to the cross, flee
to our Lord, and he gives willing hearts;may God help you to come. Come to
Christ. Acknowledge your own inability. Receive the ability from the Lord
God. When the Bible says that men are unable to come it means they are
unable to come of themselves. Notthat they are unable to come with God’s
help. God helps those who acknowledgetheir inability, come for ability; may
God help you to come. If you’re here this morning and you’ve never believed
in the Lord Jesus Christ who died upon that cross for sinners, come to him.
You cannot come of yourself; may God speak to your heart.
[Prayer] We are grateful to Thee Lord for this wonderful defense of himself
that the Lord Jesus gave. We thank Thee that he needs no defense to our
hearts. We thank Thee for the greatness ofthe Son of God. We thank Thee for

the gift of life. And oh Father, if there are some in this audience who have
never come, by Thy grace…
JOHN MACARTHUR
Embracing the Claims of Christ
Sermons John 7:14–24 43-41 Feb2, 2014
Play Audio
Add to Playlist
A + A - Reset
Open your Bible to the seventh chapter of the Gospelof John; the seventh
chapter of the Gospelof John. The wonderful experience of going through the
Gospelof John is that it's all about Christ in every page and virtually every
verse. And you can't improve upon the subject by any means. So what a
delight, again, for us to share this hour on this, and for every hour that I
spend with you on this, there are probably ten hours that I have spent at least
before that in these individual passagesbeing so profoundly blessed. I wish
you could share my joy. You only get a little bit of the overflow of the
opportunity that I have to dig down into these greatportions of Scripture
which present Christ in all his majesty.
Now as we come to the portion before us, I want to read it – we're gonna cover
verses 14 to 24. So let me read it to you. "But when it was now the midst of

the feast–' the Feastof Tabernacles, as you know, 'Jesus wentup into the
temple, and beganto teach. The Jews then were astonished, saying, 'How has
this man become learned, having never been educated?' So Jesus answered
them and said, 'My teaching is not Mine, but His who sent Me. If anyone is
willing to do His will, he will know of the teaching, whether it is of God or
whether I speak from Myself. He who speaks from himself seeks his own
glory; but He who is seeking the glory of the One who sentHim, He is true,
and there is no unrighteousness in Him.
Did not Moses give you the Law, and yet none of you carries out the Law?
Why do you seek to kill Me?' The crowdanswered, 'You have a demon! Who
seeks to kill You?' Jesus answeredthem, 'I did one deed, and you all marvel.
For this reasonMoses has givenyou circumcision(not because it is from
Moses,but from the fathers), and on the Sabbath you circumcise a man. If a
man receives circumcisionon the Sabbath so that the Law of Moses willnot
be broken, are you angry with Me because I made an entire man well on the
Sabbath? Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous
judgment.'"
The claims of Jesus were astonishing. Theywere shocking. Theywere
beyond bold. They were really outrageous claims. The man Jesus was
indistinguishable from any other Galileanman. He most likely had a Galilean
accentand his deity was completelyinvisible. What was visible was his
humanity. There was no way to see him any different than you would see any
other man. But men did not make the claims that he made.
Jesus saidthat he had come down from heaven, that he had eternally existed,
that he had been sent into the world by the Father. He claimed to be the
saviorof the world and the only saviorof the world. He claimed to be the
determiner of everyone's eternaldestiny. The claimed to be the source of
everlasting life, and the only source. He claimed to be the only wayto God.
He claimed to have the right to be honored and worshipped on an equal basis
with the eternalGod. He claimed to be one with the Father. He claimed to
have the powerto give life and even to raise the dead. He claimed to be able
to raise himself from the dead. He claimedto be the one of whom the Old

TestamentScripture spoke and the one who was the main subject of the Old
Testament.
He claimed to be the supreme judge of all men who would one day judge them
all at this return in glory. He claimed to be without sin. He claimed to have
all authority in heaven and earth. He claimed to be able to forgive sins
legitimately, to have both the power and the authority to do that. He claimed
to rule over the Sabbath. He claimed to have the right to answerprayer.
He claimed to be greaterthan the temple, greaterthan Jonah, greaterthan
Solomon, greaterthan Jacob, greaterthan Abraham. He claimed to have
been alive before Abraham even was born. He claimedto be the only source
of soul sustenance, the only bread that could feed the soul. He claimedto be
the light of the world. He claimedto be the resurrectionand the life. He
claimed to be the anointed one, the Christ, the Messiah, claimedto the be son
of God. He claimed that he had the privilege and one day would enter into
that privilege of being seatedat the right hand of God to reign forever.
This from a man who was physically, by appearance, indistinguishable from
any other Galileanman. These claims were just beyond comprehension. The
Jewishleaders judged him as a blasphemer. Their decisionwas, to simply
say, this is the most extreme of blasphemy conceivable orinconceivable. He is
a blasphemer.
This level of blasphemy, they said, is beyond what any human being would do.
Therefore, he must be under the overwhelming influence of the ultimate
blasphemer who is Satanhimself. He does what he does by the power of
Satan. He has a demon. He is likely possessedby Satan himself.
Other people were more charitable than the leaders – a bit more charitable,
anyway. Theysaid he was insane. He was insane. Theyused a word that is
also used in Acts Chapter 12 and translated this way. It's translated "You're
out of your mind." He's a mad man.
There were others perhaps even more charitable, but they were damningly
wrong about Jesus. Theywould be the disciples who followedhim for a while,
and then as we saw in Chapter 6, departed and left him. And they left

because they didn’t like his words. Theydidn’t believe in his words. They
couldn’t accepthis words. They may have judged him as a false teacher.
But whether you say he's merely a false teacher, we can'tbelieve. Or whether
you sayhe's an insane maniac and a madman, or whether he's possessedof
Satanand the ultimate blasphemer, you have made a judgment on Jesus
Christ that has severe implications forever.
On the other hand, there was John the Baptist, who said, "Beholdthe Lamb
of God who takes awaythe sin of the world." There was Andrew, in John
Chapter 1, who said, "We found the Christ. We found the Messiah." There
was Philip, who said, "We found him of whom Moses spoke." There was
Nicodemus who came to Jesus on behalf of other people and said, "We know
that you are a teachercome from God, because no one cando what you do
unless God is with him."
And there were the Samaritans from the little village of Sychar, who basically
concluded this is indeed the Messiah, the Saviorof the world. And then there
was Peterand the disciples in 6:69 who said, "We have believed and come to
know that you are the Holy One of God." It was Peterwho said, "You're the
Christ, the Son of the living God."
So on one hand, you had people who rejectedhim. You had on the other
people who acceptedhim. The vastmajority of people could be basically
placed into group one, following the lead of their religious heads. The went
down the path of rejecting Jesus either as a blasphemer, a demon-possessed
blasphemer, a mad man, or somebodywho's teaching's couldn’t be believed
or understood.
In fact, it all ended up with even the crowdthat may have deferred to him and
thought he was a goodman and said he was a goodman and questionedwhy
Jesus thought they wanted to killed him, ultimately screaming for his death,
Mark 15:11 to 15.
He was largely rejected. It was a very small group. Only 120 showedup in
the upper room in Judea on the day of Pentecostwhenthe Holy Spirit came.
That was all of all Judea.

When Jesus was calledbefore the Sanhedrin for his trial, they said to him, "If
you are the Messiah, tellus." He had told them again and again and again
and again, and they hadn't believed. Theyaskedit againand he said to them,
"If I tell you, you will not believe. You will not believe." In John Chapter 8,
in verse 48, the Jews answeredand said to him, "Do we not sayrightly that
you are a Samaritan and have a demon?" That was their diagnosis.
And that was pretty much the standard diagnosis of Jesus, to one extreme or
another. And we know that from the very opening of the Gospelof John,
John 1:10, "He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and
the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and those who were His
own did not receive Him."
Chapter 3 repeats it againin verse 11. Jesus says,"Truly, truly, I say to you,
we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you do not
acceptour testimony." Verse 32, "WhatHe has seenand heard, of that He
testifies;and no one receives His testimony." Chapter 5, verse 16, "Forthis
reasonthe Jews were persecuting Jesus." He was saying, "'My Fatheris
working and now, and I Myself am working. Forthis reasontherefore the
Jews were seeking allthe more to kill Him." So it goes rejection, rejection,
rejection.
Chapter 5 and verse 38, "'You do not have His word abiding in you,'" Jesus
says, "' for you do not believe Him whom He sent.'" Verse 43, "I have come
in My Father’s name, and you do not receive Me." Thatwas how it was. His
claims were rejected. He was rejected. Again and againwe're going to see it,
chapter after chapter after chapter, all the way until they screamfor his blood
at his death about six months after the events recordedhere.
Now, as we approach the text that I read, Chapter 7, verse 14, Jesus leave
Galilee after sevenquiet months of training with the Twelve, spending time
with them. Yes, there were some public ministry and miracles and teaching,
but primarily his emphasis was with the Twelve and he stayed in the outlaying
areas far north, northwest, southeast, to give time to prepare them. But now
in the midst of the feasthe goes to Jerusalemand he began to teach. He
reenters Jerusalem.

Remember from last time? He didn’t go when everybody went to the Feastof
Tabernacles. He waited until the middle of the week becausehe knew the
rulers wanted to kill him, Chapter 7, verse 1, they were seeking to kill him.
And when the feastwas just gathering, just beginning, they were looking for
him. They were wanting to capture him early on.
He didn’t go. Verse 11, the Jews were seeking him at the Feast, saying,
"Where is he? Where is he?" Well, he waits till midweek and then he goes.
When everything is settled in, when the people are all there, when it'll be a
whole lot harder to arresthim, he shows up.
You remember he took a secretjourney through Samaria? Luke records that
journey. He reenters secretly. At the right moment, he walks into the
Temple. The time, 29 A.D. if you want to calculate the calendar, this would
be around October15th, the time of the FeastofTabernacles, orthe Feastof
Booths, which commemorates the wilderness wandering when they dwelled in
Booths for those 40 years in the wilderness.
He reenters. He faces the world that hates him. He faces Jerusalem, where
the leaders are already determined to execute him – puts his life on the line.
Jerusalemis now filled with masses ofpeople, pilgrims who have come from
everywhere. Those in the diaspora have all come back for one of the three
feasts a year. They had to be in Jerusalem.
Well, in the middle of the week he shows up. This catches the leaders off
guard, 'cause they don’t think he's there. It's unexpected. And in some ways
they're neutralized by the crowdand the public exposure that Jesus already
has. This is his time. His time is so precise that back in verse 6, he wouldn’t
go a few days earlier, because he said, "My time is not yet here." In verse 8,
"My time has not yet fully come." Whenwe're talking about time, we're not
talking about epochs. We're talking about hours and days. He was on that
kind of schedule.
He goes up to the temple, draws, no doubt, a huge crowd, 'cause they'd been
looking for him. Back in verse 12, there was grumbling among the crowd,
murmuring, saying where is he and what is he and who is he? He's a good

man. Others say, no, on the contrary he leads people astray. He was the topic
of conversationeven though he wasn’tthere. Now he is there.
The leaders would have wanted to arresthim, and they made an attempt at it,
over in verse 32. The Pharisees heardthe crowd muttering these things about
him, and the chief priest and the Phariseessentofficers to seize him. They got
the temple police to go and arresthim.
They couldn’t pull it off. Verse 44, some of them wantedto seize him; no one
laid hands on him. The officers then came to the chief priest and the
Pharisees andthey said to them, "Why didn’t you bring him? We sent you to
arresthim. You went. Why didn’t you arresthim?" The officers answered,
"Neverhas a man spokenthe waythis man speaks." To whichthe Pharisees
said, "You’ve not also been led astray, have you?" They just couldn’t getpast
what he said. Stopped them dead in their intentions.
So here he is in the temple. They're not gonna be able to arresthim in that
environment. His time has come. And what is he doing there? Chapter7
says he's teaching. He's doing what rabbis did. Rabbis would go to the
temple, and the temple courtyard is a massive, massive area. And they would
find a locationin the temple courtyard and they would start school. And they
would sit down somewhere, andtheir disciples would come around and they
would teach in the temple ground – very traditional pattern. So Jesus did
that. He took the role of a rabbi or a teacher;he found a place and he began
to teach.
Well, what is he going to be teaching? Well, he's gonna be teaching what he
always taught. He's gonna be teaching about the kingdom. He's gonna be
teaching about sin and righteousness. He's gonna be teaching about salvation,
gonna be teaching about hypocrisy, gonna be teaching the true way of God.
He's gonna teach what he's always taught, all the things that I just repeatedto
you. He's gonna make all those claims in one way or another.
So he sets up class and he starts teaching in the middle of the week ofthe
Feastin the temple courtyard. And in the unfolding passage, he provides five
reasons to believe his claims – five reasons to believe his claims. He knows
what the opinions of the people are. He knows that. But he has not yet shut

them down. He said, "You better believe while you can believe. You better
come to the light while the light is shining, because it's not always gonna be
here."
So here is another opportunity in which he will teachthem the truth and call
them to put their trust in him. This is extensionof patience, of grace, of
mercy. Five reasons whythe claims of Christ are true. They unfold in these
verses.
Reasonnumber one – and by the way, these are goodfor non-believers to
consider. Number one:The divine source ofhis teaching. The divine source
of his teaching. There were lots of rabbis teaching. Maybe every day there
were rabbis all over that place teaching, not just at the feasttime, but on a
generaldaily basis. And perhaps at the Feastthere were even more, and there
was a cacophonyof classes going onin that open-air courtyard.
But this is what rabbis did. They found their place. Theybegan to teach.
And in order to give authority to what they said, they quoted other rabbis.
This did two things. This had the effect of validating what they said, so that
people wouldn’t think they invented it. And secondly, it kept them in the
tradition. You wanted to quoted other rabbis who were respected, so that you
could give authority to what you said. And you wanted to quoted other rabbis
so that you were in the tradition, 'cause tradition was so important.
That's what they would do. That's not what Jesus did. He didn’t quote any
other rabbis. People noted that at the beginning of his ministry at the sermon
on the mound. At the end, Matthew 7:28 and 29, the people were amazed
because he taught as one having authority, possessingauthority, which means
he didn’t quote any rabbis. He stoodalone on the sermonon the mound, with
his amazing teaching.
The first reasonto believe the claims of Christ is his teaching, his doctrine, his
knowledge. So we go back to verse 15, "The Jews then were astonished,
saying how has this man become learned?" Stopat that point. They
acknowledgedhis learning. They acknowledge his learning. It was beyond
anybody else. Eventhe temple police, who regularly would have heard the

teaching of rabbis, because that's where rabbis were often teaching. They
never heard anybody like this. Nevera man spoke like this man.
Rabbis would expound the Scripture and explain Scripture and quote other
rabbis to validate their interpretation. But this kind of teaching was beyond
anything anybody had ever heard. It was a level of wisdom, a level of
knowledge, a levelof understanding without equal. The people are
dumbfounded. They are shocked. Theyare startled by this flawless, adept
instruction, the likes of which they have never heard. He doesn’t quote
rabbis. He doesn’t validate his teaching by any human source. He doesn’t
necessarilyconnectwith the tradition. But there's never been anything like it.
They're overwhelmedby the lucidity of it, the clarity of it, the profundity of it,
the truthfulness of it, the ringing reality of it. So how are they gonna discredit
him? They attack him, not his teaching. Verse 15, “How has this man
become learned, having never been educated?” This is an ad hominem
argument. They didn’t want to argue with him. They didn’t want to debate
him. So they tried to discredit him by calling into question his training, or
lack of training.
Another time, when they wanted to discredit him and they didn’t want to
attack what he said because they couldn’t, they said, "Canany goodthing
come out of Nazareth?" So they attackedhim hometown – not a very
powerful argument.
But they knew every time they did enter into a discussionor a debate or a
confrontation with him, they were just humiliated. So they're grasping at
straws. They're shatteredby his claims, his astonishing claims. They're
shatteredby the, no doubt, the Biblical support his gives for those claims, the
masterful teaching. They can't cope with it. They can't argue with it. They
can't debate with it. They can't contradict it. They are trapped in their own
self-centered, hypocriticalsystem. He will dismantle them, so they just
discredit him. They speak in a derisive way.
"How has this man?" Some of the older translations say "this fellow, this
nobody." They don’t want to use his name. That's an expression, by the way,
of derision. Don’t let this nobody, who's giving you his ownopinion, pass

himself off as some truth teller who truly the meaning of Scripture, who truly
the Word of God and the will of God. He's just shooting off his uneducated
mouth.
It's a popular thing to do, by the way, even today, to those who speak Biblical
truth from the Word of God accuratelyand truthfully – popular for them to
be mockedby the establishedacademic elite, for their lack of training in the
proper schools. Unless you go to a schoolfull of heretics, you aren't qualified
to be profound.
This is nothing new. All the way back in Matthew Chapter 13 and verse 54,
we see a similar situation. "He came to His hometown and beganteaching
them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished, and said, 'Where did
this man getthis wisdom?'" This is his own hometown. When he's in his own
hometown, they say, "Where did he get this wisdom? He didn’t getit here."
When he's in another town, they say, "How could anything goodcome out of
that town?" Now they simply say, "How could he possibly get this teaching
when he hasn’t been to the rabbinical schools?" If you can't knock the truth,
you knock the truth teller. That's exactly what they did. They just openly
discredited him. This happens a lot.
Now, he could have defended himself by simply saying, "You're absolutely
right. This isn't from the rabbis. This is my truth. I'm God. I'm telling you
the truth." But that would have exacerbatedthe issue even more. So he
doesn’t sayhe's self-taught. He doesn’t say, "I came across this all by myself.
My doctrine is my own. My doctrine comes from me." He doesn’t walk into
that trap. That would have exacerbatedthe situation. Instead – you got to
love this – verse 16, "Jesus answeredthem and said, 'My teaching is not
Mine.'" Wow. "My teaching is not mine." Not mine. This isn't self
knowledge. Ididn’t make this up. I didn’t come to this in isolation. I'm not
teaching my own opinion. But his who sent me.
And there he trumps the rabbis. I'm not quoting rabbis. I'm quoting God.
I'm quoting God. What a reply. This is not just in defense. This is an
indictment of the Jewishleaders and their endless circularquotations of
rabbis who quoted rabbis who quoted rabbis. He says, "You're right. You're

right. This teaching is different. This is learned teaching. This is divine
knowledge. This is truth. And it doesn’tcome from the rabbis. It comes
from God." By the way, that implies that the rabbis' teaching came from the
rabbis.
My doctrine is not mine. My teaching is not mine. Just as a footnote, every
preachermust say that. Every preacher must say, "My teaching is not mine.
It comes from heaven." I can saythat, as I teachthe Word of God. "I am the
ultimate truth teller," Jesus says. "I'm telling you what God said." This is a
part of his life and ministry.
Go back to Chapter 5. This was a claim he made over and over and over. I'll
just touch a few of the illustrations. Verse 19 of Chapter 5, Jesus says to them,
“Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son cando nothing of Himself, unless it is
something He sees the Father doing; for whateverthe Father does, these
things the Son also does in like manner. The Fatherloves the Son, shows Him
all things that He Himself is doing; and the Father will show Him greater
works than these, so that you will marvel." In other words, everything comes
from the Father.
Downin verse 30, he adds, “I can do nothing on My own initiative. As I hear, I
judge; and My judgment is just, because I do not seek Myown will, but the
will of Him who sent Me." In other words, his claim is that everything he
does comes from the Father, proceeds from the Father.
Verse 24 sums it up. “Truly, truly, I sayto you, he who hears My word, and
believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life." You hear my word and that
means you're believing the one that sent me. They're one and the same. This
againis his claim.
In Chapter 8, just a brief look at, say, Verse 26. And there are more. "'I have
many things to speak and to judge concerning you, but He who sent Me is
true; and the things which I heard from Him, these I speak to the world.'
They did not realize that He had been speaking to them about the Father. So
Jesus said, 'When you lift up the Sonof Man, then you will know that I am
He, and I do nothing on My own initiative, but I speak these things as the

Father taught Me,'" constantly making the claim that he was directly,
verbatim, quoting God.
Chapter 12, verse 49, "I didn't speak on My own initiative, but the Father
Himself who sent Me has given Me a commandment as to what to say and
what to speak. I know that His commandment is eternal life; therefore the
things I speak, I speak just as the Father has told Me.” Absolute accuracy.
Listen to John 17:8 – Jesus speaking to the Father, "The words which You
gave Me I have given to them." "The words which You gave Me I have given
to them." The divine source of his teaching is the first reasonto believe the
claims of Jesus. And again, this is not just a defense. It is, at the same time,
an indictment of those who do not speak for go. How vast is his knowledge?
He knows the mind of God. He knows the mind of God – not in a general
way, not in a broad way, not in some kind of an impression. He knows the
mind of God verbally in words. He speaks the words that God gives him to
speak. He knows what go thinks. He knows what God says. He knows what
God wills, and he says it over and over again. He knows the will of the Father.
"I know the will of my Father. I do the will of my Father. I speak the words
of my Father." Complete knowledge ofthe mind of God.
He also has complete knowledge ofthe mind of man. He knew what was in
men. John 2, nobody needed to tell him anything about a man. He knew what
was in men. Chapter 5, verse 42, he makes the statement, "I know that the
love of God is in you." So he has total knowledge ofthe mind of God, total
knowledge ofthe mind of man, and complete familiarity with the revelationof
God, with all that God has disclosed, all that God knows, and therefore all
that God reveals. He says that in Chapter 5, verse 39, "The Scriptures are
these that testify about Me." He knew the mind of God. He knew the mind of
man. He knew the Scripture, and therefore he knew the true interpretation of
the Scripture. There's no rabbi that canmatch that – none. Nor could a
collectionof rabbis come close.
This is supernatural knowledge. So that's where you have to start thinking
about accepting the claims of Jesus. Youstart with his supernatural

knowledge. This is God talking. So, reasonnumber one: To embrace the
claims of Christ is his supernatural teaching, his supernatural knowledge.
Secondly, not only the source, the place form which his knowledge comes,
being the mind of God, but his desire to do God's will. This is criticalto the
sinner. This is the test. Sayit another way, his promise that if a person
desired to do the will of God, he would know the truth. Look at verse 17.
Even when you say, well, what motivates someone to come to Christ, what are
you looking for? What motivates us? I don't know, somebody might say,
"Well, you want a better life? You want your sins forgiven? Those are good
things. You want some supernatural power. That's a goodthing. But here's
the testthat Jesus gives. Look atverse 17. This is so important. "If anyone is
willing to do His will, he will know of the teaching, whether it is of God or
whether I speak from Myself."
Can I make it simple? Coming to Christ is not motivated by your desire to get
what you want. It is motivated by your desire to do for God what he
commands, okay? It's essentiallywhat he's saying.
The first reasonto come to Christ is because of the divine source ofhis
teaching. The secondis because you have a desire to do God's will. You have
a desire God's will, and if you have a desire to do God's will, you have to come
to Christ, because there's no one else to come to.
This is where salvationbegins. The Holy Spirit convicts of sin and
righteousness is judgment. The sinner is wearyof his sin and his fallenness
and his wretchedness, ofnature of it and the consequence ofit; becomes a
seeker. And he's not looking for personalfulfillment. He's not looking for
personalbenefits and blessings. That's whatthe crowdwas looking for that
eventually left Jesus in Chapter 6.
What he wants is to do the will of God. This is the step in the direction of
confessing Jesusas what? As Lord, coming as a slave to a master; coming out
from under the master of sin, the dominance of sin, to the mastery of the
lordship of Jesus Christ.

So gospeltruth is not apprehended by debate. You can have a bunch of
unbelievers in a room. You canhave an atheistdebating with somebody who
knew the gospel, and that debate may prove to fall on the side of the people
with the gospel, but only if you're gonna believe the Bible. But if you have an
unbeliever sitting there, he's not able to discernthe difference. You don’t win
the day by debate. You don’t even win the day by rational defense, even
though you can rationally defend the Bible, and even though you can debate
successfully.
What draws people to the gospel, whatdraws people to Christ is a desire to do
the will of God. God exists. He is sovereign. He is the judge and the
executioner. I'm on the wrong side of God. I'm alienated from God. I'm an
enemy of God. I need to submit to God. I'm tired of the powerthat sin
expressedin my life, the devastationof sin. I want deliverance. I want
freedom. I want a new master. That's what he's talking about.
Again, I say truth is not decidedby a debate. It's not decided by some kind of
an apologetic discussion. Butrather, you come to know the truth when God
reveals the truth to you and he reveals it to you only when you seek to do his
will. This is how faith acts. This is how faith acts. What I saving faith? It is
the desire to put your trust in Jesus Christ as to do the will of God. It requires
believing.
So if you want to know if Christ is who he claims to be, here's the test. Are
you crying out for a new master? Are you desirous of the one and only
savior? Do you have a genuine desire to carry out the revealedwill of God in
your life? Do you want to go on the narrow road through the narrow gate
and walk the narrow way? That's the issue.
God told Israelthrough Moses these words. "Ifyou shall seek the Lord your
God, you shall find him if you seek him with all your heart and with all your
soul." Psalm119:2, "Blessedare they that seek Him with the whole heart."
What is that talking about? Well, it's talking about all those things we're so
familiar with in the ministry of Jesus. "Ifany man come after Me, let him
deny himself." That's the opposite side of seeking with your whole heart.
Take up the cross. Follow me. Hate your mother. Hate your father. Hate

Jesus was not taught by man

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Jesus was not taught by man

Similar to Jesus was not taught by man (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Jesus was not taught by man