The Gospel of John 3:22-36

One of the things that the Gospel of John does is the first 18 verses, which we've shown as a chiasm, in fact we'll see that in the main service again this morning, actually introduces a lot of themes that are carried forward in the book. And one of those themes that shows up in the middle of John 1, 1-18 is John the Baptist.

And we'll see that as a theme here in this morning's passage, John 3, 22-36. Because the first part of the chapter is Nicodemus and Jesus, and they're talking. And of course, Nicodemus is, in that passage, mostly baffled. But in this passage, it's about Jesus and John the Baptist. However, it isn't interactions between Jesus and John the Baptist, but rather John speaking and explaining.

And then the last part is very likely by the Apostle John, stating some truths, and so we'll take a look at that. So it says in John 3, 22 through 24, after these things, Jesus and his disciples came into the land of Judea, and there was spending time with them and baptizing. John also was baptizing in Anon, near Salim, because there was much water there, and people were coming and were being baptized, for John had not yet been thrown into prison.

Now, first thing we run into, here's a map of Judea. It shows where Judea is, since that's mentioned. It shows where Jerusalem is. It shows where the Jordan River runs north and south there, flowing into the Dead Sea. It does not show where Anon and Salim are, because nobody seems to know. Places that have have passed away from knowledge about where they exactly are. Some speculation, but that's about it. But from the description, lots of water, much water there, probably some place along the Jordan River would be a good guess.

So, Jesus and John here were both baptized, and so that is what brings up the issue here. You remember the Pharisees had questioned John the Baptist previously. They had sent some Pharisee representatives to question him about, you know, who are you and what are you doing?

And one of the things we point out is baptism was done in Judaism, it was done for those Gentiles who had converted to Judaism. But baptizing Jews was puzzling. It didn't make any sense to them. So they were puzzled. Here is John baptizing, and so they questioned him. Now you've got John the Baptist and Jesus both baptizing. Very unconventional. Both of them are baptizing, so there's some question about that. It was puzzling, if not scandalous. What are you doing? These people are Jews. You only baptize Gentiles who are coming into Judaism, right? What about this baptism? Is this the same as we do in baptism? When we have a baptism here, does that mean the same thing as this baptism? What's the story here? Is it the same? Not? It's not the same.

The Old Testament believers, these Old Testament folks, Wasn't it they were being baptized in preparation for the kingdom? That was what it was, a preparation for becoming king. Yeah, it is an agreement with the message, right? That's what the baptism represented. It's an agreement I identify with, I agree with the message, and therefore I'm being baptized on that basis. A nation of priests. Yes, and who is being baptized? Mixtures of Jews and Gentiles? No, no. So this isn't Christian church baptism in the context that we have now.

It may sound similar externally, outside, but internally, in terms of what it's representing, it meant something different. It's simply an identification with the message. Plus a public affirmation, right? Certainly, certainly that. That aspect of it is similar. A public affirmation, and we're getting wet. You probably wouldn't want to do it on a day like today, but anyway. Nonetheless, we're getting wet. It's a public affirmation. In this case, it's an identification with the message. That's what it's representing.

So now, we have John 3, 25 and 26. Therefore, there arose a discussion on the part of John's disciples with the Jew about purification. Now, then verse 26, And they came to John and said to him, Rabbi, you who is with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you have testified, behold, he is baptizing, and all are coming to him." Uh-oh! This is a concern, right? If you're getting behind John and you see, look, everybody's streaming over to where Jesus is. That's going to be a concern, or at least they were concerned.

Let's talk first about the purification. Purification had been brought up in the last chapter, Chapter 2, and the reason it had been brought up in Chapter 2 was because in there, these were the six large jars that were for hand purification, washing the hands, washing the utensils. And by the way, the tradition there, you couldn't just stick your hands in the jars and wash your hands. It was pour it out of the jars into something else, or ladle it out into something else, and then pour it over the hands, but not back into the purification water. So that was the tradition. Here, it's likely they're talking about the same thing, but I would say with the possibility that they're making some application to, well, are you baptizing to purify people?

Does that get it covered, right? So possibly they're discussing that. What we have then here, all are coming to him. So what do you think the issue is here? All are coming to him. Aren't you concerned? What are you going to do about it? And you can imagine John's disciples getting concerned about this. We're losing our competitive edge here. And that brings up another question. Is there application of this to us in the church?

Concern over people are going to this guy or that guy. First of all, it's not the same thing. Certainly not. You're talking about Jews under a context of law. But, however, how concerned ought we to be, let me take it for instance, suppose a whole bunch of people from this class, I come the next Sunday and they've all gone downstairs to the other elective. Does that get me concerned?

I might want to look at why am I driving people away and make them fall asleep, but aside from that, it's not really a problem because what we're doing is we're feeding the flock here, and however the Lord wants to get that done, that's fine. So there isn't one elder versus another, and we're sitting here competing for who comes to what.

So there may be some realization of that kind of principle here. Some people have marveled, why aren't the pews at Holly Hills just packed all the time? We have, after all, a rather unique message that we carry across. Not that many churches are talking about grace that's full-on, full-out, pedal-to-the-metal, full-out mountains and fountains of grace, right? Yes? I wondered if we moved closer to Vandermeer, whether that would help. Yeah, we haven't moved for a long time, anyway. Here, let's look at John 3, 27-30 on the top of page 2 there.

So John answered and said, A man can receive nothing unless it has been given him from heaven. You yourselves are my witnesses that I have said, I am not the Christ, but I have been sent ahead of him. He who has the bride is the bridegroom, but the friend of the bridegroom who stands and hears him rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom's voice. So this joy of mine has been made full. He must increase, but I must decrease." Can you imagine the look on John's disciples' faces?

What? Wow! You mean what you're doing is going to fade? What you're doing is going to get less? We've been having all kinds of people come and now we're going to have everybody go to him and you're okay with that? Can you imagine the shock on their faces? Stunned by what he just said. Yeah?

Didn't a couple of John's disciples Yes, earlier, right? Yeah, and when we studied earlier, that was one of the things that happened. Early on, some of those disciples became among Jesus' inner circle, right? So they had been with John, and then went with Jesus.

Yeah, interesting observation. But see, that was like we're losing one or two, no big deal, because we've got a lot of people coming. But now, these guys are really concerned. It isn't just a little dribble. All are coming to him. I mean, we're not getting anybody. So by losing a few and he's getting them all, that's a great concern. Or at least these guys think it is, right? So John's statement here, a man can receive nothing, refers to receiving spiritually, by the way. Spiritually receiving. Why would we say it's spiritual receiving? Why would we say it's spiritual receiving?

You could always build a farm or build another kind of business or whatever it is, but this is not the kind of business that's human-based. Yeah, in other words, if I come to you and I say, hey, do you want a Bible? You can receive it. It's a physical object, right? But receiving something spiritually, that comes from God. We don't originate that. All we can do here on planet Earth is shuffle things around, physical things, right? So this is spiritual receiving.

Because everything that is spiritual originates from God. How much of the physical realm comes from God? All of the physical realm comes from God, and as John put it earlier, without Him, nothing was made that was made. And so all of the physical realm. How about the spiritual realm? Is all of the spiritual realm from God?

No, the devil is. Well, things that come into existence spiritually. But he created the devil. Yeah, now think of it. Think of it. Everything in the spiritual realm is created except for him. So, God created everything in the physical realm. In the spiritual realm, everything that exists spiritually is created by God except for God himself. Except for God himself. So, God created everything except for himself. So, when we look at this here, receiving something spiritual, God is the source of everything in the physical realm. God is the source of everything in the spiritual realm. that he has created.

This word heaven here is used here as a euphemism, much like the kingdom of God is the same as the kingdom of heaven. And we've carried on that tradition in the English as well. People, if they're trying to be somewhat judicious in their choice of words, might say instead of oh God, might say oh heavens. And instead of saying, God knows, we might say in English even, Heaven knows. So there's a tendency, even in English 2,000 years later, to carry on this Jewish tradition and use the word Heaven as a substitute for the word God.

According to the rabbinical thinking of the day, since saying God directly might allow one to accidentally even use the name of the Lord in vain. So you just avoid using God altogether. And when I look at various Jewish websites today, what they will do is G-D. That's their way of carrying on that tradition. So the word heaven is used as a precaution.

So in John 1.20, John the Baptist had indeed said, I am not the Christ. So that was right out of chapter 1 early on in the book of John. That is, I'm not the Messiah.

Since there is no place where John is recorded to have said, I have been sent ahead of him, either John did say that somewhere, those words, but it's not recorded, or John is summarizing the things that are in John 1.19-34. where he in effect said, I was sent ahead of him. So that would be a summary statement of what he had said there in John 1, 19-34.

Now, this bride and bridegroom and friend of the bridegroom, that gets into some interesting questions here. A few possibilities have been put forth. One is John the Baptist referring to Israel as the bride. One possibility. Or, the church as the bride, another possibility. Or three, the bridegroom, the bride, and the friend of the bridegroom is an illustration, no intent to identify the bride specifically. So which one of those is it? Let's go through it.

Israel is one identification with the bride that has biblical backing, at least in some degree, and we give the references there in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Hosea. John the Baptist would certainly have known about those references, as would his disciples. However, these passages do not specifically identify the Messiah, or the Son of God, as the husband of Israel, but God, specifically Yahweh, which would include the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. So not specifically Christ, but God, and specifically using the covenant name Yahweh. sometimes pronounced Jehovah. That would be all three persons of the Trinity.

For instance, Isaiah 54.5, for your husband is your maker, whose name is, and so here it gives specifically Yahweh, the Lord of hosts, where it has LORD and the New American Standard and some other translations where it's all caps. That's in reference to that word Yahweh, God's covenant name. And your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel who is called the God of all the earth. So that puts God as the husband and Israel as the wife.

Also the last passage, Hosea 16-20, looks forward to a yet future betrothal of God to Israel in the Millennial Kingdom. Something we have to take a look at there. There is some issue with identifying Israel as the bride. Another thing to point out, not written in here, is that at this point in time, God had divorced Israel. And that passage in Hosea that's referenced has a betrothal, a re-betrothal to Israel in the future colonial kingdom. So that would say at this point in time when John is speaking, Israel is not the bride.

And the betrothal is to Yahweh, all three persons of the Trinity, not Christ specifically. Now, let's look at the next one. In some ways, the identification of Christ in the Church as bridegroom and bride is a better fit, since specifically Christ the Messiah will be the groom and the Church the bride, being now betrothed. That's the picture. Yes? So in the Old Testament, did it say that Israel was the bride or was it the wife? Did it specify? Actually, the wife of Jehovah. Yes, the wife of Jehovah, or Yahweh.

So here in the New Testament we do get Christ the Messiah as the the bridegroom and the church is the bride but our current state is betrothal so that would fit somewhat better because it really does look at a bride anticipating a bride position Ephesians 1.4 and 5.22-33 picture the bride as holy and blameless and without spot or wrinkle spiritually speaking as opposed to the unholiness of Israel and Judah in times past when God gave Israel a certificate of divorce Confusing the relationship between Yahweh, God, and Israel with Christ and the Church can bring a number of problems. Nancy and I have actually encountered where people confuse those two, and it created marriage problems. And here's why. How is Israel pictured in the Old Testament? Faithful or unfaithful? Unfaithful and polluted. So is that a model for Christ in the Church? No. So it's important to keep those things distinct.

Holy and blameless starts off in Ephesians 1.4 but also continues on with more explanation in Ephesians 5.22-33.

I'm talking about the time of John the Baptist, because what we're trying to determine is what's John the Baptist talking about when he uses the Bride and the Bridegroom. However, John the Baptist, especially early in the ministry of Christ, would not have had any clue about the future existence of the Church. And he would have no earthly ministry with the Church. Why would John the Baptist have no earthly ministry with the church? When did the church begin?

Acts chapter 2, Pentecost. And when did John die? Before that, a couple of years. So you have some time separation there. John had ministry with what group? What ethnic group? The Jews. And so far as we know, only in Israel. So, there was no connection. He would have had no idea if you talked about the church, the body of Christ. He would have gone, huh?

But how old was John the Baptist when he started his ministry? Pardon? How old? About six months older than Jesus. Thirty-ish, right? Thirty-ish, about six months older, and yet what's interesting is he comes before me, and he didn't mean just ahead of me in rank. So he started his ministry about six months before Jesus started his family.

Yeah, likely so. Okay, so now the existence and character of the Church was a set of truths yet to be revealed, and that mostly through the Apostles and Prophets, Ephesians 3, 4 through 7. one of the passages that spells that out. So we conclude from the above that the best understanding of John's intent was that John intended to use the bridegroom, bride, and friend of the bridegroom as a general illustration. It doesn't fit well to either match that up with the church, because John would have known nothing about the church, and he had no ministry with the church, It doesn't fit well with the idea that this is Israel and Yahweh either.

He intended to use it as a general illustration. His purpose was not to identify the bride at this point anyway. His purpose was to talk about the joy of the friend of the bridegroom. versus the friend. He used that as an illustration. In other words, he talked about the bride once and then moved on to the bridegroom and the friend of the bridegroom.

Interesting, he says, his joy has been made full. Why would his joy be made full? He came to came before Christ, and so we know that Christ is higher than him, and he's seeing his mission being accomplished. Yeah. Did John introduce Christ? Yeah. He'd done his job. It's great.

Have you ever been to some kind of a public meeting where you're going to have a main speaker, and you'll have someone who will introduce the main speaker? And can you imagine some circumstance where the fellow who's introducing the main speaker just goes on with the main speech? You would say, well, first of all, everybody would be puzzled. And certainly the person who was planning to be the main speaker would be puzzled, right? It would seem rather odd. So really, what do you do? You hear commonly, without further ado, right? Then the introduction is made and it's handed over to the main speaker. Same thing with John here. John is one who has a purpose in being there, but his purpose is to introduce.

And he had accomplished that. Everybody's going to Jesus. Great! I've done my job. I've done exactly what God wanted me to do. It couldn't get any better than that. So John's Just happy as can be. And you can imagine these disciples, here's John with this look of joy on his face and satisfaction. He says, I've done what God sent me to do. This is wonderful. And they're going, huh? They're still kind of reeling from all this.

So when John said, he must increase, but I must decrease, John is not simply being humble. Certainly he is, but that's not his main point. We could say, he must increase, I must decrease, and that would be probably a humble or a true statement. But John meant more than that.

John had begun his ministry before Jesus, was indeed six months older, but because John's ministry was repaired away for Jesus' ministry, it only made sense that John's ministry must fade away, while Jesus' ministry developed even further, much, much further. Much, much further.

John says, this as far as I go, this is all good. It's all good. Now, at this point here, it's likely that the words from here forward in the rest of this chapter are not John the Baptist words, but rather the words of John the Apostle. So John the Apostle is now taking pen in hand and writing to kind of give some spiritual context and explanation and perspective.

So John 3.31-35 reads like this.

He who comes from above is above all. He who is of the earth is from the earth and speaks of the earth. He who comes from heaven is above all. So what he has seen and heard and what he testifies and no one receives his testimony. He who has received his testimony has set his seal to this that God is true. For he whom God has sent speaks the word of God, for he gives the Spirit without measure. The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand."

So here, verse 31, that first verse that I read, is actually in the form of a chiasm with some Hebrew poetry patterns as well. Yes, Dan? You read that, and I heard on the radio this week about all the different books that are coming out about the people who have gone to heaven and come back. Yeah. There's a lot to wonder about there.

Here it says, he who comes from above is above all, and then that verse ends, he who comes from heaven is above all. And heaven we said is a euphemism for God, so you could put in there, he who comes from God is above all. and both at the beginning and at the end of that verse there. In the middle, he who speaks of the earth is from the earth and speaks of the earth. So the words above all, if you do a search on those words, not always, but often in the Old Testament, those refer to deity. So it would say using this above all focuses on Christ's deity.

Nehemiah 9.5, Psalm 57.5, 11, 89.7, and I put et al., because there are other passages as well. Those are just some examples. So this above all phrase is one that often in the Old Testament indicate deity. It's said of God, so it indicates Christ's deity there.

Now, on top of page 4, Verses 32 through 34 refer to Christ's testimony in which the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all three involved. We have a little diagram off to the left there that is intended to illustrate the Trinity. It shows the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and it has a square in the middle to represent is God.

Each of them are God. And then we have passages, two from John and one from Acts, that says the Father is not the Son. They're two separate entities. Is not, Father and Holy Spirit, those are not the same, and the Son and the Holy Spirit are not the same. There is a denomination, one that's Pentecostal, that teaches that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are just different expressions or manifestations of the same Being.

And what's happening, they're having some turmoil because one of their main high-profile people is T.D. Jakes. Ever heard of the name? T.D. Jakes? And he has very recently decided that there is a Trinity. And so they're very upset with him. He's got other issues, but at any rate, that's something where he's doing some rethinking and saying, oh, this really looks like there is a Trinity. So, at any rate, interesting thing to come about. We give examples here, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and different references.

The truth is, you could do a much greater and much further study. Some years ago, there was a guy by the name of Bickerstaff who said, you know, let's suppose I take this whole Trinity doctrine and start from the ground floor up. I'm not going to assume anything. I'm just going to go to the Bible and say, can I, from the Bible, construct the doctrine of the Trinity and forget what I've been taught and told and everything else.

And that's essentially, I wrote a book on it and laid out. Yes, I can. Yes, Stan? Could three personal beings relate to the word likeness and one essence relate to the word image? Because in Philippians 2.5 it says that Jesus came in the likeness of man, but prior to that he must have been in the likeness of God. form-wise, right, or personal being, whatever that means.

Yeah, the image and likeness is an interesting study. As you go from Genesis, because it has image and likeness, right? As you go from Genesis into the New Testament, even into the book of James, it alternates between image and likeness and uses them as synonyms. The truth is, if we study them closely, they're not exactly identical. But in function, they're actually synonyms and used that way throughout scripture. It goes back and forth, essentially stating the same truth that man was created in the image of God and the likeness of God. So, interesting. There is a slight distinction, but apparently not functionally a huge one.

But I focus on that because, in fact, The Trinity is a very common theme in the Gospel of John, and we see some of that right here in this passage. We see reference to the Father, we see Jesus calling himself and referring to himself as the Son, Son of God and Son of Man both. And by the way, why would Jesus be called the Son of God and the Son of Man? Is that confusing or is that intended to be two separate terms that actually do apply?

And how would you explain that a little bit more fully? He's God and man. He was the only begotten son of God. He was the son of Mary. And what does only begotten mean? Only. Unique. I think that's a good way to carry it across. Unique. Alright. So, anyway. Here is Christ, the Son of God. What is Christ's testimony? It talks about His testimony, and this isn't the first time it showed up in chapter 1. What is Christ's testimony? What does He have to testify about? Does Christ testify about His deity? Yeah, multiple times. One of the things we'll see throughout the book of John, we'll see it again and again, is he makes the claim, I am.

Egoimi, which is, they say in the Greek Old Testament, this is Exodus chapter 3, here's God speaking out of the burning bush, same set of Greek words in the Greek Old Testament, egoimi. In Isaiah, egoimi is used several times in chapters 40 through 48, and in one place, egoimi, egoimi. Very emphatic double use of egoimi. In normal speech, you wouldn't have both of those, unless you were being emphatic. It's basically, I am, is the repetitive message there. Okay, here's John 1, 11-13, which we studied just in about the third week there.

He came to his own, and those who were his own did not receive him. But as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in his name. He came to his own, and his own did not receive him. Is that an absolute statement or a general statement? It's a general statement because it says in the next verse, as many as did receive him. So the general statement is, no, they didn't receive him.

But for those few that did, here is the outcome. As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even those who believe in His name. And one little thing I'll point out, this word become has within its meaning and related word definitions, within its meaning, become by being born. Become by being born. Even to those who believe in His name. Can you receive without believe? Because receiving comes about by believing. So when someone says that someone received Christ, what did they do? They believed. So you can't receive Christ without believing Him. You can't get there from here.

Alright, so in John 5.20 we will see the words, the Father loves the Son again. And what's interesting, the exact same words, but a different outcome, as we'll make a comparison there.

The message that the Father has given all things over to the Son, John 3.35 is also given elsewhere.

Here's Matthew 11.27 that we studied not too long ago, and Luke 10.22 is virtually identical words. All things have been handed over to me by my Father. Now, think about this for a minute. Here's Jesus, born of Mary, a peasant woman. Basically, they move into a small town. Indications are that probably sometime after Christ was there in the temple at age 12, Joseph died. He doesn't show up on the scene, although Jesus' mother That does. Does Jesus seem like a powerful person?

Yeah. Not. Not. As a matter of fact, he just barely made it out of Bethlehem in time not to get killed among the probably 300 babies that were killed that day. I mean, this is like hanging on by fingernails from a human standpoint. This is not privilege. This is not power. This is not renown. How can he say, all things have been given to him? What does that mean?

It has to be outside the perspective of human time. Ah, okay. Yeah, in other words, if you look at it, human time, of human vision, if you look at it from the outside, this guy's nuts. All things have been given to me, and you got these leaders in Jerusalem who are looking to take you out. All things have been given to me and I don't even have a place to lay my head. Yeah, it's not from physical observation, it's not apparent in time. Let's ask this question. We talk about position and condition here at Holly Hills, right?

Did Jesus have a position? Yes, he did. Jesus had a position, and what has happened is he has been given that position, but the realization of it won't take place until later. Will there come a time when Jesus will be powerful and renowned? Yes, his second coming. Could be by the year 2020. Could be that soon.

The word things, the way we use it. We tend to use it in the physical realm, don't we? I don't think this necessarily means physical. There actually is a sense in which it means physical too in the coming millennial kingdom because there are a lot of physical aspects of that coming kingdom. However, you're right, there's a tendency when we hear things to just talk about physical things, and he's not talking about, you know, all pews have been given unto me. All hymn books. He's not just talking about the stuff here, but he's talking about things in the spiritual realm. And by the way, what calls the shots?

The physical realm or the spiritual realm? The spiritual realm is the foundation for what is physical. So when he says all things, it will ultimately include things in the physical realm, but everything in the physical realm is founded in the spiritual realm. Nothing was made that was made except by God's doing, which came out of the spiritual realm. So this truth has actually stayed in a positional and promissory way since the realization of this is yet future. We give reference there, 1 Corinthians 15, 28. All things will be handed over to Him.

So it's a positional statement. It's just like right now we would say, you as a believer are seated with Christ in the heavens. I hope none of you have a sphere of heights. It's a positional statement, right? Because you look at it and say, wait a minute, I'm down here, right? So it's a positional statement, it's not a statement of, you know, this is where we have a seat and we can look down and see the polished gold and put our hands on the velvet. No, it's not that.

So now, John 3.36, last verse in the passage.

He who believes in the Son has eternal life, but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides in him, on him rather. So, John returns to his theme that only in believing does one have eternal life. Why does John keep coming back to this? Only in believing does one have eternal life.

Why? Because the whole system back then was all fitted around Dave, along to Abraham, so it was automatic. Yeah, yeah, in other words, it was an ethnic conclusion, or something of that sort, right? Good. Why else? Why does he keep coming back to this believing?

The Jewish system was based on works. The Jewish system is based on works. This is different. By the way, a great many of the world's religions are based on works. Biblically understood, Christianity is the only truly grace-based religion of any significance. And Judaism is based on work, certainly. We've got 613 laws of Moses, and we've got to follow all those 613 laws, right?

How about Islam? The bottom line in Islam, I don't care what you believe, it's what you do. Just do it, is the way the Muslims would say it. It's what you do that matters. And we're going to make sure you do it. But we're going to separate parts. And you go into even Hinduism and Buddhism, still it's what you do. So now, believing is the key here, and he underscores it. He's said that more than once in this passage.

Earlier in talking with Nicodemus, John 3.16, for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever He's restating that truth here. That life comes from believing.

We see here, but also John 5.24, 11.25, and 20.31, believing you may have life through his name. As we'll see, actually even in the main message, about a hundred times believing is brought forth in the Gospel of John. That is from chapter 20, verse 31, the theme and the purpose of the Gospel of John. These things are written that you might believe, and that believing may have life. Yes.

And what's interesting, even under the law, they were supposed to believe that God actually took their sins away when they went through all the ceremonial procedures that they went through. It is still a matter of faith, isn't it? Absolutely. You can go through all these rituals, but this didn't do anything, I just did it. It did because everybody else is doing it, or I did it because I'll get in trouble if I don't.

But yeah, belief was key. Belief was key. And here John is underscoring belief. This is the last verse in the chapter, and he said this before in the chapter, believing is how you get eternal life, and there isn't any other way. Did John say believing and something else? No. He keeps underscoring his believing, believing, believing, believing. That's the key.

We have something to ponder regarding the use of the word obey, or at least as it's translated here. On the surface it may sound like obedience and action brings life, but the Greek words translated not obey in the New American Standard, and the King James says it, not believeth, means to willfully disbelieve. Willfully disbelieve. So, interesting, to believe, how is that done? Is that just sort of, I accidentally believed?

Believing is an active belief. Here's the Apostle Paul, and he's talking to a desperate Philippian jailer. What must I do to be saved? He's got his sword out, and he says, you better give me a good answer, or I'm just taking myself out. believe, actively believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you'll be saved. Actively believe.

Willfully disbelieving is the opposite there. So guess what? People believe or don't believe willfully. It is a matter of will. We don't just kind of, whoops, I believed. Same thing with unbelief. It is a direction that people take. It's a fork in the road and you don't cut it down the middle.

So now, on the last page, page 5, we could expand and explain the last part of John 3.36 as follows, but in sharp contrast to what was said before, the wrath of God continually dwells on him who willfully disbelieves. The wrath of God continually dwells on him who willfully disbelieves. The wrath of God remains upon and is destined for those who do not believe and are therefore still on the trespasses and sins." We give that several different references here. Romans 118, for the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness.

Romans 2.5 But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God.

Ephesians 5.6 The wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience.

Colossians 3.6 Whereas because of these things, the wrath of God will come upon the sons of disobedience.

Is God just ticked off? Is He just a mad, angry God and just can't wait to go and scorch everybody? What's going on here? I thought Jesus died for the sins of the whole world. What's happening here that we keep seeing this wrath, wrath, wrath, wrath, wrath? What's the problem?

Yeah? identifying how serious it is that you must believe in giving people a chance, you know, oh well, that's going to happen, that doesn't make any difference, well, it's just that, yeah, I mean, it's just like he gives us all second chances. This is important, and if you didn't believe it when I told you the first time, maybe you will think about it when I put it in this perspective.

Here is Christ's death on the cross, voluntarily, for each one of us. And God makes a merciful and gracious offer to everyone on the planet. Christ didn't die, as some teach, for just a select few, and the rest of you, sorry, you're toast. Christ paid for the sins of the whole world.

And the person who willfully disbelieves is saying, nah, I don't want that. I don't want that. One illustration I could use, it's like, okay, there's this large prison cell, and everybody on the whole planet is in this prison cell. And then, the problem is that they each owe, I'll just pick a number, four trillion dollars. And of course, even the richest of them, there's no way I can touch that. I can't get there.

So some guy walks in and he says, guess what? I got a check for every single one of you. The money is in the account. There's a guy that is paying the bill here. This check is good. All you got to do, it's made out to you. All you got to do is turn it over, countersign it, turn it at the door, and you walk out.

And with that kind of an offer, some people say, yeah, I don't believe that, rip it up, and they stay in the cell. And somebody else goes, eh, come on, just drop it on the floor. And somebody else says, put it in their pocket and I'll think about it. And then some go and they turn that thing over and sign it and turn it at the door and walk out free, never to go back again.

So the price is paid for all, the money is in the account. It's applied to those who believe. And believing is not anything we merit, or do, or earn. It's not a value that we have. It is simply a dependence upon, yep, the money's in the account. The money's in the account, and it's that simple. Yeah?

It seems like believing, or unbelieving, is more... continue on if you look at that verse at the top of the page. But believing is like a one-time act. Yeah, isn't it interesting that believing once and you're saved, willfully disbelieving can be something that someone maintains and actually reverses later. At one point in time I made a comparison.

Here are my two grandmothers. I got one grandmother that became a believer in the middle of a 1906 earthquake. And a piano, which is in my brother's house, was bouncing from wall to wall. And the ground was waving all over the place, and there was a lady who had been teaching a Bible study at the home. came up to my grandmother when she was still a teenager, put her arm around her and said, now Eva, are you ready to accept the Lord? That's one grandmother.

The other one disbelieved willfully until three weeks before she died. Both died around age 87. And very different stories. But willfully disbelieved and we would tell her the gospel, different family members, tell her the gospel and she'd just zip her mouth. And then we kept praying, desperate. How's this going to... I mean, she's close to death. Some neighbors, we had no idea, came over and gave her the gospel, and she believed. But years of willfully disbelieving before she believed. Now, yes?

So, to answer that previous question, isn't it kind of like we're in a car and we're going We're driving along and we continue to drive along until we make the choice. And then when you're born again, you get out of that car and you get on the airplane. And so then it's a different transportation. You actually have to stop the car, get out, get in another vehicle so you can go a different direction.

Yeah, now let's ask the question, why all this wrath of God stuff? Is somebody messed up or what? Why all the wrath of God talk? The point is that the person who doesn't believe is still in their sins, we're going to see that in John chapter 8, they're still in them. Jesus says unless you believe you're going to die in your sins and that's not good. We talk about in Christ, the person who is in Christ is not in their sins, but the person who doesn't believe is still in them. You're dead in your trespasses and sins, as Paul says.

You're in them. They stick to you. It's like an incrustation. You just get more and more of a build-up of this gooey, yucky, cruddy stuff. Alternatively, too gross. But the point being, we're still in them until we believe. You're either in Christ or you're in the sins. That's the way it is.

And so God looks at those sins and He says, look, you completely rejected this amazing grace that I offered you. To use the illustration, you know, somebody came up to you with a check fully paying off the four trillion dollars that you could never pay. And you took that check and tore it up. Or you just stuck it in your pocket and left it there.

I think many people ask why should God be wrathful in the first place? Why does he get off? He can do whatever he wants, right? Why does he do that? What's the problem with sin? I mean, why can't God just say, well, boys will be boys and girls will be girls, and shrug his shoulders and say that? Here's God. How does He react to sin? Well, it's wrath. It's wrath, ultimately. That's why it keeps being underscored. The price has been paid, but if people turn down the grace, Okay, here's the wrath. That's because that's what they chose. That's what they chose.

God can't be neutral about sin. God can't just shrug his shoulders and say, oh well. It's kind of like when my grandson does something wrong and my daughter puts him in time out. It's not something that she did. It's something that he did and how he reacted to a certain situation. And for her not to do something about it is a problem. That's exactly right. We've run out of time, so let's pray. Lord, we thank you.

As you've revealed these things here, John keeps underscoring the importance of belief and the centrality of Christ. And Lord, in a way we can look at it, we're all introducers and Christ is in fact the one who counts. And what people may see on the outside is one person or another, but in fact we are in you and you in us. And we just pray as we are introducers, Lord, that we would be used of you. We do thank you for what you reveal because you love us. We pray in Jesus' name. Amen.