The Witnesses to Jesus'
Deity; John 5:31-37
John
The verse begins with a third
class condition in the Greek. A third class condition is almost like a pure
condition where the condition is uncertain of fulfilment: maybe yes, maybe no.
So He is using the 3rd class condition here and is saying: “If
(maybe I will, maybe I won’t) I bear witness of myself my testimony is not
true.” The word for “witness” is martureo
[marturew] and is the basic word for giving a legal testimony
or witness. We find this word scattered throughout rhe Gospel of John. It is a
fundamental theme in John’s presentation of the Gospel. Remember that John is
writing this Gospel “that you may know” with absolute unqualified certainty
that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah, and “that by believing you might have
life through His name.” When he begins that verse he says, “These are written,
and “these” refers to the signs that are mentioned. John mentions eight signs,
including the resurrection, in the Gospel of John. He is building a case. In
order to validate the claims he is going to call various witnesses. Most of the
witnesses are found in chapter five.
The doctrine of the witnesses in John
1)
Martureo
denotes the affirmation or attestation of some person or event which might be
the object of scepticism or antagonism.
2)
This word came to
designate the summary of the apologetic teaching that John is advancing in
defence of Jesus and His work.
3)
It doesn’t refer
primarily to the corroboration of His historical existence, or that He did what
He did. But John is going to validate that He is who he claimed to be and that
He performed what He claimed to perform: that He is the Son of God and that He
died on the cross as a substitute for out sins.
4)
John marshals
seven witnesses and five are mentioned in chapter five. The only two witnesses
in John that are left out of this chapter are the witness of the Holy Spirit,
which is mentioned later, and the witness of people like the woman at the well
and the disciples.
5)
There is the
witness of the Father.
6)
Jesus’ own
witness of Himself.
7)
The witness of
John the Baptist. He goes to John the Baptist merely as a concession to the
finitude of His audience.
8)
His miracles, the
works of Jesus.
9)
The witness of
the Scripture.
When Jesus says, “If I
{alone} testify about Myself, My testimony is not true,” don’t jump the gun and
jump to conclusions here that Jesus is referencing the Mosaic Law. Deuteronomy
17:6 NASB “On the evidence of two witnesses or three witnesses, he
who is to die shall be put to death; he shall not be put to death on the
evidence of one witness.” It is a very important principle that was brought
against somebody had to be validated by at least two witnesses. This is
reconfirmed in 2 Corinthians 13:1.
In John chapter eight there
is an apparent contradiction. John
This is important because
when we sit down with an unbeliever and we explain the deity of Christ we are
asked: How do you know this is true? We are making a statement here on the
basis of Scripture that Jesus is God. The unbeliever, however, is operating on
human viewpoint autonomous reason. His
concept of truth, of proof, of validation, of knowledge is all based on human
viewpoint autonomous concepts of reason. Whereas you are approaching the gospel
from divine viewpoint, from what the Scripture says. Now the Scripture says
that if Jesus is who He claims to be and He is God, then God by virtue of His
very nature is absolute truth. God is the standard of truth. One the unbeliever
wants is some autonomous independent standard of truth that we can both appeal
to. But if you really believe God is the absolute standard of truth then there
is no autonomous concept or category called truth that you can appeal to. He is
the ultimate reference point in the universe. As soon as you get caught in that
trap of trying to prove the Scriptures on the basis of human viewpoint concepts
what you are doing is saying that you are going to prove the truth of Scripture
on the basis of a false system of knowledge, and you have already lost the
battle. You are going to use human viewpoint reasoning and a human viewpoint
concept of truth and a human viewpoint concept of proof to try to demonstrate
absolute truth. Jesus is going to show us that we don’t have to do that. The
issue isn’t that complicated; the issue is going to be very, very simple.
In John chapter eight Jesus
is saying, Even if I am the only one who is witnessing to myself,
my witness is true. He is answering a different question and it is in a
different context than John five. In John five Jesus has been saying, “I can’t
do anything independent of the Father. What the Father does, I do. What the
Father tells me to do, I do. I am in equality with God but I am not independent
of God; I am not doing it my way, I’m doing it God’s way.” So when it comes to
verse 31 He says, “If I bear witness of myself apart from the Father, My
witness isn’t true.” The context bears this out.
John
Human viewpoint thinking is
going to say this is a circular argument, but the problem is that if Jesus is
who He claims to be, what do we expect? If Jesus is God and He is the ultimate
reference point of the universe we expect Him top appeal to Himself as the
ultimate reference point of the universe. If Jesus had appealed to autonomous
reason to validate the fact that He is God, that if He did what some people
think this passage is doing and he appealed to John the Baptist, the creature,
as His ultimate validation, He wouldn’t who he claimed to be. If Jesus is who
He claims to be, which is the ultimate standard of truth in the universe then
he can’t appeal to anything other than Himself to prove it. So the way Jesus handles
the argument proves who He is. It is not circular, it
is what we expect of Him if He is who he claims to be.
What Jesus is saying is, If I try to prove myself independent of the Father then I
have invalidated Myself. I have to remain in this position of subordination to
the Father. The implication is that if we try to prove Christianity in a
non-Scriptural way, just as if Jesus tried to prove His deity in a non-biblical
way he would have invalidated His claim, then our proofs are invalid and not
Scripture. We can’t let the unbeliever who is operating on an autonomous
rationalism and empiricism or idealism, or any other pagan system
of thought define the terms and the issues for us. He has to march on
God’s agenda and not on his agenda. So we have to controls
the terms and definitions of the conversation. Remember, he can be
negative and reject the whole thing, and that is his decision. Truth,
authority, and the issues like the heathen, don’t go there; like suffering, don’t
go there. They don’t have the capacity. Remember 1 Corinthians
John
John
Luke 16, the rich man and
Lazarus. Luke
John
John
John
John