Was the Messiah to be Divine?  Matthew 11:25-29

 

The context in Matthew chapter eleven is to help us to see that there is an increasing opposition toward Jesus that is arising among the people and the religious leadership. When we look at what the New Testament teaches and what the Gospels teach is that opposition from the leadership was primarily derived from the Pharisees. Remember there were two primary religious groups at that time, the Pharisees and the Sadducees. The Pharisees we might refer to as the religious fundamentalists. They were the ones who wanted to go back to the Mosaic Law. But in order to go back to the Mosaic Law, in their hyper-vigilance to protect they had set up a series of traditions and a series of secondary tertiary laws. By following those, the hope was that the 613 in the center would not be broken and Israel would not again face the horrors of military conquest and deportation that they faced in 586BC. The problem was that under their religious system—in contrast to how most people use the term, religion is always something that is contrary to what God is doing. Religion is based on works, on human effort and energy; religion is not based upon a grace-based, faith-based relationship with God, based on the fact that He has dealt with the problem of sin—they had these religious values dominating Jewish culture.

 

What we are going to see when we get into Matthew chapter twelve is the primary opposition that derived from the Pharisees toward Jesus and they will accuse Him of performing His miracles through the power of Satan. And this represents the official, final rejection of Jesus' claims to be the Messiah, His offer of the kingdom to Israel, and everything shifts after that. When we get into Matthew chapter thirteen we see a different approach from Jesus because now the people and the leaders have officially rejected His claims of Messiah, have rejected His miracles as authenticating His credentials to be the Messiah, and from chapter thirteen on the focal point is on Jesus training the disciples in preparation for something that has yet to be announced, and that is, the coming church age.

 

To give a little background as to why I have emphasized that, within the history of Judaism there has been an evolution of how the Jewish community and rabbinical scholarship counters the claims of Christianity that Jesus is the Messiah, and that Jesus came to offer the kingdom and is the promised King of Israel. In the early period of the Middle Ages they didn't really have a unified response. There were a lot of Jews up through and into the early part of the third century who were responding to the gospel. They simply read Isaiah 53 and numerous other passages and prophecies in the Old Testament and would think that this was talking about Jesus; and Christians write this. In fact, today Jews relatively never read through any sections of Scripture other than the Pentateuch, the Torah. They don't get into the prophets, they don't get into Isaiah or Daniel, and I've been told they are discouraged from doing so because it looks like they are talking about Jesus.  It actually took about 800 to 1000 years for the rabbis to come up with viable, alternative interpretations of passages in Isaiah, Psalms and other passages in the Old Testament to dilute the messianic focus from the Old Testament so that it would look as if those prophecies that we go to as being messianic were actually fulfilled historically; they were not open to be fulfilled by Jesus when He came or as an end-time/eschatological prophecy.

 

A lot of those ideas were leaked into the church during the time of the Protestant Reformation because at that time the Protestant Reformers wanted to get back to the original languages, Greek and Hebrew. But the only place they could learn Hebrew was to go to the local rabbis to teach them Hebrew. The local rabbis by this time (1500s) had all been pretty much influenced and taught the interpretations by a rabbi who was known by his acronym Rashi around 1000AD and several others. Rashi was the most notable because of the way he brought these shifts into Scripture. So the Protestants now were learning Hebrew but were picking up some of these interpretative ideas from the rabbis.

 

There has always been a thread of Protestants who really didn't believe in messianic prophecy from the Old Testament. People like John Calvin, who was a great defender of Scriptural and biblical authority, believed that the serpent in Genesis chapter three was nothing more than a snake; it wasn't Satan. How do we know it was Satan? We know for sure that is was Satan because when we get into Revelation chapters 12 & 13 Lucifer is described as "that serpent of old". That is where the connection comes in. Today we have men on faculties of many evangelical seminaries who believe the same thing. They minimize the number of prophecies in the Old Testament that talk about Jesus as Messiah. In fact, I've been told that there are a number who say that possibly the only genuine prophecy given in the Old Testament that is messianic is Psalm 110:1. Most of us would classify quite a few more—correctly. This trend that we see today may be a little larger in the academic community but there has always been a little segment in Christianity. It came out of this later rabbinic Judaism in the later Middle Ages; it didn't reflect the early thoughts of the rabbis.           

 

What we see in this passage is Jesus emphasizing His messianic credentials and His messianic claims. As we look at Matthew 11:25 we are coming out of these comments that are made in Matthew 11, talking about the rejection, the flippancy with which people treated John the Baptist and Jesus, and Jesus pronounces a judgment on these cities to whom much was given. They were given such a view of Jesus' credentials because in at least three tours through Galilee, and of His disciples, miracles were performed casting out demons, healing the sick, cleansing the lepers, giving sight to the blind, healing the lame, that had been identified as messianic miracles and credentials from Isaiah. And the people in these towns and villages in Galilee witnessed that. They heard Jesus proclaim the proximity of the kingdom, the heard the disciples announce the same thing, and yet, though many responded positively the vast majority rejected those messianic miracles and the messianic message.      

 

Matthew 11:25 NASB "At that time Jesus said, 'I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from {the} wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants'."

 

Matthew begins by saying "at that time". Jesus now responds to the circumstances and the situation. There is actually a break. As is typical with Matthew he is not giving us a chronological flow. He takes little snapshots out of the life of Christ and rearranges them in order to fit his thesis that Jesus is the Messiah who offered the kingdom to Israel and because Israel rejected the kingdom the offer has been taken back for a time and eventually Jesus will return. We don't see a chronological flow. So when Matthew says, "at that time" he is taking this out of the context of a chronological flow and is basically saying that in relation to this rejection Jesus responds.

 

His response is to thank God. It is interesting that as He is going through this height of His rejection His response is a prayer of thanksgiving. And it is not a self-oriented prayer; He is focusing on the people who have responded to this particular message. He says, "É You have hidden these things from {the} wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants'." This is the passage that is sometimes debated within the debate between Calvinists and Arminians over the sovereignty of God. I've read a few commentators who say this is where the Father has just blinded those who were not elect and illuminated those who were elect. That is not what this is talking about at all if we look at the general framework.

 

What has happened is that the Lord has revealed in a special and unique way to the cities of Galilee the credentials of Jesus as the Messiah, and that as a result of this elevated revelation they have rejected it, so that the Father is not giving them additional revelation and insight because they have rejected the lesser amount that they have already been given. This is not a passage that is depicting the Father as someone who is arbitrarily hiding these things from the Jews in Galilee. In this sentence He identifies God as Father. He just addresses Him as Father; He doesn't address Him as my Father or our Father, which is unique so far in the Gospel of Matthew. It demonstrates and intimacy that He has with the first person of the Trinity. He says, "I thank you Father, Lord of heaven and earth". And the title He ascribes to the Father is also unique here. It is emphasizing His sovereignty; that He is the one who rules and governs over the affairs of men and over His creation. So the sovereignty of God is definitely within the purview here.  

 

He says, "that You have hidden these things from {the} wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants'." So the next thing we have to understand is what is described as "these things".  It refers to the teaching and the miracles, the teaching regarding Jesus' mission as the one who is offering the kingdom and who is the King, and that His presence indicates the proximity of the King; and the "these things" also refers to the significance of the miracles as His credentials.

 

Let's think about what has been going on and not just take this verse out of context. Jesus comes on the scene only after the forerunner, John the Baptist, has been on the scene. John the Baptist has his message: "Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand". So that message is to repent. He is addressing a Jewish audience. That Jewish audience already has revelation from God, just like every human being. They have what we call general revelation—that God has revealed Himself through His creation, and that that non-verbal revelation is enough to hold every person accountable for their knowledge and understand of the existence of God. On top of having that general revelation available to them, which to some degree many of them had responded to and wanted to know more about God but were derailed by the legalism and the false religion of the Pharisees and the Sadducees. But many of them now who had heard John the Baptist wanted to learn more, and so out of curiosity they would go out into the wilderness to see John teaching and to watch the baptisms, and they would hear the message. So that is a more detailed revelation. They have gone from general revelation to special revelation as they have heard the message of John the Baptist.

 

Then when Jesus showed up John the Baptist said: "Behold, this is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world".  Then Jesus came on the scene after John was arrested and He travelled around giving more revelation, giving the same message, "Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand".  Then He sent out His disciples. So there had been several different layers of revelation given to everyone in Judea and Galilee, because by this time the disciples had travelled all throughout the northern area of Galilee and the southern area of Judea, as well as Jesus' travels through Samaria. So they had been given a lot of revelation. They have rejected it. What is going to happen?

 

We see this paradigm continually. God gives revelation. When people reject it then God doesn't give them any more revelation. What is going to happen in the next couple of chapters helps us to understand this because we come to the apex of this conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees in chapter twelve when the Pharisees accuse Jesus of performing His miracles in the power of Beelzebul. What happens in Matthew 13? Jesus starts teaching in parables. He gives the parable of the sower. Then the reaction to that from His disciples is described in vv. 10-13: "Why do you speak to them in parables?" In other words, we are kind of confused already, but now we are really confused; we don't understand what these stories are depicting.  Matthew 13:11 NASB "Jesus answered them, 'To you it has been granted to know the mysteries [previously unrevealed truth] of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted'." 

 

They have been given a certain amount of knowledge—general revelation and special revelation—but because they have rejected that, what Jesus says is, now we are going to present the truth in a way that is going to be even more difficult for them to understand. This is because they have rejected what has already been given to them. So God is just arbitrarily coming along and hiding and clouding some people's minds to the messages and enlightening others. His clouding of the minds of the wise and the prudent is as a result of their already expressed negative volition to the amount of revelation that had been given. We will see this carry on. There is going to be more revelation, more rejection and Jesus is going to take away the kingdom and will begin to teach in parables because they have rejected the light that they have already been given.

 

If you have been given a certain amount of light and you reject that then God is not going to give you more light. But if you have been given a minimal amount of light and are responsive to that then God will give you more light, and more light, and more light. So this is foundational for understanding the problem raised: well, what about the people who have never heard? There is nobody who has never heard anything—Romans chapter one. Even if it is just general revelation, everyone has heard enough to be held accountable.    

 

Romans 1:18 NASB "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, [19] because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. [20] For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse."

 

No one can say: Well, I never heard anything about that. They may not have heard the name Jesus Christ, but that is because when they got the first revelation (non-verbal) they rejected it. So God is not going to give them the second level, the third level or the fourth level. There are a lot of people in more advanced Christian cultures where they rejected at God-consciousness, general revelation, but later on they heard all manner of things about whom Jesus was and what Jesus did. But they were negative from the very first moment of understanding of general revelation.   So Paul goes on to say:

 

Romans 1:21 NASB "For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened". What makes a person a fool? The psalmist says: "The fool has said in his heart, there is no God".  So the fool is not someone who has an 80 IQ; the fool is not someone who has adopted an irrational religion. A fool is someone who has fundamentally rejected the general revelation that has been given to them. It doesn't have anything to do with their IQ or their level of education, or anything other than their response to whatever revelation God has given to them. If that response is negative then they are a fool. Paul says that their foolish heart becomes darkened as a result of their rejection of general revelation. 

 

Romans 1:22 NASB "Professing to be wise, they became fools É" They have all these academic credentials, are highly respected, have written forty or fifty books, are respected by the masses for what they have achieved in their life, but God says that because they have rejected Him, turned their back on general revelation and have turned to something else as the answer to life, they are fools. They all start worshipping something in the creation. They either worship animals, or they worship idols created with their own hands or their own minds; but they are all fools. The world classifies many of these people as wise, intelligent, successful, and great fonts of human viewpoint wisdom, but God says they are fools.

 

We also see this contrast in passages like 1 Corinthians where Paul contrasts the teaching of the Word of God (divine viewpoint) as divine wisdom, 1 Corinthians 2:6 NASB "Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature [i.e. believers understand the wisdom of the Word]; a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age É" The wisdom of the Word is not the wisdom of this age. So there are two different kinds of wisdom and two different kinds of people who are wise. There are those who are wise because they have humbled themselves under God to accept His revelation, and to believe it, and those who are wise in their own eyes (who are contrasted to believers). 

 

1 Corinthians 1:27 NASB "but God has chosen the foolish things of the world É" That doesn't mean that Christians are stupid, uneducated or unlearned. Many may be but they are not impressed with their own capabilities. They've humbled themselves. There are many who are believers and haven't been confused by academic arrogance. "É to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, [28] and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen É" So what God has just said here is that those of us who are believers are foolish, base, and despised. That is who we are as Christians, so we aren't to think too highly of ourselves. But we are humble in that we are willing to obey God and to submit to His authority and his revelation. Whereas those in the world who are esteemed by the world and are thought of as rich and powerful and intellectual, are operating on pure arrogance. James 4:6 NASB "É Therefore {it} says, ÒGOD IS OPPOSED TO THE PROUD, BUT GIVES GRACE TO THE HUMBLE.Ó  

 

These are the ones that Jesus is talking about here. "God has hidden these things (more advanced revelation) from the wise and the prudent". That is, those who in the world's estimation think that they have achieved something. The wise and the prudent would certainly include the Pharisees with all of their knowledge of the Torah, all of their knowledge of the Old Testament, all of their knowledge of all of the rabbinical teachings. They have excelled in the area of academic excellence but are controlled by their arrogance.

 

Then it says, "É and have revealed them to infants [babes]'." This is not the most literal use of BREPHOS, which would just refer to a baby or an infant. This is the word NEPIOS, a word that was also used in a somewhat insulting manner. If you had a younger sibling and he was whining, you'd say, "Aw, you're just acting like a baby", you would use the world NEPIOS. It was a word that was used idiomatically to express somebody who was older and should know better but was still acting like a whining infant. So Jesus' use of this word indicates the fact that those who submit to God's Word are viewed by the world as something that is not desirable. They are disrespected. But literally it also has the idea of being an infant. But what makes them that way is that they have submitted to the authority of God. In God's plan He has made clear to them who Jesus is and what Jesus is teaching. Because their starting point was different. Their starting point was still humility as opposed to the religious leaders, the Pharisees and many others, whose starting point was their own capabilities and their own wisdom.  

 

Jesus expresses His thanks to God that these—and there were all kinds of people, from the wealthy, the powerful and more educated to those who were common fishermen, like Peter, James and John—who had a high view of their own intellect and capabilities, and they are the wise and the prudent who have rejected Jesus' claims to be the Messiah. These are the ones who would be coming under judgment. But He is thankful that God has continued to give revelation to those who are viewed by the world as just ignorant pigs. This is good in God's sight; this fits His plan. Matthew 11:26 NASB ÒYes, Father, for this way was well-pleasing in Your sight."

 

Then we get into a fascinating verse. Matthew 11:27 NASB ÒAll things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal {Him.}"

 

Today is Palm Sunday.  In Bible churches the typical historical Christian calendar is usually only noticed at Christmas and Easter. A lot of the times we don't pay attention to some of the other days in the Christian calendar. Palm Sunday may or may not have fallen on Sunday but it is to remind us of the entry of the Lord Jesus Christ into Jerusalem at the beginning of His final week on earth, leading up to the crucifixion. So it has a messianic focus. Jesus comes into Jerusalem riding on the foal of a donkey in fulfillment of prophecy for the Messiah. He is welcomed by the masses and they are singing from the halel psalms, and it is very clear that they recognize that His entry is as the Messiah, and that they are welcoming Him as the Messiah. Some understood who he was, some still had a false view of Him and were hoping that he would be a political Messiah and take over.  

 

This is the kind of thing that is interesting when you go back and look at the conflict between Jews and Christians over who Jesus was, because in the modern church and modern synagogue they look back at Jesus and say from the Jewish side, 'Well that in the world did Jesus do that would cause the Jewish leadership, especially the Pharisees, to think that He was worthy of death'. This is their argument, that Jesus basically was a good Pharisee. His view of the Law really didn't differ that much. That is their view, and they say there is no reason to reject Jesus like they did. They can't find it. Of course, fundamentally they are rejecting the Gospels as being true because among the Jews they have pretty much bought into the liberal view from Christians that the Gospels weren't written in the middle of the first century, they were written in the late second or into the third century as a result of a lot of reflections because "obviously" if Matthew had understood Pharisaism he wouldn't have had the Pharisees as Jesus' opponents because they pretty much agreed.

 

But that just doesn't stand up because when you read in Matthew, as we all know, Jesus made a couple of claims that really irritated the Pharisees. The first one was that he was the King and therefore had the authority to offer the kingdom. The second was that He not only was the King and the promised Messiah but He was also fully God. And they viewed that as idolatry. They had by this time developed this Unitarian view of the Godhead that to believe that Jesus was God and Yahweh was God was to have multiple Gods, and that violated their concept of a more Unitarian monotheism. So they are reacting to that and they think that His claim to be God is ultimately what they crucified Him for. It is interesting that in this literature that isn't really where the focus is. The focus is that Jesus isn't interpreting the Law any different. So there are some problems there.

 

And that is why this is an important verse because, Jesus is clearly making a claim here to be one with the Father. When we look at the essence of God, all the attributes of God—sovereignty, righteousness, love, eternal life, omnipotence, omnipresent, omniscience, veracity and immutability—the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit all equally share these same attributes. They are identical in essence, so they are all equally fully God. It is very clear from the New Testament Scriptures that Jesus claimed to be God.

 

Here He is claiming to be one with the Father in knowledge. He says, "All things have been handed over to Me by My Father", a claim that is reiterated in other passages of Scripture. "É nor does anyone know the Father except the Son". So the Father has exhaustive knowledge of the Son. But then He flips it and says, "nor does anyone know the Father except the Son". The Son is not derivative deity. This excludes derivative deity, excludes the idea of Sonship that Jehovah's Witnesses have, that some time in eternity past the Son is created and given deity. Jesus says that in the same way the Father knows the Son, the Son knows the Father. It is an exhaustive knowledge of the Father. It means that He has omniscience that is equal to the omniscience of the Father, and therefore He has the same authority as the Father. He is claiming the prerogatives of deity.  

 

This really isn't anything new. What I want to end up reviewing on this Palm Sunday is that Jesus' claims to be Messiah were claims to be divine that were embedded within the prophecy of the Old Testament. And I think it is good for all of us to have at the fingertips of our minds five or six examples from the Old Testament of how the Old Testament portrays Jesus as being God.

 

One of the things I am going to point out as we go through this is some of the early comments made in the Midrash—commentaries made by the rabbis in first, second and third centuries—as well as comments made in the Talmud to show that the early teaching among Jews after the destruction of the temple in AD 70 to show that the Jews still understood these passages to be teaching something about the Messiah. Whereas today, not so much. As you develop your skills at explaining the gospel these are good passages to have in your arsenal.

 

The first one is Isaiah 9:6 which is a prophecy looking forward to the Messiah. NASB "For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace." The first two lines are parallel in the Hebrew poetry so that "child" and "son" are parallel. The term "son" had specific messianic connotation and is related to deity. A child born indicates humanity; in the second a son is given—not just born. The Son of God is given. The Son of Man, the title for the Messiah in Daniel chapter seven—that son is given, indicating deity. Then we see the government will be upon His shoulders—looking forward to the future messianic government and kingdom. Then we have the names by which he is identified. The word "Wonderful" is a Hebrew word used only to describe God; it is never used to describe man. He is called "Counselor"; He is called specifically the "Mighty God". That is the most obvious. This child is called Mighty God. He is also called "Eternal Father". Only God is eternal. How can someone who is born be eternal? That is the conundrum. 

 

In the Targum of Johnathan we have a comment that "His name has been called from Old, Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, one who lives forever". That is how they translate that. "É the anointed one in whose days peace shall increase upon us".  This indicates that when the Targum of Jonathan was written, about the time of the early church, it was clearly understood to be a messianic prophecy.

 

One of the great rabbis, Eban Ezra, said: "There are some interpreters who say that Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father are the names of God, and that only "Prince of Peace" is the name of the child. But according to my view [Eban Ezra] the right interpretation is that they are all the names of the child. So again, early rabbinical thought was that this is messianic and indicates that the child that is born is fully God.

 

Jeremiah 23:5, 6 NASB "Behold, {the} days are coming,Ó declares the LORD, ÒWhen I will raise up for David a righteous Branch; And He will reign as king and act wisely And do justice and righteousness in the land. In His days Judah will be saved, And Israel will dwell securely; And this is His name by which He will be called, ÔThe LORD our righteousness.Õ" The imagery is of the family tree of David from which there will be a King, a Branch that comes out.  His name, the name that comes out of David (humanity): "Yahweh our righteousness". So the Branch from David is also called by the personal name of God, as Yahweh.

 

This name is given specifically to Yahweh, and in the Midrash on Proverbs 19:1, Rabbi Huna says, "Eight names are given to the Messiah." In the middle of them Yahweh is given as a name for the Messiah. On the Midrash on Lamentations 1:16 we read: What is the name of the Messiah? Yahweh is His name, and this is proved quoting from Jeremiah 23:6.

 

Another passage is Micah 5:2, which is primarily referred to as the birthplace of the Messiah, Bethlehem. But at the very end of the verse it says that He is the one whose goings forth are from everlasting. He is born in Bethlehem, indicating His humanity, but He goes forth from eternity—meaning He is eternal. The Targum of Jonathan, written in the second century AD, states: "And you Bethlehem Ephratha, you who are too small to be numbered among the thousands of the house of Judah, from you shall come forth before me, the Messiah."

 

In Psalm 2:7, 8 the Messiah is identified as the Son of God, is begotten by God, and that it is to this Son that the nations as an inheritance will be given.

 

Isaiah 7:14 NASB "Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel." What you will hear if your are talking to somebody who knows anything is that virgin is a mistranslation there because it really doesn't necessarily mean virgin. However the word does mean a very young woman of marriageable age who has a conception and birth that is unique. It is so unique it can be a sign. It is no sign for a non-virgin to conceive and give birth. So obviously for a young woman of marriageable age to conceive and give birth would be a sign. The rabbis who translated the Septuagint (LXX) understood that alma here meant virgin in context, and they translated it into the LXX as PARTHENOS, the Greek word that specifically describes a virgin. 

 

Psalm 110:1 NASB "The LORD says to my Lord: ÒSit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet.Ó Who are the two Lords here? David is writing this. David is alluding to one Lord as the Lord, Yahweh, and the other Lord as David's superior. The only person superior to David is God. So there are two divine beings having a conversation here and "my Lord" (the second Lord) is told to sit at the right hand of the first Lord, which indicates a place of equivalence where they had the same authority. 

 

Proverbs 30:4 asks a series of six questions. NASB "Who has ascended into heaven and descended? (Only God) Who has gathered the wind in His fists? (Only God) Who has wrapped the waters in His garment? (Only God) Who has established all the ends of the earth? (Only God) What is His name (Yahweh) or His sonÕs name? (Yeshua) Surely you know!"  This indicates that God has a Son. Tie that to Psalm two and you have a fascinating prophecy related to the Messiah as the Son of God.

 

In the verse that we are looking at in Matthew 11:17 Jesus says, "All things have been handed over to Me by My Father É" This is what is stated in John 3:35 NASB "The Father loves the Son and has given all things into His hand". This isn't just an isolated verse over in Matthew. Again, in John 5:21 Jesus says, NASB "For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son also gives life to whom He wishes. [22] For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, [23] so that all will honor the Son even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him." The way He is talking is, the Son and the Father are of equal authority and equal deity.

 

Then we come to the most significant parallel verse in the Gospel of John (10:15) where Jesus says, "As the Father knows me, even so I know Him". We have mutual knowledge of one another. Then He develops that in the next sentence and says, "I lay down my life for the sheep."

Slides