How To Study The Bible
Vern Peterman · Aug 4, 2002
How to Study Bible (2001-02), No. 44
Holly Hills Bible Church
https://hollyhillsbiblechurch.org/teaching/messages/48262245496792

Transcribed from the recording by SermonAudio, so expect the occasional misheard word.

Okay, we're actually going to move on to another verse this morning. Amazing, huh? But since we have an overhead, I want to do some quick flashing of some things that didn't seem to make it. This was from the Weiss translation and the point being this if issue which Weiss brings across here is since and then if in the second part and the point Then also, this is the linguistic and exegetical key in taking this, which is translated sense here. It says, the fact of fulfillment is assumed to be fulfilled. Like I say, my strong preference in translating it and bringing it across is, if it is certain, translate it as certainty. It seems translators get snagged on putting an if there, which Somebody who is not looking at the original language will get a possible instead of a, you know, this is why kind of thing. And it's a very different understanding. So even here, while they explain the fact of fulfillment as assumed, if is not really the right way to bring it across. But now the next one, and this was I think the point where I kind of lost the overhead last time.

The next one, this is a fellow by the name of Perkins who explains this quite well. It's an actual past event. And then this next one applies a likely outcome to the circumstance. So it's the sense if sequence. And again, what I like to do is to look for confirmation, two or three different scholars coming from different standpoints arriving at the same conclusion. rather than, as we pointed out with that one Weiss passage that Joanne brought up, if I see just one guy says something and nobody else sees it, I'm reluctant to teach that because I want to see that something is well-founded and not some particular person's theory, hypothesis, or partially explored and explained conclusion. Let's move ahead to the passage we were looking at here.

One of the points we made in verse 13, "...and no man has ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of Man which is in heaven." In other words, He was able to be an eyewitness for one. You see that? Christ was able to be an eyewitness because He was there. But the turning point, and this is a part we haven't gotten to yet, is verse 14. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up. What's he saying there?

It seems to me like he's being very gracious to Nicodemus because he's giving him an analogy that he can certainly relate to. And that's, I think, a key point. Analogies that people can relate to. It's something even Paul uses as a point of contact in Acts 17.

He goes there and he says, hey, they've got an altar to the unknown God. And by the way, that altar has been found. Archaeologists have found that altar to the unknown God that Paul refers to. Paul in Acts 17 finds this altar to the unknown God, and so he comes to them and appeals to them and says, the unknown God, the one you don't know, that's the one I'm telling you about. And Jesus does, as Joanne pointed out, very much the same thing. He takes a point of contact that Nicodemus would very well understand.

The Jews saw the entire Old Testament as inspired. They didn't call it the Old Testament. They saw the entire Old Testament as inspired, but you know how we have kind of a red letter edition where we say, well, this is a little bit more, you know, and so we'll look for those red letters. To them, the Mosaic law was extra.

And here, you know, to appeal to Moses and to talk about what Moses did, that was the ultimate basis of appeal that Jesus could make, right? Here's Moses, and what did Moses do, and what did Moses say? So Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness. When and where did that happen? After they had sinned and complained about the manna, wasn't he?

In numbers? Okay, yes. Unhappy, okay. And what happened to them? They began getting this, you know, basically it was threatening their lives. It wasn't just an irritant, right? And let's take a... And you know, that's a very good point. He didn't say, by golly, you're a gun. If you don't, I'm going to swallow you up. But he's saying the bottom line is you are headed for death. And if you don't look to This provision, you're gone. Here is the response in Numbers 21, 7-9.

So the people came to Moses and said, We have sinned, interesting statement, because we have spoken against the Lord and you. Intercede with the Lord that he may remove the serpents from us. And Moses interceded for the people. Then the Lord said to Moses, Make a fiery serpent, set it on a standard, and it shall come about that everyone who is bitten, when he looks at it, he will live. And Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on the standard. And it came about that if a serpent bit any man, when he looked on the bronze serpent, he lived. So this is what he's making reference to, right? So Nicodemus, being a specialist of specialists on the law, would very well know this.

He didn't give him chapter and verse. Why? They didn't have that until later, right? Okay. Yeah, didn't have any, but... Yeah, that's right. Just as Moses and Nicodemus think, just as Moses did this, instantly, oh, I know what that's all about. Okay?

And look at this. What are the parallels between this and Christ being lifted up? What are the parallels that you can think of? Because of sin, our sin. Okay. We have sinned, okay? It's a sin problem. Alright? Alright? That's one thing. What else? The consequences of sin. The consequences of sin are what? Yeah. Okay. Good. And what else? Christ was sin for us. Pardon? Christ was sin for us and made sin. He was made sin for us.

Yeah, what was on this? standard that it was lifted up. Here's this serpent. Okay. Yeah. This creature that was not regarded well by the Jews. It was despised. Figure of Satan. Yes. Yeah. It was despised. Okay. All right. What else do you see? Okay. It was set on a standard. What does the standard do? It puts them up to a place of visibility and access. Okay. All right, what else do you see? What else is parallel? Well, for one thing, the Greek word is the same in both instances. Which Greek word?

Hupso. Who's that? Hupso. To heighten, to raise high. To raise up, okay. All right, the Greek word is the same. Okay. All right, what else do you see? Good. When they looked upon and beheld the serpent, it wasn't really the bronze that made the holding or the belief. It was the response of belief. If you didn't believe it, you'd say, you know, hey, I don't like the condition I'm in, but that ain't going to do me any good. Right? And just looking at it, that's the thing that's going to do me any good. Yeah.

You'd look at it and say, how's that going to do anything about this? Our human response to to what Christ did on the cross might be, you know, hey, I've got this and that and that problem. How does this guy nailed up on this piece of wood do anything for me? But from a human standpoint, it seems to fall short, doesn't it? Alright, good. What else? If they rejected, they died. Yes, if they rejected, basically they stayed on the same path.

Sin has a momentum, doesn't it? Once it gets headed off in the direction of sin, it basically stays in that direction unless you're going to do something radical to change it and only God can make the provision to change it. Sin has a, kind of in a parallel to physics, has a momentum. It carries on to its same consequences unless there's an outside force, outside of man, to change it, okay?

At this point we talked about belief, but it's also this beholding. This beholding. It was a recognition that salvation is outside of me. I can't do it. I can't do it with something I got, with something I can create. This is God's provision. Yeah, Cheryl? Yeah, there was one observation too, the fact that it was the serpent that bit them and God told Moses to put an image of that serpent, the very thing that bit them, on that pole. There we go. Yeah. Christ who knew no sin was made sin for us. The sin was the problem, right? So what happens? Sin itself is what is crucified. Christ was made sin for us. Amazing analogy and this is not accidental. Not accidental. Has Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness?

Which, of course, this is something Nicodemus is going to understand well. Maybe not the full depth in terms of the analogy, but it's a great starting point because Nicodemus is going to understand it. Even so, must the Son of Man be lifted up? He's going to understand the first half of verse 14, is he going to understand the second half? Okay, yes, you're correct. Eventually he will, but let's do one thing. On the one side, as Joanne pointed out, it's an analogy with which Nicodemus could very well connect. On the flip side of it, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up. When Nicodemus heard Son of Man, did he think that, oh, that's the guy I'm looking at?

Probably not directly, but I think he started to think that. It kind of took time, didn't it? There was something different about this man. Yeah, it took time. He started to see it, and in fact, as Joanne pointed out, eventually we know that he did, but it didn't happen instantly, did it?

But a key point is that the Lord started with what he knew to give him a kind of a comparison, a place to launch to understand what he didn't know. Let's look at, John doesn't let loose of this lifted up idea. In chapter 12, he gives us a really good insight into what the people's thinking was about this being lifted up. Let's take a look at this. In chapter 12, 32-34 is the passage I'm looking at, and this lifted up phrase comes in 32 and 34. So we have kind of an Oreo cookie there. So let me read it.

And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself. But he was saying this to indicate the kind of death by which he was to die. The crowd then answered him, We have heard out of the law that the Christ is to remain forever. How can you say the Son of Man must be lifted up? Who is this Son of Man? Ok, now, this is a very insightful verse. First of all, this is chapter 12. What we've been studying is from chapter 3. So this is later. So we're saying that some time has gone by between chapter 3 and chapter 12, and at least the masses have not got a very good picture, have they? No. They've not come around.

So let's take a look. Here's this if thing. I don't know, but I raised that as a question. It's another place where the translators, I'm not sure, but That may be something that personally I would want to look at. And I don't want to get too distracted, but that could be your own project to take a look at and see what it is. But let's put it this way.

Is he going to be lifted up? Is that in doubt? Is it in doubt? No. But anyway. Shouldn't you say if and if it's so? Yeah, in other words, something to indicate other than just it might happen. Yeah, I mean, Christ didn't come to earth to just kind of throw the dice and, gee, I wonder if I'm going to be lifted up. Yeah, I haven't looked at it in terms of the original Greek, but I'm just saying that that's something that, just looking at it, I would question it. Just because of that point that I keep bringing up here.

But, let's not let us distract it. I am lifted up from the earth, I'll draw him into myself. He was saying this to indicate the kind of death he was to die. Notice what is the crowd's response? Let's take a look here real carefully at their response. We have heard out of the law.

Now, they use the phrase the law. One of the things you'll hear in the New Testament is the law and the prophets. In fact, it was the law and at the beginning, and the prophets at the end, and in between there were historical books, poetical books, books of different kinds, but their idea is kind of like A to Z, and everything in between. And so they would say the law and the prophets, and they really meant the whole, what we call the Old Testament. And they got to the place where just the law was a shortcut. We just call it the law. In fact, they're including everything in what we call the Old Testament. But we have heard out of the Old Testament, to put our phrase in it, that the Christ... Now, we have here the Christ.

What would they have said in their original thinking? They would have thought, as Jews, they would be thinking Messiah. This is brought across to us in Greek. But they would have been thinking, in our concept of Jewish Messiah, that's what's in their minds, right? In our concept of the Messiah, he is to remain forever. Now, what are they thinking of? Yeah, they're thinking of here's this earthly kingdom and it's going to go on and on and on and on, right?

And are they wrong in that? No. What are they missing? The church age, okay? And what else are they missing? Certainly that, yes. I'm sorry, what? Yeah, in other words, they were looking, okay, here we are, we're under the Romans, these Romans are nasty. We hate the Romans. Okay?

That's their thinking. And they had everything from, on the one hand, kind of the Sadducees and the Pharisees who'd worked out a deal with the Romans that kind of gave them some power. And a few, like Matthew, who actually collected taxes for the Romans. And then you have the other extreme, Simon the Zealot. They would do a lot of cloak and dagger stuff and take people out. In a context outside of the Twelve Disciples, Simon the Zealot would be killing Matthew the tax collector.

I mean that. I'm not exaggerating. That would be a strategy. Take him out. Next time I get a chance, I'm going to put a dagger through his ribs. That would be their thinking. In that context, they're thinking, okay, here's these nasty Romans, and you've got a spectrum of political responses to that. But one way or another, they're hoping that the Messiah will come and free them from these nasty Romans. That's their thinking. And it was such a prominent thinking at that time that it was only a few decades later that they would pull off a revolt and try to kick the Romans out and twice after that, try it again.

They're still waiting for the Messiah. Yes, and actually a great many of them have given up. But the Orthodox Jews, yes, still waiting for the Messiah. And I've read some of their documents even now with all the time that's gone by and they'll have this mixed idea, maybe there's two messiahs, maybe the messiah is going to do something and then come back, and they got a real confused idea. Because they look at the passages that talk about the messiah suffering, and then they look at the passages that talk about the messiah reigning, and they don't make sense out of it. So what have they dropped out? They've dropped out that Christ's first coming, the first coming of the messiah, was for this purpose, to be lifted up.

And that there would be this church age in between and then go through the tribulation period. That whole set of events between just was not in their thinking. They did not understand it. They didn't comprehend it. And in one sense you can't blame them because the Old Testament doesn't talk about the church. It doesn't talk a lot about the Messiah, does it? Yes. It talks repeatedly about the Messiah's suffering. But they weren't able to get it sorted out. They didn't want to see it. They wanted to deliver. He reigned and took them right into the... That's right. From a human standpoint, think of it.

Here's Acts 1.6. What are the disciples saying? Is now the time when you're going to set up the kingdom? Is now the time?

Look, we've spent three years with you. We went through all this stuff on the cross. All that horrible time in the Garden of Gethsemane. You're getting arrested. One of us tries to pull a sword out, cuts off a servant's ear, you put it back. We're confused, but after all this stuff is now the time. So they're still thinking that. This is the popular mindset. The Son of Man must be lifted up. Where does this fit into this whole picture?

Could you tell us again how the Old Testament looked at that term, Son of Man? It comes out of the book of Daniel. It was a term that was well understood to mean the Messiah. The book of Daniel specifically uses that term as a messianic term. So they would understand that.

Now, given that, But you see the phrase Son of Man in the book of Daniel, and it doesn't talk about the Son of Man in terms of suffering. It talks about the Son of Man coming as we understand to be the second coming. So now, here's this, the Son of Man must be lifted up, huh? Where are you making that connection? There are like Psalm 22 for example, Isaiah 53, real extensive passages But they didn't connect that up with the Son of Man.

They somehow were still puzzled about how that was going to come about. And still are. To the point where many of them have just dismissed the whole messianic idea. It's actually a minority of Jews. Even of those that are religious, a minority that are actually looking for the Messiah to come. They are, but it's a minority.

But also wasn't this, I mean, didn't the Jews think also that this was just for them? That they didn't have the picture of all these Gentile nations also falling under? Yeah, they considered the Gentiles as just kind of knuckling under and that was kind of their picture, you know. But they didn't see themselves as this is the channel of God's blessing the world. A lot of them didn't get that idea.

You started to say something? Do you know or think that after Jesus came with his message that then the Jewish rabbis etc. looked back at Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 and just kind of dismissed that information? It's interesting because I've done a fair amount of reading of what they have written and they wrote even within the first second centuries they wrote about Jesus himself that you actually find in some of the the rabbinical writings they talk about Christ and there's even there's even a Jewish commentary on the book of Revelation so I mean they didn't neglect it but but there are things about it all that it's a it's a mixed story and and just to kind of give a quick summary some Jews After there was the failed and most catastrophic rebellion in 70 AD, in which the Jews just got slaughtered, and yeah, actually slaughtered many of their own people. If you failed to oppose the Romans, they slaughtered you, by the thousands. There were two subsequent major rebellions after that, and both of those were failed rebellions. The Jews were a very difficult people, but many of the rabbis after that were very reluctant to embrace this messianic idea because it stirred too much of this rebellion and trouble.

There was sort of a tendency to just hold off on this thing and not focus in on it. Especially some months ago when we studied through Daniel 9, 24 through 27, you kind of look at, okay, here's the clock. you know, of the 70 weeks and all that. It points to Jesus. And so a lot of them today don't even want to look at it. But there's a website called Torah.org. And I've looked through a lot of their answers and that kind of thing.

And boy, they really backpedal on it. Hard. Because it's a very painful thing for them. And so they will put it off as, this is an analogy of the difficulties the Jews will go through, or something of that sort. And that's only one of their approaches, but that's one of the ways that they'll deal with it. So they'll look at Isaiah 53, they'll look at Psalm 22, and they'll just say that that's a description of the awful things the Jews will experience, and have experienced. So they'll just chalk it up to that.

Forgetting that It speaks in singular person terms, forgetting also the Jews were spoken of as female, not male. So anyway, there's problems with their interpretation. But you can see, given their perspective, how can you say the Son of Man must be lifted up? They see that passage in Daniel where it uses the phrase Son of Man, well that's talking about what we call the Second Coming.

So you can see they're trying to make this connection. Whoa, wait a minute. How can you get there? Who is this son of man? And what's the response? What are the verses right after that? 35, 36, and 37. What do those say? Somebody read that for us, would you?

And Jesus said unto them, yet a little while ago, is the light with you? Walk when you have the light, lest darkness come upon you. For he that walketh in darkness knoweth not where he goeth. While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may be the sons of light. These things said Jesus departed and did hide himself from them. Interesting response. Yeah, the thing is, what was their problem? What was their stumbling block here? Yeah, they could not make the connection.

Now, given this as a backdrop, because this John comes back to this phrase, lift it up here, twice here in this passage we just looked at. Given that as a backdrop, what insights does that give us into what Nicodemus might have been thinking when Jesus said what he did in verse 14? What question marks might have been going through Nicodemus' mind? Okay. Yeah, in other words, had he made the connection?

Do we have any evidence at that point in time that he had made the connection? that this man he was talking to was the Son of Man. As we've indicated, he was maybe starting to get it, but he wasn't there yet. And what questions do these Jews in chapter 12 have? Who is the Son of Man? Who are you talking about? And what's the other question? How can you say that the Son of Man? Yes, in other words, on what basis are you saying, you know, where is it? Show us. On what basis are you saying that the Son of Man must be lifted up? That didn't connect with them. And then, who is He? Those were their sticking points. They didn't see it.

They were anticipating Okay, here's the Son of Man, he's going to come, we've got this rain that goes forever, and where's the rest of what you're talking about in the midst of it? So did they think that Daniel was also an allegory? Or something? I don't believe they thought it was an allegory, but that phrase Son of Man in Daniel is only used in a context of the second coming. So they weren't looking at, they weren't making the connection. Here's the son of man and he's actually going to come and be lifted up to die? They couldn't make the connection. And what was their problem?

Jesus actually went to an interesting direction on this. He did what? What was Jesus' response in chapter 12? He didn't answer them directly. Okay. But what was the response in verse 37 there, ultimately? What did Jesus do? They'd seen the miracles, and he says the Son of Man has to be lifted up, all those things, and yet they didn't believe. So his response, interestingly, was to hide himself.

Notice that the belief issue comes up in chapter 12 with respect to being lifted up. And that's something we pointed out earlier. The belief issue comes up. And it's the same thing we're going to see in the very next verse in John chapter 3. Up to this point has John written in this account, up through verse 14, has he written about belief? Has he? Well, you mean up to? To verse 14. Verse 14?

Yeah. John 3, first 14 verses, says you're written about belief. Yeah, if I told you earthly things, you did not believe. Okay, yeah. He has begun to talk about the belief issue there. Okay? But he has not zeroed in on it specifically. In verse 15, he's going to really turn the tide in terms of bring this belief issue up. Ultimately, think about this. It isn't just a matter of what do people understand. It's a question of what they believe. I don't mean belief in terms of intellectual assent. I mean belief in terms of what they will place their confidence in.

Nancy and I know a lady. She lives over in California. We've known her for many years. three decades. She has been presented with the truth of the gospel. She has even gotten to the point where she has been on the elder board of a liberal church. But she isn't really willing to believe. So she'll know things, she'll even go out and do stuff that's religious, but knowing full well that it takes her placing her faith in Christ and what Christ did for her and pending upon that, she's unwilling to do that.

And as you read these accounts here, you notice that it keeps coming back to the belief issue. We're going to see that as we get into verse 15 and especially into verse 16. This is the one, you know, John 3.16 that everybody talks about.

And what we're going to see there is the Greek structure of John 3.16 emphasizes belief. Okay? It comes out a little bit in the English. In the Greek, it's like belief. Okay? Do you keep going back to the law? Yeah, because what does the law keep pointing you back to though? Reliance upon the law says do.

But what Jesus is bringing Nicodemus around to is belief. Different. And even this verse we're looking at, verse 14, There's nothing, absolutely nothing that people can do about those serpents except to believe. That is what deals with the sin issue. Yeah. And there isn't any other thing. Can't I do something else, Moses? I mean, there must be some way I've got to contribute to this thing. And the response is, no, this is it. And that's all there is. And there isn't anything else.

So anyway, we're going to be turning a corner here as we step into verse 15. We're going to see the belief issues start to come up more strongly. And at 16, it just comes out in flashing neon lights. I mean, it's real strong. Anyway, that's enough for now. That's all we can handle, right?

Okay, let's pray. Lord, we do give You thanks that You have made every provision Lord, how desperately we are in need of your provision, but how amazing in the way that you have not only saved us, but blessed us. And we just pray this in Jesus' name. Amen.