Why Did the Leaders Want to Kill Lazarus?

Why would the chief priests want to kill a man Jesus had raised from the dead? John gives the reason: people were believing in Jesus because of Lazarus. I want to follow the events leading to that plot, because the leaders’ response exposes what can happen when preserving influence becomes more important than receiving the truth.

The Miracle That Made Lazarus a Target

By the time Jesus reached Bethany, Lazarus had been in the tomb four days. Mary and Martha had been grieving their brother’s death, but Jesus’ delay did not mean He was unable to help. He had said that the illness would serve God’s glory and the glorifying of the Son. What followed would reveal His authority in a way the people gathered there could witness.

Before going to the tomb, Jesus told Martha, “I am the resurrection and the life” (John 11:25). He then called Lazarus out of the grave. The man who had died emerged still bound in graveclothes, and Jesus told the people to loose him and let him go. The people who had mourned him were now seeing him alive again.

Many of those who saw it responded by believing in Jesus:

Then many of the Jews who had come to Mary, and had seen the things Jesus did, believed in Him.

John 11:45

The sign directed their faith toward the One who had called Lazarus from the tomb. It revealed Jesus as the Son sent by the Father, with authority over life and death. The study on the miracles of Jesus examines that purpose in His works more broadly. John also tells us why he recorded the signs:

And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

John 20:30-31

John’s purpose requires more from a reader than amazement at an unusual event. Lazarus’s return to life bears witness that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and calls us to believe in Him for life. The leaders who opposed Him were faced with that same testimony.

The Council Chose Control Over Truth

Some of those present reported what Jesus had done to the Pharisees. The chief priests and Pharisees then gathered a council to discuss His growing influence:

Then the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered a council and said, “What shall we do? For this Man works many signs. If we let Him alone like this, everyone will believe in Him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and nation.”

John 11:47-48

The leaders acknowledged that Jesus was working signs. Their concern was what the spread of belief would do to their place and nation, and they anticipated Roman intervention if it continued. Instead of asking how they should respond to the One doing these works, they discussed how to contain His influence.

The fear of what Rome might do made their argument sound practical, but it could not justify resisting the truth before them. They should have been leading people to recognize God’s work and respond in repentance and worship. Protecting their authority had become a reason to oppose the One to whom the signs pointed.

Caiaphas, the high priest, argued that one man should die rather than the whole nation perish. John explains that his words carried a prophetic meaning beyond that political calculation: Jesus would die for the nation, and would gather into one the children of God scattered abroad. From that day, the leaders plotted to put Him to death. God’s saving purpose did not make their decision to murder Jesus righteous.

After that decision, Jesus withdrew from public activity among them and went with His disciples to Ephraim, near the wilderness. John 11:49–54 gives that sequence. The decision against Jesus was already in place when He later returned to Bethany and Lazarus became a second target.

Bethany Made the Witness Impossible to Ignore

John marks Jesus’ return to Bethany as six days before Passover:

Then, six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus was who had been dead, whom He had raised from the dead.

John 12:1

At the meal there, Martha served, Lazarus sat at the table with Jesus, and Mary anointed the Lord’s feet with costly oil. The man who had been in the tomb was now eating with the One who had raised him. John records no speech from Lazarus in this scene; his presence at the table was itself evidence of what Jesus had done.

People came to Bethany to see that man as well as Jesus. His restored life was drawing attention, and the chief priests wanted to stop its effect:

Now a great many of the Jews knew that He was there; and they came, not for Jesus’ sake only, but that they might also see Lazarus, whom He had raised from the dead.

John 12:9

But the chief priests plotted to put Lazarus to death also, because on account of him many of the Jews went away and believed in Jesus.

John 12:10-11

Their decision concerned a man against whom John records no wrongdoing. Lazarus had become a threat because people believed in Jesus on account of him. The leaders wanted to remove the witness instead of submitting to the Lord whose power his life displayed.

I find the proposal especially reckless in light of the miracle. Killing Lazarus could not strip Jesus of His authority over death or change the fact that He had raised him. The plan exposed how determined these leaders were to resist Christ. They were willing to murder Lazarus as well as Jesus to suppress evidence that should have led them to faith.

This was a plot, not a momentary outburst. The council had already chosen to seek Jesus’ death, and now the chief priests extended that intention to the man whose life was persuading others. Deliberate planning did not make their course wise; it meant they were organizing their resistance to God. The study on Lazarus considers his place in the Gospel account more fully.

Lazarus Pointed Beyond Himself to Jesus

The direction of the people’s faith explains why Lazarus became a target. They believed in Jesus because of him. The Greek expression di’ auton in John 12:11 means “on account of him” or “because of him.” Lazarus was the reason people were coming to believe, but Jesus was the One in whom they believed.

Lazarus had neither raised himself nor acquired an independent power to give life. He was the man Jesus had rescued from the grave, and his restored life bore witness to the Lord’s authority. The chief priests were not simply objecting to Lazarus becoming well known. They wanted to stop belief in Christ, so attacking His witness was a way of resisting Him.

John’s wording also prevents us from treating this as a conflict between Jesus and all Jewish people. In John 12:9, many of “the Jews” came to see Him and Lazarus; in verse 11, many of “the Jews” believed in Him. Jesus, His apostles, Lazarus, Mary, and Martha were Jewish too. John specifically identifies the chief priests as the people plotting against Lazarus.

The context determines the scope of John’s references to the Jews. Sometimes the expression concerns people in Judea more broadly, while elsewhere it refers to hostile authorities or their circles. Here, Jewish people believed while certain Jewish leaders resisted. We should be precise about whom John describes, rather than turn his account of those leaders’ rebellion into an accusation against an entire people.

Evidence, Opposition, and God’s Appointed Time

Before raising Lazarus, Jesus had already appealed to His works as evidence of His relationship with the Father. John 10 records His challenge to those who opposed Him:

If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; but if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him.

John 10:37-38

Jesus called them to consider the works even though they resisted His words, so that they might recognize the Father’s presence in Him and His unity with the Father. Their response was another attempt to seize Him. The later raising of Lazarus supplied further evidence, yet the council’s response was to plan His death.

Evidence had led many people to believe, but it did not force these leaders to submit. They acknowledged the signs while treating the faith those signs produced as a threat.

When Jesus entered Jerusalem after the return to Bethany, the people who had seen Lazarus raised continued to speak about it. Others came to meet Him because they had heard what He had done:

Therefore the people, who were with Him when He called Lazarus out of his tomb and raised him from the dead, bore witness. For this reason the people also met Him, because they heard that He had done this sign.

John 12:17-18

The Pharisees complained, “Look, the world has gone after Him!” (John 12:19). They were exaggerating the extent of the response, but their frustration showed that the witness was spreading beyond their control. The plot against Lazarus had not stopped people speaking about the miracle.

Lazarus’s restored life therefore helps explain the conflict as the cross drew near. It drew people to Jesus and provoked stronger official hostility. The raising of one man had become part of the events leading toward the Savior’s death. The study on the resurrection grave clothes follows another physical witness to Christ’s power over death.

Even then, the leaders did not determine Jesus’ hour. John 12:36 records Him leaving and hiding after calling the people to believe in the light. His earlier withdrawal to Ephraim and this later departure both show Him continuing His ministry without submitting to His opponents’ timetable. He would give His life according to the Father’s purpose.

John records the intention to kill Lazarus, but does not tell us the outcome of that plot. Nor does he describe Jesus taking Lazarus away or keeping him under visible protection. We know what the chief priests planned, and we know that Jesus continued toward His appointed death. We should not add a rescue or a death for Lazarus to complete an account John leaves there.

Jesus had said that He would lay down His life willingly. That did not make the wicked hands that inflicted His suffering innocent. The sinless Son physically bore the punishment for our sins in His body, willingly shed His blood for the sins of the whole world, and completed His saving work through His death before rising bodily. His enemies truly killed Him, yet they could not turn His voluntary sacrifice into a defeat of God’s purpose.

The study on Jewish attempts to kill Jesus traces these hostile leaders’ wider opposition. The study of Jesus as truth considers the One they were refusing to receive.

What Lazarus’s Testimony Teaches Us

Lazarus became a target because his restored life was persuading others to believe in Christ. Faithful testimony can still provoke opposition. That gives us no reason to seek conflict or call every criticism persecution, but it also means that universal approval cannot be our measure of faithfulness.

The desire to preserve control can lead any human heart into resistance, whether a person is religious or irreligious. The council’s fear of losing its place should make me examine what I am trying to protect. If I dismiss a faithful correction because accepting it would weaken my position, I am allowing self-protection to decide what I call true. I need to consider what God’s Word says before attacking the person who has exposed something wrong. The council’s practical calculations led toward murder because keeping control had become more important than receiving Christ.

Our testimony should direct people to the Lord as clearly as Lazarus’s restored life did. When God saves or changes a person, we should speak truthfully about His work and explain whom we trust. The witness has not become the Savior. Whatever attention a testimony receives should help people understand Christ’s mercy and authority, rather than encourage them to admire the person telling it.

John wrote the signs so that we may believe Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and receive life in His name. I should not study the leaders’ response as though only their unbelief needs to be considered. Lazarus’s return from the grave confronts us with the Lord who called him out. We are called to trust that Lord, receive His truth, and submit to Him.

My Final Thoughts

The chief priests wanted to kill Lazarus because people were believing in Jesus on account of him. His restored life had made him a witness they wanted to silence. I need to take their response seriously when truth challenges a position I would rather defend. I also want the way I speak about God’s work to keep directing people to Christ, because Lazarus could not save anyone. It is Jesus, the crucified and risen Lord, who has authority over death and gives life to those who believe in Him.

New Wine and Old Wineskins: What Jesus Meant

When Jesus spoke about new wine and old wineskins, He was answering a question about fasting. His disciples were eating and drinking while other religious groups fasted, and people wanted an explanation. Jesus answered by calling Himself the Bridegroom, then describing a damaged garment and bursting wineskins. I want to follow that conversation before applying His words to our own lives. Otherwise, a passage about receiving Christ can become a convenient endorsement of whatever change we already want.

The Bridegroom’s Presence Changed the Fasting Question

Matthew, Mark, and Luke all record the fasting question. Matthew identifies John’s disciples as the ones who asked it. Mark tells us that John’s disciples and the Pharisees were fasting, and Luke includes frequent prayers in the comparison. Their familiar religious practices raised an obvious question: why did Jesus’ followers behave differently?

In Luke’s account, this conversation follows Levi’s banquet for Jesus. The Pharisees and scribes had objected to His disciples eating with tax collectors and sinners, and Jesus had explained that He came to call sinners to repentance. His meals were part of a ministry they were failing to understand. The fasting question likewise needed an answer that took account of who He was and why He had come. Matthew records the question and His reply:

“Then the disciples of John came to Him, saying, ‘Why do we and the Pharisees fast often, but Your disciples do not fast?’ And Jesus said to them, ‘Can the friends of the bridegroom mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them? But the days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast.’”

Matthew 9:14-15

A wedding was an occasion for rejoicing with the bridegroom. His friends would not mourn as though he were absent while he was there with them. Jesus used that familiar situation to explain His disciples’ conduct. The Bridegroom had arrived, so the people sharing His company had reason to rejoice. A fasting schedule could not be the final measure of whether they were responding properly to God.

Jesus also said that His disciples would fast when the Bridegroom was taken away. He was not dismissing fasting as worthless or forbidding it to His followers. He was explaining why it was inappropriate to demand it of them on this occasion. Those who asked about fasting needed to recognize the significance of His presence before deciding how His disciples ought to behave.

His reference to being taken away looks ahead to His rejection and death. Wicked men would betray, arrest, mock, and scourge Him, then crucify and kill Him. Jesus willingly bore the punishment for our sins in His innocent body and shed His blood. He completed His saving work through His death, was buried, and rose bodily from the dead. Christian fasting belongs in our relationship with that crucified and risen Savior; it cannot purchase the righteousness He gives.

The Garment and Wineskins Expose an Impossible Mixture

Jesus continued His answer with a picture of someone trying to repair an old garment. Luke emphasizes the damage done by cutting a patch out of a new one:

“No one puts a piece from a new garment on an old one; otherwise the new makes a tear, and also the piece that was taken out of the new does not match the old.”

Luke 5:36

The person has spoiled a new garment to produce a patch that does not even match the old one. It is a foolish way to treat both. Jesus could not be reduced to a useful improvement in a religious system that refused His authority. He was calling sinners to Himself and announcing the kingdom. Fitting His ministry into the expectations of those who challenged His disciples would miss what He had come to accomplish.

He then described a similarly wasteful attempt to store wine:

“And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; or else the new wine will burst the wineskins and be spilled, and the wineskins will be ruined. But new wine must be put into new wineskins, and both are preserved.”

Luke 5:37-38

Wineskins were containers made from animal skin. As new wine fermented, the resulting pressure stretched the skin. An old skin that had already stretched could no longer accommodate that pressure as a fresh one could, so it would burst. The NET Bible’s note on Luke 5:37 explains this background. The result in Jesus’ picture is the loss of the container and the wine it was supposed to hold. Fresh skins could accommodate the new wine, so both would be preserved.

I understand these pictures as describing the incompatibility between what Christ brings and a religion determined to retain its own terms. The promised new covenant could not be treated as a minor adjustment to the old order, and self-righteous expectations could not govern the Savior’s work. The Bridegroom’s presence required people to receive Him, rather than insist that He justify Himself by conforming to their pattern.

Luke records one further observation about a person’s preference for familiar wine:

“And no one, having drunk old wine, immediately desires new; for he says, ‘The old is better.’”

Luke 5:39

The drinker prefers what he already knows. In this conversation, I understand that preference as an explanation of resistance to Jesus. Someone comfortable with an established religious pattern may be reluctant to receive Him, even when that pattern cannot supply the salvation he needs. Jesus is describing the person’s preference, not withdrawing His earlier warning about the bursting skins or declaring the old order sufficient.

Jesus Fulfilled the Law and Brought the Promised Covenant

We need to distinguish that resistance from the purpose of God’s Law. The Lord who gave the Law had not made a mistake that Jesus now needed to correct. Jesus explained His relationship to the earlier revelation plainly:

“Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.”

Matthew 5:17

The Law was holy and good. Under the Mosaic covenant, it governed Israel, exposed sin, and pointed forward to Christ. The failure lay in sinful people who broke God’s commands and could not make themselves righteous. Human traditions compounded the problem when they set aside what God had commanded, while self-righteousness encouraged people to mistake their religious standing for righteousness before Him.

Christ obeyed the Law perfectly. Its sacrifices pointed to His better sacrifice, and its priesthood pointed to His work of bringing us to God. Jesus is our Mediator, the one who brings sinners into a right relationship with God through His own saving work. He bore sin’s punishment and established the new covenant in His blood. The earlier revelation had prepared people to receive Him, not to resist Him.

God had promised this covenant through Jeremiah, including forgiveness of iniquity and His law written on hearts. The promise was made to the houses of Israel and Judah, as Paul recalls in Hebrews 8. Ezekiel likewise spoke of the inward change God would give His people:

“I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.”

Ezekiel 36:26

A heart of stone is unresponsive to God. Giving a heart of flesh describes His work of making His people responsive to Him. Another external demand could expose their failure, but it could not produce this inward change. God promised to give what they lacked. Paul describes that life-giving work when he speaks of his own ministry:

“Who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.”

2 Corinthians 3:6

His words “the letter kills” do not mean that the written Word of God is harmful or that studying it will make us spiritually dead. The Law exposes and condemns sin; it cannot impart the life a guilty sinner needs. The Spirit gives that life. Paul was not offering a less careful approach to Scripture, but explaining the difference between condemnation under the Law and life under the new covenant.

In Hebrews, he also explains what the promise of a new covenant means for the first:

“In that He says, ‘A new covenant,’ He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.”

Hebrews 8:13

The first covenant had served its God-given purpose and was passing away. Returning to it as our covenant would mean turning back from the fulfillment God had promised. Through Christ we receive forgiveness and the life the Spirit gives, so the answer to human failure is found in Him rather than in another attempt to establish our own righteousness.

This is why outward religious adjustment cannot meet our need. A command can tell me that hatred is sinful without making me love the person I hate. God must forgive my guilt and change me from within. The person in Christ is a new creation, as 2 Corinthians 5:17 teaches. A new label, a better reputation, or more enthusiasm for religious activity cannot accomplish that work.

Christian Liberty Rejects Legalism and Lawlessness

In Galatians, Paul confronted teachers who were insisting that Gentile believers needed circumcision and observance of the Mosaic Law to be accepted by God. They were treating faith in Christ as insufficient. Paul answered that God’s promise preceded the Law and that the Spirit was received by faith. Requiring those observances would make acceptance depend on something added to Christ’s saving work.

“Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage.”

Galatians 5:1

Legalism makes religious works a basis of our acceptance before God. In Galatia the demand concerned circumcision and the Law, but that kind of confidence can take other forms. A person may rely on ancestry, calendar observances, personal discipline, rituals, or moral achievement. Whatever the particular claim, we distort the gospel when we treat those things as necessary to complete what Christ has accomplished. His saving work does not need our religious record to finish it.

Paul also taught the Galatians to serve one another through love instead of using their freedom as an opportunity for the flesh. That is the other abuse we must reject. Someone who says that grace excuses his dishonesty, sexual sin, or cruelty has ignored what the Spirit produces in a believer’s life. Christ frees us from trying to earn God’s acceptance and teaches us to live as people who belong to Him.

An inherited church practice is not a form of bondage simply because it is old. If it is rooted in Scripture, it may remain wise and useful for generations. A new method may help a church serve people, but its novelty cannot establish its faithfulness. We need to ask whether it submits to Scripture, honors Christ, and helps us obey Him. Calling a movement “new wine” does not exempt its claims from examination.

Church methods do affect the people a church serves, and we should consider them responsibly. But Jesus’ answer to the fasting question was about His own presence and work. If I make the passage chiefly about updating a program or changing a worship style, I have replaced His subject with my preference. Neither innovation nor attachment to familiar routines can give the life He came to bring.

The Passage Calls for More Than Religious Repair

Religious respectability can also conceal resistance to Christ. The opposition of the Pharisees warns us against confidence in outward standing while resisting the Savior. I cannot make my moral record, heritage, rituals, or visible separation from others the basis of my acceptance and then add Jesus as a finishing touch. I need Him to save me from guilt I cannot remove.

A person can admire Christian teaching, adopt Christian morals, and become comfortable among believers without trusting Christ. Those changes may improve his reputation, but they do not give him spiritual life. When I speak of regeneration, I mean being born again through God’s work, rather than simply learning how a Christian is expected to behave. We need forgiveness through Christ’s blood and the new birth in which the Holy Spirit gives life and dwells within us.

The new life then becomes evident in how we respond to God. We should look for repentance, a willingness to receive correction, and obedience that grows from faith. This is not sinless perfection, and our conduct does not earn the life Christ gives. But an unchanged heart hiding beneath religious language is not what Scripture means by a new creation. I need to ask whether I have trusted Christ and been made new in Him, rather than settle for looking better to other people.

Believers are not under Sinai as their covenant, but we remain under Jesus’ authority. The Spirit teaches us to turn from ungodliness and obey His Word. We can fast and pray because we depend on Him, without turning either practice into a claim that God owes us His favor. Love and service likewise grow from the life He gives. We receive Christ on His terms and learn to obey Him, instead of trying to make Him endorse the righteousness we claim for ourselves.

My Final Thoughts

The Bridegroom had come, and His disciples’ conduct had to be understood in light of His presence. His pictures of the garment and wineskins explain why His work could not be fitted into religious expectations that refused Him. Jesus fulfilled the Law and established the promised new covenant in His blood. We need the forgiveness and new life He gives, far more than a repair to our religious reputation.

I want to receive that grace without turning it into either self-righteous performance or an excuse to disregard Christ’s commands. The Savior who frees us from trying to earn acceptance also gives us His Spirit and teaches us to obey. That is a much greater change than adopting a new method or giving an old habit a fresh name.

The Pharisees: Who Were They and Why Did Jesus Rebuke Them?

Jesus rebuked many Pharisees for hypocrisy, but He did not use their name as a general insult for people who took obedience seriously. He identified what they were doing: giving human traditions God’s authority, neglecting people they should have helped, and trusting their religious standing while rejecting Him. I need to understand those charges before applying the warning to someone else—or assuming it could never apply to me.

The Pharisees Were an Influential Jewish Movement

The Pharisees were a movement within Judaism during the Second Temple period, the centuries between the rebuilding of the temple after the exile and its destruction by Rome in AD 70. They interpreted the Law and sought to apply it to ordinary life. Their teaching addressed purity, tithing, Sabbath observance, fasting, vows, and meals. They were influential among the people without being identical to the priestly establishment.

The Sadducees, another Jewish group, were closely associated with that establishment. Acts 23 says they denied resurrection, angels, and spirits, while the Pharisees acknowledged them. Scribes and lawyers were people trained in the Law, and some belonged to the Pharisees, but the terms describe different things. A person’s training did not by itself establish his membership in the movement.

The name “Pharisee” is usually connected with a Hebrew or Aramaic root for separation. “Separated ones” may refer to a concern for purity or a distinct way of life, though the name’s precise origin is debated. Their influence becomes visible during the Hasmonean period, when a Jewish dynasty ruled in the centuries before Christ. Some historians connect them with earlier devout Jews called the Hasidim, but the evidence does not establish a continuous organization running from one group to the other.

Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian, describes their influence and distinguishes them from the Sadducees and Essenes. In Antiquities 13.297, he also distinguishes inherited Pharisaic observances from commands written in the Law of Moses. That historical background helps explain the disputes over tradition in the Gospels. Later rabbinic writings require more caution: the Mishnah was compiled around AD 200, and the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds came later. Jesus was not debating a finished Talmud in the first century.

Several Pharisaic convictions were true, including belief in resurrection and the authority of God’s Law. Yet agreeing with a biblical doctrine did not guarantee that someone would receive the Messiah. A person could defend resurrection in principle while rejecting Jesus, or teach God’s commands while evading their claim on his own conduct.

We must also keep the movement distinct from Jewish people generally. Jesus, His apostles, and His earliest disciples were Jewish. His rebukes addressed unbelief and misconduct within that setting; they give us no permission for contempt toward Jews. Nor did every Pharisee respond alike. Nicodemus listened to Jesus, Gamaliel urged restraint, and Acts explicitly mentions Pharisees who believed. We will consider those men alongside the leaders who opposed Him.

Jesus Exposed Religious Confidence That Never Reached the Heart

The confrontation began before Jesus’ public ministry, when John the Baptist called people to repent. Pharisees and Sadducees disagreed sharply with one another, but John told both groups that descent from Abraham could not shelter an unrepentant person from judgment.

In those days John the Baptist came preaching in the wilderness of Judea, and saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!” For this is he who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah, saying: “The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the LORD; Make His paths straight.'” Now John himself was clothed in camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist; and his food was locusts and wild honey. Then Jerusalem, all Judea, and all the region around the Jordan went out to him and were baptized by him in the Jordan, confessing their sins. But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, “Brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Therefore bear fruits worthy of repentance, and do not think to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I say to you that God is able to raise up children to Abraham from these stones. And even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees. Therefore every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather His wheat into the barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”

Matthew 3:1-12

John did not deny God’s covenant promises to Abraham. He denied that ancestry excused the sins of Abraham’s descendants. The fruit he required was evidence of genuine repentance, not payment for mercy. Baptism could not conceal a refusal to turn to God, and neither can church attendance or religious vocabulary conceal mine. John directed his hearers to the Coming One, who would separate the wheat from the chaff.

Jesus likewise refused to treat a respected religious life as sufficient for entry into His kingdom. In the Sermon on the Mount, He upheld the Law while exposing how far its demands reached beyond outward conduct.

“Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 5:17-20

Jesus was not asking His disciples to accumulate more regulations than the Pharisees. He addressed the anger behind murder, the lust behind adultery, dishonest oaths, and hatred of enemies. Someone could avoid a conspicuous offense while cherishing the sin from which it grew. God sees that inward life, even when other people admire our restraint.

I cannot produce the righteousness God requires by comparing myself with someone worse. I need the new life He gives and the righteousness received through faith in Christ. That does not make obedience unnecessary. Jesus condemned teaching people to break God’s commands; His rebuke reaches the self-righteous performance that seeks recognition while avoiding obedience of the heart.

Luke records how this attitude appeared around a Pharisee’s own table. Simon judged the woman who wept at Jesus’ feet, but Jesus exposed Simon’s cold welcome through the parable of two debtors unable to pay. The woman’s tears and perfume did not buy forgiveness. Jesus said her faith had saved her; her love expressed the mercy she had received. When other Pharisees and scribes complained that He received sinners, He answered with the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the lost son in Luke 15. Their resentment was out of place when repentance should have brought joy.

Jesus made the danger of comparison especially plain in another parable. Luke tells us exactly whom He was addressing.

Also He spoke this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others: “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other men–extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I possess.’ And the tax collector, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me a sinner!’ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

Luke 18:9-14

The Pharisee’s prayer rehearsed his discipline and contrasted it with other people’s disgrace. Fasting and giving were not the problem. He trusted those practices to establish his righteousness, then used them to despise the man nearby. The tax collector brought no record of achievement and offered no excuse; he asked God for mercy. Jesus said he went home justified, accepted as righteous before God, rather than the Pharisee.

I need to hear that even if my doctrine is conservative and my habits are disciplined. Years of respectable service cannot make God owe me acceptance. Humility means agreeing with His judgment of my sin and receiving His mercy, without pretending that evil is good or obedience irrelevant. The study on true humility examines that response more fully.

Christ Placed Scripture Above Tradition and False Strictness

The Sabbath disputes show why strictness alone cannot establish that an interpretation is faithful. Jesus’ opponents accused His disciples of breaking the Law, but He answered from the Law itself.

At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. And His disciples were hungry, and began to pluck heads of grain and to eat. And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to Him, “Look, Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath!” But He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him: how he entered the house of God and ate the showbread which was not lawful for him to eat, nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? Or have you not read in the law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless? Yet I say to you that in this place there is One greater than the temple. But if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. For the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.” Now when He had departed from there, He went into their synagogue. And behold, there was a man who had a withered hand. And they asked Him, saying, “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?”–that they might accuse Him. Then He said to them, “What man is there among you who has one sheep, and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not lay hold of it and lift it out? Of how much more value then is a man than a sheep? Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.” Then He said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” And he stretched it out, and it was restored as whole as the other. Then the Pharisees went out and plotted against Him, how they might destroy Him.

Matthew 12:1-14

Deuteronomy 23:25 permitted plucking a neighbor’s standing grain by hand, so the disciples were not stealing. The objection concerned doing it on the Sabbath. Jesus recalled David’s need and the priests whose temple service continued on that day, then applied Hosea’s words about mercy. He called the disciples guiltless and declared Himself Lord of the Sabbath. He was not admitting that they had sinned and making an exception because He liked them.

The man with the withered hand brought the same question into the synagogue. Jesus asked why someone willing to rescue a sheep would object to helping a person. He restored the man’s hand and declared that doing good on the Sabbath was lawful. These leaders then went out to plan His destruction. They were prepared to condemn a merciful healing while devising how to kill the One who performed it.

I need to ask more than whether a rule sounds demanding. Does it follow the biblical text? Does applying it require me to condemn someone God calls guiltless? Jesus did not violate God’s Sabbath command; He challenged the interpreters who misused it. The study on the Sabbath day of rest considers the command and its covenant setting.

A later dispute made the conflict between God’s commands and inherited rules even more explicit. Scribes and Pharisees from Jerusalem challenged the disciples’ failure to perform ceremonial handwashing.

Then the scribes and Pharisees who were from Jerusalem came to Jesus, saying, “Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.” He answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? For God commanded, saying, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’ But you say, ‘Whoever says to his father or mother, “Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God”– then he need not honor his father or mother.’ Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition. Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying: ‘These people draw near to Me with their mouth, And honor Me with their lips, But their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'” When He had called the multitude to Himself, He said to them, “Hear and understand: Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.” Then His disciples came and said to Him, “Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?” But He answered and said, “Every plant which My heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted. Let them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind leads the blind, both will fall into a ditch.” Then Peter answered and said to Him, “Explain this parable to us.” So Jesus said, “Are you also still without understanding? Do you not yet understand that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and is eliminated? But those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile a man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies. These are the things which defile a man, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile a man.”

Matthew 15:1-20

The issue was ritual washing before a meal, not ordinary cleanliness. Jesus answered their complaint by showing how their own tradition allowed someone to evade support owed to his parents. Mark’s parallel uses the word Corban for a gift devoted to God. A declaration that sounded devout could leave needy parents without help, making “Honor your father and your mother” ineffective. No religious designation gave someone permission to disregard that command.

Jesus applied Isaiah’s rebuke to people whose lips honored God while their hearts remained far from Him. Ceremonial washing could not reach the moral defilement within. Murder, sexual sin, theft, false witness, and blasphemy proceeded from the heart; unwashed hands did not create that corruption. Their remedy left the actual source of evil untouched.

Families and congregations can develop useful habits, but a custom does not acquire God’s authority through age or familiarity. If it contradicts Scripture or excuses disobedience, we need to change it. I cannot insist that another person satisfy a test of righteousness God never established simply because it is familiar.

This is also why I want to use the word legalism carefully. It describes treating law-keeping or religious works as a means of justification, and it can describe imposing human rules as though God made them conditions of acceptance. It does not describe every serious effort to obey Scripture. Biblical church order, sexual purity, truthfulness, and refusal of idolatry do not become wrong because someone finds them restrictive.

Ephesians 2 teaches that salvation is God’s gift rather than a reward for works, then says believers are created in Christ Jesus for good works. Obedience grows from the life He gives; it cannot purchase forgiveness. We should reject religious bondage without calling God’s commands bondage too. The study on Galatians develops the distinction between grace and attempts to secure acceptance through the Law.

Nicodemus and the Believing Pharisees Show the Need for New Birth

Earlier in Jesus’ ministry, Nicodemus had approached Him differently from the hostile questioners we have considered. He acknowledged that Jesus’ signs required God’s presence. Yet Jesus told this learned Pharisee and ruler that he needed something neither his office nor his education could provide.

There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. This man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, “Rabbi, we know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.” Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.” Nicodemus answered and said to Him, “How can these things be?” Jesus answered and said to him, “Are you the teacher of Israel, and do not know these things? Most assuredly, I say to you, We speak what We know and testify what We have seen, and you do not receive Our witness. If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things? No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.”

John 3:1-21

Recognizing that Jesus came from God was not itself the new birth. Nicodemus needed to be born of the Spirit. When I use the word regeneration, I mean that genuine new birth, not adopting a Christian name or improving a respectable religious life. Flesh gives birth to flesh; only God can give the spiritual life Jesus described.

I understand the reference to water and the Spirit in light of the promised cleansing and new heart in Ezekiel 36. Jesus expected a teacher of Israel to understand the need for inward renewal. He was not saying that baptismal water produces regeneration. Water baptism follows personal faith and pictures identification with Christ; the Spirit gives new life.

Jesus then directed Nicodemus to the Son of Man who would be lifted up. God loved the world and gave His Son so that whoever believes in Him should have everlasting life. Whoever refuses Him remains condemned. Religious membership could not settle Nicodemus’ standing before God, and it cannot settle ours.

Later, Nicodemus asked whether the Law judged a man without first hearing him. At Jesus’ burial, he brought costly spices and helped Joseph of Arimathea care for the body. Those actions suggest growing courage and attachment to Jesus, though John records them without an explicit confession of faith or a conversion scene.

Other passages also record individual responses we should recognize. In Luke 13, some Pharisees warned Jesus that Herod wanted to kill Him. After Jesus’ resurrection, Gamaliel urged the council to release the apostles rather than risk fighting against God. Neither a warning nor wise counsel by itself establishes saving faith, but we should describe what each man did rather than assume all Pharisees acted alike.

Later, at the Jerusalem council, Acts 15 identifies some Pharisees explicitly as believers. Their presence in the church did not mean every inherited assumption had been corrected.

And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” Therefore, when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem, to the apostles and elders, about this question. So, being sent on their way by the church, they passed through Phoenicia and Samaria, describing the conversion of the Gentiles; and they caused great joy to all the brethren. And when they had come to Jerusalem, they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders; and they reported all things that God had done with them. But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.” Now the apostles and elders came together to consider this matter. And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: “Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they.”

Acts 15:1-11

The men who believed still wanted Gentiles circumcised and commanded to keep the Law of Moses. In a dispute that began with the claim that circumcision was necessary for salvation, this was a serious error. Peter answered by describing what God had already done: He had given the Gentiles the Holy Spirit and purified their hearts by faith. They did not have to become Jews before they could belong to Christ. Jews and Gentiles receive salvation through the same grace.

Scripture calls these Pharisees believers while recording their need for correction. Conversion does not instantly remove every long-held assumption. We must confront an error that burdens people and misrepresents salvation without assuming that every believer who needs correction has never known Christ.

Paul later acknowledged his own Pharisaic background before the divided council in Acts 23. He appealed to their shared belief in resurrection, and Pharisaic scribes said they found no evil in him. He could recognize that agreement without endorsing everything the movement taught. I do not need to deny what someone gets right in order to address what he gets wrong.

The Woes Warn of Final Judgment, Not Mere Religious Failure

Those differing responses make the hostility of other leaders more conspicuous. Returning to the period before Jesus’ final week, John 11 records chief priests and Pharisees calling a council after He raised Lazarus. They acknowledged His many signs but feared that widespread belief would bring Roman intervention against their place and nation. The largely Sadducean chief-priestly establishment and Pharisaic leaders could cooperate against Him despite their disagreements.

Caiaphas argued that one man should die rather than the nation perish. John explains that his words announced more than Caiaphas intended: Jesus would die for the nation and gather God’s scattered children. God’s saving purpose did not excuse the men who chose murder. By the time Jesus entered Jerusalem for His final week, the opposition had already reached that point. Matthew places His public rebuke of the scribes and Pharisees amid the confrontations that followed.

The received text includes Matthew 23:14 and therefore eight woe statements. The familiar count of seven follows critical editions that omit that verse. These studies follow the Textus Receptus, the received Greek text, and its predominantly Byzantine tradition, so I retain the verse and count eight. I do not accept the Alexandrian omission as a reason to remove that warning.

Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do. For they bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do to be seen by men. They make their phylacteries broad and enlarge the borders of their garments. They love the best places at feasts, the best seats in the synagogues, greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called by men, ‘Rabbi, Rabbi.’ But you, do not be called ‘Rabbi’; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren. Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ. But he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted. “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither go in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you devour widows’ houses, and for a pretense make long prayers. Therefore you will receive greater condemnation. “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel land and sea to win one proselyte, and when he is won, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves. “Woe to you, blind guides, who say, ‘Whoever swears by the temple, it is nothing; but whoever swears by the gold of the temple, he is obliged to perform it.’ Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gold or the temple that sanctifies the gold? And, ‘Whoever swears by the altar, it is nothing; but whoever swears by the gift that is on it, he is obliged to perform it.’ Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gift or the altar that sanctifies the gift? Therefore he who swears by the altar, swears by it and by all things on it. He who swears by the temple, swears by it and by Him who dwells in it. And he who swears by heaven, swears by the throne of God and by Him who sits on it. “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone. Blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel! “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you cleanse the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of extortion and self-indulgence. Blind Pharisee, first cleanse the inside of the cup and dish, that the outside of them may be clean also. “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but inside are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness. Even so you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness. “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous, and say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.’ “Therefore you are witnesses against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers’ guilt. Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell? Therefore, indeed, I send you prophets, wise men, and scribes: some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city, that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation. “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing! See! Your house is left to you desolate; for I say to you, you shall see Me no more till you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the LORD!'”

Matthew 23:1-39

Jesus spoke to the crowds and His disciples, warning them not to reproduce what these teachers did. Sitting in Moses’ seat referred to their role in teaching the Law. His instruction to heed them cannot mean accepting every tradition they promoted, since He had already rejected traditions that canceled God’s commands. His hearers were to obey what truly came from Moses without imitating teachers who said it and failed to do it.

The charges name concrete abuses. These leaders hindered people from entering the kingdom, exploited widows while making long prayers, and trained converts in the same corrupt religion. Their distinctions about oaths provided ways to evade obligations. They carefully tithed small herbs while neglecting justice, mercy, and faith. Jesus did not tell them to stop tithing; He told them to fulfill those duties without neglecting the weightier commands.

They also sought honor through prominent seats, greetings, and religious titles. Phylacteries were small containers holding Scripture passages, worn on the body; making them broad turned an expression of devotion into a conspicuous display. Jesus required His disciples to serve one another rather than use religious position to elevate themselves above their brothers.

His images of a dirty cup and a whitewashed tomb expose why improved appearances would not solve the problem. The outside looked respectable while greed, self-indulgence, and lawlessness remained within. When He calls someone a “hypocrite” here, He is exposing a deceptive religious performance, not merely observing that every believer falls short. Honoring dead prophets did not excuse rejecting God’s messengers in their own generation.

Jesus’ severity did not mean He was unwilling to receive them. He lamented that He had wanted to gather Jerusalem’s children, but they were unwilling. I understand His desire as sincere and their refusal as culpable. His words do not describe an invitation people were never permitted to accept, nor do they allow us to replace their responsibility with irresistible grace or fatalism.

His question about escaping “the condemnation of hell” was equally serious. The word translated “hell” is Gehenna, derived from the Valley of Hinnom and used here for final judgment. These leaders faced more than public embarrassment. Religious standing could not protect them from the judgment of the Messiah they rejected.

Unbelievers will be raised and judged at the Great White Throne. The Lake of Fire is Gehenna and the second death, the final, irreversible destruction of the human body and soul. Human beings possess no independent immortality. Conscious existence between death and resurrection does not mean they must remain conscious in torment forever. Revelation 20:10 describes endless torment for the devil together with the beast and the false prophet.

John’s earlier warning about chaff consumed by unquenchable fire fits that final destruction. No one can extinguish the fire or prevent it from completing God’s judgment. The word does not require an indestructible human soul kept alive endlessly. Both John and Jesus warned that religious privilege gives no refuge to someone who finally refuses the Savior.

Yet Jesus went willingly to the death these leaders sought. Wicked men physically tortured and punished Him, shed His innocent blood, and killed Him. He bore that real punishment for our sins in His innocent body. His saving work was complete in His blood and death before His burial and bodily resurrection. The Father did not punish or curse His beloved Son. He did not abandon, strike, or bruise Jesus, nor did He pour wrath on Him.

Christ died for the whole world, making God’s offer of salvation genuine for every person, though people can resist and reject Him. Everyone who repents and believes receives forgiveness and eternal life. Mercy was not withheld because someone belonged to the Pharisees. The unbelieving leaders remained responsible for refusing the Light, and Paul’s conversion shows how fully Christ could forgive even a determined persecutor.

Paul Shows How Christians Must Leave Self-Righteousness Behind

Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. For me to write the same things to you is not tedious, but for you it is safe. Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation! For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh, though I also might have confidence in the flesh. If anyone else thinks he may have confidence in the flesh, I more so: circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee; concerning zeal, persecuting the church; concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ. Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith; that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death, if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.

Philippians 3:1-11

Paul knew Pharisaic life from within. He could name his ancestry, circumcision, training, and zeal. His description of himself as blameless concerned righteousness measured by the Law; it did not mean he had been sinless before God. The man with that impressive record had persecuted Christ’s church.

After meeting Jesus, Paul gave up using those things as grounds for acceptance. He counted them as loss so that he might gain Christ and receive the righteousness God gives through faith. He wanted to know Christ, share in His sufferings, and attain the resurrection. His obedience continued, but he no longer presented it as a claim over God.

I need to examine my confidence as honestly. Teaching sound doctrine and behaving respectably in public cannot compensate for hidden greed, lust, bitterness, or deceit. Calling myself a Christian does not establish that I have been born again. Genuine new life should become evident in my conduct, without making that conduct the means of earning salvation or pretending a believer becomes sinless. When someone repents, we should welcome him rather than resent the mercy Christ has shown. His past is no reason to withhold fellowship where Christ has cleansed him.

Teachers bear particular responsibility. We must not burden people with demands we refuse to bear ourselves, manipulate vulnerable believers, or use titles and attention to secure a privileged place.

At the same time, a congregation should not use “Pharisee” to silence someone who raises a biblical concern. We need to examine the passage together. Scripture may command the practice directly, or a sound inference may support it. An inherited habit does not become a divine command through religious language, and an actual command does not become optional because someone attaches an insulting label to the person defending it.

My Final Thoughts

The Pharisees confessed several biblical truths, and some received Christ. The leaders Jesus rebuked were not condemned for caring too much about obedience. They used religion to protect their standing, excused what God condemned, and resisted the Messiah before them. I need to examine those same dangers in my own conduct rather than congratulate myself for recognizing them in someone else.

We are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. Our obedience should grow from the life He gives, our traditions must remain subject to Scripture, and another sinner’s repentance should bring us joy. Correct doctrine and disciplined habits are good, but neither can replace the new birth or give us grounds for confidence apart from Christ.

Who Tried to Kill Jesus? What the Gospels Actually Say

People tried to seize or kill Jesus several times before the crucifixion, and the Gospels identify different people in those encounters. I want to follow what each group did and why the attempt failed. The accounts show Jesus continuing His ministry until He willingly gave His life, while holding His opponents responsible for what they chose. They give us no grounds for passing that guilt on to an ethnicity or to later generations.

We Must Name the People the Gospels Name

The crowd in Nazareth came from Jesus’ hometown synagogue. Elsewhere, Pharisees plotted with Herodians, men associated with Herod’s political order. Chief priests and members of Jerusalem’s council organized opposition, while temple officers and hostile crowds tried to seize Him. These groups sometimes cooperated, but they were not one indistinguishable body acting in every scene.

John sometimes calls an opposing group “the Jews.” The context tells us whether he is describing authorities, festival leaders, particular questioners, or a crowd. Jesus was Jewish according to the flesh, and John and the other apostles were Jewish too. John’s Gospel also repeatedly describes Jewish people believing in Jesus. We would misread him if we took an expression for opponents in one encounter as a description of every Jewish person’s response.

I need to name the people Scripture names. A person’s ancestry does not make him guilty of someone else’s crime, and there is no biblical basis for antisemitism. Contempt for Jewish people cannot be justified from an account about particular leaders or crowds opposing the Messiah who came through Israel.

We also need to distinguish a plot or attempted stoning from the final execution. Some opponents tried to throw Jesus from a hill or stone Him. Crucifixion, however, was a Roman sentence authorized by Pontius Pilate and carried out by Roman soldiers. Pilate repeatedly declared that he found no fault in Jesus, yet sent Him to the cross. Accurate responsibility includes that Roman decision as well as the actions of the people demanding it.

Attempts in Nazareth and Disputes Over the Sabbath

The first attempt on Jesus’ life that Luke records took place in Nazareth, where He had grown up. The people heard His gracious words before trying to kill Him, so we need to follow how their response changed.

So He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read. And He was handed the book of the prophet Isaiah. And when He had opened the book, He found the place where it was written: “The Spirit of the LORD is upon Me, Because He has anointed Me To preach the gospel to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives And recovery of sight to the blind, To set at liberty those who are oppressed; To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD.” Then He closed the book, and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all who were in the synagogue were fixed on Him. And He began to say to them, “Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.” So all bore witness to Him, and marveled at the gracious words which proceeded out of His mouth. And they said, “Is this not Joseph’s son?” He said to them, “You will surely say this proverb to Me, ‘Physician, heal yourself! Whatever we have heard done in Capernaum, do also here in Your country.'” Then He said, “Assuredly, I say to you, no prophet is accepted in his own country. But I tell you truly, many widows were in Israel in the days of Elijah, when the heaven was shut up three years and six months, and there was a great famine throughout all the land; but to none of them was Elijah sent except to Zarephath, in the region of Sidon, to a woman who was a widow. And many lepers were in Israel in the time of Elisha the prophet, and none of them was cleansed except Naaman the Syrian.” So all those in the synagogue, when they heard these things, were filled with wrath, and rose up and thrust Him out of the city; and they led Him to the brow of the hill on which their city was built, that they might throw Him down over the cliff. Then passing through the midst of them, He went His way.

Luke 4:16-30

Jesus read Isaiah’s promise and announced that it was being fulfilled in their hearing. The people marveled at His words, yet also questioned Him as Joseph’s son. He anticipated their demand that He perform in Nazareth the works they had heard about in Capernaum, and warned that a prophet is not accepted in his own country.

His examples came from their own Scriptures. Elijah had been sent to a widow in Sidon during the famine, and Elisha had cleansed Naaman, a Syrian, while many lepers remained in Israel. God had shown mercy beyond Israel’s borders. Familiarity with Jesus and descent from Israel gave His hometown no right to dictate how He must act. The warning exposed the danger of knowing who had grown up among them while refusing to receive Him as God’s messenger.

At that point the congregation became furious, drove Him out, and led Him to a cliff to throw Him down. Luke says Jesus passed through them and went His way. He does not tell us how that happened. The crowd may have recoiled before His authority, or confusion or another circumstance may have opened the way. An openly miraculous escape is possible too. We cannot settle the manner from the description, but their intent is clear: they tried to kill Him and failed.

Mark describes another synagogue encounter in which a man with a withered hand became the focus of a Sabbath dispute.

And He entered the synagogue again, and a man was there who had a withered hand. So they watched Him closely, whether He would heal him on the Sabbath, so that they might accuse Him. And He said to the man who had the withered hand, “Step forward.” Then He said to them, “Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?” But they kept silent. And when He had looked around at them with anger, being grieved by the hardness of their hearts, He said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” And he stretched it out, and his hand was restored as whole as the other. Then the Pharisees went out and immediately plotted with the Herodians against Him, how they might destroy Him.

Mark 3:1-6

Jesus’ opponents watched for a healing so they could accuse Him. He brought the man forward and asked whether the Sabbath permitted doing good or evil, saving life or killing. They remained silent, and He looked at them with anger and grief over their hard hearts before restoring the man’s hand.

The Pharisees then went out and plotted with the Herodians to destroy Him. The religiously strict Pharisees and the politically connected Herodians found common ground in opposing Jesus. His question had exposed what their response now confirmed: they opposed an act of mercy on the Sabbath while arranging to kill the One who had performed it.

Jesus had not made compassion a violation of God’s command. The Sabbath prohibited ordinary labor; it did not require Him to leave a suffering man unaided. His opponents’ interpretation had brought them into conflict with the Lord of the Sabbath Himself. I need to consider that danger when I apply rules to other people. A rule that serves my control while setting aside what God actually requires cannot be defended merely by calling it strict obedience.

The dispute recorded in John 5 took place in Jerusalem after Jesus healed a man at Bethesda and told him to take up his bed and walk.

For this reason the Jews persecuted Jesus, and sought to kill Him, because He had done these things on the Sabbath. But Jesus answered them, “My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.” Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.

John 5:16-18

The opposition intensified when Jesus spoke of His Father’s continuing work and His own. His hearers understood that He was making Himself equal with God.

Jesus did not withdraw that claim. In the teaching that follows, He says the Son gives life, receives the same honor as the Father, and executes judgment. John describes the Sabbath charge against Him, but that does not require us to accept His opponents’ interpretation as correct. The sinless Son had not disobeyed God’s law; He had challenged the authority of people who claimed to enforce it.

His identity explains why the dispute reached so much further than a disagreement over Sabbath practice. The eternal Son had authority to judge their interpretation, give life, and require honor. Defending their religious position by rejecting Him put these opponents against the God they claimed to serve.

Jesus’ Divine Claims Brought Stones and Attempted Arrests

John later describes Jesus teaching publicly in Jerusalem while rulers sought His death and the crowds disagreed about Him. He continued speaking about His identity and the Father who had sent Him.

Now some of them from Jerusalem said, “Is this not He whom they seek to kill? But look! He speaks boldly, and they say nothing to Him. Do the rulers know indeed that this is truly the Christ? However, we know where this Man is from; but when the Christ comes, no one knows where He is from.” Then Jesus cried out, as He taught in the temple, saying, “You both know Me, and you know where I am from; and I have not come of Myself, but He who sent Me is true, whom you do not know. But I know Him, for I am from Him, and He sent Me.” Therefore they sought to take Him; but no one laid a hand on Him, because His hour had not yet come. And many of the people believed in Him, and said, “When the Christ comes, will He do more signs than these which this Man has done?”

John 7:25-31

Some Jerusalem residents were puzzled that a man the rulers wanted dead could still teach openly. They wondered whether the rulers had recognized Him as the Christ. Others objected that they knew where Jesus came from, while many believed because of His signs. The crowd itself was divided; it cannot be treated as a single group rejecting Him.

When Jesus testified that He knew the One who sent Him, people sought to take Him, but no one laid a hand on Him because His hour had not yet come. In John, that hour concerns His coming death and glorification, including His resurrection. His opponents could not bring it forward by threatening Him. This does not mean the people surrounding Him had ceased to make choices: leaders planned, officers acted or hesitated, and hearers believed or resisted. God carried out His purpose while those people remained responsible for their responses.

Jesus continued His mission without allowing threats to silence Him or treating an unnecessary confrontation as proof of courage. Later encounters brought more explicit claims and another attempt to kill Him.

Jesus answered, “If I honor Myself, My honor is nothing. It is My Father who honors Me, of whom you say that He is your God. Yet you have not known Him, but I know Him. And if I say, ‘I do not know Him,’ I shall be a liar like you; but I do know Him and keep His word. Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.” Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.” Then they took up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

John 8:54-59

Jesus distinguished Abraham’s beginning from His own eternal existence. He did not say, “Before Abraham was, I was.” He said, “I AM.” His hearers took up stones because they recognized a claim far greater than having lived for a long time. A mere man claiming that divine identity would be committing blasphemy; Jesus spoke as the eternal Son, fully God and fully man.

He hid Himself and left the temple. John does not explain whether the escape involved a visible miracle, so I would neither insist that Jesus became invisible nor rule out an extraordinary act. What the passage does establish is that He escaped without retracting His claim. The attempt failed, and His ministry continued.

My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. I and My Father are one.” Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.” Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are gods”‘? If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; but if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him.” Therefore they sought again to seize Him, but He escaped out of their hand.

John 10:27-39

In John 10, Jesus promises His sheep eternal life and says they will never perish. They are secure in His hand and in the Father’s hand. He then declares, “I and My Father are one.” His opponents again take up stones and state their charge plainly: He, being a Man, is making Himself God.

Jesus answers from Psalm 82. I understand the reference to people called gods there as language used of human judges who received God’s word. If Scripture could use that language, these hearers needed better grounds for charging the One whom the Father sanctified and sent with blasphemy. Jesus did not reduce Himself to the level of those judges. He pointed to His works and reaffirmed that the Father is in Him and He is in the Father. They tried to seize Him, and He escaped.

The Father and Son are distinct Persons who share the one divine nature. That is part of the doctrine of the Trinity, the one God existing in three Persons. Jesus was not claiming to be the Father, and He was not denying His deity to avoid the stones. His promise of eternal life rests on the divine authority His opponents refused to recognize.

The Raising of Lazarus Turned Opposition Into a Council Plot

After Jesus raised Lazarus, the chief priests and Pharisees gathered a council to decide what to do. Their discussion acknowledged His signs while treating His growing following as a threat.

Then many of the Jews who had come to Mary, and had seen the things Jesus did, believed in Him. But some of them went away to the Pharisees and told them the things Jesus did. Then the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered a council and said, “What shall we do? For this Man works many signs. If we let Him alone like this, everyone will believe in Him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and nation.” And one of them, Caiaphas, being high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all, nor do you consider that it is expedient for us that one man should die for the people, and not that the whole nation should perish.” Now this he did not say on his own authority; but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for that nation only, but also that He would gather together in one the children of God who were scattered abroad. Then, from that day on, they plotted to put Him to death. Therefore Jesus no longer walked openly among the Jews, but went from there into the country near the wilderness, to a city called Ephraim, and there remained with His disciples.

John 11:45-54

Many of the Jewish mourners who witnessed Lazarus being raised believed in Jesus. Others went to report what had happened to the Pharisees, although John does not give each reporter’s motive. The council’s own words are clearer: they acknowledged that Jesus performed many signs and feared that continued belief in Him would bring Roman intervention.

Their fear concerned both “our place and nation.” The word place is commonly understood as a reference to the temple, as the NET translators’ note explains. The temple, national survival, and their own position of authority were closely connected concerns. They anticipated a Roman response to a popular movement around Jesus and proposed killing Him as their solution. Political anxiety could not make that solution righteous.

Caiaphas argued that it was expedient for one man to die rather than for the nation to perish. He was advocating a killing to preserve political security. John explains that his words also prophesied something beyond his calculation: Jesus would die for the nation and gather God’s scattered children into one. God used the high priest’s statement to announce the saving purpose Caiaphas did not understand.

From that day the council plotted Jesus’ death, and He withdrew to Ephraim with His disciples. He was moving purposefully toward the appointed Passover, rather than surrendering Himself to an earlier attack. His withdrawal also warns me against confusing courage with remaining exposed to every threat. Continuing the work He had been given sometimes involved leaving the place where people sought to seize Him.

When Jesus was back in Jerusalem in the days before His crucifixion, He confronted the leaders through a parable about a vineyard and its tenants.

Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures: ‘The stone which the builders rejected Has become the chief cornerstone. This was the LORD’s doing, And it is marvelous in our eyes’? “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it. And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder.” Now when the chief priests and Pharisees heard His parables, they perceived that He was speaking of them. But when they sought to lay hands on Him, they feared the multitudes, because they took Him for a prophet.

Matthew 21:42-46

In the vineyard parable, tenants mistreated the owner’s servants and killed his son. Israel’s rejection of prophets provided the background, while the chief priests and Pharisees recognized that Jesus was speaking against them. They wanted to seize Him but held back because the people regarded Him as a prophet. Here Matthew gives a specific reason why an arrest did not happen: they feared the crowd.

The rejected stone would nevertheless become the chief cornerstone. The leaders’ rejection could not overturn Jesus’ identity or His kingdom. I do not read His judgment on these unfaithful leaders as canceling God’s promises to Israel, much less as permission to hate later generations. Unbelief brings judgment, while believing Jews and Gentiles receive the same salvation through the Messiah.

Now it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, that He said to His disciples, “You know that after two days is the Passover, and the Son of Man will be delivered up to be crucified.” Then the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders of the people assembled at the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, and plotted to take Jesus by trickery and kill Him. But they said, “Not during the feast, lest there be an uproar among the people.”

Matthew 26:1-5

Jesus told His disciples that He would be delivered up and crucified at Passover. Meanwhile, chief priests, scribes, and elders met at Caiaphas’s residence and planned to take Him by deception. They wanted to avoid an uproar during the feast. Judas later gave them an opportunity to seize Him at night, away from the crowds who heard Him teach.

Jesus knew what they were planning and willingly went toward the death He had foretold. That knowledge did not make Him the author of their crime, and the Passover fulfillment did not make His killers agents administering a just punishment. He was the sinless Lamb whose blood would bring deliverance. Their falsehood and violence remained wrong even while God accomplished salvation through what they did.

Jesus Gave Himself When His Appointed Hour Came

Jesus had already explained His willing death in His earlier teaching about the Good Shepherd. That teaching helps us understand why He finally submitted to arrest: He submitted because He had chosen to give His life, with authority to take it again.

I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own. As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd. “Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.”

John 10:14-18

The words “No one takes it from Me” do not deny the physical actions of those who arrested and killed Him. The Gospels name the officers, rulers, and soldiers involved. Jesus meant that none of them could force Him into a death He had not freely accepted. He could prevent an arrest, as the earlier encounters show, but He had come to give His life for the sheep. His bodily resurrection would follow that chosen death.

Willing surrender and human responsibility therefore belong together. The Son chose to suffer for others; the people who inflicted that suffering chose cruelty. He would die in the manner and at the hour He accepted, rather than at the Nazareth cliff or under stones in the temple. John shows that willing authority again when the arresting party finally reaches Him.

When Jesus had spoken these words, He went out with His disciples over the Brook Kidron, where there was a garden, which He and His disciples entered. And Judas, who betrayed Him, also knew the place; for Jesus often met there with His disciples. Then Judas, having received a detachment of troops, and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, came there with lanterns, torches, and weapons. Jesus therefore, knowing all things that would come upon Him, went forward and said to them, “Whom are you seeking?” They answered Him, “Jesus of Nazareth.” Jesus said to them, “I am He.” And Judas, who betrayed Him, also stood with them. Now when He said to them, “I am He,” they drew back and fell to the ground. Then He asked them again, “Whom are you seeking?” And they said, “Jesus of Nazareth.” Jesus answered, “I have told you that I am He. Therefore, if you seek Me, let these go their way,” that the saying might be fulfilled which He spoke, “Of those whom You gave Me I have lost none.” Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant’s name was Malchus. So Jesus said to Peter, “Put your sword into the sheath. Shall I not drink the cup which My Father has given Me?”

John 18:1-11

Judas knew the garden because Jesus often met there with His disciples. He arrived with officers and a detachment of troops carrying lights and weapons, but Jesus stepped forward and identified Himself. When He answered, the armed party drew back and fell to the ground. He then required them to let His disciples go. The Good Shepherd was protecting His own even while yielding to arrest.

Peter drew a sword and cut off Malchus’s right ear. Jesus told him to put the weapon away and spoke of drinking the cup the Father had given Him. That cup was the suffering and rejection He had accepted, including the torture and death wicked people would inflict. It was not the Father’s wrath against His Son. Peter could not advance the saving work by fighting to prevent the surrender Jesus had chosen.

After His arrest, Jesus was brought before the religious authorities and then before Pilate, the Roman governor. John records the governor’s part in the punishment and final sentence.

So then Pilate took Jesus and scourged Him. And the soldiers twisted a crown of thorns and put it on His head, and they put on Him a purple robe. Then they said, “Hail, King of the Jews!” And they struck Him with their hands. Pilate then went out again, and said to them, “Behold, I am bringing Him out to you, that you may know that I find no fault in Him.” Then Jesus came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. And Pilate said to them, “Behold the Man!” Therefore, when the chief priests and officers saw Him, they cried out, saying, “Crucify Him, crucify Him!” Pilate said to them, “You take Him and crucify Him, for I find no fault in Him.” The Jews answered him, “We have a law, and according to our law He ought to die, because He made Himself the Son of God.” Therefore, when Pilate heard that saying, he was the more afraid, and went again into the Praetorium, and said to Jesus, “Where are You from?” But Jesus gave him no answer. Then Pilate said to Him, “Are You not speaking to me? Do You not know that I have power to crucify You, and power to release You?” Jesus answered, “You could have no power at all against Me unless it had been given you from above. Therefore the one who delivered Me to you has the greater sin.” From then on Pilate sought to release Him, but the Jews cried out, saying, “If you let this Man go, you are not Caesar’s friend. Whoever makes himself a king speaks against Caesar.” When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus out and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called The Pavement, but in Hebrew, Gabbatha. Now it was the Preparation Day of the Passover, and about the sixth hour. And he said to the Jews, “Behold your King!” But they cried out, “Away with Him, away with Him! Crucify Him!” Pilate said to them, “Shall I crucify your King?” The chief priests answered, “We have no king but Caesar!” Then he delivered Him to them to be crucified. Then they took Jesus and led Him away.

John 19:1-16

Pilate had Jesus scourged, and Roman soldiers crowned Him with thorns, mocked Him, and struck Him. The governor then repeatedly declared that he found no fault in Him. When chief priests and officers demanded crucifixion, their accusation concerned His claim to be the Son of God. Political pressure followed: releasing a man presented as a rival king could be portrayed as disloyalty to Caesar. Pilate finally handed the innocent Jesus over for crucifixion.

Jesus had told Pilate that his authority could have no power against Him unless it had been given from above. That did not excuse the sentence. Jesus also spoke of the greater sin of the one who delivered Him over, distinguishing guilt without declaring Pilate innocent. Particular religious leaders pressed for the execution, and a Roman governor authorized Roman soldiers to carry it out. Neither side’s responsibility disappears because the other side also sinned.

Scripture Assigns Responsibility Without Ethnic Blame

After the resurrection and Pentecost, the Jerusalem believers themselves faced threats from the authorities. Their prayer looked back at those who had opposed Jesus.

So when they heard that, they raised their voice to God with one accord and said: “Lord, You are God, who made heaven and earth and the sea, and all that is in them, who by the mouth of Your servant David have said: ‘Why did the nations rage, And the people plot vain things? The kings of the earth took their stand, And the rulers were gathered together Against the LORD and against His Christ.’ “For truly against Your holy Servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose determined before to be done. Now, Lord, look on their threats, and grant to Your servants that with all boldness they may speak Your word, by stretching out Your hand to heal, and that signs and wonders may be done through the name of Your holy Servant Jesus.” And when they had prayed, the place where they were assembled together was shaken; and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and they spoke the word of God with boldness.

Acts 4:24-31

The Jerusalem church prayed about Christ’s death in the light of Psalm 2. They named Herod and Pontius Pilate, Gentiles and people of Israel, among those gathered against God’s holy Servant. Local leaders pressed their case, Judas betrayed Jesus, false witnesses lied, crowds demanded His death, and soldiers inflicted the punishment. The prayer names responsibility across these groups rather than assigning the crucifixion to one ethnicity.

It also says that those opponents did what God’s hand and purpose had determined beforehand. I understand this as God foretelling and directing the outcome without planting malice in their hearts or approving their crimes. He could accomplish His saving purpose through their actions without becoming the One who tortured His Son. The believers making this prayer were themselves under threat, yet they asked for boldness to preach. They did not ask for permission to retaliate against a people.

Earlier, at Pentecost, Peter had joined God’s determined purpose with the guilt of those who crucified Jesus.

“Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know– Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it.

Acts 2:22-24

Jesus was delivered according to God’s determined purpose and foreknowledge, yet the hands that crucified Him were lawless. Judas’s betrayal, Pilate’s sentence, and the soldiers’ violence did not become righteous because God knew and used what would happen. God then raised Jesus, because death could not hold Him.

The saving sacrifice was complete through Christ’s shed blood and death before His bodily resurrection. Wicked men physically tortured and killed Him under an unjust sentence, and He willingly bore that real punishment for our sins in His innocent body. The Father did not punish or curse Jesus, abandon Him, strike or bruise Him, or pour wrath on Him. The Father sent and raised the Son, while wicked people inflicted what the Son chose to endure.

Caiaphas had wanted a death that would preserve political order. God’s purpose went far beyond that calculation: the sinless Messiah gave Himself for Israel and the whole world. His blood provides forgiveness for everyone who believes. Peter preached that forgiveness to Jewish hearers in Jerusalem, calling them to repent. The apostles’ response to the crucifixion was to offer grace to the people before them, rather than pass guilt down through their ancestry.

Matthew records the crowd saying, “His blood be on us and on our children.” Those words could not make unborn descendants morally guilty of an act they had not chosen. Within weeks, the apostles preached forgiveness in Jerusalem and thousands of Jewish hearers believed. Paul longed for Israel’s salvation and taught that the Gospel is for the Jew first and also for the Greek. Using the crowd’s words to condemn later generations contradicts the way the apostles proclaimed Christ.

Antisemitism contradicts that Gospel. We must not use these accounts to insult Jewish neighbors, repeat slurs, or excuse violence against them. People living now did not take part in the ancient trial. At the same time, refusing ethnic blame does not require hiding what particular leaders and crowds did. We can name their actions truthfully while recognizing that people from every nation need Israel’s Messiah.

that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For “whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved.”

Romans 10:9-13

The same Lord is rich to all who call on Him. Transferring blame to another person or people cannot save me; I must respond to Christ myself. Paul directs us to confess Jesus as Lord and believe that God raised Him from the dead. The offer is for Jew and Gentile alike, and truthful witness empowered by the Spirit should be our response to those who oppose Him.

My Final Thoughts

I see particular people choosing wickedly in these encounters, including Roman authorities who carried out an unjust sentence. I also see the eternal Son continuing His work until He willingly gave His life. God’s purpose and Christ’s surrender did not make the attackers’ cruelty righteous, and their guilt cannot be inherited by an ethnicity. We should face what happened honestly and make the same offer the apostles made: forgiveness through the crucified and risen Messiah for everyone who believes.

The Miracles of Jesus: What They Reveal About Him

When Jesus healed someone or calmed a storm, He gave people a reason to ask who He was. His words explain what those works revealed, and the Gospels call us to respond to Him. I want to follow that teaching carefully, because amazement at a miracle does not necessarily lead a person to faith.

What the Miracles Reveal About Jesus

A biblical miracle is an extraordinary act of God within His creation, displaying power beyond what creatures can accomplish through ordinary ability. God sustains the world and its dependable patterns; creation is not an independent machine from which He is normally absent. The God who gives and preserves life can also act in unusual, recognizable ways to reveal His authority and carry out His purposes.

That does not diminish His providence, His care through ordinary circumstances. We can thank Him for food, medical care, timely help from a friend, and protection from danger. But calling every welcome coincidence a miracle can obscure what the Gospel writers describe. Jesus commanded a storm to stop, multiplied a small supply of food, gave sight to a man born blind, expelled demons, and called a dead man from his tomb. Human skill or fortunate timing cannot explain those acts.

John calls these works signs because they reveal who Jesus is. He tells us why he selected the events recorded in his Gospel.

And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

John 20:30-31

John wants his readers to believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and receive life in His name. The signs support that testimony and call for a response to Him. We can admire an extraordinary event and still refuse to trust the One whose identity it reveals.

Lists of the miracles narrated in the four Gospels often include about three dozen events, with thirty-seven a common count. Scripture does not give that number as a final tally. The totals depend on how readers combine parallel accounts and count episodes involving several acts. Gospel summaries also describe many healings and deliverances beyond the individually recorded cases. John 21 says the world could not contain the books if everything Jesus did were written one by one. The selected testimony gives us sufficient grounds to recognize Him without claiming to record all He did.

Jesus also appealed to His works as witnesses that the Father had sent Him. We need to read those works alongside His teaching and the Scriptures they fulfilled. The prophets had announced God’s saving action, including opened eyes and ears, strength for the lame, and good news for the poor. Jesus’ ministry gave people concrete reasons to recognize the promised Messiah.

His authority did not make Him indifferent to the people receiving help. He saw hungry crowds and supplied food, touched people suffering from disease, and had compassion on a widow grieving for her only son. Their bodies and grief were real concerns to Him. His call to repentance and faith did not make their present suffering unimportant, and relieving that suffering did not remove their need for forgiveness.

We need to hear what Jesus said about Himself as we consider these works. He commanded creation and claimed authority to forgive sins, going beyond the role of a human prophet who received power from God. The Gospels present Him as the Creator who became truly human without ceasing to be God. His genuine humanity and His full deity belong together in our understanding of Him.

Authority Over Creation and Human Need

John identifies the wedding at Cana as Jesus’ first sign. When the wine ran out, He told the servants to fill six stone waterpots used for Jewish purification. They filled them to the brim, and the water became wine of remarkable quality. Running out of wine could bring embarrassment upon the hosts, but John’s stated purpose directs our attention to Jesus’ glory and the disciples’ faith.

When the master of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and did not know where it came from (but the servants who had drawn the water knew), the master of the feast called the bridegroom. And he said to him, “Every man at the beginning sets out the good wine, and when the guests have well drunk, then the inferior. You have kept the good wine until now!” This beginning of signs Jesus did in Cana of Galilee, and manifested His glory; and His disciples believed in Him.

John 2:9-11

The master of the feast did not know where the wine had come from, but the servants knew they had drawn the water at Jesus’ command. John explains the result: Jesus manifested His glory, and His disciples believed in Him. The wine was real, yet the passage gives no endorsement of drunkenness or promise that Christians will live in luxury. We need to follow John’s explanation of the sign rather than use it to support those expectations.

The disciples encountered His authority in frightening circumstances on the Sea of Galilee. Mark 4 describes waves filling their boat while Jesus slept. Several disciples were experienced fishermen, so we should not dismiss their alarm as ignorance of the lake. They woke Him, and He addressed the wind and sea.

Then He arose and rebuked the wind, and said to the sea, “Peace, be still!” And the wind ceased and there was a great calm. But He said to them, “Why are you so fearful? How is it that you have no faith?” And they feared exceedingly, and said to one another, “Who can this be, that even the wind and the sea obey Him!”

Mark 4:39-41

At His command, the storm gave way to a great calm. Jesus confronted the disciples about their fear and lack of faith, and they asked one another, “Who can this be?” They had more to consider than their relief at surviving. Israel’s Scriptures describe the LORD stilling the sea, and these men had just seen the wind and waves obey Jesus. His sleep showed His genuine human life, while His command revealed authority over creation.

Matthew 14 records a separate occasion when Jesus walked on the water. Peter stepped out toward Him, became afraid as he saw the wind, and began to sink. When he cried for help, Jesus reached out and caught him. We should not combine this with the sleeping and calming of the storm in Mark 4. Both events taught the disciples to depend on Christ, but they happened in different circumstances.

The feeding miracles also brought the disciples beyond their calculations about what they could supply. All four Gospels record the feeding of about five thousand men; Matthew notes women and children as well. Matthew and Mark also describe a separate feeding of four thousand. The starting supplies and the baskets remaining differ, and Jesus Himself later referred to both occasions (Matthew 16:9–10). These are two events, not confused versions of one feeding.

Then Jesus said, “Make the people sit down.” Now there was much grass in the place. So the men sat down, in number about five thousand. And Jesus took the loaves, and when He had given thanks He distributed them to the disciples, and the disciples to those sitting down; and likewise of the fish, as much as they wanted. So when they were filled, He said to His disciples, “Gather up the fragments that remain, so that nothing is lost.” Therefore they gathered them up, and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the five barley loaves which were left over by those who had eaten. Then those men, when they had seen the sign that Jesus did, said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.”

John 6:10-14

The people ate as much as they wanted, and the disciples gathered twelve baskets of fragments from the five barley loaves. Jesus had met a real need. John then describes the crowd trying to make Him king by force and later seeking Him for more food. Jesus directed them to the lasting food He gives and identified Himself as the Bread of Life. If I turn the feeding into a promise that believers will never experience hunger, I overlook His call to receive eternal life through faith.

Healing, Compassion, and Authority Over Demons

Jesus healed fever and paralysis, opened blind eyes and deaf ears, and cleansed leprosy. He healed a woman suffering from persistent bleeding, restored a withered hand, and healed an injured ear. Sometimes He touched the person; at other times He simply spoke, even when the sufferer was some distance away. These differences help us see why healing cannot be reduced to a ritual someone learns to master. It came through His authority.

John the Baptist had identified Him as the Lamb of God and witnessed the Spirit descend upon Him. Later, while imprisoned under Herod, John sent disciples to ask whether Jesus was the Coming One. Jesus answered by directing the messengers to what they could hear and see.

Jesus answered and said to them, “Go and tell John the things which you hear and see: The blind see and the lame walk; the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear; the dead are raised up and the poor have the gospel preached to them. And blessed is he who is not offended because of Me.”

Matthew 11:4-6

The works Jesus named correspond to Isaiah’s promises, particularly the opened eyes and ears and strengthened limbs of Isaiah 35 and the good news of Isaiah 61. He gave John reasons to recognize Him as Messiah. His warning also called John to trust Him even when the way He carried out His work differed from people’s expectations.

That promised work also brought mercy to particular people. Jesus saw the crowds as sheep without a shepherd, touched a leper, and stopped the funeral procession of a widow’s only son. His compassion was expressed in what He did for them. Yet He did not heal every sick person in the Roman world, and His concern gives us no authority to demand that every instance of suffering end on our timetable.

The Gospels also distinguish physical disease from demonization, even when summaries mention both together. John 9 rejects the disciples’ assumption that a man’s blindness had to result from his own sin or his parents’ sin. We must not assume a particular person’s illness or disability proves personal wrongdoing, deficient faith, or demon possession.

When Jesus confronted unclean spirits, He commanded them with authority. He neither negotiated as their equal nor borrowed power through occult incantations. Mark 5 describes a tormented man living among the tombs in the country of the Gadarenes. He could not be restrained and was harming himself. The herd of pigs mentioned in the account also fits the largely Gentile setting.

When he saw Jesus from afar, he ran and worshiped Him. And he cried out with a loud voice and said, “What have I to do with You, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I implore You by God that You do not torment me.” For He said to him, “Come out of the man, unclean spirit!” Then He asked him, “What is your name?” And he answered, saying, “My name is Legion; for we are many.” Also he begged Him earnestly that He would not send them out of the country. Now a large herd of swine was feeding there near the mountains. So all the demons begged Him, saying, “Send us to the swine, that we may enter them.” And at once Jesus gave them permission. Then the unclean spirits went out and entered the swine (there were about two thousand); and the herd ran violently down the steep place into the sea, and drowned in the sea.

Mark 5:6-13

The demons recognized Jesus and had to ask permission to enter the swine. Afterward, people came and saw the man clothed and in his right mind. They were afraid and asked Jesus to leave. They could see the result of his deliverance, yet that did not make them willing to welcome the One who had freed him.

Jesus sent the restored man home to tell what the Lord had done and how He had shown him mercy. A man who had lived among tombs and harmed himself could now go home with that testimony. I want to keep Christ’s mercy toward him in view rather than become absorbed in a demon’s vocabulary. The passage records deliverance from terrible bondage; it gives no instructions for staging dramatic confrontations.

Some opponents attributed His expulsions of demons to Beelzebub. Jesus exposed the contradiction in that accusation: Satan would be casting out Satan. He then explained whose power was at work and what His presence meant.

But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, surely the kingdom of God has come upon you.

Matthew 12:28

The King had arrived and was confronting Satan’s dominion. His works displayed the kingdom’s authority and gave people a preview of restoration under His reign. We can draw hope from that preview without treating it as the completed restoration. Disease, death, disasters, and demonic activity remain, and even after Pentecost the apostles suffered while creation continued to groan.

Authority Over Death and Sin

The Gospels describe three people Jesus restored from death before His own crucifixion. Jairus learned that his twelve-year-old daughter had died while Jesus was still on His way to the house. At Nain, a widow was accompanying her only son to burial. At Bethany, Lazarus had already been in his tomb four days when Jesus arrived.

Jesus took the girl by the hand and told her to arise. At Nain, He stopped the procession and commanded the young man to rise. At Bethany, He ordered the stone removed and called Lazarus from the tomb. Whether death had just been reported or burial had already taken place, it yielded to His word.

Now when He had said these things, He cried with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come forth!” And he who had died came out bound hand and foot with graveclothes, and his face was wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, “Loose him, and let him go.”

John 11:43-44

These people returned to mortal life. Scripture does not describe them receiving glorified, incorruptible bodies or being freed from the prospect of dying again. Their restoration was extraordinary, but Jesus’ own resurrection was different. He rose bodily never to die again.

In John 10, Jesus said He willingly laid down His life and had authority to take it again. Scripture also says the Father raised Him and speaks of the Spirit giving life. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit act in perfect agreement. These statements show the unity of the one triune God, without suggesting competition among the divine Persons.

The risen Jesus had identifiable wounds, ate in His disciples’ presence, and invited them to touch Him. They were not encountering a surviving spirit. John says the doors were shut when Jesus stood among them, but does not explain how He entered or say that He walked through a wall. Luke describes Him vanishing at Emmaus without describing a visible journey to another location. I can affirm the reality of His risen body without inventing its physical mechanics.

But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming.

1 Corinthians 15:20-23

Firstfruits are the beginning of a harvest. Paul uses that term to explain how Christ’s resurrection assures His people of what will follow. Others had returned to mortal life before Him, but He entered incorruptible resurrection life. Those who belong to Him will receive bodily resurrection at His coming, when mortality gives way to immortality and corruption to incorruption. Their future rests on the Lord who has already conquered death.

Jesus will return bodily to rule in the literal kingdom promised to David. His thousand-year reign will be followed by final judgment and the eternal order in which death is no more. The Gospel miracles give us grounds for that hope because the King has already demonstrated His authority over the enemies He will finally remove.

Earlier in His ministry, Jesus had used a visible healing to show His authority to forgive sin. In Mark 2, four men lowered a paralyzed man through a roof because the crowd blocked their access. Jesus pronounced the man’s sins forgiven before healing him. The scribes understood that forgiveness belongs to God, but they concluded that Jesus was blaspheming.

When Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven you.” And some of the scribes were sitting there and reasoning in their hearts, “Why does this Man speak blasphemies like this? Who can forgive sins but God alone?” But immediately, when Jesus perceived in His spirit that they reasoned thus within themselves, He said to them, “Why do you reason about these things in your hearts? Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven you,’ or to say, ‘Arise, take up your bed and walk’? But that you may know that the Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins”–He said to the paralytic, “I say to you, arise, take up your bed, and go to your house.” Immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went out in the presence of them all, so that all were amazed and glorified God, saying, “We never saw anything like this!”

Mark 2:5-12

Someone could pronounce forgiveness without giving observers an immediate way to test the claim. Jesus commanded the man to rise and carry his bed home, and the man did so in front of them all. The healing they could see established His authority as the Son of Man to forgive sins on earth. Forgiveness and new birth are real works of God’s saving mercy, while this bodily healing provided visible testimony to Jesus’ authority to grant that mercy.

Signs, Unbelief, and Modern Miracle Claims

The Greek words used for these works often overlap in meaning. Semeion is a sign that identifies or points to something, while dunamis emphasizes power and can describe a mighty work. Teras is a wonder, and ergon means a work or deed. John frequently uses that last word when Jesus appeals to His Father’s works as testimony. They describe aspects of an event, so we should not treat them as four mutually exclusive categories. Thayer discusses sign, power, wonder, and work in their respective entries.

A demand for another sign was not always an honest search for understanding. In Matthew 12, Jesus healed a demon-possessed man who had been blind and mute, and opponents attributed the Spirit’s work to Satan. Some scribes and Pharisees then asked for a sign on their own terms.

Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered, saying, “Teacher, we want to see a sign from You.” But He answered and said to them, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Matthew 12:38-40

Jesus used Jonah’s three days and three nights in the great fish to point to His own burial and bodily resurrection. He went on to speak of Nineveh’s repentance at Jonah’s preaching and the queen of the South’s journey to hear Solomon. They had responded to less revelation than the people standing before Jesus had received. Someone greater than Jonah and Solomon was present, yet these opponents resisted Him.

The response to Lazarus makes that resistance especially plain. Many witnesses believed after seeing him raised, but others reported the event to the Pharisees. The council discussed Jesus’ signs without denying that He was doing them.

Then many of the Jews who had come to Mary, and had seen the things Jesus did, believed in Him. But some of them went away to the Pharisees and told them the things Jesus did. Then the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered a council and said, “What shall we do? For this Man works many signs. If we let Him alone like this, everyone will believe in Him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and nation.”

John 11:45-48

The leaders feared that widespread belief in Jesus would bring Roman intervention and cost them their place and nation. They moved toward killing Him, and the chief priests later plotted against Lazarus too (John 12:10–11). Their response shows that evidence does not force people to submit. Miracles support the truth without compelling saving faith against a person’s will. Faith comes through hearing God’s word, and each hearer is responsible for his response to Christ.

An impressive event cannot make false doctrine true. Scripture warns of signs associated with deception, so we must examine a claim alongside its message and the biblical identity of Jesus. We also need to consider the teaching and conduct it produces. Wonder becomes dangerous when someone uses it to demand belief while refusing to have the claim tested by God’s word.

I believe the Spirit continues to give miraculous gifts today. We may pray for healing and deliverance and receive genuine reports of God’s work with gratitude. I reject the approach often called hyper-charismatic, which accepts dramatic manifestations without adequate testing. No gifted personality is entitled to exemption from Scripture’s scrutiny.

But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills.

1 Corinthians 12:7-11

The Spirit is a divine Person who distributes gifts as He wills to benefit the body. No believer controls Him, and receiving a particular gift does not establish that someone is saved or spiritually superior. Nor should we assume that every Christian will reproduce all of Jesus’ works. He is the unique Son, and the Spirit gives different gifts to the members of His body.

A healing claim should be specific enough to examine: what condition was present, and what actually changed? Independent medical evidence can help answer those questions. No one should be pressured to report an improvement that has not occurred, and a ministry must not urge people to withdraw from treatment. Medication changes should be discussed with the prescribing clinician, because some medicines, including steroid tablets, can be unsafe to stop abruptly.

The message behind the claim also needs examination. A dramatic video cannot vindicate a ministry that diminishes Christ or distorts His gospel. Selling access to spiritual power, manipulating a crowd, blaming sick people, and hiding failed predictions are reasons to challenge a ministry’s conduct. No apparent success excuses dishonesty.

God is able to heal, and we should pray earnestly. Paul nevertheless left Trophimus sick and gave Timothy practical advice for a recurring infirmity. In his own suffering, he also learned to depend on God’s sufficient grace in weakness. These passages leave us no grounds to promise every believer immediate relief or accuse someone of inadequate faith because suffering continues.

Receiving help from physicians, medicine, therapy, or assistive devices is not unbelief. Prayer and ordinary care can accompany one another. A suffering person needs truthful companionship and practical help, not pressure to defend God’s reputation by pretending the symptoms have disappeared. We can ask for healing without making the person responsible for producing it.

Jesus came to provide more than relief from present troubles. He is the eternal Son, fully God and fully man, born of a virgin and without sin. Wicked men tortured and crucified Him, while He voluntarily gave Himself to be slain as the perfect sacrifice for our sins. He shed His innocent blood and died for the whole world, completing His saving sacrifice before His burial and bodily resurrection. The Father did not punish, curse, abandon, strike, bruise, or pour wrath on Jesus. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit remained united, with no broken fellowship in the Godhead.

For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures,

1 Corinthians 15:3-4

His signs direct us to this crucified and risen Savior. God’s invitation is genuine, and people can resist it, just as eyewitnesses resisted Jesus despite His works. Turn to Him in repentance and faith. Everyone who believes is forgiven and justified, meaning declared righteous before God, and becomes a new creation through the new birth. The Holy Spirit indwells and seals the believer, who is eternally secure in Christ. This assurance gives us no permission to live lawlessly, and a shallow profession does not establish that someone has received new life. Obedience is evidence of the Spirit’s work, never a way to earn or keep salvation; new birth does not mean sinless perfection.

We do not need to pretend that sickness, disability, grief, or uncertainty is a small burden. The signs reveal the King who can overcome those enemies, even while full bodily redemption awaits His return. Until then, we can pray honestly, receive proper care, and test every claim without depending on a spectacle to sustain our faith.

My Final Thoughts

The miracles direct my attention to Jesus, who commands creation, has compassion on sufferers, and holds authority over sin and death. He gives us reason to trust Him without promising that every present affliction will end before His return. We should pray boldly, welcome the Spirit’s gifts, examine what is claimed, and care faithfully for those who continue to suffer. Our hope rests in the crucified and risen Christ who forgives those who believe and will finally make all things right.