Coming to Faith

Reading: John 10.22-30
A couple of weeks ago we were thinking about "believing Thomas." I made the comment, "There are three kinds of doubters. There are some who throw arguments against believing because they don't want to believe, anyway. There are others who live with a constant uncertainty about anything and everything. And there are some who raise probing questions because they know that belief is going to mean the total commitment of their lives."

John Stott in his book, Basic Christianity, asks the honest seeker after truth to pray this prayer before looking at the evidence about Jesus, "God, if you exist (and I don't know if you do), and if you can hear this prayer (and I don't know if you can), I want to tell you that I am an honest seeker after the truth. Show me if Jesus is your Son and the Saviour of the world. And if you bring conviction to my mind, I will trust him as my Saviour and follow him as my Lord" (p. 19).

That is a very reasonable and honest prayer for anyone. However, I suspect it sifts out whether people genuinely want the truth about Jesus.

Tell us plainly

That appears to be the situation in today's reading from John 10.

It was "the Feast of Dedication" - "Hanukkah", the footnote tells us. In 168 BC, the Temple in Jerusalem was dedicated to the worship of Zeus by order of Antiochus Epiphanes. An altar to Zeus was set up on the high altar. When Judas Maccabaeus recaptured Jerusalem three years later, he had the Temple purged and a new altar put up in place of the one that had been desecrated. The Temple was then rededicated to God with eight days of festivities. That is the festival of Hanukkah.

Jesus was "walking in Solomon's Colonnade" (v. 23) in the Temple area in Jerusalem. We are told "the Jews gathered around him". This was the outer courtyard, so there could have been God-fearing Gentiles in the vicinity as well. When Jesus had called himself the Good Shepherd who would lay down his life for the sheep and take it up again, the response of the Jews was divided (v. 19). However, "the Jews" here were largely opposed to him.

They asked, "How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly" (v. 24).

Did they want Jesus to declare himself as the Messiah so they could believe in him, so that they could follow him? Or did they want a plain declaration from Jesus so they could deal with him, so that they could reject him?

From time to time we are faced with arguments against faith. Arguments like - "It's all invented! There never was a Jesus!", "Jesus taught many good things, but never did any miracles!", "Jesus died all right, but he stayed dead!"...

When people raise objections like that, I wonder, are they willing to believe if reasonable answers are given? or are they set in their unbelief and looking for arguments to support their unbelief? That's not for us to say. The Lord kept on at Saul of Tarsus until he finally came to faith (Acts 9).

Let's look for a moment at those three objections.

Was the story of Jesus just an invention of the gospel writers and the early Christians? Historians have concluded that there is more evidence that Jesus was a real person than that Napoleon ever lived. The Jewish historian, Josephus, a Pharisee who wrote towards the end of the first century, includes a reference to Jesus - "Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works-a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day" (Antiquities, 18.3.3). Tacitus, the Roman historian who lived from 60 to 120 AD, says that "Christus... was executed at the hands of the procurator Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius" (Annals, xv.44). Modern-day Jewish guides in Israel affirm that Jesus was a real person. Our guide seemed to accept the gospel records about him - and to acknowledge the corruption of the Jewish priesthood at that time. Well, what about the miracles? It is very striking that early Jewish sources, while rejecting Jesus as the Messiah, acknowledge that he performed miracles but attribute such miracles to sorcery - a Jewish opinion we also find in the New Testament (Matthew 12.24).

And the resurrection? German New Testament scholar, Rudolph Bultmann, caused a major storm in the mid-1900s. He affirmed strongly that the New Testament clearly teaches the resurrection of Christ, but argued that it is unacceptable to "modern scientific and biological man" ("The New Testament and Mythology" in H.W. Bartsch ed., Kerygma and Myth, SPCK 1960). However, the question isn't "do resurrections happen?", but "did Jesus, the unique Son of God, rise from death on the third day, as he had promised?" We are not dealing with a repeatable phenomenon which scientists can test, but the historical question of what happened on this one unique occasion.

Frank Morison was impressed by the teaching of Jesus but had no time for miracles. He decided to write a book about Jesus the Teacher, centering his study on the last week of Jesus' life - the one period, so he thought, completely devoid of the miraculous. That book "refused to be written" as he was confronted by the evidence for the miracle of the resurrection. He recounts this in his book, Who Moved the Stone?

Miracles and Faith

Jesus says, "I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father's name speak for me" (v. 25).

In John 8 we read his claim, "Before Abraham was born, I am!" They were ready to stone him there and then (vv. 58-59). Earlier in chapter 10 he had said, "I lay down my life - only to take it up again. No one takes it from me..." (vv. 17-18).

Some modern-day teachers have insisted persuasively that evangelism will be largely ineffective without the miraculous - without "signs and wonders." But this wasn't the teaching and practice of Jesus. His miracles were acts of compassion, not exhibitions of power - he had rejected that approach at the time of his temptation (Mt 4.1-11). He didn't trust those who followed him on account of the miracles (Jn 2.23-25). Mostly his miracles were done privately - with an attempt to "keep them quiet" (as in Mk 7.31-37).

Miracles do happen. Sometimes, as in the case of Saul of Tarsus, they are the means of bringing someone to faith. In recent times there have been a number of reported cases of Moslems converting to Christ because of dreams, visions and healings.

In today's reading we hear Jesus saying, "The miracles I do in my Father's name speak for me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep..." (vv. 25-26).

The Son of God

There it is again - the theme of the shepherd and the sheep from earlier in the chapter. True sheep recognise and respond to the Shepherd's voice (vv. 3-5,16). It isn't that Jesus doesn't want these to be included also. The heart of the Shepherd is always reaching out to "other sheep." It is just that by their attitude and behaviour they are ruling themselves out.

The claim and promise of Jesus are quite unmistakable - "My Father, who have given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. I and the Father are one" (vv. 29-30).


© Peter J. Blackburn, Home Hill and Ayr Uniting Churches, 6 May 2001
Except where otherwise noted, Scripture quotations are from the New International Version, © International Bible Society, 1984.
Back to Sermons