NOTES for Joh 7:25-36

Messianic ideas in Gospel times were quite developed; there was even a distinctive "messianic" theology describing everything connected with the Messiah, with His ministry, His appearance, and how and from where He should come. All the events that, according to the corresponding concepts, were to happen before the Messiah's appearance and immediately after His appearance were also described and explained, including those signs and miracles that the Messiah had to demonstrate publicly or privately to those who were supposed to see them, as proof of His messiahship. Such signs, it was assumed, were necessary: without them it was impossible to recognize the true Messiah, impossible to distinguish Him from the false messiahs constantly appearing then in Judea.

At the same time, one of the signs of the true Messiah was His acceptance as such, in particular by the temple leadership headed by the high priest and by the authoritative spiritual leaders of the Synagogue. Such acceptance was considered necessary because the Messiah was viewed then first of all as an earthly King after all, though not an entirely ordinary one. His reign would be accompanied by extraordinary signs and miracles connected with such a measure of God's presence as the world had never known before, but the Kingdom itself, as people thought, would still exist on earth, though according to the laws of the Torah given by God. It was impossible to build such a Kingdom without the participation of the Temple and the priesthood, just as it was impossible to build it without the participation of the believing people. Therefore the Messiah would necessarily need the support of both the high priest and the leaders of the Synagogue.

And now the people are watching: how do the priesthood and the authoritative people in the Synagogue, whom the people call "the rulers," relate to this unusual Man? If they do not hinder Him, perhaps He really is that very Messiah whom everyone is awaiting? The gathered people did not think that both the high priesthood and the elders of the Synagogue were simply at a loss, not knowing what to do, and they took this confusion for readiness to acknowledge Jesus' messiahship. Very soon it will become clear that those who thought this way were mistaken, but for the moment the silence of the temple and synagogue leadership could be understood in two ways.

Before us is an example of how certain knowledge and convictions can cloud our eyes and distort the "correct" view of life, a view filled with the Holy Spirit, which sees everything happening around it and gives it a proper assessment. We see people whose certainty about the unknown place of Christ's origin has closed Jesus off from them. Having stopped at this point and pulled the "handbrake," they no longer see anything else. They do not hear His words and are not convinced by looking at His works. That is precisely why Jesus says to them: "He who sent Me is true, and you do not know Him." After all, knowledge of the Lord presupposes fulfilling His will in the Spirit, and Christ was sent to earth by the will of the Father for the redemption of sins, the conversion and sanctification of many.

In the Gospel there are quite often situations when Jesus speaks in hints that His listeners do not understand at all or understand incorrectly. A misunderstanding arises, which Jesus nevertheless does not resolve. Or rather, He resolves it in a rather distinctive way: instead of a direct answer He offers a new hint.

As a result, those listening to Him remain in complete perplexity, arriving at conclusions very far from those which, as it turns out, Jesus expected from them. What is this: deliberate mystification? Hardly: Jesus was never a mystifier. Or is the matter what is sometimes called the messianic secret - the fact of His messiahship, carefully hidden by Him until the time? Perhaps - when the question concerned His messiahship, Jesus gave no direct answer; it was voiced no earlier than the Lord's entry into Jerusalem.

But the matter is hardly only the messianic secret; the features of human nature are also important. It is not by chance that in the culture of the East, and in a certain period also of the West, the parable, the hint, and the unsaid played such a large role. It was thought better to hint at the answer and give readers or listeners the possibility of finding it themselves than to give everything ready-made. And the point is not only that a solution found independently is remembered better. The state in which the seeking person abides also plays an enormous role. This state presupposes the rejection of all ready-made and habitual cliches - not always their complete destruction, but always rejection.

For a paradox is always built on the possibility of seeing something new in what is well known, by looking at it from an unexpected angle. And the capacity for such a view is connected with a person's fundamental openness. Not only intellectual openness, for intellectual openness alone without spiritual openness usually does not exist, but precisely spiritual openness is needed for full life, especially for the life of the Kingdom. And Jesus prepares His listeners for this life by His very word, for the word too is an instrument of the Kingdom.

Speaking to the people, Jesus continually tries to bring His listeners back to the foundations, to the spiritual core of the Yahwist and Jewish tradition. As we know, He was accused more than once of breaking Shabbat by healing people on the day of Shabbat. And He reminds them of circumcision, which is performed on the appointed day even when that day happens to be Shabbat. And He adds: what, then, are you accusing Me of?

The logic is clear: circumcision is only a sign of the Covenant, a sign of faithfulness to the Torah. And so, in order to mark a person's faithfulness to the Torah, it is possible to set aside the rest of Shabbat; such neglect is not considered a violation of Shabbat. Can the One who heals a person on the day of Shabbat, bringing him into the life of the Kingdom, be considered a violator of Shabbat? This is not about medicine, not about treatment, which in some cases Jewish tradition does indeed regard as a violation of Shabbat. It is about opening the Kingdom of God to a person in all its fullness. Is this not, in the end, the true meaning of Shabbat? After all, all the prohibitions and restrictions surrounding the Sabbath day ultimately have only one purpose: to shift a person's attention completely from everyday life to the presence of God, without which no spiritual life is possible.

Faithfulness to the Torah is an essential condition of communion with God; that is why circumcision, as a sign of such faithfulness, is performed even on Shabbat. And is the manifestation of the Kingdom of God not even a sign or symbol, but a vivid manifestation of that same faithfulness? If it is, why must people seize stones when the One appears who manifests the Kingdom, and manifests it in all its fullness?

In this way Jesus tries to convey to His listeners the true meaning both of Shabbat and of spiritual life itself. Yet many of them, remaining more attached to their tradition than to the Kingdom, are still ready to grab stones.

By the time this conversation between Jesus and His brothers takes place, He has already performed a number of miracles in Galilee and has become a noticeable figure there. According to human logic, this success should be developed by performing in Judea the miracles and signs that the Galileans had seen. All the more so because Christ is doing nothing bad or forbidden; otherwise they would not have urged Him so insistently to "show Himself to the world." They expect that, when He comes to Jerusalem, to that center of the Jewish faith, He will declare Himself the Anointed One. But divine logic is arranged differently, and so, after answering them that "the time has not yet been fulfilled," He remains in Galilee.

Is this not how we too often ask the Lord to manifest His power in an obvious way? We wait for signs and wonders from Him that would reveal His glory to the world and thereby bring even more people to Him. But God acts quietly and unnoticeably, just as Jesus came to Jerusalem "not publicly, but as it were in secret." He does not impose Himself on people, but waits for them of their own will to entrust their hearts to Him; He patiently waits for each of us to acknowledge in Him the King of kings.

This is one of the strangest dialogues in the Gospel. It looks as if the Jews simply do not understand what Jesus is talking about, while He Himself does not answer their words but says things that appear irrelevant. Yet if we consider the remarks of the people and of Jesus separately, their logical coherence is immediately revealed. They are simply conducting the conversation (if it is a conversation at all) in different directions. The Lord speaks about His mission - to bring people the word about the Father (for He Himself is the Father's Word), while the crowd's remarks show its complete lack of understanding.

Sometimes it feels as if this situation repeats again and again: Christ speaks to us through the Gospel, and we answer Him about something entirely different. To some extent this is natural, because we belong to different worlds (He is "from above," we are "from below"); He speaks of what we have not seen, but He has seen. This is not a lecture; it is testimony. And it is grasped only through the love and faithfulness of disciples who, not yet fully understanding and not yet believing perfectly, feel that Jesus speaks the words of eternal life and do not want to leave Him.

Today's reading helps us see more clearly the influence that religiosity has on a person's soul and consciousness. The account begins with mention of the feast of Sukkot ("the Feast of Booths"), to which Jesus' brothers are going to go in Jerusalem (vv. 2-3). Sukkot was one of the four main feasts of the Jewish religious year, and as usual a great gathering of pilgrims was expected in Jerusalem. It is no surprise that Jesus' brothers, who did not believe in His messiahship, wanted Him during the feast to proclaim Himself publicly as the Messiah and to give the proofs that those around Him had already demanded of Him more than once (vv. 3-5). Evidently, they expected to see the Messiah as the majority of believing Jews of the Gospel period imagined Him - as a Messiah-king, proclaiming an independent Jewish state and driving out the Romans. It is no surprise that Jesus refuses such a demonstration (vv. 6-8); He does come to Jerusalem, but secretly, trying not to draw attention to Himself (vv. 9-10).

Meanwhile, in the city, very different rumors about Him are circulating: some consider Him a man of God, others a deceiver (vv. 11-12). But everyone looks anxiously over his shoulder at those whom the evangelist calls "the Jews," meaning, as we can see, the spiritual leaders of the Synagogue and of the Pharisaic movement (v. 13). At that time Jesus again speaks to the people gathered in the temple court about the main thing - about His mission (vv. 14-18). And also about the true meaning of the Sabbath, whose meaning had long been lost behind numerous ritual prescriptions (vv. 19-24). Then some of those present recognize in the Speaker the One who had already been accused of breaking the Sabbath law, a violation punishable by death. And perhaps He is right? After all, no one appears to be intending to apply any sanctions to Him. But He cannot be the Messiah, for the Messiah must appear in some completely different way (vv. 25-27).

Here before us, as if on the palm of a hand, are all the questions that religion produces in the consciousness of a person who finds himself face to face with Christ and with the Kingdom that He brought into the world. No one has ever done such miracles as He has, and, perhaps, no one ever will (v. 31), but... why did He come not as religious tradition says of Him? And why do the religious leaders not receive Him? Where is the truth - in the religion that rejects Him, or in that evident reality of the Kingdom which bears such bright witness to Him? Each person answered this question for himself, and on this answer depended the acceptance or rejection of the Savior and of the Kingdom He brought into the world.