Jesus, the light of the world

By reicheltdr on September 1, 2024

15 Pentecost
John 8:12-20

If we read John's Gospel as it was written and as it stood for several centuries, before the spurious account of the woman caught in the act of adultery was added, then we move directly from Nicodemus' attempt to ask for a fair hearing for Jesus, to Jesus' statement: 'I am the light of the world.'

This is significant for a couple of reasons. First, it means the context is still the Feast of Booths and Jesus is continuing his conversation in the Temple. Not only was water a theme at the festival, as we saw in the previous text, but so was light. The cloud of light that led the people of Israel during their sojourn in the wilderness was one of the themes of remembering the time in the dessert. And candles were also lit in significant quantities at the feast as part of this theme. So not only has Jesus gotten the attention of those assembled by saying 'Let anyone who is thirsty come to me,' now he has proclaimed, 'I am the light of the world.'

And secondly, it is significant that this text follows immediately upon the end of chapter seven when Nicodemus shows up for the second time in John's Gospel. It reminds us of the first time Nicodemus met Jesus. There, in chapter three, Jesus' final words to Nicodemus were these: 'The light has come into the world, and people loved darkness rather than light and do not come to the light … but those who do what is true come to the light.'

The theme of Jesus as the light of the world will be familiar to the reader's of John's Gospel. John began his Gospel by declaring that the Word which has come into the world is 'the light of all people. It is a light that shines in the darkness and no darkness will overcome it.'

The Pharisees and others gathered around would, of course, not be aware of these words not yet written. But there was at least one person present who had heard something like this before. And that was Nicodemus.

Could this have been partly a special message and call to Nicodemus? Possibly. For it is also in the context of the this same talk the John mentions the importance of testimony, the terminology of coming 'from above', the linking of belief with salvation, and most obviously, the repeating of the prophecy that the Son of Man will be lifted up off the earth.

If Nicodemus had been mulling over in his mind his earlier conversation with Jesus, he would have likely taken much of what was said as a personal reminder and challenge to him. (But that's another sermon!)

But there was another greater and more obvious context to these words of Jesus that the Pharisees and other religious leaders clearly did not miss. And that was the several messianic texts in Isaiah in which the coming Messiah is said to be the light of the nations. Most famously we think of Isaiah 9:2, 'The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; those who lived in a land of deep darkness, on them light has shined.' And also Isaiah 49:6, 'I will give you as a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth.' And Isaiah 60:1-3, 'Arise, shine; for your light has come, and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you. … nations shall come to your light and kings to the brightness of your dawn.'

Jesus was clearly claiming to be the Messiah. And the religious leaders reacted strongly. They accused him of testifying on his own behalf that he is the Messiah.

And this brings us to the second significant aspect of this text: a revisiting of the legal argument that we occurred at the end of chapter five. As you will recall, in that text it was Jesus himself who said, 'If I testify about myself, my testimony in not true' (5:31). He then went on to bring out John the Baptist, the Scriptures as represented by Moses and God the Father as his witnesses.

Now we seem to have a repeat of this legal dispute over witnesses. But with a twist.

This time around Jesus appears to take the opposite point of view. Instead of conceding that he cannot testify about himself, and bringing instead three other witnesses, it is now the Pharisees who tell Jesus that he cannot testify about himself. Perhaps they remembered their last verbal sparing match with Jesus some months earlier. Perhaps they had wondered what else they could have said. Quite possibly they workshopped various responses they could use when they next met. It was common in the rabbinic schools to hold debates, and for disputants to take the other side to see who they would conduct the argument. Now their chance has come for a rematch. Jesus is back in Jerusalem and back in the temple teaching and they are once again trying to challenge him. And when he says he is the light of the world, someone among them remembers that in their last matchup Jesus had said he could not testify on his own behalf.

They had him.

Or so they thought.

But Jesus shifts tack rather than conceding.

From the standpoint of rabbinic debates this is quite significant, because Jesus now seems to be obliging by taking the opposite position to what he took the first time. He will now argue that he is indeed testifying on his own behalf and that this testimony is valid.

He makes two crucial points. First, he knows who he is and where he comes from, and they do not. Hence he is uniquely qualified to say who he is, whereas they have absolutely no idea and have nothing to say on the matter.

And to the legal point in question, Jesus points out that the testimony of two witnesses is accepted in legal proceedings. So technically he is not testifying about himself alone. He is testifying that he is the light of the world, the Messiah. And he is making this testimony together with his Father. That makes two. Hence a valid testimony.

At this point the Pharisees know they are in trouble. They are having a repeat of their earlier debate and Jesus is now besting them taking opposing point of view, namely, that he can testify on his own behalf. They are running short on options.

So they ask Jesus to produce his second witness. 'Where is you father?' they ask (v. 19). They had done their research on Jesus. They had earlier said 'we know this man's mother and father. They knew Joseph was no longer living. So they thought once again that they had him because he had named a witness that could not be produced.

But Jesus cuts them short here. He tells them that they do not know who he is (a point he has already made) nor do they know his father. Because if they knew one, they would know the other. So they do not know who Jesus is, therefore they cannot say he is not from above. And they have not understood who his second witness is. Not only that, Jesus points out that they do not personally know his second witness.

And there would seem to be a double meaning here, as there so often is in Jesus' words. On the one hand, the Pharisees think they are talking about Joseph of Nazareth, and Jesus has pointed out that they do not know who Jesus' true father is. But also, Jesus has pointed out that they do not know God their own Father and creator. They think they know God, but when God in flesh is standing before them, they have no idea who he is. They do not recognise him.

And this text is all about who Jesus is. The legal arguments illustrate an important point about the intransigence of the Pharisees and high priests. But we should not let these legal arguments cause us to forget what started this particular exchange.

Jesus claimed to be the light of the world.

Everyone present knew from their reading of Isaiah that this was a claim to be the Messiah.

So this debate was always about who Jesus was.

In the course of the legal arguments, the question continues to be about who Jesus is.

He is the one from above. He is the one who is known through the Father and through whom the Father is known.

And as Jesus says at the end of the argument, in his summation if you will, 'If you knew me, you would know my Father also.'

So the point is that they had no idea who Jesus was. And because they did not know Jesus, they did not truly know God the Father.

Jesus is the light of the world. But the unbelief of the Pharisees was keeping them in the darkness.

Jesus continues to be to the light of the whole world. He is the light that no darkness can overcome. But if we close our eyes to who Jesus is. If we do not know him, then, like the Pharisees, we will continue to stumble about in darkness even though we have the promised light of the world right before us.

To Jesus' debate with the Pharisees in not simply about proving that he can testify that he is the light. It is a call for them and for us to open out eyes and let this light in, so that we no longer walk in darkness.

Amen.

Pastor Mark Worthing.