Chapter 5
2020-I noticed in my Harmony of the Gospels that John is the only one who relates the events of this chapter. Only John gives us the speech that Jesus makes in vss 19-47. This is interesting in that Jesus here does everything but come right out and say "I am the Messiah". But he stops short of that. He gives all the evidence, calls all the witnesses, but leaves the conclusion - the inescapable conclusion - to the hearers.
2022 - But he told the woman at the well that's who he was in the last chapter. Why did he tell her, but won't tell these? He is in Jerusalem itself, after all.
Starts with "after this". The previous chapter ended with the official whose son was ill in Capernaum, and the father goes to Cana where Jesus is and asks for help.
So "after this", Jesus goes to Jerusalem again for a feast. It does not specifically tell us what feast. MSB says that from 5:1-7:52 describes the rejection of Jesus as Messiah. It says that at first, it was doubted, then when Jesus healed on the Sabbath, the controversy intensified and came out into the open, then in Chapter 6 many of his own disciples abandon him - after he says only the chosen are saved - and then in 7, the religious officials attempt to arrest him. The shift is observable in John's writing. More specific to this chapter, MSB says this is the only feast that John talks about without identifying. All the others in his book are named.
Jesus comes to the pool at Bethesda, near the Sheep Gate. Invalids are lying around nearby, believing that the spring has healing powers. Jesus asks one man, who's been there 38 years, if he wants to be healed. He says he never gets to the water in time after it is disturbed. Jesus tells him to get up and walk, which the man does.
Wow...ESV does not even include verse 3b and verse 4. It skips from 3a to 5. MSB notes say these were obviously added later, since early manuscripts don't include them at all. So the ESV doesn't put them in. This is the part about the angel disturbing the water, and healing the first one there. Information we do have includes the possibility that intermittent springs fed the pool, which would show up as the water being disturbed. Also, some sources say that the water was so rich in minerals that in appeared to be red - so they thought it had medicinal value. Apparently this "belief" is very old, and still survives.
2022 - KJV does have 3b and 4. Why did they include them if, as MSB says, they were "obviously added later"? When did we learn that was the case?
2022 - This healing is much like the one in Luke 13. In that case, recorded only in Luke, the stooped over woman, who's been that way for 18 years, is straightened on the Sabbath, and Jesus is rebuked by the chief of the synagogue. Now we have this healing, of a man lame for 38 years, also on the Sabbath, and recorded only in John. How many instances of Jesus "breaking the law" of the Sabbath are recorded in the gospels? How many in the synoptics vs in John? How many are recorded in multiple gospels and how many in only one? Why is this "breaking of the Sabbath" such a huge deal in the gospels? Why so many instances recorded? This is a study that ought to be done. I need to put this study together. In my notes, in the gospels, I have used the word Sabbath 10 times. Those 10 might be a really good place to start.
This healing was on the Sabbath. So when the Jews saw this lame man walking, instead of being amazed, they told him he shouldn't be carrying his bed around on the Sabbath. They were not about real life, they were about the rules. So many today are the same. The lame man blames the healer. Says the man who healed him told him to carry his bed. They try to find out who the "guilty" man is, but the lame man didn't even get his name.
2022 - Hmm...Jesus told this man to take up his bed and walk. Jesus told him to carry his bed. I believe I had this right before when I determined that the truth of the matter is that it is never against God's intention to do the right thing. To do what is needed or appropriate. In Luke 13 Jesus points out that the Pharisees are willing to untie their donkeys and take them to water. Because you do that. And if you've been healed, you grab your stuff and leave because you no longer reside at a mystic pool that doesn't work anyway. The 10 say Honor the Sabbath Day to keep it holy. It does not say never for any reason do any work at all on the Sabbath, even if people have to die because the doctor refused to sew them up that day.
Later, Jesus talks to the man in the Temple, and tells him to sin no more, lest something worse than being lame for 38 years occur. Instead of taking this to heart, the man goes and tells the temple officials the name of the man who told him to carry his bed on the Sabbath. Because of this, because he openly and blatantly promotes dishonoring the Sabbath, the "Jews were persecuting Jesus".
2022 - These very important verses:
15 The man went away and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had healed him. 16 And this was why the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because he was doing these things on the Sabbath. 17 But Jesus answered them, "My Father is working until now, and I am working." 18 This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God. [Jhn 5:15-18 ESV]
Perhaps these verses answer the question above about why "breaking the Sabbath" is recorded so many times. It is because it was right out there for all to see, and with multiple witnesses, and was the only "trumped up infraction" the Jews could find. AND, it is important that Jesus in each case defends his actions by comparing them with instances of the Pharisees "working on the Sabbath" that they did NOT consider wrong. These incidents made the Pharisees hypocrites in reality, but they used them to accuse Jesus. And then Jesus adds to that by saying he and his Father both work on the Sabbath (see below). Note that at Jesus' trials later, they don't even bring up his violation of the Sabbath. That is not the main charge against them. His assertion that he is the Son of God is the one that tears the High Priest's robe. John clarifies all of that here in these four little verses.
Then Jesus says this:
17 But Jesus answered them, "My Father is working until now, and I am working." [John 5:17 ESV]
The Jews believed that God "broke" his own Sabbath by keeping the sun, stars, and so on moving, even on the Sabbath. So when Jesus tells them that he also is working, he is saying that like God, he too is entitled to work on the Sabbath. To the Jews, this was Jesus claiming God as his literal Father, and made him equal with God. This is about the deity of Christ.
2022 - Does John include this as part of his polemic against the Sect of John the Baptist? Is he showing that while John denied any such claim to deity, he ascribes deity to Jesus using John's own words, and now using Jesus' words? I don't think that is the main point in this episode, but I can see where it would be a bit related.
2022 - I have to take a break and fix breakfast for the grands. In fact, I am late.
vss 19-47 are in red. This is the rest of the chapter. I have a feeling there will be a lot here for John to have recorded so much. The first part is a response to the Jew's outrage that he made himself equal to the father. Jesus starts like this:
19 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise. [John 5:19 ESV]
Seems to me that Jesus is saying that He and the Father never pursue conflicting interests. They never disagree. Though Jesus is a man, and on earth, while the Father is spirit, and in heaven, yet their "conduct" of the world's business is exactly in sync. This is because they are both God. The function of each is different, but not the goal of each. The only way they could have different "wills" would be if they were not the same. If they were individuals rather than one God, they could have different plans.
This verse:
21 For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will. [John 5:21 ESV]
Only God can raise the dead. He can work in and through others to do so, as with some of the prophets, but the resurrection was always attributed to God, not to the prophet. (2022 - Well...not really. There isn't just a whole lot of raising he dead in the OT, but the ones that are there are credited to prophets. They weren't to "affirm" that Elijah and Elisha were truly sent from God, there was no doubt of that anyway. All knew God worked through the prophets, and that the power to raise the dead came from God alone, but it was the prophets who "raised the dead". I think I had previously misstated that.) Here, Jesus says that He too can give life. It seems likely to me that Jesus is talking about physical resurrection first, but is also talking about eternal life. I think this is so because Jesus goes on to say that God has turned over the judgement of men exclusively to the Son. This is to "redirect" honor due the Father to the Son, because of what the Son is about to do in the work of redemption. Because the work of the Son is to redeem man from sin, it is also his right to judge sin. Then, since God has so honored the Son, those who refuse to do likewise don't just dishonor the Son, but in turn dishonor God.
2022 - I think Jesus is also distinguishing between physical raising from the dead and spiritual eternity in heaven or hell. Jesus has been given the power to give eternal life through grace, and to give eternal life by paying the penalty of all men. Until this time, all men have died without sufficient atonement to spend eternity in heaven. They, without us, could not be made perfect. But here is Jesus, to perfect the atonement, and so "release" all souls, both OT and NT, to eternity in heaven. God up to this point has only raised the dead physically. Jesus has come to do so spiritually, in accordance with the will of his Father. So here again, John is trying to bring out the spiritual nature of this manifestation of the Kingdom of God, and distinguish this time of the church age from the time of the Law. The Law was all about the physical - the temple, the priests, the sacrifices, and Moses. But the church is a kingdom that cannot be seen, that requires no physical manifestation in order to belong, and is quite freeing in terms of required ritual.
These verses:
22 For the Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. [Jhn 5:22-23 ESV]
Here is a verse that separates Christianity from all other religions. This man who walked on earth is to be honored as God is honored. I am reminded of how Absalom set himself up as a judge in his father David's kingdom, and won "supporters" to himself because he exercised that judgement. In these verses, Jesus first makes it clear that, unlike Absalom, all that he does is in accordance with his Father's will. The Father has given all judgement to Christ specifically to garner the honor of position that would otherwise be exclusively for the Father. God is "promoting" his son in the eyes of all who know either of them. And, to withhold the honor due Christ is to withhold honor from the Father. I suspect this is analogy to spurning a son being also an insult to that son's father. If you hate my son, you also hate me.
2022 - Vs 23b could be a part of the polemic against the Sect of the Baptist. It is absolutely unequivocal here, from John himself, the beloved apostle, who spent actual time - days and nights and years - with Jesus that to put the Baptist above Jesus, or to say that Jesus was a fake prophet riding on the coattails of the Baptist, is to refuse to honor Theos. Jesus, in John, goes on to say that only those who hear his (Jesus') words can pass from eternal spiritual death to eternal spiritual life.
Then there is the way of salvation, expressed in Jesus' own words:
24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life. [Jhn 5:24 ESV]
Hear this truth - that Jesus and the Father are One, and believe in the Father and the Son. The Father will only accept what the Son has judged acceptable. The Father accepts the Son's judgement, and does not himself judge. Remember that John told us in chapter 1 about the Word. Belief. True belief, not just in God - as Jews and Muslims both do - but also in His Son. This was always God's plan in the OT prophecies, but the Jew's never really saw it. Now, as it comes to pass, they are under God's wrath, and the redemption is most notably accepted by Gentiles.
Jesus tells them that sometime in the future, He, Jesus, the Son of Man, is going to raise everyone from the dead, and He will judge them, deciding who has eternal life and who receives eternal judgement. Surely this was understood by them as making Himself the final decider. The Supreme court in our government, in that the last say belongs only to him. God has included the role of judge with the role of redeemer. This is why there is no salvation without Jesus.
Note that in these verses, 25-29, Jesus refers to himself as the Son of Man again, looking back to Daniel, and he is given the power to judge, and to give life. To decide who will go into eternity in heaven and who will die the second death. God is not the one who decides this, Jesus decides - even though Jesus always decides in the same way God would decide. The Pharisees could have little doubt about what Jesus was claiming here. They knew the OT scriptures. They "got it" when Jesus called himself the Son of Man, which he does over and over.
2024 - (Moved this excerpt from John into its own note. "Christ as Judge", in the Final Judgment Notebook). There are some very powerful things here concerning judgment:
In vs 22, ALL JUDGMENT is given to the Son. ALL means ALL. So how can it be Theos who judges at the GWT? Yet we clearly see that in Revelation.
If Christ judges all, then the Bema seat is just one aspect at one particular time of that judgment. It is not the ONLY judgment of Christ.
To reject Christ then is to reject God also, but it is in fact the rejected one that will judge those who reject HIM. The one who died for you will judge you for how you view what he did for you. Imagine being offered a million dollars, taking it, and never paying it back nor honoring the one who made you rich. Then you get arrested for something, and the judge who decides your punishment is the one whose loan you took but didn't repay. How do you think that's going to go?
Look at 24. If you have eternal life, you do not come into judgment. These are two distinct groups. It doesn't say that you will come out fine when you're judged. If you believe, you won't even be tried. Isn't that what it says?
2025 - Vs 24 again:
"Hear MY word, and believe Him who sent Me". Lots of capital letters there.
One, has eternal life.
Two, does not come into judgment.
Three, has passed from death to life.
This is salvation. This is the gospel. Yet it is never the one you hear about on Sunday. That one is always confess that you are a sinner and ask for salvation. This is Jesus himself talking, and he says we are to "hear him" - which I interpret as making his words absolute truth, and doing as he says, even if that seems contradictory to the Law. What he has just said to the people of Jerusalem is that He, Jesus, is not the judge of eternity. God has given that position - that office - to Jesus. Jesus is judge of all now, and it is he that will remember how he was treated, whether he was confessed or denied in times of trial, and so on. He's the judge, you had better follow HIS rules...WHILE believing in the Father. It was after all the Father who "delegated" this position to the Son.
2022 - Hmmm. I don't know why I haven't pulled out vs 25 before:
25 "Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. [Jhn 5:25 ESV]. Isn't this an interesting verse. Doesn't this verse confirm the comment before vs 22 above that until this point, NO ONE has received atonement sufficient to enter the presence of God? But now, the time is here, with the arrival of Jesus, when those long dead OT saints will finally be covered by the blood of an acceptable, fully atoning sacrifice, and enter into the presence of God. When they will "live" as man lived before the fall, in full fellowship with God as his perfect creations. Those who have chosen to love him will be with him. Not ALL the dead, but those who hear. And you cannot hear if you have not been called.
2024 - Or...we are all dead in trespasses and sin, and with the arrival of Jesus, those who heard his voice, while he was here, were saved. (Constituting a unique dispensation. There is another place, a better place, where this is implied...but I haven't found it.) Saved in a different way than those who came before. They were saved by faith in the Father. With the coming of Jesus, salvation is in him only. He just told us that in vs 24, and indirectly in vs 22.
This idea is repeated in vs 28:
28 Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice [Jhn 5:28 ESV]. Surely this says that ONLY JESUS can get you to heaven, and that this was true even for those long dead.
Now here is another interesting implication of this...Would this not mean that even the OT saints are "in Christ"? It is important, because if they are, then they are raptured along with the church, they are judged at the bema seat, and only the lost and the survivors of tgt will stand before the Great White Throne of God. So this is a pretty big question, and the implications of 25 and 28 are very far reaching, and again, it is only the gospel of John that records this discourse of Jesus. AND, if nothing else, this elevates Jesus still further to a unique position among men. The Son, the only way, the only authority that can grant life...how many other unique roles for Jesus does John mention here?
I would also add this verse to the "in Christ" question:
29 and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment. [Jhn 5:29 ESV]. Where else is this language used, language of a resurrection either to life or to death? This is not the rapture. That is only to life. Only the saved are raptured to stand at the bema. So OT saints are NOT going to be raptured. Nor will they stand at the pre-millennial judgment, because ONLY the living will be judged then. So Jesus' choice of words here seems to be pointing exclusively at the Great White Throne. And that means that OT saints are not resurrected UNTIL that judgment, to be judged BY Theos, not by Christos. Is this phrase "resurrection of life" used anywhere else? No...only here, and it is this in both KJV and ESV. So what I first thought was a "clouding" as to my opinion of who will be raptured turns out to be a pretty good proof to solidify my opinion on that.
2022 - Another day...I wonder, if vs 25 is a reference to those who are in Christ - because the hour is now here - and who will be raptured and go straight to heaven when Jesus returns, and this is contrasted, in vs 29, with the OT saints - who's hour is coming (but NOT here yet) - who will be resurrected at the GWT? Wow. That surely does seem to make good sense.
2024 - Let's look at them side by side:
25 "Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. ...
28 Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice [Jhn 5:25, 28 ESV]
Are we talking about two different resurrections here? Or are we talking about trust in Christ alone transferring us from dead in sins to life eternal? Key is that the hour for this "is now here", contrasted with vs 28, where "an hour is coming".
In both 25 and 28, The phrase "is coming" in both 25 and 28 is Present Middle Indicative. Present tense can either be as in English, and mean "right now", or it can be a historical present, meaning an event of great importance described as if witnessed by those to whom the statement is addressed. Further, the event described happens in actual time - it is a real event - and the indicative tells us it is a factual done deal, though the time it occurs is not stated.
But in 25 we also get "and is now here". "is" is Present Active Indicative. So the only difference is that "is coming" is a single word in the middle voice, and "is" is a single word in the active voice.
Middle voice: Denotes that the subject is both an agent of an action and somehow concerned with the action.
Active voice: Represents the subject as the doer or performer of the action. e.g., in the sentence, "Jesus returned to Capernaum" Jesus performs the action.
So what is it trying to tell us by using both voices in 25 and only the middle in 28? I don't know. BUT, as I look at this, perhaps the real key that should get our attention is that in 28, the phrase "will hear" is future tense, and describes an action that has not yet occurred. We must add vs 29 at this point...
29 and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment. [Jhn 5:29 ESV]. At some FUTURE time, there will be an event where the Son of Man will call/shout and all those who have not been resurrected at that point WILL BE resurrected. SOME OF THEM, will be resurrected into heaven - I'm thinking in their resurrection bodies - which will be joining their spirits already in heaven with God. Now, since some will also be resurrected to judgment, and go into hell, this is NOT the rapture. That tells us plainly that not all saved people will be raptured. Now this COULD be about those who are saved after the rapture and before the GWT, which will be 1000 years plus a year or 3 1/2, but that seems a very small amount of time for Jesus to give it this much attention. So it COULD ALSO be about the OT saints, saved under the Law or before the Law - in any case those saved before the New Covenant went into effect (which is what vs 25 is about) AND those saved or not during the last of tgt and the Millennial, as two separate events. And here is another implication...as stated in 24, those who are saved under the New Covenant "has eternal life and does not come into judgment, but is passed from death to life".
Perhaps Jesus is making a distinction between those who lived and died under the Law, who will either be counted saved by faith in God, as was Abraham, as was King David, OR, if they fail there, then they will be judged according to the Law of Moses - the Old Covenant - and found guilty for violations there. But Old Covenant and before will be judged according to their works if they did not have faith counted as righteousness for them. All of these, along with Millennial saints, will be raised and judged at the GWT. Those under the New Covenant will be raptured at the Sixth Seal, and judged by Theos at the Bema seat right after the rapture, with Jesus as advocate, saying, I died for that sin, I died for that one also, and that one, and on and on and on. After the "reading of the sins", none will remain, no charges will remain, so there will be no crime to judge.
That's all I have for 2024. Spent a good deal of time on it, but this is an excellent argument for OT Saints not being resurrected until the GWT.
2022 - And what about vs 27...
27 And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. [Jhn 5:27 ESV]. Jesus has this authority BECAUSE he is the Son of Man. Ezekiel is also called son of man. Did Ezekiel execute judgement also? Did he have some kind of authority to judge in his day, or will he have some future specialized authority to do so? How is it that only Ezekiel and Christ have this title. Is it in Cullman??? (Yes. Chapter 6, Jesus the Son of Man.) I will look forward to that.)
A new section starts, titled "Witnesses to Jesus".
Jesus reiterates that he is not acting alone. He is not just some man. All that he does is according to God's will, because He is God, in perfect harmony. Then this verse:
31 If I alone bear witness about myself, my testimony is not true. [Jhn 5:31 ESV] I believe Jesus here is quoting the Law of Moses to them, which required two witnesses. Jesus recognizes that because of this law, they are not going to believe him on the basis of his own claims only, but they will require more. So Jesus reminds them that they asked John the Baptist who he was. His answer isn't quoted here, but we know that John said Jesus was the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world. John said Jesus was the Messiah. Jesus reminds them that they believed John, when he came on the scene, believed he was a prophet from God, and so believed what he said. But Jesus points out that he is greater than John, and the evidence for this - the witness - is found in the work Jesus does, in the miracles he performs. They should take John's word as a witness, because they believe his is truthful, but John is just a man. The miracles point to a far more authoritative witness - God Himself. Only God could do such miracles, yet Jesus does them. So the witness of a man, and the witness of God himself through the miracles that Jesus does.
2024 - Vs 31 and following show again that Jesus was greater than John, and reminds us that John himself made this very clear. Those who are listening to Jesus in this verse know what John said. They can testify to John's testimony that Jesus was a greater. Yet even more telling is that John did no miracles, not one, at any time. John was a prophet who did no miracles. He dressed like Elijah and talked very bluntly like Elijah, and so is in that sense the promised return of Elijah...but another Elijah will come, I believe doing great miracles in the end times (perhaps one of the two witnesses) and so be entirely the return of Elijah. But the real contrast here is that Jesus IS doing miracles, unprecedented in history, infinitely beyond the miracles done of any previous prophet, and certainly more than John did. So in terms of Culman's book, this is another rebuttal aimed at the Cult of John the Baptist, and refuting their claims that John was the greater of the two on two very public, very well known grounds
This verse:
37 And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen, [Jhn 5:37 ESV]
MSB references three accounts of Jesus' baptism, where the Father said "This is my beloved Son...". So not only the miracles, but a voice from heaven - and to Jews, only God ever spoke from heaven in this way - testifies that Jesus is the Son.
But why then would Jesus continue by saying they've never heard God? If he was referring to the voice at his baptism as the witness of God from heaven, why then say that they couldn't have heard it?
Maybe Jesus is talking about their skepticism. They don't like what John told them, so they decide he wasn't trustworthy. After all, he is now a criminal, thrown into prison, not to be associated with any longer. How can they accept his former testimony in light of current fact? But they also heard the very voice of God, and now they say it couldn't have been God, because no one hears God directly! With both John, and the witness of God from heaven, they are putting their conclusion before the evidence by repudiating credible witnesses. Even so, the miracles have not been repudiated.
2022 - Ok, wait...If we take as fact that John's gospel is written as a polemic, then John is using this speech Jesus gave to the Pharisees as evidence of who he was as evidence to the Sect of the Baptist as to who he was. The sect is likely still following Mosaic Law also, so John would bring that up. Jesus here says that HE is not a witness for himself. I am pretty sure elsewhere that he says he IS a witness. Anyway...Jesus reminds them that at first, they believed John the Baptist's witness as to who Jesus was. This would hit both the Pharisees and the Sect. Now they have decided to discount what John said. If the Sect does not believe that John was truthful, then why would they follow him in the first place, much less go to so much trouble to override John's own teaching?
Then vss 35,36, with reference to the sect:
35 He was a burning and shining lamp, and you were willing to rejoice for a while in his light. 36 But the testimony that I have is greater than that of John. For the works that the Father has given me to accomplish, the very works that I am doing, bear witness about me that the Father has sent me. [Jhn 5:35-36 ESV]. This is almost addressed directly to the Sect. Sure, John was a big deal, and a bright light, and you followed him. And HE TOLD YOU I would come, and now look at the confirmation in the miracles that says I am a greater! John told you. The works tell you. I think this is important because we have so many places - I think some in the Synoptics...that story where they want to ask Jesus a question and he says "Let me ask you one first...". I am not sure the Pharisees ever accepted that John was a prophet. He called them vipers. Surely they were enemies from the start. I believe that Jesus made this speech to the Jewish religious authorities. Note that John does not say "Pharisees". So...Jesus says that at first they believed John was a prophet, and then changed. John uses the same discourse to remind the Sect of what Jesus said this day, in public. This would have been well known.
John the Baptist has no recorded miracles. That is why 36 is there, because of all the miracles recorded about Jesus. Jesus is OBVIOUSLY greater than John.
Next Jesus turns to scripture. He says they search scripture as the way to eternal life. Jesus says they are in fact correct, because those scriptures are yet another witness as to who he is. They foretell his coming, but the Jews still refuse to equate Jesus with the prophecies of the Messiah. Jesus tells them that they don't have to recognize him as Messiah for him to be Messiah. He requires no endorsement from the religious elite. Two witnesses remain authoritative, Two they have not been able to repudiate. The miracles that Jesus does, and the scriptures that foretell his coming. These two still stand.
Then a very pointed accusation. Jesus tells these people that they don't have the Love of God in them. They love their scriptures - their rules, their hierarchies, their positions - but they cling to that rather than loving God directly. God has sent the Son, as their scriptures tell them He will. Yet they will not believe, even with more than sufficient witnesses to identify him as their Messiah. So Jesus says he won't judge them, their own precious scriptures will condemn them - Mosaic Law condemns them - because they won't believe the witnesses.
2024 - Vs 45:
45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you: Moses, on whom you have set your hope. [Jhn 5:45 ESV]. Doesn't this tie back to the long 2024 note above? The Pharisees of Jesus' time chose to reject him as Messiah, to reject the redemption he offered IF they would believe in him, and instead to remain under the Law of Moses. And in so doing, they will be judged according to that Law. Lacking faith, they will be judged by the rules in the Law. Their hope is not in Christ, the second Moses, but remains in Moses and the Law. They choose the Old Covenant. We know how that will come out. This seems to tie back quite well with previous 2024 conclusions. When so many verses fit together, it makes me think I'm getting it right.
2024 - Then, as the last nail in the coffin, Jesus reminds them that Moses wrote of another prophet like himself that would be raised up. But they refuse, despite the quality of the witnesses saying that Jesus IS that prophet, to recognize Jesus as their awaited Messiah, a greater than John the Baptist.
2020-I think part of Jesus' point here is also that the truth of what he is telling them, and of who he is, is spiritually discerned. Since these Pharisees and religious leaders are so focused on the ritual of the Law, they do not see the reality of the law. They don't see the law in physical form. They are spiritually dead because they are not really seekers any more, except in the "researcher" sense. They think they know all there is to know, and they are not really looking for the Messiah in their time. He publicly accuses the religious leaders, who's livelihood depends on the peoples reverence for their learning and knowledge, of not having clue one about what they are teaching, and in fact says that they are violating the rules that they hold so dear in refusing to believe what the scriptures say about the man that is right in front of them.
2022 - I am tired. There is a lot in 5. The last verses use scripture to establish that Jesus is the Son. That Moses own words, besides those of the Baptist, point to the son. I am too tired to pull it all out...but I think that's what it is about. Hopefully more time next year. Isn't it interesting that for the last two years, I had distractions when I got to this chapter...