Not Peace, But a Sword - John 7:40-52

If you were to take a straw poll among people here in the Roanoke Valley and simply ask, “does Jesus Christ bring peace or division?” What do you think they would say? I think we all know what folks would overwhelmingly say: “well peace, of course!”

And they wouldn’t necessarily be wrong! After all, Isaiah tells us that Jesus is the “Prince of Peace” and Jesus famously said things like, “Blessed are the peacemakers” in the Sermon on the Mount.

And yet at the same time, Jesus says in Luke, “Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division.” Or what he says in Matthew 10, which I’ve referred to in the title of this sermon, “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.”

The correct answer to my initial question is both! Jesus brings peace and division. I bring this up only because, what do we see in our text? Great division. There’s division at every level. There’s division among the crowd and there’s division among the authorities.

Jesus is both the most unifying and divisive person of all time. He’s both. The church is centered and founded upon the work of Jesus Christ which is our source of peace, but in the world there’s great hostility that is centered around the work and person of Jesus Christ. It all centers around him, and whether you experience peace or division comes down to how you answer the question: who is Jesus Christ?

Is this not the basic question that is dividing the crowd and authorities in our passage? They couldn’t agree on how they were supposed to understand Jesus Christ.

It’s the last day of the Feast of Booths and the crowds are talking about Jesus, the Temple guards or officers are talking about him, the priest and Pharisees are talking about him. Everyone is still talking about Jesus!

Previously, in verse 32, the chief priests and Pharisees sent Temple guards or officers to arrest Jesus.

But everyone hasn’t finished processing Jesus’ words from the end of the Feast: “If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink.” So, the crowd is still working through their thoughts on Jesus.

Division among the crowd

Who exactly is Jesus? This is something that has come up in multiple places already! There was disagreement among crowds when Jesus fed the five thousand. This is an ongoing discussion, isn’t it?

Because some said he’s the Prophet, others said he’s the Christ. The Prophet is a reference to Moses’ prophecy in Deuteronomy 18, where the Lord says he’ll raise up a new Prophet like Moses. It was a reference to the Messiah, but many Jews made a distinction between the Prophet like Moses and the Messiah. Some Jews thought they were two different people while some believed they were the same person.

But even those that thought of Jesus as the Messiah didn’t think of him as one that would save them from their sin! They may have thought of the Messiah as a political figure.

All of this led to an even greater debate: how could Jesus be the Messiah if he’s from Galilee? The obvious answer is of course, no, the Scriptures tell us the Messiah will not come from Galilee, the Messiah will come from Bethlehem. But doesn’t this whole discussion really highlight the crowd’s ignorance of Jesus? They assume because he’s from Galilee that he must have been born there too! They knew the Messiah would come from Bethlehem, but the irony of their whole discussion is that Jesus did come from Bethlehem.

This was the major point of contention among the crowd. Many did not think that Jesus could be the Messiah because he was from Galilee. While others seemed willing to overlook it.

And of course, the crowd’s debate over whether Jesus was a great prophet or was he the Messiah, doesn’t indicate the presence of saving faith. Instead, it simply shows us that the crowd was trying to figure out Jesus. How were they supposed to understand him? Was he a holy man, was he some sort of prophet, or was he the Messiah? Should you devote yourself to him or just think of him as a guy who said a few nice things?

This division certainly still exists today. People are still divided over how to understand Jesus. C.S. Lewis wrote in Mere Christianity,

““I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him [that is, Christ]: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic–on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg–or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse…. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come up with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to (pg. 52).”

Lewis was really on to something because those that try to contain Jesus in a box don’t have that option. There is no third option for Jesus. There is no middle ground. General positivity toward Jesus Christ isn’t an option. There is no such thing as casual or cultural Christianity. I like the way John Owen in his book “The Mortification of Sin” refers to casual Christians as “professors.” Not like college ‘professors’ or something like that, rather, he was referring to people that outwardly profess faith. They claim one thing but everything else about their lives indicates something else.

Jesus is either the greatest liar of all time or he’s precisely who he claims to be. Those are the only options.

Division among the authorities

But in our passage, it’s not just the crowd that’s wrestling through their understanding of Jesus, it’s also the authorities. We see a great division arise between the Temple guards and the Pharisees. Both the Temple guards and the Pharisees were authoritative figures.

There’s a really interesting episode that transpires in this passage. In verse 32, the Pharisees gave direct orders to the officers or Temple guards to go and arrest Jesus. They wanted him apprehended because he was openly challenging their authority and gaining popularity.

And in verses 45-49, there’s an interaction between the officers and the Pharisees, because the officers approach the Pharisees empty handed. This is probably one of the more confusing aspects of this passage: why would they even bother!? They knew it would displease the priests and Pharisees if they went to them without Jesus in tow.

It’s honestly pretty funny when you think about it, because the officers had one job! Am I right? And not only is Jesus still not arrested, the officers have the gall to walk over to the Pharisees to talk about it.

The Pharisees see them approaching, without Jesus, and they’re wondering, “what are you doing?” It’s essentially what they say to them in verse 45. “The officers then came to the chief priests and Pharisees, who said to them, “Why did you not bring him?””

The priests and the Pharisees wanted a perp walk. They wanted him to be arrested and for it to be this grand public processional that would humiliate Jesus - that’s what they wanted. The officers were supposed to arrest Jesus, make a little show of it, and let the priests and Pharisees, the big boys, figure out what to do next.

The priests and Pharisees expected the officers to be their big dumb henchmen. We’ve all seen these movies. The bad guys always have a motley crew of men that do their dirty work. These are the men that just blindly follow orders without ever asking any questions.

That’s exactly what the officers were supposed to do for the priests and Pharisees, except they don’t arrest Jesus. And they tell the priests and Pharisees exactly why: “No one ever spoke like this man!”

So much for big dumb henchmen, right? In fact, they did the opposite of what they were supposed to do. They analyzed what Jesus said. They took it into careful consideration. The Temple policemen are actually quite thoughtful.

The 2016 election really stands out for one thing that has nothing to do with Trump or Hillary. The 2016 election was remarkable because so many of the so-called experts were so incredibly wrong. They would go on TV and talk so confidently about their data. How their numbers were right and there was no way they could ever be wrong. According to them, Trump had no chance.

But we know how the election turned out, and then all these experts had to admit they were wrong. They had to acknowledge their errors, or just sit in the awkwardness of having everyone know how wrong they were. They had to eat a big piece of humble pie.

I think we see something very similar here. The experts are so smug, arrogant, condescending and yet, completely wrong about Jesus Christ. They think they know him. They think they have him pegged. After all, they’re the “Biblical scholars,” they’re the educated smart ones, and the crowd and officers – they’re all ignorant.

The gospel of John is rich with irony. Scholars call it Johannie irony, which is on full display, isn’t it?

The priests and Pharisees who think of themselves as high intelligent experts are dead wrong, and the people that they think of as unintelligent and ignorant are at least willing to give Jesus the time of day. They recognized that there was something different about him.

The Pharisees' arrogance is on full display in verses 47 and 48. You can hear it in the way they respond to the officers: ““Have you also been deceived? 48 Have any of the authorities or the Pharisees believed in him?”

In other words they’re saying, “you ignorant Temple guards - you’ve also have been deceived? Notice that none of us experts have been so naive as to be deceived by Jesus!”

Not only do the Pharisees belittle the officers, but they also belittle the crowd in verse 49. “But this crowd that does not know the law is accursed.””

The crowd is accursed for doing what? Hearing Jesus out! But notice what the Pharisees said, “this crowd that does not know the law…” According to the Pharisees, the crowd doesn’t know the law, but they obviously do. It’s due to everyone’s ignorance that they’re taking Jesus seriously. But the informed people know better.

It’s all so very backwards isn’t it?

Their elitism, arrogance, and pride is on full display. But the officers and crowd were not far from the kingdom of God. They were close.

Granted, close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. But nevertheless, the crowds and the officers were willing to give Jesus the time of day. They were willing to hear him out, which indicates a basic level of humility.

The kind of basic humility that says, “I might not always be the smartest person in the room.” The kind of humility that genuinely believes you can learn something from someone else. The kind of humility that genuinely listens and takes to heart what someone else is saying.

The crowds and officers didn’t necessarily believe they had it all figured out and that Jesus said something of value. It’s this sort of attitude that would lead the officers to say, “No one ever spoke like this man!”

The crowd is at least willing to give Jesus a fair shake. But the priests and Pharisees don’t want to do that… with the exception of one person.

And the Honesty of One

It’s here we meet Nicodemus again. Hopefully, you remember Nicodemus from John 3, he wanted to know how you got back into your mother’s… we don’t need to go there do we? Hopefully you know what I’m talking about!

At this point, it’s not entirely clear whether or not Nicodemus trusts Jesus. Eventually, he trusts in Jesus, but here things are still a little uncertain.

But he seems to be the only cool-headed Pharisee. Look at verses 51-52. “Does our law judge a man without first giving him a hearing and learning what he does?”

Nicodemus, rather than making an emotional case for Jesus insteads argues for him to be treated fairly based upon Old Testament law. Nicodemus was holding the priests and Pharisees accountable to the standard they claimed was so important to them!

After all, what Nicodemus was saying is grounded in the law. Deuteronomy 1:16-17 says, “Hear the cases between your brothers, and judge righteously between a man and his brother or the alien who is with him. 17 You shall not be partial in judgment. You shall hear the small and the great alike.”

The accusers were supposed to have an opportunity to make their case as was the accused. There was supposed to be a fair trial. There was supposed to be due process.

But they were not having any of Nicodmus’s cool-headed integrity because they were convinced that Jesus was an open and shut case. Jesus couldn’t be the Messiah after all, he was from Galilee! The things that he said about himself were blatantly false - so they thought. And so there was no need to treat Jesus fairly. In fact, they openly mock Nicodemus.

“Are you from Galilee too? Search and see that no prophet arises from Galilee.”

The Pharisees for all their pride over their great expertise, knowledge, and understanding of the law were willing to blow right over all of it in their effort to condemn Jesus as soon as possible.

Humility, honesty, and integrity are necessary ingredients to give another person a fair hearing. You’ll want to hear someone else out. Nicodemus is the only one that seems to maintain his composure and is willing to treat Jesus fairly.

All he’s doing is encouraging his fellow Pharisees not to rush to judgment. Because that’s what happens isn’t it? People still rush to judge Jesus because they assume they know him. They’ve heard things, friends have made comments, but they haven’t explored it for themselves. They haven’t taken what Jesus has said seriously. They just sort of shrug it off.

But doesn’t this demonstrate the depth of division. The chief priests and Pharisees in their rush to condemn Jesus were willing to throw out due process, and all the Old Testament laws simply because they hated him.

There is absolutely no doubt that Jesus Christ brings division. But the division he brought didn’t center around anything he did. Jesus wasn’t an insurrectionist or anarchist setting fire to building and revolting against institutions and structures. No, what made Jesus so divisive was what he said. It was and still is the gospel message. “If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink.” It’s words like that that make him offensive and divisive.

The fact that Jesus said he was the Son of God, and that he came to save sinners and people must put their faith in him - that’s what makes Jesus so divisive.

And yet, at the same time words like, “If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink,” can be the source of the greatest peace and comfort you’ll ever know. It’s through Christ we receive the ministry of “reconciliation” which is a fancy word for “brings peace.”

And it’s that message can either bring people together or tear them apart. If Jesus faced hostility over the gospel message you and I must expect and anticipate the same thing.

We should expect to see his name bring division in places, like government, schools, and corporations. We should not be surprised by the anger of the world towards Christ.

And we should continue to expect essential Christian beliefs to become more incongruent with our society. So don’t be surprised when your Christian faith draws the ire of the world.

But it doesn’t stop there because I know many of you have lost relationships with friends and family over Christ.

Division over Christ should not be a surprise. One of the ways this passage challenges you and me, is that if we are to expect and anticipate division over the gospel then you and I must count the cost. How firm is the foundation of your faith? Will you run the moment it’s challenged or tested or will you be ready on that day?

Even on those challenging days, may we all remember that a life with Christ is always greater than a life without him. Let’s pray together.