It is another who bears witness concerning me, and I know that the witness which he bears concerning me is true.
Jesus has just made the highest claims about Himself, so any court would ask: who else says so? He does not rest on His own word alone, but points to another witness whose testimony He knows is true.
The previous sentence has puzzled many readers, since Jesus never spoke a false word. The point is legal, not moral: a single witness could not establish a case under Israel's law.
Verse 31 sounds strange to a great many: "If I alone bear witness about myself, my testimony is not true." That is, not valid. The law requires two witnesses, and He recognises its claims upon Him. In the preceding verse He says, "I can of Myself do nothing." That is, He cannot act independently.
So is His own witness worth nothing? The seeming contradiction has an answer, and it lies in the place Jesus takes in this chapter.
What then is the answer to the seeming discrepancy? It seems to be this: in John 5 He speaks not only as Son, but as one who has become flesh, and He does nothing of Himself except what He sees the Father doing. Our Lord's argument is that if He was the only one to bear witness of Himself, His witness would not be true. He meets the Jews' claim with grace, and He also searches them. They held that if a man bears witness of himself, his witness cannot be true. There must be two witnesses. Three were better — more than enough, according to Jewish law.
Commentators differ on the identity of this other witness. Some take it to be John the Baptist, the first witness named in the verses that follow. One writer rules that out.
But another bore witness of Him, a witness of absolute truth. This cannot refer to John the Baptist, for the Lord puts John's witness on a much lower level in verses 34 and 35. It is the Father's witness of which He speaks, both in the works the Father had given Him to finish, and in the Father's spoken word (v. 37).
Jesus does not only receive this witness. He knows it is true, and that knowing tells us something about Him.
"There is another." Here I believe our Lord secretly refers to God's witness to Him, known to Himself, not the witness He gives to others (see chapter 8). … From this we may indeed learn the unity and divinity of our Lord, for as the Father bore witness, so He was able to know its truth.
This other witness is not the last. Jesus goes on to call several more.
However perfect His own witness, it would not be valid by itself according to the law. The law says, "The testimony of two people is true." So, though His judgment was just and His motives pure, He does not ask men to believe in Him on His own witness alone. He goes on to give four other witnesses. First, John the Baptist (verses 32-35). Second, His works (verse 36). Third, the Father Himself (verses 37, 38). Fourth, the Scriptures (verses 39-47).
Behind the legal argument lies a moral one. A man pushing his own claim has already given himself away.
His own witness was also true. But what He states is this: "If I am seeking to glorify Myself, I do not demand your confidence. I do not ask you to believe." … And this always holds good. If a man is seeking to exalt himself, he has a motive that is not truth; his witness is not true.
He does not need human backing. He calls for it anyway, out of love that wants people saved.
John the Baptist, then, is the first witness. The Lord summons him in that ready and everlasting love which said nothing of His own testimony, hoping somehow to convince them and bring them to believe the truth. John had plainly been raised up for this very purpose, and no witness among men could be harder to doubt… Christ did not seek testimony from man; yet how low He stooped to save souls!
- One witness is not enough. "My testimony is not true" means "not valid on its own." The law demanded two witnesses, and the Son placed Himself under it.
- A second witness. He rests His case on someone outside Himself. Commentators differ over who it is: the Father, or John the Baptist, named in the verses that follow.
- A known witness. He does not just receive this witness. He knows it is true, and that points to the unity and divinity of the Son.
- Four more witnesses. John, His works, the Father's own voice, the Scriptures. The testimony piles up far past the two the law required.
- Witness that saves. He needed no human word, yet He stooped to call one, hoping to convince His hearers and save them.
Ye have sent unto John, and he has borne witness to the truth.
Jesus answers His challengers, and He does not rest His case on His own word alone. He calls witnesses. The first one He names is a man these same leaders had already sent men to question.
Under the law, one voice on its own could not settle a case. Jesus holds Himself to that same standard.
However perfect His own witness was, on its own it would not be valid under the law, which says, "the testimony of two people is true". One has said, "The testimony of one man might be true — absolutely; just as true in itself as that of two. But it would not be true in the same way to others; it would need confirmation". So although His judgment was just and His motives pure, He does not ask men to believe in Him on His own witness alone.
The words "you sent" point back to something already on record. These men started the inquiry themselves, so its outcome is theirs to answer for.
They had sent a special team to John the Baptist to look into his claim, and everyone knew that John had recognised the Lord. They "sent to John, and he has borne witness to the truth." So what about the baptism of John? Was it from heaven or from man? Either they had already settled the question of John's authority, or else they were in no position to give a verdict on the Lord. A judgment about the one had to take in both. Either way, they already had what they needed to answer their own question.
Jesus says John bore witness to the truth, not simply to Himself. What made John's witness so strong was how little he claimed for himself.
This record sets John the Baptist aside entirely. The truth was that he was nothing, and that the Christ — the Prophet whom he had not yet seen — was everything. This testimony is beautiful. John the Baptist sets himself aside so that the truth may win. Later, after making nothing of Himself, the Christ whom John announced stands before Pilate, testifies that He is a King, and counts His own life as nothing to hold to the truth. John the Baptist had said, "I am not;" Jesus said, "I am."
Jesus needed no human voice to prove who He was. So why name John at all?
John the Baptist, then, is the first witness the Lord calls. He calls him in that ready and everlasting love which said nothing of His own testimony, hoping that somehow they might be convinced and believe the truth... His own testimony was never self-serving and never stood alone. Yet He sets it aside and points to the man sent ahead of Him. God had raised up John for this very purpose, and no one could deny it. No human testimony could be imagined more trustworthy. His birth, his life, his preaching, his death — all bore the stamp of truthfulness... On the other hand, Christ did not seek testimony from man. Yet how low He stooped, so that souls might be saved!
John is only the first name on the list. Three more follow in this chapter, and the problem at the end is not weak proof but an unwilling heart.
The Lord brings forward four witnesses to Himself... (1) John the Baptist bore witness of Him: "You sent to John, and he has borne witness to the truth" (ver. 33). (2) "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" (ver. 36). (3) And then, again, "And the Father who sent me has Himself borne witness about me" (ver. 37). (4) And, last of all, the Scriptures bear witness of Him... But He adds these solemn words: "yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life." This fourfold testimony to Christ might well convince any heart.
Evidence, then, is never the missing piece. Something deeper decides the outcome.
Responsibility rests on this: God has given full and adequate evidence, suited to man. But man's will and desires are such that he loves darkness more than light. So God's power gives life by His own sovereign act. Conscience is the one faculty that lets light in, and nothing else does — except that love draws; for God is love as well as light, and He reveals Himself in Christ.
- Sent — They started the inquiry to John themselves, so his answer was evidence they had asked for.
- Truth — John testified to the truth by declaring what he was not, so that Christ might be everything.
- Stoop — Christ needed no human witness, yet He named one anyway, so that they might be saved.
- Greater — John is only the first of four witnesses; the works, the Father, and the Scriptures follow.
- Will — Full evidence leaves men responsible. Only love drawing the heart makes them come.
But I do not receive witness from man, but I say this that *ye* might be saved.
Jesus is answering religious leaders who have challenged Him, and He calls witnesses to prove who He is. The strange part: He names a human witness, John the Baptist, then says He does not need one — and that He speaks so that they may be saved.
Jesus had just pointed to John the Baptist's witness. Now He sets it in perspective.
The first witness, John, was just a man. Jesus needed no such testimony, yet He mentioned it, if by that means some might listen and be saved. In verses 33-35, Jesus is really bearing witness to John, who had borne witness to the truth as a burning and a shining lamp. John's witness had both warmth and light. Yet he was only a lamp — that is the word the Lord used. Jesus was the true light, like the sun shining in its strength. Now the sun needs no witness from a mere lamp, even though it burns and shines.
If His own word is enough, why produce witnesses? Because He was meeting men on the ground of the law they claimed to keep, which required more than one voice.
However perfect His own witness was, on its own it would not be valid under the law. The law says, "The testimony of two people is true." One has said, "The testimony of one man might be true — absolutely; just as true in itself as that of two. But it would not be true in the same way to others; it would need confirmation." So, though His judgment was just and His motives pure, He does not ask men to believe in Him on His own witness alone.
In the rest of the chapter He names four witnesses: John, His own works, the Father, and the Scriptures. That is more than the law asked for.
He sets His own testimony aside and points to the man who came before Him. Love is what moves Him to do it.
John the Baptist, then, is the first witness. The Lord calls him in that ready and everlasting love which said nothing of His own testimony, hoping that by some means they might be convinced and believe the truth... Nor did Christ seek testimony from man; yet to what did He not stoop that souls might be saved?
Another writer adds what happened to that light once Christ had come.
He points to John's testimony. It was a merciful concession to man's need, though He Himself had no need of a witness that was only human. It was a call to rouse men's attention and awaken a sense of need in them, and in fact many were roused... Like everything human, John's testimony was limited in time and place, so it had to give way to the One he testified about.
The words "so that you may be saved" tell us why He speaks at all. One writer turns them straight on the reader.
God is giving you now the opportunity of being saved. Hear what the Lord Jesus says: "I say these things so that you may be saved" (v. 34). Are you saved? Not yet! Do you not want to be saved? He wants you to be saved. How may you be saved? Only by Him. Will works do it? A dead man cannot work, and that is what you are.
The Lord's description of John — burning and shining — gives a pattern for anyone who speaks for God.
Perhaps difficulties arise because we may shine a little but do not burn. Clearly, though we may express the truth, if the warmth of love is absent there will be a lack of interest... People have often refused the testimony of a saint of God. Yet those who heard it had to admit he meant what he said. He burned as well as shone.
The evidence was not the problem. Their refusal came from somewhere else.
Their unwillingness was the real hindrance. He read their hearts. And now He tells them plainly what He knew about them. Their actions betrayed them.
- Sufficient — Jesus needs no human recommendation. John was a lamp, and the sun needs no lamp to prove it is shining.
- Stooping — He names a human witness anyway. The law asked for more than one voice, and He met men where they stood.
- Salvation — He says why He speaks at all: not to defend Himself, but so His hearers may be saved.
- Shining — John's testimony burned as well as shone. It roused people to their need, then gave way to Christ.
- Stubbornness — the proof was never the problem. They were unwilling to come to Him.
*He* was the burning and shining lamp, and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light.
Jesus is answering the Jewish leaders who want Him dead for healing on the Sabbath and for calling God His own Father. Instead of defending Himself, He calls witnesses — the first being John the Baptist, whose light they enjoyed for a while but never followed to Christ.
Jesus did not need a witness from man, yet He brings John forward anyway.
John the Baptist is the first witness. The Lord calls him in that ready and everlasting love which said nothing of His own testimony, hoping that somehow they would be convinced and believe the truth. John had been raised up for this beyond all denial, and no human testimony could be imagined more trustworthy. His birth, his life, his preaching, his death all bore the stamp of truthfulness. … On the other hand, Christ did not seek testimony from man; yet what would He not stoop to, so that souls might be saved?
The Greek word behind "lamp" is not the word used of Christ as the Light.
The word properly means "lamp" — a hand-lamp fed with oil. … It fits John the Baptist in John 5:35: a lamp lit by another to shine for a time. The older King James wording loses this, and wipes out the difference between him and Christ. Christ is in Himself the light, and John was only its witness.
That difference carries the Lord's argument. Christ does not depend on the man who points to Him.
John's witness had both warmth and light. But he was only a lamp — that is the word the Lord used. Jesus was the true light, like the sun shining in its strength. Now the sun needs no witness from a mere lamp, even though it burns and shines.
People often misquote what the Lord said about John. The older translation quoted here reads "light" where the ESV reads "lamp."
Light is good, but it is not heat. John the Baptist was "a burning and a shining light," not "a bright and shining light," as people often quote it. He did shine, but not like an electric light. There was heat, as well as light.
Applied to service now, this explains why clear words sometimes leave people cold.
Perhaps difficulties arise because we may shine a little but do not burn. Clearly, though we may express the truth, if the warmth of love is absent there will be a lack of interest. … If people see that we mean what we say, because we learned it in God's presence, the service is bound to bear fruit.
John's single-mindedness put him in the way of harm.
That light not only shone, it burned. He was no "reed shaken by the wind." His life was one of power and effect, because it had one absorbing object — one grand purpose. … So he burned, not with zeal only, but in condemning everything that opposed his Master's advancement. He had, therefore, to suffer.
Their gladness was real, but conditional. It lasted exactly as long as it cost them nothing.
As long as it did not interfere with their self-importance, and before their opposition of heart came out, they were willing to rejoice, and to please themselves in John's light instead. They were willing to rejoice in it, but they were not baptised by him.
Their gladness never brought them to Christ Himself.
They were very willing to rejoice for a while in the light, but they would not come to the Son to have life. (John 5:35, 40.)
A lamp is lit for the night. It is not meant to compete with morning.
He was like the lamp, burning and shining — not the light of day, but lighting up the darkness of the night. They had been glad of it, and willing to make use of its cheer for a while. John's testimony was limited in time and place, like everything human. So it had to give way to the One he testified about.
- Lamp. John was a lamp lit by another and burning for a time; Christ is the Light itself. Every faithful witness holds borrowed brightness.
- Burning. John gave heat as well as light. Truth spoken without the warmth of love leaves hearers unmoved.
- Cost. Because John burned for one object — his Master's honour — he also had to suffer for it.
- Season. The crowd's joy lasted only while John's light cost them nothing. They enjoyed it, but they never let him baptise them.
- Life. Enjoying the lamp is not the same as coming to the Light. Verse 40 finishes the story: they would not come to the Son to have life.