The crowd answered [and said], Thou hast a demon who seeks to kill thee?
Jesus is at the Feast of Tabernacles. He has just told the crowd that not one of them keeps the law Moses gave, and He has asked why they want to kill Him. The answer is not a denial but an insult. It raises two questions: who is speaking, and why does the Lord let the slur pass?
Two groups stand in this scene, and they do not know the same things.
The people in general were not aware how far hatred was driving the leaders, and had no suspicion that they were set on the death of Jesus... In their ignorance the crowd spoke with rash irreverence and violence against the Lord, who does not stop to notice it. Instead He points out how absurd it was for them to quarrel, and to wonder at one work of His — the healing of the sick man at Bethesda on the Sabbath.
Not knowing about the plot did not leave the crowd standing on neutral ground.
The crowd, who knew nothing of their evil, said, "You have a demon! Who is seeking to kill you?" Where the truth is not received, the very ignorance of the crowd about the wickedness of their rulers only plunges them deeper into rejection and confusion about Him who charges that wickedness on them. Notice the careful distinction Scripture keeps all the way through between the Jews who were deliberately blind and the crowd, who still perished in their unbelief.
Older translations say "you have a devil." The word means a demon, and they say it to the Son of God.
They were strangers in Jerusalem themselves, and knew nothing of what the Jews were planning. They accuse the Lord, saying, "You have a devil" [rather, demon]: "who is seeking to kill you?" — an awful speech to make to the Son of God. But it was not the last time He would be attacked this way in Jerusalem. In the riches of His grace He passed it by.
The accusation was more than name-calling. Under the law it carried a death sentence.
A charge like that, if proved, would have made the Lord liable to the death sentence of the law. For the LORD had commanded through Moses, "A man or a woman who is a medium or a necromancer shall surely be put to death; they shall be stoned with stones" (Lev. 20:27). The Jews did, as we learn elsewhere, say of the Lord that He had a demon (John 7:20; John 8:48, 52; John 10:20), and they also sought to stone Him.
The insult was their way out.
Moses had given them the standard of the law to live by, yet none of them kept it, He says. If they were righteous, why were they plotting His death (verse 19)? His words, however, serve to prove their hatred toward Him more fully; because He had seen through their evasion, they accuse Him of having a demon. They will use any trick to slip out of responsibility for their own deceit.
Commentators differ here. Some read the crowd as uninformed about the leaders' plan; Grant reads the reply as part of the hatred already at work.
He never defends Himself against the charge. He turns them to their own practice instead.
The Lord is silent in the presence of this violent and wicked charge. Still, He condemns them for their folly and hypocrisy. In condemning Him for a good work — making a man completely well on the Sabbath — they condemned themselves, since they do the work of circumcision on that day. Then the Lord exposes the rest of their false judgment. They had judged by appearances and without divine guidance. Righteous judgment comes only from seeking the will of God.
The refusals in this chapter come from every direction.
In the course of the chapter this rejection of Christ, by every class, becomes increasingly plain and definite. His brothers do not believe in Him (verse 5). The people charge Him with having a demon (verse 20). The Jews are amazed at Him, and try to seize Him (verses 15, 25, 30). The leaders of the nation send officers to arrest Him (verse 32).
- Charge. The crowd does not answer His question. It answers with a charge of demon possession, spoken to the Son of God.
- Weight. The charge was no mere insult. If proved, it carried the law's death sentence, and the same slander returns in John 8 and John 10.
- Ignorance. Visitors to the city knew nothing of the leaders' plot, yet their ignorance did not shield them. It drew them deeper into rejecting Him.
- Motive. They insult Him the moment He exposes their evasion. Slander was their escape from responsibility.
- Answer. He leaves the insult unanswered and points to their own Sabbath circumcision. Right judgment comes from seeking God's will, not from appearances.
Jesus answered and said to them, I have done one work, and ye all wonder.
The crowd has just told Jesus He has a demon, and He answers by pointing back to one act of healing in that same city. Why should a single kindness be the thing that left them plotting His death?
He gives no details, but the crowd knew which work He meant. It had happened at the pool of Bethesda, on a Sabbath.
The crowd spoke out of ignorance. Their words against the Lord were reckless, disrespectful and violent. He does not stop to notice it. Instead He points out how absurd their quarrelling is — and how absurd it is to wonder at one work of His, the cure of the disabled man at Bethesda on the Sabbath.
The cure was instant, and everyone at the pool saw it.
This was no slow recovery, getting better step by step. He took up his bed and walked. He had been disabled for thirty-eight years. Yet he could now do what he could have done before the illness struck — and he did it at once, in front of the whole crowd of sick people. He got up. He carried his bed. He walked.
They all marvelled. That sounds like a step toward faith, but astonishment on its own is a dead end.
News of the miracle caused a stir in the district. We read that everyone marvelled — as people always do at things they can neither understand nor copy. But that kind of feeling does not touch the heart or the conscience.
Wonder that refuses to believe is not safe ground. Scripture has a warning for it.
"I did one work, and you all marvel at it." They stayed in that state and perished, as Scripture had said before. Now the warning takes in all of them, and His works as well as His words: "Look, you scoffers, be astounded and perish; for I am doing a work in your days."
Jesus points them to their own practice. They circumcised on the Sabbath, so that they would not break the law of Moses.
In many cases they rightly carried out this surgery on the Sabbath day, or else they would break the law of Moses. The Jews were careful about this. But when Christ, in pure grace, healed on the Sabbath day, they were angry enough to plot His death! Circumcision required real physical work. The Lord's healing mercy did not. How could the Jews justify their objection to such goodness?
The verdict they passed on Him rebounded onto themselves.
They condemned Him for doing a good work — making a man completely well on the Sabbath day. In doing so they condemned themselves, for they did the work of circumcision on the Sabbath.
Why heal on that day at all? He had already given the reason at the pool itself.
In the fifth chapter we are told, "My Father is working until now, and I am working." How could God rest in a world of sin — a world where evil ran wild, Satan ruled, death reigned, and people were miserable and wretched? How could God rest here? His nature of love made it impossible... You cannot shut up the compassion of God, you cannot stop the outflow of His grace and goodness.
The Lord does not stop at the Sabbath question. He goes on to the way they judged.
Then the Lord exposes the rest of their false judgment. They had judged according to appearances and without divine guidance. Righteous judgment comes only by seeking the will of God.
Something was missing from their judgment, and God is willing to supply it.
They had not brought God in, and so they were wrong — not on the surface only, but altogether. If we are not to judge by appearance, we clearly need divine guidance. That is just what God is so willing to give His children: not teaching only, but direction and judgment.
- One work. One deed lies behind the whole uproar: the healing of the disabled man at Bethesda, done on a Sabbath.
- One wonder. They all marvelled. But amazement at what you cannot explain touches neither heart nor conscience. Scripture's word for such wonder is: be astounded and perish.
- One exposure. They circumcised on the Sabbath so they would not break Moses' law. That was real physical work. Yet a healing that cost no labour made them furious.
- One reason. God could not rest in a world of sin, misery and death. So the Father worked, and the Son worked. No one can shut off His grace to protect a day.
- One verdict. Judge by appearances, leaving God out, and you are wrong all the way down. Righteous judgment starts by seeking God's will — and God gives that guidance.
Therefore Moses gave you circumcision (not that it is of Moses, but of the fathers), and ye circumcise a man on sabbath.
Jesus is defending one healing done on a sabbath, and He answers by pointing to what the crowd did on sabbaths themselves. His case rests on a short phrase — circumcision came "not that it is from Moses, but from the fathers" — which puts it before the law they were using against Him.
The Lord traces all their anger back to one miracle. Then He sets it beside a routine they never questioned.
The crowd did not know what they were saying. They spoke against the Lord with rash irreverence and violence. He does not stop to answer that. He points instead to how absurd their quarrelling is, and how absurd it is to wonder at one work of His — the cure of the sick man at Bethesda on the sabbath. Yet everyone took it as a matter of course to circumcise a male child on the eighth day, even when that day was a sabbath. They did this to honour the law of Moses, though circumcision in fact came from the fathers.
Now weigh the two acts against each other:
In many cases they rightly did this surgery on the sabbath day. Otherwise they would break the law of Moses. The Jews were careful about this. Yet when Christ, in pure grace, healed on the Sabbath day, they were angry enough to plot His death (v. 23)! Circumcision required real physical work. The Lord's healing mercy did not.
"The fathers" points back to Abraham. Circumcision reached them long before the law, and that timing carries weight.
Moses did put circumcision into the law he gave. Yet it did not come from Moses. It came from the fathers. So it had a different character from law, because it was tied to the men through whom God in His grace gave them the promises. The apostle later shows that circumcision was the seal of the righteousness of faith in Abraham (Rom. 4:11). Abraham receives it when his body is already dead and children from him are impossible... So this circumcision belongs to a time before the law, and its meaning is the very opposite of law. Yet the law itself puts it above the law — that is, above the commandment about the sabbath. So the law itself gave grace first place.
One writer points out which part of Moses they held on to:
They looked to Moses, and it was on the law of Moses that they rested — not on the promises or the covenant in it.
So if circumcision is not simply a legal rule, what is it?
Let no one think that circumcision must be a legal thing. In the setting it is given here, it goes together with grace — it is the sign that the flesh is put to death. It was indeed taken into the law when that system came in later. But in itself, as our Lord Himself shows, it was not from Moses but from the fathers — from Abraham... It means flesh judged, and that is the true spiritual meaning of what God set up then.
The argument does more than clear Jesus. It turns the charge back on the men who made it.
The Lord stays silent in the face of this violent and wicked charge. Still, He condemns them for their folly and hypocrisy. They condemned Him for a good work — making a man completely whole on the Sabbath day. In doing so they condemned themselves, for they did the work of circumcision on the Sabbath... They had judged by appearances and without divine guidance. Only by seeking the will of God can anyone judge righteously.
This verse also shows how the Lord handled the writings of Moses — as fact, and as Moses' own.
Jesus constantly refers to facts recorded in the books of Moses... "Has not Moses given you the law? … Moses gave you circumcision," etc. (John 7:22). This is the steady teaching of Christ. So there is a shallow effort to deny that Moses really wrote these books, and to deny their inspiration — that God truly speaks to us through Moses (the law), the psalms and the prophets. That effort is a wicked attempt to make Jesus a liar and a deceiver.
- Older. Circumcision came from the fathers, not from Moses — it belongs to a time before the law, tied to God's promises.
- Deeper. Its meaning is the opposite of law-keeping. It stands for flesh judged, and it sealed the righteousness of faith Abraham already had.
- Preferred. The law itself let circumcision override the sabbath command. So the very code they defended put grace first.
- Exposed. They circumcised on the sabbath and called it honouring Moses. He healed on the sabbath and they called it sin. Their own practice condemned them.
- Trusted. Christ treats the books of Moses as fact and as Moses' own writing; to discard them is to make Him a deceiver.
If a man receives circumcision on sabbath, that the law of Moses may not be violated, are ye angry with me because I have made a man entirely sound on sabbath?
The crowd has just accused Jesus of having a demon. He answers the grudge behind the insult: a healing He had done on a Sabbath. His reply turns their own rule against them. They cut into a man's body on that day, so why the anger when He makes one whole?
The Lord picks one act they performed without a second thought and sets it beside His own. Nothing about the Sabbath stopped it.
It was a common matter of course to circumcise a male child on the eighth day, even if that day was a Sabbath. This was done in honour of the law of Moses, though in fact circumcision came from the fathers and not from Moses.
The comparison cuts deeper. One of the two acts involved real labour, and it was not the Lord's.
In many cases they rightly performed this surgery on the Sabbath day. Otherwise they would break the law of Moses. The Jews were careful about this. But when Christ, in pure grace, healed on the Sabbath day, they were angry to the point of plotting His death! Circumcision required actual physical work. The Lord's healing mercy did not. How could the Jews justify their objection to such goodness?
The Lord is careful to note that circumcision came from the fathers, not from Moses. That one detail settles the argument.
Circumcision, though incorporated by Moses in the law he gave, was not what came from Moses but from the fathers... This circumcision belongs to a time before law, and in its meaning it is the very opposite of law. Yet the law itself puts it above the law — that is, above the commandment of the Sabbath. So grace had, by the law itself, precedence above the law.
The healing behind the argument was done for a man helpless for thirty-eight years. Put his years of Sabbaths beside one word from Christ.
The Sabbath day was a shadow, and it allowed no burden and no works. In the same way Christ the substance — God's rest — must stand alone... What could the Sabbath do for him? More than nineteen hundred Sabbaths had passed over him, and he was still withered. But then Jesus came — He to whom those Sabbaths only pointed. One word, "Rise!" and at once the man was made whole. What a contrast! Do think about this. Nineteen thousand Sabbath days could never heal you.
There is a reason God did not rest that day. It lies in what this world is, and in what God is.
How could God rest in a world of sin? Evil was rampant, Satan was ruling, death was governing, and man was miserable and wretched. How could God rest here? His nature of love made it impossible... You cannot shut up the compassion of God, you cannot stop the outflow of His grace and goodness.
Their charge turns back on the men who made it.
The Lord is silent in the presence of this violent and wicked charge. Nevertheless, He condemns them for their folly and hypocrisy. They condemned Him for doing a good work, for making a man completely well on the Sabbath day. In doing so they condemned themselves, since they did the work of circumcision on the Sabbath.
One thing made such a verdict possible: the ceremony mattered more to them than the man.
They condemned Him for speaking a word that made a man completely well on the Sabbath. Yet they practised circumcision on that day, so that they might keep the law of Moses. Their lifeless ritual was of more importance to them than judgment, mercy, and the love of God.
- Their rule. They circumcised on the Sabbath to keep the law of Moses. That was real physical work; a word of healing was not.
- Their history. The sign came from the fathers, before Moses. By keeping it on the Sabbath, the law itself gave grace precedence over law.
- Their patient. Thirty-eight years of Sabbaths left the man withered. One word from Christ made him completely well.
- Their God. God's nature of love makes rest impossible in a world of sin and misery, so His grace keeps flowing out.
- Their verdict. They defended the ritual and attacked the cure, so they condemned themselves. Ceremony weighed more with them than mercy.