John 12:20-26 Some Greeks ask to see Jesus. Jesus is told about it and he launches into a lesson about...something else.
I have never been able to make sense of this sequence of events, or why these Greeks are even mentioned. As far as we know, they never see him and go away denied. Meanwhile, Jesus is talking on a different topic.
Any thoughts?

First problem: Who were these Greeks? I checked various commentaries and like how Thomas Coke explained it --

John 12:20. And there were certain Greeks— After the conquest of Darius by Alexander, all his successors of different nations were called Greeks, whence came the name of "the Grecian monarchy," otherwise called "the Syro-Macedonian." Thus Antiochus Epiphanes is said to have reigned in the hundred and thirty-seventh year of the kingdom of the Greeks, 1 Maccabees 1:10. St. Paul likewise often distinguishes all other nations from the Jews by the name of Greeks, Romans 1:16; Romans 2:9; Romans 10:12 and the greater part of Syria was, in our Saviour's time, called Greece by the Jews. Hence, when he was in the borders of Tyre and Sidon, and a woman besought him to cast the evil spirit out of her daughter, she is called a Greek, a Syro-phoenicean by nation, Mark 7:26 and these Greeks who were desirous to see Jesus, were probably of the same nation, and known to Philip, who is here said to have been a native of Bethsaida in Galilee, a neighbouring country, for which reason they might particularlyapply themselves to him. As all the Gentiles were thus named by the Jews Ελληνες, it denoted their religion, rather than their country; but in the present instance, the persons called Greeks were not idolatrous Gentiles; for their business at the feast, which was to worship, shews that they were proselytes to the Jewish religion, and that they cherished expectations of the Messiah. See Acts 2:5; Acts 8:27; Acts 13:43.

Also Heinrich Meyer's explanation --

John 12:20. The Hellenes are, as in John 7:35, not Greek Jews, Hellenists (Calvin, Semler, B. Crusius, Ewald), but Gentiles,—proselytes, however, as is shown by what follows (note especially the pres. part. ἀναβαιν.: who were wont to go up), and that of the gate, like the Aethiopian chamberlain, Acts 8:27, not pure Gentiles (Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euth. Zigabenus, Salmasius, Selden, and several others, including Paulus, Klee, Schweizer).

Where did the scene take place? Probably in the court of the temple, with which locality, at least, the entry just related, and the connected transactions, onwards to John 12:36, best correspond. According to Baur, however (comp. also Scholten), the whole affair is to be referred simply to the idea of the author, who makes Jesus, under the ascendancy of Jewish unbelief, to be glorified by believing heathendom. This idea is that of the history itself. Bengel rightly observes: “Praeludium regni Dei a Judaeis ad gentes transituri.”

Well and good, but I'm wondering why it's there at all. As far as I can see, it contributes nothing to the narrative.

Well and good, but I'm wondering why it's there at all. As far as I can see, it contributes nothing to the narrative.
Maybe to show that Jesus welcomes and embraces everyone, no matter nationality or culture or lifestyle or livelihood or even orientation.

Maybe to show that Jesus welcomes and embraces everyone, no matter nationality or culture or lifestyle or livelihood or even orientation.He welcomes and embraces everyone who comes to Him on His terms. What did He tell the woman caught in adultery? "Go and sin no more." That message never changes. Same thing with the rich young ruler. Have you ever read that he told someone, "Go and live any way you want?"

As to the Greeks, that's a really good question. It's possible, of course, that he did see them. Perhaps the story is there to contrast with the attitudes of the Pharisees who most definitely did not want to see or listen to Jesus.

He welcomes and embraces everyone who comes to Him on His terms.
What??? Jesus reaches out to everyone. Any one of those has the choice to say, "No, thanks."

As for "Greeks" (from the quoted material I previously posted in this thread):
St. Paul likewise often distinguishes all other nations from the Jews by the name of Greeks, Romans 1:16; Romans 2:9; Romans 10:12 and the greater part of Syria was, in our Saviour's time, called Greece by the Jews.

What??? Jesus reaches out to everyone. Any one of those have the choice to say, "No, thanks."I would agree with that. "No, thanks, Jesus. I think I will stick with my way."

I would agree with that. "No, thanks, Jesus. I think I will stick with my way."
You didn't scold me about my (deliberate) grammar mistake. [What??? Jesus reaches out to everyone. Any one of those have the choice to say, "No, thanks."]

You're slipping!

I'm getting older everyday, WG. I miss the minutiae from time to time. And I think you will give me some applause for my sincere effort with my vocabulary. Yes??? Minutiae! Yeah.

I'm getting older everyday, WG. I miss the minutiae from time to time. And I think you will give me some applause for my sincere effort with my vocabulary. Yes??? Minutiae! Yeah.
It's NOT minutiae! (Did you take Latin?) It's subject-verb agreement! I went back and corrected it in my original post.

And I really like your answer to dwashbur's question:
"As to the Greeks, that's a really good question. It's possible, of course, that he did see them. Perhaps the story is there to contrast with the attitudes of the Pharisees who most definitely did not want to see or listen to Jesus."

You do realize, I hope, that you are slowly but surely regaining your status as the committed grammarian?

Even if you did not agree with it, wouldn't you still give me a few props for using the word? I think it's a great word.

You do realize, I hope, that you are slowly but surely regaining your status as the committed grammarian?
Oh, my! Those are the sweetest words I've heard all week!

Even if you did not agree with it, wouldn't you still give me a few props for using the word? I think it's a great word.
I am simply in awe that you so quickly pulled that word out of your personal lexicon! I want to shout
"Venivit, visit, vincit!"

Uhm...have no idea what that means. It does sound Italian. And I pulled that word out of my own, 67 year old head.

Uhm...have no idea what that means. I does sound Italian. And I pulled that word out of my own, 67 year old head.
You've heard or read "veni, vidi, vici"? It's Latin. Supposedly, Julius Caesar said it after his quick victory in his short war against Pharnaces II of Pontus at the Battle of Zela. That famous declaration is in first person. The one I posted to you is in third person. Now, feel free to google.

See how these threads begin to meander, dwashbur?!

It's bound to be, "I came, I saw, I conquered."

It's bound to be, "I came, I saw, I conquered."
Nope. Close! Third person (WG speaking about JL), not first person (JL speaking about himself):

"Venivit, visit, vincit!"

("Veni, vidi, vici" is the famous quote by Caesar. First person, "I" as the subject.)

Hey, I could teach you Latin conjugations and declensions, JL!

You came, you saw, you conquered???

That one confused me, too.

I doubt he saw the Greeks, and I don't understand his answer when he was told about them. It strikes me a bit like this:

"The kitchen faucet is leaking. Can you fix it?"

"Did I ever tell you about the wart on my elbow?"

There is no direct explanation of it in the text, so we are left to speculate. It is odd that the story was even included and you do wonder what the point was. I imagine it is one of those, "You would have to have been there," situations.

That one confused me, too.

I doubt he saw the Greeks, and I don't understand his answer when he was told about them. It strikes me a bit like this:

"The kitchen faucet is leaking. Can you fix it?"

"Did I ever tell you about the wart on my elbow?"
I have decided Jesus took a quick look and saw them and thought, Yo! Even the 'Greeks' [non-Jews] are here to check out the temple and join us in worship! Which reminds me, where on earth are the Pharisees? They're supposed to be here, too!" Then Jesus said, "And now that at least some of us are here, did you ever think about what can happen with a seed?"

You came, you saw, you conquered???
Um, third person (the words bolded earlier) singular is he/she/it. Thus,
"He came, he saw, he conquered."
I was referring to you, dear JL, as being the subject "he." Our next lesson in Latin will be on noun singular and plural endings. Or dwashbur can teach us a bit of Greek.

Believe it or not I studied Greek in Bible college. I don't recall the endings. Too long ago.

The story follows after the triumphal entry. The Jews at the feast were seeking to make Christ King, to follow Him, even against those who hated Him and his popularity.

But this was not His purpose. As the Jews came with palms and a great many were seeking His counsel and to look upon Him, the focus is upon the hour of his death. He sought to love them that were with Him more and to prepare the disciples for His death. See 12:13,27,13:1,34

This is where the significance of the Greeks lie, albeit I'm not sure of their specific place in society, Christ says as an answer to their request, now I must go die like this wheat. This so that the kingdom of heaven can multiply. He was preparing for his death and putting off the hopes of those that would make Him King of Israel.

Does that help?

The Jews at the feast were seeking to make Christ KingHow do you know that?

John 12:13 - Luke 19:38 - Mark 11:9,10

Lets not forget that Herod sought to kill the coming King, fearing that He would usurp his authority.
Matthew 2:3

To this day, Jews believe Christ is not the Messiah because He had never ruled as King, this is a central tenant of the Jewish belief about the Messiah. It would make sense that those treating Christ like royalty, believed He was this King.
Micah 5:2 / Genesis 49:10

In 30 BC Herod was declared by the Roman Senate the great King the Jews, these territories were later annexed by the Romans (6ce) and the Jews lived under Roman rule at the time of the Triumphal Entry. This was to be the fulfillment of the Messianic rule of Judea, they were promised a king, I imaging common thought at the time was that this King would free them from the Romans.

You are right. I misread your post to say that the GREEKS were seeking to make Him king. My bad.

I have been thinking about this a bit more, and reading the prophecies in Isaiah, Psalms, and elsewhere. I believe that the Greeks are specifically mentioned as a fulfilment to some of these prophecies.

The Greeks and the gentiles are often used interchangeably in the New Testament, and there are several prophecies explaining that Christ would be the redeemer for all nation's, to establish a covenant with the gentiles, and to be a light for the whole world. Isaiah 11:10 stands out exceptionally for this question concerning the Greeks.

See:
Isaiah 42:1-7 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+42%3A1-7&version=NKJV) - Isaiah 66:18-20 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+66%3A18-20&version=NKJV) - Habakkuk 2:14 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Habakkuk+2%3A14&version=NKJV) - Zechariah 9:9-10 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Zechariah+9%3A9-10&version=NKJV)
Galatians 3:8 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+3%3A8&version=NKJV) (Genesis 12:3 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+12%3A3&version=NKJV)) - Isaiah 2:2-3 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+2%3A2-3&version=NKJV) - Isaiah 11:10 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+11%3A10&version=NKJV)

Except that there is no evidence Jesus even talked with this group of Greek men, much less gave them any spiritual benefit.

More along the lines of seek Him, not so much be a disciple.

I like that thought.

More along the lines of seek Him, not so much be a disciple.
We don't seek Him. He finds us!

WG, I think it's a bit of both...

Relative to this discussion:


“And in that day there shall be a Root of Jesse,
Who shall stand as a banner to the people;
For the Gentiles shall seek Him,
And His resting place shall be glorious.”

We don't seek Him. He finds us!The first steps certainly belong to Him. Wow! We agree on something.

Except that there is no evidence Jesus even talked with this group of Greek men, much less gave them any spiritual benefit.

Thank you. He never even seems to have answered the question of whether they could see him or not, he went off on a different topic. Hence my question: why is this even there?

Thank you. He never even seems to have answered the question of whether they could see him or not, he went off on a different topic. Hence my question: why is this even there?
Encouragement to the rest of us Greeks?

Found this on the internet which was interesting, especially the thought that these were Greeks who had accepted the Jewish faith and thus were in Jerusalem on a feast day, but still doesn't completely address your question. "

"When you read the passage, the Greeks came to Philip. Instead of simply bringing them to Him, Philip goes and gets Andrew, as though there was some kind of hesitation. As if Philip thought to himself, "Should I bring these Greeks to Jesus?" If you read the whole passage above Matt 15:21-28 this Canaanite woman is crying out to Jesus and he is ignoring her basically because she is not of the House of Israel. I am sure this was something the disciples / apostles of Jesus were very aware of and so the hesitation of Philip.If you look at Acts 10 & 11 it is absolute proof that even after the ascension the Apostles strongly thought that the message was for the Jews only. The only conclusion to make here in John regarding Philip with the Greeks is that Philip did hesitate due to this knowledge that Jesus was primarily ministering to the lost of the house of Israel."

DWash, have you ever read the NET translation? Just wondering what you think of it. I would imagine its study notes would appeal to you.

It's been ages since I looked at it. I think I stopped consulting it when I bought a Logos package.

I have pondered this and pondered this. We know that He came for the lost house of Israel. Mathew 15:24 Could He have been implying he had nothing to talk to them about until AFTER his death, burial and resurrection? Because after Jesus is informed that there were Greeks who wanted to meet with him in verse 24 He goes on to say unless a corn of wheat falls into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it brings forth much fruit. Gentiles were grafted in after his resurrection. Just a thought. Am I way off??????

We know that He came for the lost house of Israel. Mathew 15:24 Could He have been implying he had nothing to talk to them about until AFTER his death, burial and resurrection? Because after Jesus is informed that there were Greeks who wanted to meet with him in verse 24 He goes on to say unless a corn of wheat falls into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it brings forth much fruit. Gentiles were grafted in after his resurrection. Just a thought. Am I way off??????

Interesting! We know he sort of fudged that principle a couple of times for individuals - the Roman centurion and the Canaanite woman - but that may have been because they already believed, or had seen enough to be able to believe. These guys seem to have been more curiosity seekers, but it's impossible to tell from what little we have. I like this idea.

Interesting! We know he sort of fudged that principle a couple of times for individuals - the Roman centurion and the Canaanite woman - but that may have been because they already believed, or had seen enough to be able to believe. These guys seem to have been more curiosity seekers, but it's impossible to tell from what little we have. I like this idea.

Is is possible that believers tend to ascribe meaning to every word written down by the authors of the Gospels as though every jot and tittle had profound meaning?

Maybe Jesus was just having a conversation with the centurion and the Canaanite woman with the possibility of his fudging a principle the farthest thing from his mind. Remember what Jesus said about the "principle" of the sabbath.

I understand how the Bible can lend itself to many, many ideas and interpretations, and I understand how fascinating such an exercise can be ( and fruitful), but sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

No offense.

Maybe Jesus was just having a conversation with the centurion and the Canaanite woman with the possibility of his fudging a principle the farthest thing from his mind. Remember what Jesus said about the "principle" of the sabbath.

Not sure I follow. Can you expand a bit?

Not sure I follow. Can you expand a bit?

I'll try.

Your comment about knowing that Jesus "fudged that principle a couple of times for individuals" was offered in response to ClassyT's explanation on the passage in Matthew re "he came for the lost house of Israel". You found her comment "interesting".

In my comment, I thought that Jesus talking to the centurion and the Canaanite woman was not, as you described, a "fudging of principle". Rather I thought it was simply something Jesus said talking to those individuals without reference to Matthew's "lost house of Israel". No fudging implied or otherwise.

I added the sabbath reference since it is somewhat similar to Jesus' attitude to certain "principles". The principle (rule/regulation/belief) that the sabbath was intrinsically sacred on its own was debunked by Jesus when he said, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath". Not a perfect analogy - what analogy ever is - but it contains the idea of a principle not always sacrosanct.

Another thought, which I did not raise for obvious reasons as opening up a can of worms, is that perhaps the confusion arises from the possibility that the part about the Greeks and what immediately followed was not originally connected. The Gospel of Matthew copy that is the earliest we have is about 10-15 generations after the events described - more than enough time for an error in copying which is why I believe that sometimes meaning is forced into Bible passages that was never intended to be there. Especially when it requires jumping through hoops to extract a meaning not there.

Dave,

In regards to him fudging the principle I guess I agree with you. These two individuals were gentiles but in BOTH instances the Lord was moved by their faith. In fact, these are the only two in the gospels where Jesus says they have great faith. I find that amazing.

Hi T,
Agreed. In fact, he told the people the Roman soldier had more faith than any of them. So I wonder: when he said he came for the lost sheep of Israel, maybe he didn't mean it as a hard-and-fast rule but more of a principle with very flexible edges? And when he said what he did to the Canaanite woman, basically calling her a stray dog, I wonder if he was just testing her a little?
We have so little text, it's sometimes frustrating trying to sort out his mindset.

Perhaps his thought was that He, being sent only to the lost sheep of Israel, would not pursue contact with non-Jews in the same manner He did with Jews, and yet was still prepared to minister to them as the opportunities arose such as with the great ministry he experienced in the town of Sychar.

Dave..... We SOO do have little text. AND yet....I'm sure it's for a reason. Perhaps for discussions like this? ( a personal note: hope all is well with you and your family)

jilisenbe:

Exactly! With the exceptions who desperately sought him out.

Exactly! With the exceptions who desperately sought him out.Nice to meet you, CT.

Who were these Greeks?"Among those who went up to worship at the feast were some Greeks" that is Greek speakers, that is gentiles non-Jews. Kind of an umbrella term for gentiles because Greek language and culture dominated the world outside Juda. Something like internationals, and we don't know where they were from- maybe they were from the Decapolis gentile towns just to the northeast of Galilee. But as gentiles, they know they can't just walk up to Jesus, and meet him. Perhaps they know he used to say; he'd been sent only to the lost sheep of the House of Israel.


why these Greeks are even mentioned.Verse 21," they came to Philip, who is from Bethsaida in Galilee which is a Hellenized, a Greekish City close to the border. They recognized in him a sort of Greekish kind of Jew and they say; sir we wish to see Jesus, and Philip knows that this is a tricky request from gentiles. So he went and told Andrew who is also from Bethsaida that Greekish town or city and perhaps rather nervously they go and told Jesus. It's a strange little incident but it's deeply symbolic, it's a little bit like the Magi at the beginning of Matthew's gospel. These representatives of the rest of the world- the Pharisees say the world has gone after him, and these representative, outsiders request to see him. So we join the story when the Lord Jesus stands on the verge of worldwide success. It's very upbeat apart from the puzzling donkey as he rides into Jerusalem, it's all victory and acclimation and success and worldwide influence opening up...Jesus here are some internationals here is an opportunity to open up worldwide ministry- Jesus triumph ministries intergalactic, Jesus the power pastor leading the power team, that's what we're waiting for at this point, Jesus the one who can raise the Dead. And what we're about to hear is a great significance, when we are praised, because the Lord Jesus speaks not of success but of sacrifice and the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus, on which we focus first is necessary and costly and fruitful. First, it is necessary- versus 24 to 26 verse 23 "Jesus answered them," and it's a strange answer. We want to see Jesus and on the face of it the answer that Jesus gives is not an answer at all, it appears to be completely irrelevant to the question. "we want to see Jesus"- "And Jesus answered them, the hour has come." The hour that is not yet come in chapter 4 of the wedding, and my hour has not yet come, the hour that had not yet come in chapter 7 his hour not yet come and they wanted to arrest him, the hour that has not yet come in chapter 8 as he teaches in the Temple. Now the hour has come, for the son of man to be glorified to be lifted up like the suffering servant of the Lord. Isaiah 52 and 53 raised and lifted up and highly exalted glorified to die on the cross. How strange, at just the moment when the worldwide ministries opening up for him, surrounded by a cheering crowd, singing Psalms, waving palm branches...is approached by these internationals, the Pharisees exasperated that the world is going after him. How strange to say now it is time to die.

Much more to this, that I'd like to say...If it speaks to you at all(?). I'm tired and out of time.

("We want to see Jesus"-you can't see Jesus...you'll have to go to the cross if you want to see Jesus)...<-Initially this was not my intended response (wanting to go much further, with the seed and all)...it was cut short (lack of time), but it works for me.


It seems I have done it again, I read the first page in this thread and already posted my reply. Wasn't able to read the second page, sorry. 

I was reading in 2 Corinthians 4- I thought how well the passage fits with John 12:20-36...2 corinthians 4- For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of God’s glory displayed in the face of Christ. 6 But we have this treasure in jars of clay to show that this all-surpassing power is from God and not from us. What catches my eye is John Jacobs and the power team. There's a picture of these seven men who clearly have a lot of steroids and they built up these big muscles, devastating huge blocks of ice, massive slabs of concrete, and shredding thick telephone books with their bare hands. The extraordinary ministry of the power team just has to be seen to be believed. These world-class athletes use phenomenal feats of strength, power and speed to boldly proclaim the omnipotence of Jesus Christ, and of course, we laugh at that, it's easy to mock that kind of nonsense but there is something in all of us that wants to be known as the power team or the power pastor. In John's gospel, ' truly truly I say to you'- a very simple familiar agricultural picture unless a grain of wheat falls into the Earth and dies it remains alone. if you have a seed on a plate for a long time- you can sing to it, you can speak to it, you can pray about it you can do what you like. You put a grain of wheat on a plate and it will just be one grain of wheat, you can eat it but that's all it's going to be that's it, it's a very simple image. If it's going to be anything more than that it needs to fall into the ground and die. And the third primary meaning must be for the Lord Jesus himself, what the Lord Jesus implies of his own ministry is so long as I walk around doing miracles and such that nobody's ever done before as long as I teach, such that no human being has ever talked before no matter how wonderful my teaching no matter how astonishing,  powerful my miracles I will remain alone. I may be surrounded by crowds of admirers there may be a fan club, but at the deepest level I will be alone. And its an extraordinary thought isn't it...that if the ministry of the Lord Jesus had ended thereafter the razing of Lazarus his influence would have been superficial. His ministry would have been a failure nobody would be changed inside, there would be no forgiveness of sins, but if it died-  it goes down into the darkness of the earth if it's buried well then it germinates and it bears much fruit. A  simple picture everybody can understand, the picture that is true for Jesus the Lord. Jesus will only win the world if he first dies. We want to see Jesus they say and you cannot see Jesus, the face of the crucified Christ as he dies then you will see him. 

there is something in all of us that wants to be known as the power team
Hardly!

In John's gospel, ' truly truly I say to you'- a very simple familiar agricultural picture unless a grain of wheat falls into the Earth and dies it remains alone.

If it's going to be anything more than that it needs to fall into the ground and die.
If John said that, he wasn't much of a farmer. A seed doesn’t die when it's planted and then begins to grow into a plant. Quite the opposite! a seed is full of the potential of life (and continues to be so) as it becomes a plant! The process is called germination.

John 12:24 Most assuredly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it produces much I'll leave you to your own understanding.


2 Corinthians 4-7: Therefore, since through God’s mercy we have this ministry, we do not lose heart. 2 Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God. 3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 5 For what we preach is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake. 6 For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of God’s glory displayed in the face of Christ. 7 But we have this treasure in jars of clay to show that this all-surpassing power is from God and not from us. essence being, that we don't really wish to be simple "jars of clay." There is something in all of us that wants to be known as the power team (Maybe only Disciples and Pastors).  I wanted to talk more about 2 Corinthians 4, regarding those of us (even Jesus) who are considered jars of Clay., Wasn't able to elaborate as much as I would have liked.

What spirit-filled Christian wouldn't want their ministry (in fact their lives) to reach the ends of the Globe?  What is their purpose for wanting such a ministry(?) 

There is something in all of us that wants to be known as the power team
I want to see him so clearly and so powerfully that I am changed from one degree of glory to another into his image so that I can show him to others more compellingly.

Jesus is saying; My pathway (I think he would rather have remained a simple Jar of clay) to glory is through death, as will be to all who want to see me.

I have a good picture of what this verse means. I was only trying to explain my understanding. In the hope that others gain a better understanding of the passage.  As you know I'm illiterate. many grammatical errors and it takes me much too long when trying to articulate.

I'll leave you to your own understanding.
I was raised with farms all around me and have no clue what you mean.

So what we have here;
Jesus Hits the World stage. Now the crowd that was with him when he called Lazarus from the tomb and raised him from the dead continued to spread the word. 18- Many people, because they had heard that he had performed this sign, went out to meet him. 19- So the Pharisees said to one another, “See, this is getting us nowhere. Look how the whole world has gone after him!”

verse 19- the Pharisees plotting against him since chapter 5 of John's gospel and they say to one another you see that you're gaining nothing it's pointless all our plots all our machinations all our power the world has gone after him the world has gone after this Jesus who can raise the dead, It's a tremendous power, what can we possibly do against this man who can raise the dead...I imagine you might have thought that they were exaggerating when they said the world has gone off after him, after all the crowds that they watched were, for the most part, Jewish crowds not the whole world, but even as they speak verse 20 their words acquire a prophetic character, and begin to be fulfilled now among those who went up to worship at the feast were some Greeks that is Greek speakers that is gentiles non-Jews


Jesus Predicts His Death; The Greeks (Much the same as the Magi) showed up. (struck with the turmoil of Death) Jesus replied, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. Like the tent that Paul uses elsewhere in 2 Corinthians, and in his days on Earth the Lord Jesus was a frail fully human mortal human being. His fully divine nature as the eternal Son of God did not in any way weaken or compromise the full frailty and mortality of his human nature, any more than his fully human nature compromised the fullness of his deity, and the precious and the trials and the temptations that affected Jesus were real precious and genuine trials and terribly pressing temptations, there was no play-acting as if Jesus were God pretending to live like us.


Very truly I tell you unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed(alone). But if it dies, it produces many seeds. What the Lord Jesus implies, of his own ministry is so long as I walk around doing miracles and such, that nobody's ever done before, as long as I teach such that no human being has ever taught before, no matter how wonderful my teaching no matter how astonishing, powerful my miracles I will remain alone. I may be surrounded by crowds of admirers there may be a fan club but at the deepest level I will be alone and its extraordinary thought isn't it, that if the ministry of the Lord Jesus had ended there, after the razing of Lazarus his influence would have been superficial. His ministry would have been a failure nobody would be changed inside, there would be no forgiveness of sins.

But if it dies, it produces many seeds. 25 Anyone who loves their life will lose it, while anyone who hates their life in this world will keep it for eternal life. [For those who love this life (World), they will simply die, alone (produce no seed). Those who live for Jesus will produce many seeds (fruit) but if it dies, it goes down into the darkness of the earth, if it's buried well then it germinates and it bears much fruit at a very very simple picture. Everybody can understand the picture that is true for Jesus. The Lord Jesus will only win the world if he first dies. Now it is time to die, we want to see Jesus they say and you cannot see Jesus the face of the crucified Christ, as he dies then you will see him.


I was raised with farms all around me and have no clue what you mean.
I was raised with many Horses all around me (including my backyard) and I still don't know how to ride a horse. A person can grow up around Bible-believing Christians and still miss salvation. Those of us that are in Christ Jesus, must give our lives (die). It's costly but it will be fruitful.


If it's going to be anything more than that it needs to fall into the ground and die.
A seed doesn’t die when it's planted and then begins to grow into a plant. A seed will die once it is planted. Hopefully not before it bears fruit, producing many more seeds (applicable to Christians only). Those in Christ Jesus die to self while growing in Jesus. God planted his seed in us, if I may. So it turns out we all face death, we're gonna die. Doesn't matter how long you sit on that plate (holding on to life, for as long as you can), alone. We all end up in the ground sooner or later. You do understand once you are in the ground you are dead, be seed or flesh? So you can choose to be buried with Jesus, or not. Either way, it is death. But...those who choose Jesus will be raised with him also.

The thingy about the seed is; Don't be that seed that chooses not to be planted. Don't be afeared of death, death is inevitable. Take your seed and plant it face down at the cross of Jesus.
@WG; Sorry, that's the best I can do. If you need further explanation please do not refer to me. Your buddy should be able to explain it more to your liking.

@WG; Sorry, that's the best I can do. If you need further explanation please do not refer to me. Your buddy should be able to explain it more to your liking.
Suggestion: Please keep your comments and answers shorter and on target. Watch your punctuation. You tend to ramble and be very wordy, meanwhile losing your frustrated reader who tries hard to pull out a message for himself. Short, meaty sentences can be very effective. (And, btw, Jesus has always been in my life. He is my best friend. He and I carry on conversations all day, every day.)

Hang in there, Walter. You can be a bit long winded, but you do have a regard for the truth, and you don't attempt to profess a belief in the Bible while denying it with your comments. For that you are to be commended.

JL, what does it mean to "profess a belief in the Bible"?

To believe the Bible to be God’s word.

To believe the Bible to be God’s word.
Which version?

Really an irrelevant point, but if makes you happy, the best answer would be the original autographs.

Really an irrelevant point, but if makes you happy, the best answer would be the original autographs.
That's only a very small part of the Bible. Which version is the most reliable?

But then, the most important verses are Matthew 22:36-40.

What is a small part?

What is a small part?
Small, i.e., non-existent part.

The original autographs refer to the original documents that contain the books of the Bible. When Paul, for instance, dictated the letter to the Romans to Tertius and handed it to Phoebe to carry it to Rome, the result was the autograph of the Romans Epistle. All such original writings have perished; nobody knows what has happened to them.

You said something was only a very small part of the Bible. What were you referring to?

You said something was only a very small part of the Bible. What were you referring to?
The autographs, which very probably no longer exist.

The autographs are a small part of the Bible?? What??

The autographs are a small part of the Bible?? What??
Okay, delete "a small part of". Feel better now?

I think you are confused.

I think you are confused.
Do you know the difference between autographs and original texts?

You clearly did not know what an autograph was.

You clearly did not know what an autograph was.
And it is....

The original manuscript penned by the author.

The original manuscript penned by the author.
Good googling.

Remember...I used the term in post 61 in a reply to your question. However, when you said the autographs were "a very small part" of the Bible, a comment which made no sense, then it seemed obvious you had no idea what they were. The autographs WERE the Bible at the time of their writing.

At any rate, there are a number of good translations available. No major doctrine of the Bible is dependent on a particular version for it's existence. I tell the guys at the rehab that a good, word for word translation is desirable for their primary study Bible. The paraphrases are nice as a sort of commentary. Once they complete three months, we give them a good study Bible. They get to choose the version. Top choices right now are the NKJV, CSB, and the NLT. Rather strangely, the NIV does not seem to appeal to them.

I do think your comment about Matthew 22 was a good one. If you combine that with John 14:15, we see that loving God with all our heart, mind, soul and strength leads us to obey His commands willingly.

Remember...I used the term in post 61 in a reply to your question. However, when you said the autographs were "a very small part" of the Bible, a comment which made no sense, then it seemed obvious you had no idea what they were. The autographs WERE the Bible at the time of their writing.
I was in the midst of messaging with a depressed cyberfriend and had only a small part of my brain on AMHD, was thinking of fragment, not autograph. Sorry.

Suggestion: Please keep your comments and answers shorter and on target. Watch your punctuation. You tend to ramble and be very wordy, meanwhile losing your frustrated reader who tries hard to pull out a message for himself. Short, meaty sentences can be very effective.Noted. Thanks for the advice.  I honestly try to keep it short, but there is just so much in this passage. I tend to get excited (believing I know something) and want to share.

I hope that I was doing okay with my first two posts (Watch your punctuation, my bad)? post 55 was a bit much and not really needed. But I was a bit perplexed and highly frustrated- WG's  Response; couldn't believe she was questioning something that "Jesus said" (Not John)?
'"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone but if it dies, it bears much fruit. John 12:24 (NASB).' Not me, not John...Jesus!!!

I write much too fast. Then I usually have to go over, and over and over, everything I've written, again, and then some more and an additional 76 times, editing punctuations. Entering this thread a bit late, having to catch up and read 1,2,3 pages before responding gets exhausting. I spent my time reading most of the posts, I put my time in, I should get at least equal time writing as I did reading.  lol ;-)

After reading the last two pages of this thread (no worries, this will be short), It looks as if everybody is still a bit miffed on why our Man Jesus didn't call in the greeks?

Jesus clearly had death on his mind; His death, the death of Jesus is necessary, but it is costly - verse 27; now is my soul troubled. I sometimes wonder whether we take it seriously enough, whether if we in practice, we default to thinking Jesus is God simpliciter, Jesus is God full stop! We don't take seriously- "and now is my soul is troubled." Now my whole inner being recoils in horror, now I'm thrown into strong turmoil, now I don't know what to feel or think, I'm profoundly agitated. Very striking this man who quietly turned old covenant water into New covenant wine in chapter 2. The Man who healed the dying boy with a word at a distance in chapter 4. The man, with a word, healed a man in the place of old covenant Life by the temples paralyzed for 38 years in chapter 5. The man who took five loaves and two little fish and fed a crowd of thousands in chapter 6, As the new Moses. The man who gave sight to a man born blind, a miracle that nobody did in the Old Testament, and the man who just a few weeks previously stood outside the tomb of a man dead long enough for his body to begin to decompose, and this man says "now is my soul troubled, now my soul is full of horror and revulsion and visceral terror. It's not a man who lacks courage for at least a year since John chapter 5 verse 18- they've been plotting to kill him and he's known that...public death threats from the most powerful men in the land- and this courageous man who continues public ministry in the face of these death threats, credible death threats- now his soul is troubled? What shall I say, he says father save me from that hour, everything in him cries for that. But for this purpose I've come to this hour- Father glorify your name. The death of the Lord Jesus is necessary it is costly.                      

"I've come to this hour"...this was the hour of his death- Sure, send in the Greeks- we'll hang for a bit...I'm good, after all, I'm God...I got this!

If I may...The seed thing; It doesn't matter how big your ministry gets- Lord Jesus implies of his own ministry is; so long as I walk around doing miracles and such that nobody's ever done before, as long as I teach such that no human being has ever taught before, no matter how wonderful my teaching no matter how astonishingly powerful my miracles (power pastor)...I will remain alone. It's not about being in the ministry," it's about your death for the ministry (the only way to produce fruit). it's so easy to get caught up "in" the ministry...nobody wants to continually focus on death (yet we're continually focused on the ministry)? I think Jesus was always thinking about his death. He was always mentioning "My hour has not yet come." Only when the Greeks showed up...then he knew his time was up.

ooop's, I did it again. And I'm not finished, I still have to edit/add...Doh!

I was in the midst of messaging with a depressed cyberfriend and had only a small part of my brain on AMHD, was thinking of fragment, not autograph. Sorry.It happens. No problem.

He was always mentioning "My hour has not yet come."As far as I have been able to find, He actually said it just once in John 2:4, and that was not speaking of His death but of the beginning of His time of ministry. Perhaps it was spoken in another place, but I haven't found it if so.

As far as I have been able to find, He actually said it just once in John 2:4, and that was not speaking of His death but of the beginning of His time of ministry. my earlier post
The sacrifice of the Lord Jesus, on which we focus first is necessary and costly, and fruitful. First, it is necessary- versus 24 to 26 verse 23: "Jesus answered them," and it's a strange answer; We want to see Jesus, and on the face of it the answer that Jesus gives is not an answer at all. It appears to be completely irrelevant to the question. "we want to see Jesus"- "And Jesus answered them;  the hour has come. The hour that had not yet come in chapter 4 of the wedding in Cana, my hour has not yet come. The hour that had not yet come in chapter 7, when they wanted to arrest him.  The hour that had not yet come in chapter 8, as he teaches in the Temple, and now the hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified to be lifted up like the suffering servant of the Lord.

I think what Jesus was trying to convey here; that it isn't so much about his (including our) ministry...It's about Sacrifice/Death. His death is always the underlining (ministry) story. Picture if you will; Pastor Rickshaw McGraw (Power preacher extraordinaire) has cancer, Unless he gets an operation he will die...how does death look back at him? Why is he going to (most assuredly) go for the Operation? If Jesus would have continued his ministry (at this point) there would have been a shift in his focus, and his death might have been prevented from happening in the manner (death by crucifixion) of the Cross itself. Focus on the Cross, not your ministry. Maybe, applicable to Disciples/Pastors only?

My objection was to your comment that He was "always mentioning, 'My hour has not yet come.' " Now you say the hour had not yet come at a variety of places, and I see your point and it's a good one. I'm simply pointing out that He said it but once, and it did not pertain to His suffering but to His ministry.


Focus on the Cross, not your ministry. I'm not sure what you mean by that.

I'm simply pointing out that He said it but once, and it did not pertain to His suffering but to His ministry.
That's just it- you hit the nail on the head. The point being; Jesus didn't come into this world just to pay lip service to the ministry. The answer that Jesus gives is just as perplexing as the one he gave in John 12:20

He said it but once (not true), and it pertains to his ministry"...Yes.  Jesus didn't come into this world just to pay lip service to the ministry. Christ not only proclaims but is the gospel. He is this because He is the manifestation of that which is the very soul of personality. The sacrifice of the Lord Jesus, on which we focus first is necessary. The Lord Jesus will only win the world if he first dies.

Mary, Mother of Jesus, was all about enjoying Jesus (God). The bracing teaching about sacrifice hadn't really been heard...how important it is to try and sound all the notes of scripture
. Focus on the Cross, not your ministry.
I'm not sure what you mean by that. Might be Jesus was talking to those who wish to become his disciple (Pastors)?

If I am a Preacher and need a heart transplant, do I go for it? I could easily say yes, do it for the ministry(especially if I have the biggest ministry the World has ever seen!) ...where would my head be? 

One more: If Paul remained alive, do you think people (entire cities) would have become believers of Paul? Followers of Paul, and his ministry?

@WG, What would be the best way to go about learning basic writing skills?

I see what you mean, I am all over the place.

He said it but once (not true)Where else?



If I am a Preacher and need a heart transplant, do I go for it? I could easily say yes, do it for the ministry...where would my head be? Huh?


One more: If Paul remained alive, do you think people (entire cities) would have become believers of Paul? Followers of Paul, and his ministry?No. The Gospel was never accepted by entire cities. It has always been a minority position.

Okay, let me put it to you this way; If Jesus continued with his ministry (excluding his death), could he have had the entire world believing in him and his ministry?

Look at it this way. How many followers did He have after three years? 120 in the upper room? So at 40 a year, how long would it have taken?

How many would you say, if he had 700 years? being born in the time of Methuselah? IF Jesus never died, what of his ministry then?
You're missing the point. His Ministry was never the issue...never the issue with him (if that helps?).

Okay, let me put it to you this way; If Jesus continued with his ministry (excluding his death), could he have had the entire world believing in him and his ministry?
It's two millennia later. The entire world isn't anywhere close to believing in Him.

It's two millennia later. The entire world isn't anywhere close to believing in Him.

Yah, and he died. How much less if he had never died?

Yah, and he died. How much less if he had never died?
And communication was very poor back then. I wonder how things would have worked out had He been born in, say, 1990.

I'm simply pointing out that He said it but once, and it did not pertain to His suffering but to His ministry. I get that. That's all fine and dandy. When I look into the matter of the wine, wedding, ministry thingy...I get a lot of this> For one thing, something must be lost in translation (Sound familiar?) when Jesus addresses his mother "Woman." And; For another, he says his "hour has not yet come", but he goes ahead and performs the miracle anyway. And: How much of this is because we (or at least I) don't understand the culture and how much of it is due to aspects of their relationship. And; Even though it was not the time to give them his blood, yet he gave them physical wine as a symbol of what he would later provide. One more; Just as this wine came from jars used in ceremonial washing, the blood of Jesus can truly cleanse people from all sin. This wine was so good that the headwaiter exclaimed his delight; the blood that Jesus provides truly satisfies the soul's thirst, and all who taste it will marvel at its quality. This wine helped give physical strength to those who drank it; Yet another; Jesus’ blood provides spiritual life to all who will accept it.  I agree, this is acceptable. But, thinking that this is the reason why Jesus was trying to draw attention to when he said, “My hour has not yet come"...To us maybe, but not to him. Tell me he didn't have death on his mind...“For This Cause Came I into the World”?


"We want to see Jesus"-you can't see Jesus...you'll have to go to the cross if you want to see Jesus

It is clear to me, that Jesus didn't want to draw attention to himself or his ministry (something to consider; those doing pastoral work?).  When the Feast of Tabernacles was approaching, Jesus’ brothers tried to encourage him to go to Judea and act publicly so he could show himself to the world, but Jesus said, “My time is not yet here.” He eventually did go to the feast in a not-so-public way, and while he taught in the temple, the leaders desired to seize him, but, “No man laid his hand on him, because his hour had not yet come.” (John 7:30) A few days later he was again teaching in the temple, and the crowd was enraged by his claims, yet still, “No one seized him, because his hour had not yet come.” (John 8:20) In all three cases, Jesus was trying to avoid bringing attention to himself.  Jesus didn't come to minister to us, he came to do God's will, per se.
Quick note: coincidently enough, you see the same confusion regarding John 12:20, as you do in John 2:1-11. Hmmm? 


How many followers did He have after three years? 120 in the upper room? So at 40 a year, how long would it have taken? If the ministry of the Lord Jesus had ended after the razing of Lazarus, his influence would have been superficial. His ministry would have been a failure, nobody would be changed, there would be no forgiveness of sins.

Keep on going, Walter. You're thinking things through.

I'm nearly done.


Jesus is essentially saying to Mary, “My hour to die is not yet come, so don’t pressure me to do something that might bring that about!”
Jesus’ vision never stalled-out on death

Now I'z Gots to wonder, was Jesus afeared of Death???

I don't think it's disrespectful to acknowledge that the Lord Jesus, as a human being who was tempted in all points of human vulnerability (Romans 8:3; Hebrews 4:15), should have entertained an occasional moment of anxiety?

1. Wasn't this Jesus' first miracle?
2. Was this the beginning of His ministry?
3. What was His ministry supposed to accomplish?

Wasn't this Jesus' first miracle? Possibly (but I doubt it). First, recorded Miracle?
Was this the beginning of His ministry?After his baptism? I haven't put much thought into it. Curious; something to do with his blood (the water into wine) at the wedding, with relation to the end of his ministry, raising of Lazarus (the Greeks, aka. the world, entering the picture...wanting to see)? I believe his life was the ministry.
What was His ministry supposed to accomplish? Fulfillment of the Law, Sacrifice?