Tuesday, April 22nd, 2014
8am
“But when Jesus heard it he said, “This illness does not lead to death. It is for the glory of God, so that the Son of God may be glorified through it.” 11.4
My immediate conclusion from hearing this would have been, “oh great, Lazarus isn’t going to die” and it reminds me of chapter 9 of John.
“As he passed by, he saw a man blind from birth. And his disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus answered, “It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him. We must work the works of him who sent me while it is day; night is coming, when no one can work.” 9.1-4
So Jesus is saying that Lazarus will not die from his illness, and like the blind man in chapter 9, the purpose of the illness is to glorify God.
Jesus knows the events that are going to happen and he knows that Lazarus is going to die. But he says that this illness is, “not to death”, which can only be taken to mean that it will not ultimately end in death. Nonetheless, this must have been particularly confusing to his disciples when Jesus tells them Lazarus is dead (v14). Huh? But didn’t you say Lazarus’ illness does not lead to death? It would have all been very confusing had I been in that audience. Was Jesus mistaken? What is he going to do? How do I reconcile those two statements:
1. Lazarus’ illness does not lead to death
2. Lazarus has died
I’d like to think that after having witnessed 6 prior miracles (water into wine, healing a royal official’s son, healing a paralytic, feeding 5000 people, walking on water, and healing a man that was born blind) I would have thought, “well, this is going to be another miraculous event!” But I doubt that would have been my reaction then any more than it would be today. My immediate impulse would probably tend toward disappointment.
9am