My exegesis on the Gospel for the Second Sunday after Trinity, Year A, Matthew 9:35-10:23 continues.

Part 1 has the full reading and exposition for Matthew 9:35-9:38.

Today’s post focusses on Matthew 10:1-2:

10:1 Then Jesus summoned his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to cure every disease and every sickness.

10:2 These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon, also known as Peter, and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John;

In 2015, I wrote an exegesis based on Matthew Henry’s commentary for Matthew 10: parts 1 and 2, which may also be of interest.

Commentary comes from Matthew Henry and John MacArthur (as specified below).

Jesus was literally pained to know that God’s chosen people, the Jews, were without true shepherds. Without proper spiritual support, they would be condemned to eternal death.

Our Lord’s words at the end of Matthew 9 can be read in terms of a mission field or final judgement on their souls. There is scriptural reasoning for both perspectives:

9:37 Then he said to his disciples, “The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few;

9:38 therefore ask the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest.”

In Matthew 10, the ex-tax collector evangelist tells us that Jesus summoned the Twelve and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to cure every disease and sickness (verse 1).

Matthew Henry’s commentary reminds us of how Jesus worked with these men in stages (emphases mine):

He had called them some time before to be disciples, his immediate followers and constant attendants, and he then told them that they should be made fishers of men, which promise he now performed. Note, Christ commonly confers honours and graces by degrees; the light of both, like that of the morning, shines more and more. All this while Christ had kept these twelve,

1. In a state of probation. Though he knows what is in man, though he knew from the first what was in them (John 6 70), yet he took this method to give an example to his church. Note, The ministry being a great trust, it is fit that men should be tried for a time, before they are entrusted with it. Let them first be proved, 1 Tim 3 10. Therefore, hands must not be laid suddenly on any man, but let him first be observed as a candidate and probationer, a proposant (that is the term the French churches use), because some men’s sins go before, others follow, 1 Tim 5 22.

You can find more on 1 Timothy 5:17-25 here. Paul tells Timothy not to be too eager to ordain church leaders; they must prove themselves first.

Returning to Henry’s commentary, Jesus put the Apostles:

2. In a state of preparation. All this while he had been fitting them for this great work. Note, Those whom Christ intends for, and calls to, any work, he first prepares and qualifies, in some measure, for it. He prepared them, (1.) By taking them to be with him. Note, The best preparative for the work of the ministry, is an acquaintance and communion with Jesus Christ. They that would serve Christ, must first be with him (John 12 26). Paul had Christ revealed, not only to him, but in him, before he went to preach him among the Gentiles, Gal 1 16. By the lively acts of faith, and the frequent exercise of prayer and meditation, that fellowship with Christ must be maintained and kept up, which is a requisite qualification for the work of the ministry. (2.) By teaching them; they were with him as scholars or pupils, and he taught them privately, besides the benefit they derived from his public preaching; he opened the scriptures to them, and opened their understandings to understand the scriptures: to them it was given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, and to them they were made plain. Note, They that design to be teachers must first be learners; they must receive, that they may give; they must be able to teach others, 2 Tim 2 2 …

Henry describes the full import of this calling:

II. What the commission was that he gave them.

1. He called them to him, v. 1. He had called them to come after him before; now he calls them to come to him, admits them to a greater familiarity, and will not have them to keep at such a distance as they had hitherto observed … It is observable, that when the disciples were to be instructed, they came unto him of their own accord, ch. 5 1. But now they were to be ordained, he called them …

2. He gave them power, exousian, authority in his name, to command men to obedience, and for the confirmation of that authority, to command devils too into a subjection. Note, All rightful authority is derived from Jesus Christ. All power is given to him without limitation, and the subordinate powers that be are ordained of him …

(1.) He gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out. Note, The power that is committed to the ministers of Christ, is directly levelled against the devil and his kingdom. The devil, as an unclean spirit, is working both in doctrinal errors (Rev 16 13), and in practical debauchery (2 Pet 2 10); and in both these, ministers have a charge against him. Christ gave them power to cast him out of the bodies of people; but that was to signify the destruction of his spiritual kingdom, and all the works of the devil; for which purpose the Son of God was manifested.

(2.) He gave them power to heal all manner of sickness. He authorized them to work miracles for the confirmation of their doctrine, to prove that it was of God; and they were to work useful miracles for the illustration of it, to prove that it is not only faithful, but well worthy of all acceptation; that the design of the gospel is to heal and save … Observe what an emphasis is laid upon the extent of their power to all manner of sickness, and all manner of disease, without the exception even of those that are reckoned incurable, and the reproach of physicians. Note, In the grace of the gospel there is a salve for every sore, a remedy for every malady. There is no spiritual disease so malignant, so inveterate, but there is a sufficiency of power in Christ, for the cure of it. Let none therefore say there is no hope, or that the breach is wide as the sea, that cannot be healed.

III. The number and names of those that were commissioned; they are made apostles, that is, messengers. An angel, and an apostle, both signify the same thing—one sent on an errand, an ambassador. All faithful ministers are sent of Christ, but they that were first, and immediately, sent by him, are eminently called apostles, the prime ministers of state in his kingdom. Yet this was but the infancy of their office; it was when Christ ascended on high that he gave some apostles, Eph 4 11. Christ himself is called an apostle (Heb 3 1), for he was sent by the Father, and so sent them, John 20 21. The prophets were called God’s messengers.

1. Their number was twelve, referring to the number of the tribes of Israel, and the sons of Jacob that were the patriarchs of those tribes. The gospel church must be the Israel of God; the Jews must be first invited into it; the apostles must be spiritual fathers, to beget a seed to Christ. Israel after the flesh is to be rejected for their infidelity; these twelve, therefore, are appointed to be the fathers of another Israel. These twelve, by their doctrine, were to judge the twelve tribes of Israel, Luke 22 30. These were the twelve stars that made up the church’s crown (Rev 12 1): the twelve foundations of the new Jerusalem (Rev 21 12, 14), typified by the twelve precious stones in Aaron’s breast-plate, the twelve loaves on the table of show-bread, the twelve wells of water at Elim. This was that famous jury (and to make it a grand jury, Paul was added to it) that was impanelled to enquire between the King of kings, and the body of mankind; and, in this chapter, they have their charge given them, by him to whom all judgment was committed.

2. Their names are here left upon record, and it is their honour; yet in this they had more reason to rejoice, that their names were written in heaven (Luke 10 20), while the high and mighty names of the great ones of the earth are buried in the dust.

Matthew gives us a list of the Twelve, first, Simon, also known as Peter, and his brother Andrew, along with James son of Zebedee, and his brother John (verse 2).

If we go back to John 1, much of the second half featuring as the Gospel for the Second Sunday after Epiphany (Year A), we find that John and Andrew, Peter’s brother, were the first of our Lord’s disciples, having been exhorted by John the Baptist to follow Him.

However, as Simon Peter was the bold spokesman for the Twelve, Matthew put him first in this list.

John MacArthur says:

Peter was the leader. He was the out front, up front man … the Lord refined and developed Peter into a leader that was useful …

God uses people like Simon: impulsive, dynamic, impetuous, strong, initiators, bold, who very often talk a better game than they play, the dynamic kind.

MacArthur explains why the Gospel writers break the Apostles up into three groups of four:

… there are always three groups in every list of the apostles. There are four lists, Matthew, Mark, Luke and Acts, and always in all four lists, they’re the same three groups with the same four names in each group. And so, we’re looking at group one. And it is the most intimate group, group two is the next most intimate, and group three is the least intimate of the 12 … And so, we’re looking at this most intimate group, all came from the same town, all have the same profession, and all were in the first group called to Christ.

MacArthur tells us more about Peter’s brother Andrew, referring to the aforementioned passage in John 1:

By the way, his name means manly. He too was a native of Bethsaida, that little village in Galilee. And he like his brother was a fisherman. In fact, in Matthew 4 he was down at the sea when Jesus came along, he had already met Jesus, he had already believed in Jesus, he had already affirmed Him as the Messiah, but after going back to his fishing, now the Lord appears again to him at the shore, and calls him permanently to follow and He will make him a fisher of men.

Prior to coming to follow Jesus Christ he had been a pious Jew, he had been a godly Jew, he had been a God-fearing Jew. He had also been a disciple of John the Baptist. In fact, it was one day at the message of John the Baptist that his life was changed. For John the Baptist saw Jesus in John 1 and said: “Behold, the Lamb of God.” And Andrew was there that day, along with John who was also a fisherman, and surely an acquaintance as well as was James. And he and John heard John the Baptist say that, and they followed after Jesus immediately. And Jesus turned and said to them, “What seek ye?” And they replied, “Where do You dwell?” And they went where Jesus dwelt, and they spent the entire day with Him, and those hours were the crisis in their spiritual history. And when they came out of that day spent with the Lamb of God, immediately it says that Andrew opened his mouth and said these first words, “We have found the Messiah.” No sooner did Andrew discover the reality of Jesus Christ for himself, than that he announced to his brother Peter that very phrase, “We have found the Messiah.”

Peter and Andrew lived together, it says in Mark 1:29, and no doubt they shared everything. And especially did Andrew want to share with him the Messiah. And so, from this very beginning he becomes a part of that intimate four.

MacArthur points out that Peter, Andrew and the Boanerges (‘thunder brothers’), James and John, sons of Zebedee, are almost always mentioned together in Gospel accounts:

In fact, if you study through the New Testament, it’s James, and Peter, and John; and Peter, James, and John; and John, and Peter, and James. They’re always the inner circle and nobody is ever let into that inner circle except when Andrew gets in and it’s Peter, James, John and Andrew. He was in the most intimate four but he never quite cracked that inside three. But he was greatly respected. In fact, Philip, who was in group two, a little less intimate with the Lord, one time had some Greeks come to him and say, “We want to see Jesus.” And you know where Philip took them? He took them to Andrew. Why? Because I guess Philip thought that if you want to get to Jesus, all you’ve got to do is get to Andrew. Andrew was intimate with Jesus. And Andrew was respected.

Andrew features most prominently in John’s Gospel. One wonders if that is because both had been close disciples of John the Baptist and knew each other. In any event, Andrew is always bringing people to Christ:

… all of a sudden in the fourth gospel, the gospel of John, Andrew begins to emerge from the background. And we see Andrew three times in the gospel of John, and all three times Andrew is doing the same thing. It’s easy to characterize him. The first time is in John chapter 1 verse 40, which I just reported to you. It says in John 1:40, “One of the two who heard John the Baptist speak,” and that would be John and Andrew, “followed Him and he was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother.” And by the way, Andrew is always called Simon Peter’s brother with, I think, one or two exceptions, maybe just one. That’s always how he’s identified. “And he first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, ‘We have found the Messiah,’“ which is being interpreted the Christ, the anointed one, “and he brought him to Jesus.” Now, if you want to know how to characterize the life of Andrew, it’s very simple: he is the one who was always bringing people to Jesus.

The second time we see him is in the sixth chapter of John and the eighth and ninth verse. A vast multitude of people are gathered, Jesus is teaching, it’s late in the day, the crowd is hungry. There’s not enough food, and Andrew brings to Jesus this time a little boy. And the little boy has five loaves and two fish. It doesn’t mean five big loaves of bread; it means five little flat barley crackers and two fish. And they would take those fish and they would pickle them and then they would eat them with the crackers. So, he brought a little fellow with five barley crackers and two pickled fish. He brought him to Jesus. I guess Andrew must have thought the Lord could make a whole lot out of a very little.

The third time we meet him is in John 12. And I’ve already alluded to that incident. And in John chapter 12 and verse 20, Philip is approached by the Greeks, or the Gentiles, and they want to see Jesus. And Philip tells Andrew, and together they went to Jesus. The assumption being that they took the folks there too.

And so, whenever you see Andrew he is involved in finding Jesus so that Jesus can meet someone, bringing people to Jesus. I guess maybe he didn’t think there was anybody that Jesus didn’t want to see, or there was anything Jesus couldn’t respond to, or there was any problem Jesus couldn’t solve. Because he’s characterized as the one who brought men to Christ.

Recall that Andrew and John were disciples before Matthew and some of the other Apostles were, which is why we have episodes in John’s Gospel that we do not have in the Synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke:

… in these three incidents several things become clear. First of all, we see Andrew’s openness. He knew that they were to go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. He knew that primarily it was the Jew first and then to the Gentile. And yet he also got the Spirit of our Lord, because the Lord originally had revealed His messiahship to a half-breed Samaritan woman, so Andrew was never choked by a hyper-Judaism. I mean, he didn’t have any problem at all with bringing some Gentiles to Jesus. So, we sense a little bit of the openness of his heart. There just wasn’t anybody outside; there wasn’t anybody that he didn’t think Jesus would not want to see.

We also see his faith. He had a simple faith. I don’t know what he was thinking when he brought those five crackers and two fish with such a huge crowd. I don’t know what he was trying to do, running around looking for whoever had a lunch. But he must have had some kind of faith to believe that the Lord could do something with that. After all, he had seen Jesus make wine. Why couldn’t He make food?

A third thing we see is not only his openness and his faith, but we see his humility. I mean, he spent his whole life being known as Simon Peter’s brother. You can believe it. And now, when he had found the Messiah, there might have been a temptation to say, “Boy, now I’m not telling Peter. This is my chance to be somebody.” But no. No, he runs to get Peter, knowing full well that as soon as Peter enters the group he will run the group, because that’s Peter. And Andrew will be right back where he’s always been as Simon Peter’s brother. But he thought more of the work to be done then who was in charge. He thought more of the cause of the eternal virtue of the Kingdom then he did of his personal and petty problems. Sad to say, but there are some people who won’t play in the band unless they can beat the big drum. James and John had that problem, didn’t they? But not Andrew. I don’t find Andrew fighting about whose going to get the glory in the Kingdom.

You see, Andrew is the picture of all those who labor quietly in humble places. Not with eye service as men pleasers but as servants of Christ doing the will of God from the heart. Andrew is not the pillar like Peter, James and John, he is a humbler stone.

Aye, but he is the patron saint of Scotland.

MacArthur shares a quote from a Scot, Daniel McLean, excerpted below:

A man of very moderate endowment, who scarcely redeemed his early promise, simple minded and sympathetic without either dramatic power or heroic spirit. Yet he had that clinging confidence in Christ that brought him into that inner circle of the 12. A man with deep religious feeling with little power of expression. He was more magnetic than he was electric. Better suited for the quiet walks of life than the stirring thoroughfares. Yes, Andrew is the apostle of the private life.

Then we come to Zebedee’s sons James and John.

MacArthur explains why James is always mentioned before John, yet we know much more about John than him:

In two lists, out of the four lists of the 12, he is next to Peter. Yet, we know very little about him. In fact, note this: he never appears alive in the gospels apart from John his brother in any incident. They’re inseparable in the gospels. Now, I believe it’s important to note that he’s always mentioned before John. And it probably not only indicates that he was older, but that he was the leader of this rather dynamic duo. He is the strength. He is the zeal. He is the passion. Now, these brothers, James and John, were also fishermen, and their father was Zebedee, and Zebedee was a fairly well-to-do man because he employed hired servants in his business. So, they had a pretty good fishing business going up there on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee. And James fits into this first group because he was in the early calling. John and Andrew were the first two, and certainly James would be so close to John that he worked his way into that intimacy.

Now, as you look at the Bible in terms of incidents, James appears more as a silhouette than a photograph, and so you have to kind of get an imagery just without all of the fullness of what might have happened.

MacArthur tells us how Jesus came to call the two Boanerges:

… I think the best way to look at James is to consider what the Lord named him and his brother John. In Mark 3:17 Jesus gave them a name, He called them Boanerges, which means sons of thunder, sons of thunder. If James is the leader, and that is indicated by the fact that he appears first, then he was a son of thunder. Now, he must have been a passionate, zealous, fervent, wild-eyed, ambitious, aggressive guy. To give you a classic reason why, in Acts [12], Herod decided to vex the church, and the first guy he went after was James, and he chopped off his head, and they took Peter and put him in jail. Which indicates that Peter was not as big a problem as James. I mean, when you capture James and Peter, and kill James, and let Peter live, that says something about the kind of man James must have been. Strong man, zealous man; he was perhaps the New Testament counterpart of Jehu, who said come see my zeal for the Lord, and then uprooted the house of Ahab and swept all the Baal worshippers out of the land. This guy made enemies fast. 14 years, he was dead. I mean, he was the first disciple to be martyred. They got rid of him quick. He was a real problem, thunderous individual. And he must have had his zeal fed daily by the one who said the zeal of thine house has eaten me up.

Jesus had to calm down the Boanerges, James in particular:

Several incidents stand out and I’ll show you where James is mentioned and the way he acts. Luke 9, Luke 9 verse 51: “It came to pass when the time was come that Jesus should be received up,” it’s time to move toward the Passion Week, “he set his face to go to Jerusalem. And sent messengers before his face.” The messengers are going now into Samaria to prepare the way, “And they entered into a village of Samaria to make ready for him.” They wanted the Samaritans to hear the message, Christ was coming; the Messiah was coming. “And they didn’t receive him because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem.” Listen, Samaritans just hated the Jews and Jerusalem. They had their own place of worship, Mount Gerizim. They probably chased these messengers out with curses and stones. They probably threw stones at them. And so, the messengers come back and say they’re not going to receive You in such and such a village. And then, verse 54 we meet the sons of thunder: “And when His disciples James and John saw that, they said, Lord, wilt Thou that we command fire to come down from heaven and consume them, even as Elijah did.” Lord, let’s just burn them up, burn them up. Great missionary heart. Just get all the unsaved and consume them Lord, just like Elijah did.

You see, you can identify with who James’ heroes were. “And so, Jesus turned and rebuked them and said, You don’t know what manner of spirit you have.” This is not the spirit for now. Elijah’s spirit does not apply now. This is not a time for judgment on an ungodly heretical nation. This is time for the proclamation of a new covenant. You’re out of sync, guys. I mean, your basic character is leaking through, burn them up, that isn’t the idea. “For the Son of Man isn’t come to destroy men’s lives but to save them. So, they just went to another village.” Jesus rebuked them strongly. They were hateful. They were intolerant. James had so much zeal and so little sensitivity. I mean, what kind of an evangelist would he make? And yet, I have to admit there’s a touch of nobility in it. I’m glad that he got mad when the Lord was dishonored. I would hate to have seen him pass without a reaction at all. He was zealous. He was explosive. He was fervent. He was passionate. I mean, he didn’t just sit and watch it happen.

Look at another incident in Matthew 20. Very often, zealous people are also ambitious people. They’re very goal oriented, very task oriented. And so, this is the incident that we looked at in reference to the disciples in general a couple of weeks ago, but just a reminder. “Then, came to Him the mother of Zebedee’s children with her sons,” and they’re dragging along on her skirt tails, and they wanted some, they and, “And so she says to the Lord, ‘Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on the right hand the other on the left, in Thy Kingdom.’“ Would You put my boys on the two thrones next to You? I mean, the implication is: it’s obvious to You that they’re the cream of the crop, isn’t it? A mother, right? My children are gifted. Isn’t it apparent? I mean, we can see it, Zebedee and I. I mean, and they’re the ones that have the zeal. You say, What about Peter? Listen, Peter had a lot of zeal but he also had some problems. I mean, he would deny and bail out. James didn’t seem to have that same problem. Peter faltered here and there, but it seems as though James was just resolute, he just, I mean, he was dead in 14 years. I mean, they got rid of him fast. He didn’t knuckle under at all. He didn’t equivocate. He didn’t compromise. And, boy, he could see his ambition. I’m going all the way for the Kingdom, man, and not only to the Kingdom, but right to the right hand.

And Jesus said, “You don’t even know what you’re asking. Can you drink the cup that I’m going to drink?” Oh, sure we can. All right, you will. And verse 24, the fever pitch was reached and the argument over who was going to get what in the Kingdom. They all started arguing. And Jesus went into a little lecture on what real leadership is.

But they were ambitious. James was ambitious. This is a terrible thing for them to do, to arouse the spirit of rivalry, to clamor for honor from the Lord. These who were the persecutors of the Samaritans are now ambitious, self-seeking, place-hunters, stalking the favor of the Lord as if He were some despotic ruler who could dispense his patronage on some kind of principle of favoritism. They were demeaning Christ and His Kingdom. Well, James had zeal, he had great fervor and he knew the Lord’s special interest in him, he was in the inside group. He felt he ought to have an equal reward for all of his capability. And the Lord reminded him, you’ll get a reward, James, but it won’t be what you think. Before you get your throne, you’re going to get a cup and, you’re going to drink it all the way. And the cup is suffering, because the way to the throne is always the way of the cross. And James, as I said, 14 years later got his request. He wanted a crown; Jesus gave him a cup. He wanted power; Jesus gave him servanthood. He wanted to rule; Jesus gave him a martyr’s grave …

MacArthur sums up this story of differing personalities thus far:

… What kind of people does God use? Well, He uses the great leaders like Peter. He uses the quiet, behind-the-scenes, obscure, faithful people like Andrew. And He also can use the brash, courageous, ambitious, zealous, sometimes loveless, insensitive, selfish people like James. ‘Cause Christ brought his temper under control. He bridled his tongue. He directed his zeal. And He taught him to seek no revenge, and to desire no honor for himself. And it finally came to the place where James was willing to die for Jesus. So, both the brothers drank the cup. For John, the cup was a long life of rejection and a death in exile [on Patmos]. For James, it was a short flame and martyrdom.

Interestingly, MacArthur says there was a Roman coin with an ox that unintentionally illustrated James and John’s respective lives:

The Romans had a coin years ago, and on the coin was an ox. And the ox was facing an altar and a plow. And under the ox, it said, “Ready for either.” And that’s how it is in service for Christ, and that’s how it was for the sons of thunder. There is the moment dramatic sacrifice on the altar; that was James. And there is the long furrow of the plow; that was John. But both of them drank the cup. James had to learn sensitivity. He had to learn to quiet his ambition, but he did, and God used him.

John also had his fiery moments, although not as many as his brother did.

MacArthur says that it would be incorrect for us to think of John as a delicate flower, as he is so often portrayed in religious art:

Now, may I hasten to add, we think about John, we think about some meek, mild, pale-skinned, effeminate guy lying around with his head on Jesus’ shoulder, sort of looking up with a dove-eyed stare, with little skinny arms, you know. And you’ve missed it, folks, if that’s what you think. He was in all those incidents about James that I just read you. And he was one of the sons of thunder. He was intolerant, burn them up, Lord, he was ambitious. I want the seat on your right and left. He was zealous, he was explosive, but I think not quite as much as James. James seems to be the prominent one, and John does seem to have a side to him. I mean, at least John lasted. He lived to, till nearly the year 100. He outlived everybody. He was explosive too.

Now, it’s interesting to note that the only time he appears alone by name, you know what he’s doing? He’s mad at somebody. That’s right, John. Who’s he mad at? Some guy who was casting out demons in Mark 9. Why was he mad? He said to Jesus, he said: “There is a man casting out demons and he’s not in our group.” He’s not in our group. “I forbade him to do that.” I told him, Listen, fellow, cool it. You’re not in our group. He was sectarian. I mean, he was narrow-minded.

During his time spent with Jesus, John changed and became associated with love, but a love associated with eternal truth:

… he also had a tremendous capacity for love. And you show me a man who has a great capacity for love, and no sense of the truth and no limits, and no guidelines, and no strong convictions, and I’ll show you a disaster of tolerance and sentimentality. So, God knew that the greatest source of truth in the New Testament, as far as a human author is concerned, about love would have to be a man who was also strong and uncompromising, or his love would take him down the road of sentimentalism. And if he was to speak the truth in love, he had to be as much committed to the truth as he was to love. And so, you find two things that stand out in John’s life: the word love, and the word witness. 80 times he uses the word love. 70-some times the word witness in one form or another. He was always the witness to the truth and always the teacher of love. And so, he is the personification of speaking the truth in love. It’s so good that his love was controlled by his witness, by his truth. He was a truth seeker. He wanted to know the truth. He was a discoverer. He was a visionary. He it was, who first recognized the Lord at the lakeside of Galilee. He it was to whom God revealed the future in the apocalypse. He was the seer, the visionary, the truth seeker. The reason he was hanging around Christ’s breast was not some kind of sloppy, sickening sentimentalism, what it was, was his heart literally hungered for the truth, as well as the deep affection for Christ. He wanted to gather every word that came out of his Lord’s lips as well as bask in the light of His love.

So, he became a lover, but a lover whose love was controlled by the truth. And that control was born out of that tremendous zeal he had in his personality, that passion, that strength, that fiery character. And in case you don’t think he is, you try reading 1, 2, and 3 John and see how he denounces those who are antichrist, and those who will stand up in church to twist and pervert. He’s firm, he’s strong. You read the gospel of John and see how he sets the people of God against the people of Satan, the redeemed against the lost. How he talks about the judgment of the righteous and the unrighteous. The man knew where the lines were drawn and his love is never sentimentalism.

… where he emerges is in his own gospel, and he appears in his own gospel several times, always the same way. How? Listen, John 13:23: “Now, there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved.” Whom Jesus loved, the disciple that Jesus loved, that’s John. He never uses His name. He calls himself the disciple whom Jesus loved. Now, listen, the man had a heart of love, and a man who has a heart of love understands love and has a great capacity to give and receive love. People who can love greatly can be loved greatly because they understand. And John literally took in the love of Christ and gave out the love of Christ, so he called himself the disciple whom Jesus loved. That’s the only thing he ever called him.

In the 19th chapter and the 26th verse, he appears again. “Jesus saw His mother and the disciple standing by, whom He loved.” Same disciple whom Jesus loved. Chapter 20 verse 2: “Then runs and comes to Simon Peter,” Mary Magdalene does, “and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved.” Chapter 21 verse 7, same thing: “Therefore the disciple, whom Jesus loved, said to Peter.” Verse 20: “Peter turning about sees the disciple, whom Jesus loved.” Verse 24: “This is the disciple who testifies these things.” It is the disciple, whom Jesus loved, that wrote the gospel of John, that’s what he says. He literally was in awe that Jesus loved him. And it wasn’t a sickly sentimentalism, it wasn’t that he said, “Oh, I’m so wonderful, the Lord loves me so much, I just want you to know I’m the disciple He loved.” No, no, no.