← Back to sermon library

Well, our focus tonight primarily 
will be verse 29, the work of the Redeemer on behalf of His 
people. Behold, the Lamb of God who takes 
away the sin of the world. But we'll notice that verse 29 
does not stand alone. There's a lot that precedes concerning 
the Lord Jesus Christ. There's a lot preceding concerning 
the Lord's relationship to the Father. And sort of as an outflow 
from this morning's sermon on the doctrine of the Trinity, 
I thought we would investigate a little bit further, verses 
1 to 18, before we get to verse 29. So I want to look first of 
all at the identification of the Word in verses 1 to 18, and 
then secondly, the description of the work of the Savior in 
verse 29. Now, we're not going to go through 
every jot and tittle there in verses 1 to 18, but just a couple 
of the key points. Again, keeping in mind what we 
saw this morning in terms of the one God, the divine, infinite 
being, and there are three subsistences or persons, the Father, the Son, 
and the Holy Spirit. They all have in common the divine 
essence, but they are personal subsistences, and they are one 
God everlasting, existing as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. 
So let's look at the identification of the word, verses 1 to 18. 
In the first place, notice that the word is God. First of all, 
we ought to identify who this Word is. If we had never read 
John's Gospel, if we had never heard sort of theological language, 
if we didn't know the identity of the Word was Jesus Christ, 
there is sufficient information in here to tell us this. Notice 
it's the Word that became flesh. So the self, same Word of verse 
1. is the word of verse 14, the 
word became flesh and dwelt among us. So the incarnate Son is the 
word, the Lord, the second person rather, of the Trinity. And in 
the first place, we see that the word was with God. Verse 
1-1, It says in verse 1a, in the beginning was the Word, and 
the Word was with God. That shows that distinction between 
the Father and the Son. It shows that modalism, as I 
mentioned earlier, is incorrect. It is simply false that God was 
the Father, became the Son, and is now the Holy Spirit, that 
He simply represents Himself in various modes of being. No, 
we see distinction among the persons of the Trinity. Specifically 
here, the first and the second person, where we read, the Word 
was with God. God here specifically is the 
Father. So the Word, identified as Jesus 
later, is the second person of the Trinity, and He is with God. There is distinction between 
these persons, and this demolishes the notion of modalism or Sabellianism. The fact that the Word is with 
God indicates that the Word Himself is eternal. In other words, the 
word being with God indicates that the word is eternal, like 
God the Father. Calvin says, with reference to 
the language of in the beginning, he says, he does not ascribe 
to the word a beginning of time, but says that he was from the 
beginning and thus rises beyond all ages. So it highlights, actually, 
the eternality of the Word or the Second Person of the Trinity. So we see here His relationship 
to the Father. He is always with Him, from everlasting 
to everlasting, Father and Son and the Spirit. But we're focusing 
on the Father and the Son tonight. are always with one another. John Gill says this phrase denotes 
the existence of the Word with the Father, His relation and 
nearness to Him, His equality with Him, and particularly the 
distinction of His person from Him as well as His eternal being 
with Him. For He was always with Him and 
is and ever will be. So it's most important that we 
maintain the fact that there are these three persons. There 
are these three subsistences. There is distinction. They are 
distinguished by their relative properties and their personal 
relations, and we need to maintain that. But notice what John goes 
on to say, in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with 
God, and the Word was God. Again, here it's highlighting 
the fact that the three persons have the essence. They have deity. They are altogether God. Not three making up the one God, 
but the one God existing eternally in three persons. The Word who 
was with the Father, distinguished from the Father, is nevertheless 
God. The Word and the Father have 
the whole divine essence, but they are distinguished by these 
properties. And we'll see at least one of 
those properties when we follow up with the fact that He's eternally 
begotten of the Father. Again, Turretin says, when the 
Son is said to be one with the Father and yet to be a distinct 
person from Him, there is no contradiction. Again, I'm probably 
pushing my luck with another doctrinal sermon. We had some 
of this this morning and probably stretched some of your minds 
a little bit when you heard words like subsistence and, you know, 
the various things that I mentioned this morning. But we're going 
to just follow up on that because, again, it's most important. We 
need to understand what's in view here. We have the word with 
God, distinctiveness, distinction between the first and second 
persons of the Trinity, but we have identification. The Lord 
Jesus Christ, the second person of the Trinity, is God. They 
all three have the essence. They all three have this deity. It is in common, but there is 
distinction among the persons. Again, Turretin. When the son 
is said to be one God with the father and yet to be distinct 
person from him, there is no contradiction. Although he has 
the same essence, according to which he is said to be one with 
the father, yet he has not the same mode of subsisting. Our 
Confession says they are distinguished by several peculiar relative 
properties and personal relations. The father is unbegotten. The 
son is begotten. The spirit proceeds from the 
father and the son. The father has paternity. The 
son has affiliation. The spirit proceeds from father 
and son, or spiration. Those are the things that distinguish 
the persons of the Godhead. Yet again, they have in common 
the divine essence. The three persons are distinguished 
by these peculiar relative properties. They share or they have the whole 
divine essence, yet not three essences, one essence, three 
persons. That's how there is not a contradiction. Now, notice in terms of the Word, 
one of the things that distinguishes Him from the Father is what we 
call eternal generation. Notice in verse 14, the Word 
became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, 
the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace 
and truth. You've all heard that language, 
only begotten of the Father. We see it again in verse 18, 
no one has seen God at any time, the only begotten Son who is 
in the bosom of the Father. he has declared him." Now, it's 
translated here as only begotten in the New King James and in 
the King James as well. Your Bible version may have the 
only son or the one and only son. This translates a Greek 
word that's monogamous. Now, some have picked on the 
Greek-speaking fathers because they use the translation, only 
begotten. The word primarily does mean 
unique and only son or the one and only son. That is an accurate 
translation to be sure. But the fathers or some theologians 
have used this and referred to it as only begotten. That's caused 
some in our day to say that the Greek-speaking fathers didn't 
know how to translate a word that they knew that was in their 
language. No, they understood that the 
rest of the Bible taught eternal generation of the Son. They didn't 
simply go to these only begotten texts in John's Gospel and Epistle, 
but they saw a theology of eternal generation, and they certainly 
used that language, only begotten, with reference to these Johannine 
texts. One man, John Gill, says, I cannot 
see any reason to object to the use of the phrase eternal generation 
as applied to the Sonship of Christ, since one divine person 
is said to beget. Psalm 2. Today I have begotten 
you, and therefore must be a father. And another divine person is 
said to be begotten, John 1, 14 and 18, and elsewhere, and 
therefore must be a son. And if a begotten son, as he 
is often said to be, then he must be a son by generation. Again, this is a doctrine that 
you need to be aware of is being pushed away from sort of the 
theological interpretation of the Bible. This idea of the only 
begotten of the Father, it's something that was very common, 
it was something that is very traditional, it is very classical, 
and it is very well established biblically, but today some suggest 
that we ought not to use it. But the primary emphasis in that 
doctrine of eternal generation is to show the distinction between 
the Father and the Son. It speaks to those relative properties, 
those personal relations. It shows us how there is distinction 
between the first and the second and the third person of the Trinity 
when we consider this whole idea of eternally begotten. Giles says, with reference to 
the fathers and their use of this language, he says, it is 
simply to make the point that in profoundly theological context, 
the word monogamous may imply that what is unique about the 
son is his preexistence as God, yet other than God the father, 
something explained in terms of his eternal begetting or generation. In other words, this language 
is absolutely crucial if we want to maintain the reality that 
there is one God in substance or essence in three persons, 
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The language that is used here 
is to explain or to demonstrate or to display the relationships 
between the persons of the Godhead as God in Himself. And this is 
what the history of the church has done, and this is something 
that we need to continue to do as well. Consider the fact that 
the identification of father implies son. The idea of son 
implies generation. Now, it's not a generation in 
time. That's why we call it eternal 
generation. And Gregory of Nazianzen explains. He says, the begetting of God 
must be honored by silence. Lord, we know that it happens. The father eternally begets the 
son. But how? That's not something 
we can penetrate into. Remember this morning I made 
the distinction between creator and creature? There are certain 
things as creature we're just not going to get. We know that 
it's true, the Father eternally begot the Son, the Son is eternally 
begotten of the Father, but how do we efficiently or sufficiently 
explain that Gregory says, the begetting of God must be honored 
by silence. It is a great thing for you to 
learn that He was begotten. But the manner of His generation, 
we will not admit that even angels can conceive, much less you. Shall I tell you how it was? 
It was in a manner known to the Father who begat and to the Son 
who was begotten. Anything more than this is hidden 
by a cloud and escapes your dim sight. I think that's the best 
way to address this whole issue. Well, I don't understand. How 
did that happen? Well, He's God. The relationships 
between the persons of the Trinity, the Father is unbegotten, the 
Son is begotten, and the Spirit proceeds from the Father and 
the Son. That explains the distinction 
among the persons. It explains the difference in 
terms of the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Father, 
the Spirit is not the Father or the Son. But in terms of how 
this took place, Gregory's counsel is most wise. We cannot peer 
into this, go back into eternity past, and somehow discover for 
ourselves the particular ins and outs of the eternal generation 
of the Son. That it's true, the Bible sets 
forth. That it must be believed, we 
need to embrace. And that it distinguishes for 
us Father, Son, and Spirit is something that is most useful 
in arguing against these false conceptions of the Trinity, or 
this denial of the Trinity, or this arrogant assertion of modalism. Brethren, we need to make sure 
we think straight concerning these particulars. Now, that's 
probably the toughest part we had to get through tonight. The 
Word is God. The Word is eternally begotten 
of the Father. But then notice in verses 14 to 18, the Word 
became flesh. The incarnation is highlighted for us in verse 
14. The Word became flesh and dwelt 
among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten 
of the Father, full of grace and truth. The reason why I kind 
of go behind verse 29 before we get to verse 29 is something 
I mentioned this morning. It's good to look at what Jesus 
does on the cross. Always, absolutely, positively 
wonderful to consider the author of our salvation. See, what John 
is doing is he's starting somewhere beyond the cross. He starts an 
eternity past to bring us to the cross. And I think there's 
a world of help in this kind of an approach to what Jesus 
has wrought on our behalf. In other words, it's the doing 
and the dying of the Son of God, to be sure, on our behalf. But 
it has behind it this massive, glorious plan of an eternal God 
and Father. It has, as its sort of backdrop, 
the very God of eternity, who in the person of the Lord Jesus 
Christ has stepped into time. He has taken on our flesh. The 
Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Just think about this relative 
to verse 1 for a moment. The fact that this Word, who 
was in the beginning with God and was God, nevertheless comes 
into this world and becomes flesh. If that doesn't blow your mind, 
you're not thinking properly through John's prologue. If you 
haven't ever stopped to consider the fact that the bread we eat 
and the wine we drink, almost said blood, almost devolved into 
potpourri there for a moment, the bread and the wine, brethren, 
it's there, and it's certainly relative to the cross, but it's 
relative to eternity past. In the beginning was the Word, 
and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. And that Word 
became flesh, and He tabernacled amongst us. That puts the cross 
in its larger theological context. Dare I say it's Trinitarian context, 
it's Christological context, and when we see that connection, 
it ought to make us stand in wonder and in awe and in praise 
and in worship. He became flesh and dwelt among 
us, John says, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the 
only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. When 
John penned these things, I can only imagine there was this, 
you know, worshipful response as he's writing these words on 
the page, as he's pondering, as he's considering, as he's 
reflecting upon the glory that is Jesus Christ. This one who 
was in the beginning with God, this one who in the beginning 
was God, has now stepped into our realm and has taken on our 
flesh and he has dwelt among us. Notice, not only that, not 
only His incarnation, but His covenantal headship. Again, we 
put the cross in the context of Trinitarian theology, we put 
the cross in the context of Christology, and we put the cross in the context 
of covenant. Notice in verse 17, he says, 
for the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came 
through Jesus Christ. Now, I think it's intriguing 
that at times we might read that verse and conclude there was 
never any grace or truth under the Mosaic Covenant, and that 
there's no law under the New Covenant. No, that's not what 
John is saying. It's a comparative statement. 
Under Moses was law. That was the primary defining 
characteristic of that covenant with Israel. It was law. Not 
that there wasn't grace. The whole sacrificial system 
bespoke the grace of God Most High. You approach to Yahweh 
through a bloody knife and a burning altar. There was certainly grace. There were promises. concerning 
Messiah. There were promises concerning 
His redemptive work. The faithful back then always 
looked forward to the coming Messiah for their salvation. David was saved by grace. Abraham 
was saved by grace. Everybody in the old covenant 
that was saved was saved by grace. But in terms of Moses mediating 
a covenant, that covenant was primarily identified with law. 
And with Jesus mediating a covenant, that covenant is primarily identified 
with grace and truth. And that's the point in John 
1, 17. He's not suggesting Moses bad, Jesus good. He is not suggesting 
that at all. He is telling us there is this 
covenantal transformation that has now occurred. In the beginning 
was the Word, the Word was with God, the Word was God. This Word 
became flesh and dwelt among us, and in His life and in His 
ministry, He would inaugurate a new covenant, and that new 
covenant would be marked by grace and truth. Certainly, there is 
law to be sure. The people of God have the law 
of God as their rule or pattern for life, but nevertheless, the 
marked feature of new covenant theology is grace and truth. And then finally, before we leave 
this section behind, John 1 29, notice the revelation of God. Or we might say that Jesus is 
the revelator of God. You've all heard the word exegesis. 
Well, it's in verse 18. No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is 
in the bosom of the Father, He has exegeted Him. He has declared 
Him. Who better to make known God 
to the sons of men than the one who was in the beginning with 
God and the one who is God? He makes known who God is. So you see, all of that leads 
us now to the declaration of John the Baptist in John 1 29. 
And let's look at that in particular. First of all, we ought to appreciate 
John's behold. Verse 29, the next day John saw 
Jesus coming toward him and said, behold. Now, there's a whole 
lot of reasons why somebody would say, look, or see, or behold. But I wonder if it doesn't dare 
some theological importance. as if the Baptist is suggesting 
the time has come, the arrival of redemption has come. In other 
words, what he says concerning the one he calls attention to 
is a most powerful and packed statement concerning the redemption 
of his people. So this, behold, was probably 
a bit more than I want you to look at that particular individual 
there. I want you to notice that particular 
individual there. I want you to see that particular 
individual there. I think with all the weight of 
the promises of God being yea and amen in our Lord Jesus, when 
the Baptist saw Christ and he says, behold, there's a lot behind 
the scenes. All that the Old Testament prophesied, 
all of the prophets and the law that had specified that the Messiah 
would come, that he would be the sacrifice, that he would 
lay down his life for his people, all that now is in the eyesight 
of John the Baptist. Imagine if it were you. You'd 
probably yell, behold to, there's the one in whom our redemption 
lies. There's the one in whom our freedom 
lies. There's the one in whom we have 
forgiveness of sins. Behold, the Lamb of God who takes 
away the sin of the world. It's a beautiful thing. The Old 
Testament promises have come to pass in fruition and fulfillment 
in the life and the ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ. Notice 
His function. He calls him the Lamb of God. Now, certainly that's a title. 
We can refer to Jesus as the Lamb, but I think it sort of 
points to his function. This is what he does. This is 
the purpose for which he came. Now, I realize that in the Old 
Testament sacrificial system, there were a whole host of different 
animals that were employed in the sacrificial system. But Lamb 
just sort of summarizes all of that. And when John calls Jesus 
the Lamb of God, it ought to suggest in all of our minds certain 
key moments in redemptive history in the Old Testament. Remember 
that scene in Genesis chapter 22 when God tells Abraham to 
take your son, your only son, your monogamous, Take the son 
whom you love up to Mount Moriah, the future site of Temple. Take 
him there and sacrifice him, Abraham." So Abraham just obeys. Abraham does what God tells him 
to do. And Isaac, on the way to sacrifice, 
says, Father, we have the wood, excuse me, we have the fire, 
but where is the sacrifice? And what does Abraham tell Isaac? The Lord will provide. He then ties Isaac down, he's 
about to bury the knife into his son, his only son, the son 
whom he loves, and the angel of Yahweh stops him. And after 
God tells him no, they look and they see a ram caught in the 
thicket. This is the Lamb of God. That ram pointed forward. It was a type. It was a shadow. 
It was a pointer to this Lamb of God who takes away the sin 
of the world. We see the sacrificial system in Leviticus chapter 16. 
The whole concept of the two goats for sacrifice, the one 
that was actually caught and the blood was sprinkled on the 
mercy seat, and then that second goat, the priest, takes that 
goat, lays his hands on the goat, more than likely pushing on it, 
and he confesses the sins of Israel, and then they drive that 
goat out into the wilderness. This is a visual representation 
of the expiation or removal of Israel's guilt. So there's blood 
to atone, and then there's this goat sent out in the wilderness 
as a removal of the guilt of Israel. You see, all of this 
is behind John the Baptist. Behold, the Lamb of God who takes 
away the sin of the world. Brethren, when you read New Testament 
passages like these, think of your Old Testament, too. I mentioned 
to you, the fellow stopped by the other day and he wanted a 
Bible. And he said, but I only want a New Testament. I said, 
no, you're getting an old Bible. You need the Old Testament to 
make sense of the New Testament. That's the way we are today. 
We just want the New Testament, especially those little ones 
that I can fit in my pocket. I just want that. It just brings 
me comfort. It just brings me hope. It brings 
me encouragement. There's nothing wrong with the 
New Testament doing that. But brethren, so much of the 
New Testament is probably very difficult to understand without 
the Old Testament. I wonder how anybody ever makes 
it through the book of Hebrews without any idea of the book 
of Leviticus. I mean, certainly there's truths 
to be gleaned, and there's things that you can learn, and there's 
probably some benefit and encouragement when you gaze at Christ as the 
author of Hebrews sets him forth. But when you understand it in 
the larger context of the book of Leviticus, We understand it 
in the larger context of the Old Testament. When you see how 
the author there, Paul, in Hebrews, is citing text after text after 
text from the Old Testament, doesn't it ever provoke any of 
us to say, boy, these New Testament authors sure love the Old Testament. 
Perhaps I should too. These New Testament authors should 
appeal to the Old Testament a lot. Perhaps I should, too. You see, 
when John the Baptist says, Behold the Lamb of God who takes away 
the sin of the world, there's a whole block of data that informs 
our understanding with reference to that declaration. The passage 
that Cam read at the outset of worship in the prophet Isaiah, 
Isaiah 53, specifically at verse 7. He was led as a lamb to the 
slaughter. and as a sheep before its shearers 
is silent, so he opened not his mouth." Brethren, when the Baptist 
says, behold the Lamb of God, he's not making some observation 
without reference to this body of data. And when we consider 
that statement, the Lamb of God, we ought not to proceed without 
focusing on this blessed material as well. So the provision of 
atonement or the provision of a lamp by Yahweh is signified 
or shown us in Genesis 22, the very sacrificial system, which 
in many respects comes to its pinnacle in Leviticus 16. In 
an excellent, excellent book by Michael Morales on the book 
of Leviticus, he shows how even structurally Leviticus 16 is 
the center of the book. And not just theologically, which 
it most certainly is, But even structurally, the way the book 
is put together leads us to see the emphasis on the Day of Atonement 
in the book of Leviticus. Brethren, it is what drives the 
Baptist's statement here. Of course, the prophesied function 
of the servant of the Lord, and then when we understand the Lamb 
of God who takes away the sin of the world. We'll notice how 
he does that. I mean, we already know that 
because we're Christians and we're here tonight to celebrate 
the supper. We know it's going to come through a violent death. 
But they would have known that too with this identification 
of the Lamb of God. The lambs that were used in the 
sacrificial system weren't, you know, stroked and petted. They 
had their throats cut, their blood poured out, their, you 
know, skin awful burned, and their meat fed to the priests 
in certain instances. So the idea of Lamb of God indicates 
there's going to be a violent death with reference to this 
one. Now, when we consider sacrifice, 
what is presupposed there? It's a couple of sort of fundamental 
assumptions. Certainly, they're clearly explained 
in the Old Testament, but with reference to us here and now, 
those two assumptions or those two presuppositions is that God 
is holy and we are not. God is holy and we are not, and 
the only way for sinful, wretched man to approach to a holy God 
is through sacrifice. I mentioned Morales. He says 
the Old Covenant sacrificial system, or the book of Leviticus 
specifically. Morales says Israel's sins must 
be dealt with expiated. Only a cleansed humanity may 
belong to Yahweh. The way to God then is through 
a bloody knife and a burning altar. And that is precisely 
what this language is indicative of, the Lamb of God who takes 
away the sin of the world. Christ is the new covenant bloody 
knife and burning altar. The way of access to the Father 
is through the Son. And lest you forget who the Son 
is, He was in the beginning with God. He was in the beginning 
God. He became flesh and dwelt among 
us. We beheld His glory. We saw Him 
as the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. It's 
that one who functions as the Lamb of God. It's that one who's 
led as a lamb to the slaughter. It's that one who goes to the 
cross for us men and for our salvation. You see what John 
is doing? He's showing us this glorious 
view of who Jesus is and then telling us specifically what 
Jesus does. It's similar to the book of Hebrews. 
We get this identification of Christ in chapter one. He is 
superior to the prophets. He is superior to the angels. He is the exalted of the Lord 
before it ever gets into his priestly work. What do the authors 
want us to appreciate there? That there's something behind 
the cross. There's a plan and a purpose 
that is larger or inclusive of that particular aspect of redemption. In other words, brethren, we 
sit here tonight by virtue of the cross, but that cross is 
located at a time, at a place in the history of which God had 
ordained before the foundation of the world. It's not haphazard 
that we find ourselves here tonight. It's not luck. It's not happenstance. It is according to the purpose 
and plan of a great and glorious God, a creator who made this 
world and all things in it, A Creator who, when He saw His creatures 
destroy themselves by sin, nevertheless undertook on their behalf and 
in the person and in the work of the second person of the Trinity, 
becomes flesh and saves us from our sins. Now, note His purpose. If His function is the Lamb of 
God, His purpose is specified in the rest of what John says. 
Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. Isn't 
that beautiful? You ever just think, wow, my 
sin has been taken away? I don't ever think about that. 
Well, you should. You really should. You really should consider 
the fact that my sins are forgiven. I mean, do you ever just have 
those days when it's bad and there's trials and there's sorrows 
and there's hardships and there's difficulties, you get bad news 
after bad news after bad news? Be of good cheer, your sins are 
forgiven. Doesn't that sort of center a 
man and a woman? Doesn't it sort of bring balance 
and restore equilibrium? I mean, as bad as Trudeau may 
be, as bad as Obama was, as bad as the rulers of this age are, 
my sins are forgiven. Doesn't that encourage you? Does 
that make you happy? Does that make you want to dance 
and sing? Well, you can't dance and sing because you're a Christian. 
You know what I mean. David danced before the Ark of the Covenant. 
You do it like David in the privacy of your own, oh no, knock yourself 
out. Whirl about and praise God. Butler 
preached that we can dance. No, no, no, no, don't do that. He takes away our sin. Has anybody 
ever said, what's so good about Christianity? Well, the fact 
that my sin has been taken away. What's so good about your religion? 
My sins are forgiven. What's so good about being a 
believer in Jesus Christ? He atoned for my sin. He's the 
bloody knife and the smoking altar by which I approach to 
Yahweh of Israel. That's good news. He takes away the sin of the 
world. The sins of His people are taken 
up by Him. They are blotted out by Him. They are taken away by Him. This is done in His crosswork. the way that lamb was taken out 
of the flock, brought to the temple, the owner cut its neck, 
presented it over to the priest, who then engaged in the sacrificial 
process. That is what our Savior went 
through on our behalf so that we may be saved. That's what it means to have 
your sins taken away. Notice the scope. He says, Behold 
the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. Now before 
the Arminians, jump and dance and sing and whirl about before 
the Ark of the Covenant. Whirl, as used by John, doesn't 
mean every single human being without exception. World, as 
used by John, means people without distinction. And the primary 
emphasis in John's gospel, it's not just Jews, but Gentiles. In fact, go back to the prologue 
and look at verse 10. You have the word world there 
used in three different ways. It's the same Greek word, he 
was in the world. That must mean planet Earth. and the world was made through 
him. But verse 3 has already told 
us he made all things. So he didn't just make Earth, 
he made Mercury and Venus and Neptune and Pluto, he made the 
solar systems and the galaxies, and he made all that stuff. So 
when John says he was in the world, that means he was on planet 
Earth. The world was made through him, 
that means the entire cosmos, and the world did not know him. That's used in an ethical sense. 
We use the word world in that way as well. Oh, you're being 
worldly. You're of the world. Well, that's 
certainly how it's meant there at the end of verse 10. So whenever 
you're a Bible reader and you come across the word world, it 
doesn't mean every single human being without exception. And 
especially when you look at John's gospel and there's this theology 
of inclusion of Gentiles in the redemptive plan of God. Notice 
in John 3.16, for God so loved the world that He gave His only 
begotten Son that whoever believes in Him should not perish but 
have everlasting life. It's qualified who are the benefactors 
of this redemptive work, the ones who believe in Him. within 
the world, from every tribe, tongue, people, and nation, but 
they are the ones who believe. They are Jews and Gentiles. Notice in 4.42, after Jesus' 
dealings with the Samaritans, we see in verse 42, then they 
said to the woman, now we believe, not because of what you said, 
for we ourselves have heard him, and we know that this is indeed 
the Christ, the Savior of the world. Those of us who have been 
engaged in the study of the former prophets will know that Samaritans 
were terrible human beings. Now, I would say so are Canadians 
and so are Americans and so are all of us. So don't think I have 
a, you know, a racist bent against Samaritans. But, you know, when 
you go back into the kings and you see what happened in Samaria 
when it was resettled after the conquest and various persons 
from different people groups were placed in that land and 
they started multiplying their idols. Samaria at the time of 
our Lord Jesus Christ and Samaritans were looked down upon. That's 
why for Jesus to meet with this Samaritan woman at the well and 
point her to himself is absolutely incredible. But the idea is, 
is that he is not only the savior of the Jews, but he is the savior 
of the world. Caiaphas gets this right in John 
chapter 11. John chapter 11. Verse 49, this isn't a plot targeting 
the destruction of our Lord Jesus. Caiaphas gets right theology. John 11, 49, and one of them, 
Caiaphas, being high priest that year, said to them, you know 
nothing at all, nor do you consider that it is expedient for us that 
one man should die for the people and not that the whole nation 
should perish. Now this he did not say on his own authority, 
but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus would 
die for the nation, and not for that nation only, but also that 
he would gather together in one the children of God who were 
scattered abroad. It's pretty good theology from 
a God-hating rebel. But you see, the wrath of God 
or the wrath of man praises God. And then, of course, in John 
12, 32, Jesus said, and I, if I am lifted up, will draw all 
men to myself. Go back for just a moment in 
verse 20. It says, Now there were certain 
Greeks among those who came up to worship at the feast. Then 
they came to Philip, who was from Bethsaida of Galilee, and 
asked him, saying, Sir, we wish to see Jesus. You see, we've 
got Greeks, we've got Gentiles, we've got persons flocking to 
Israel's Messiah. And I think one of the best sort 
of definitions or explanations of John's use of world is in 
John's book called Revelation. Where in chapter 5, he says in 
verse 9, they sang a new song saying, you are worthy to take 
the scroll and to open its seals for you were slain and have redeemed 
us to God by your blood. out of every tribe and tongue 
and people and nation, and have made us kings and priests to 
our God, and we shall reign on the earth." So the word world 
does not mean every single human being without exception, but 
it means persons without distinction. Jews, Gentiles, one Lamb of God 
who takes away the sin of the world. And so when John makes 
that declaration, when he announces the arrival of Messiah in verse 
29, behold, the Lamb of God, that's His function, and His 
specific purpose is to take away the sin of the world. But this 
is not the first time that we meet Jesus in the gospel according 
to John. That prologue traces back into 
the history of the second person of the Trinity, that he was with 
God, that he was God, that he became flesh, and he dwelt among 
us. He is the covenantal head of 
the new covenant. He is the revelator of God, according 
to verse 18, and he is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin 
of the world. Well, brethren, I hope that that 
puts the whole scope of the work of the Redeemer in that larger 
theological context. Again, we can focus on the cross, 
and we must focus on the cross, but we ought to focus on the 
Trinitarian life of God We ought to think of who the person of 
our Lord Jesus Christ is. One man, John Webster, says, 
the hidden life of God, precisely its inaccessibility and completeness, 
is the ground of creaturely well-being. Essentially, what he's saying 
is that who God is in Himself is the ground of creaturely well-being. He says, it is because of the 
divine processions and the missions which rest upon them that there 
is a creature and a servant of God to come to the creature's 
aid and a spirit to bestow life. I quite like that, putting the 
work of Christ into its larger Trinitarian context. As well, 
the person of Christ in terms of overarching Christology. It's 
almost impossible to preach a sermon on these themes and not quote 
the Nicene Creed. The Nicene Creed tells us that 
Jesus is the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father 
before all worlds, God of God, light of light, very God of very 
God. begotten, not made, being of 
one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made, 
who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven and was 
incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made 
man and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered 
and was buried, and the third day he rose again, according 
to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven. and sits on the 
right hand of the Father, and he shall come again with glory 
to judge the quick and the dead, whose kingdom shall have no end." 
Now, you gotta see that these Nicene Creed writers didn't make 
this stuff up. They reflect a movement that 
we see here in John's prologue. In the beginning was the Word, 
the Word was with God, the Word was God, and that Word became 
flesh and dwelt among us. That Word goes on to be identified 
in terms of his function as the Lamb of God, who takes away the 
sin of the world. It's good to see the work of 
Christ in its larger theological context. It's good to see the 
work of Christ in its larger covenantal context. This is why 
Paul says that all the promises of God are yea and amen in Jesus. When we eat this bread and we 
drink this cup, we are proclaiming His death. Let's define the His. Let's marvel at the His. Let's 
worship the His. Let's glorify the His. Let's 
praise Him and honor Him and adore Him, because when we see 
that He left that to come into this to save us, it ought to 
cause us to worship and praise. John Calvin said, it was also 
imperative that he who was to become our Redeemer be true God 
and true man. It was his task to swallow up 
death. Who but life could do this? It 
was his task to conquer sin. Who but very righteousness could 
do this? It was his task to rout the powers 
of world and air. Who but a power higher than world 
and air could do this? Now, where does life or righteousness 
or lordship and authority of heaven lie but with God alone? Therefore, our most merciful 
God, when He willed that we be redeemed, made Himself our mediator 
in the person of His only begotten Son. Praise Almighty God for 
that glorious truth and may we eat tonight and drink tonight 
proclaiming His death, giving some concentrated focus as to 
who His is or who He is in that statement. He is the eternal 
Son of God, who for us men and for our salvation came down from 
heaven to save us. Guilty, vile, helpless we, spotless 
Lamb of God was He. Full atonement, can it be? Hallelujah, 
what a Savior. Well, let us close in a word 
of prayer. Our Father, we thank you for the Lord Jesus Christ. We thank you for how John teaches 
in John 1. not only that he functions as 
the Lamb of God with the purpose of taking away the sin of the 
world, but from whence he comes, how we thank you for the inner 
life of God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and how we thank 
you that you have dealt so graciously with your creature, your sinning 
creature, how we thank you for redemption through his blood, 
how we thank you that we have access to the Father by the Son 
or through the Son by the power of the Holy Spirit, and may these 
things truly encourage our hearts. And may you help us to recall 
the fact that the purpose defined, at least in this text, is that 
he takes away the sin of the world. May you encourage us with 
this truth, not just tonight, but each and every day. May we 
find time to reflect upon the goodness of God, the glory of 
the gospel in the sense or in the fact that we have been forgiven 
of our sins. We thank you and we praise you 
through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.