If there is no challenge, everything remains the same. If no one challenges the leader in a sport competition, the champion remains uncontested. The same would be true in the political arena; a party that never undergoes a challenge will never be defeated, and the existing state of affairs would continue, as long as everyone is satisfied with the status quo. Similarly, whatever one accepts as true, remains as one believes it to be, as long as it goes unchallenged by the critic. Things change only when whatever is accepted is contested.
In our previous study, we’ve seen that Jesus’ brethren told him he needed to face those who disputed his claims as Messiah, and let his disciples see the miracles he does. In doing so, he would gain the support he needed to take hold of the leadership of the nation (John 7:3-4). Jesus replied, telling them the time for his challenging his enemies was not yet fulfilled. Their time, on the other hand, would always be present (John 7:6). What Jesus meant was, his brethren agreed with the Jewish authorities’ worldview of things. They embraced the status quo, vis-à-vis their messiah must rid the nation of its enemies by force. Therefore, if any one of them would claim that office, he would be embraced as the Jews’ messiah that very day, as long as he presented himself to the nation, according to the nation’s presumption of what the messiah must do.
Why would any of Jesus’ enemies challenge his claim, if Jesus didn’t challenge or dispute his enemies’ worldview? It is only because Jesus did dispute that worldview, that he was not already accepted as the Messiah (John 7:7). The, then, current worldview of the office of Messiah was that he would destroy the Jews’ enemies, which is what John’s disciples wanted Jesus to do, when Herod beheaded the prophet (Matthew 14:12; cp. John 6:14-15). However, the Kingdom of God doesn’t come with observation, so that one could find it on a map (Luke 17:21), or say it is happening here or there. In other words, the Kingdom in which Jesus is the Messiah is not of this world (John 18:36), and cannot even be perceived, unless one is born again in the spirit (John 3:3), because the Kingdom of God is within the hearts of men (Luke 17:21). Thus, if there isn’t a challenge, there will be no change, but if one challenges the status quo, as Jesus did, folks prepare themselves for battle.
Therefore, Jesus sent his brethren in the flesh up to Jerusalem to celebrate the feast without him. He remained behind, because his time was not, yet, fulfilled (John 7:8). Nevertheless, he would go up after them, but not publicly with the pilgrims. He went up with his disciples privately so that his coming wouldn’t be known (John 7:9-10), which evidently succeeded, probably catching his enemies by surprise, because, when they didn’t find him among the caravan of pilgrims coming from Galilee, they, no doubt, thought that he wasn’t coming at all (cp. John 7:11).
The time Jesus spent in Galilee largely depends upon the time his brethren went up to the feast. Did they go up in time to celebrate the Feast of Trumpets (1st day of the month) and the Day of Atonement (10th of the month), thus, celebrating all the national holy days occurring during the seventh month? That would mean they were in Jerusalem for three to four weeks. On the other hand, were they there only to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles, vis-à-vis for only eight days (the 15th through the 22nd of the month)? In any case, the Gospel of John has Jesus in the Temple and teaching about the middle of the Feast of Tabernacles (John 7:14). However, how long he may have been in Jerusalem, prior to the middle of the Feast of Tabernacles, isn’t said. Nevertheless, the Synoptics seem to indicate he arrived in time to celebrate the whole eight-day festival with his disciples.[1]
______________________________________________________
[1] See my previous study in the Gospel of Luke: Jesus at the Feast of Tabernacles, and my previous study in the Gospel of Mark: Where Was the Mount of Transfiguration?
Smoodock's Blog 