Is There a Contradiction Between John 8:14 and John 5:31?

Question: John 8:14 appears to contradict John 5:31. I have read several commentaries which assert that in John 5:31 Jesus was referring to his testimony as a man in relation to the laws of the time; whereas in John 8:14 he is speaking of himself as a divine being whom the law cannot apply to.

If this is the case, would you please help me understand how you came to that conclusion. I see no evidence of this interpretation in the scriptures. I am always wary of falling into the trap of explaining away contradictions/issues I have with scripture through rationalization rather than truly looking at what the scripture says and trying to understand it for itself.

 

Answer: This is from the commentary by Gary Burge (NIV Application Commentary on John), that I thought was a pretty thorough explanation:

5:31
Witnesses for Jesus’ case (5:31 – 40). John 5:31 is crucial in Jesus’ trial. In Old Testament law, more than one witness was needed in order to condemn someone (Deut. 17:6). This idea was expanded in judicial settings to say that more than one person was needed to confirm someone’s testimony (Mishnah, Ketuboth 2:9). In 5:31 Jesus is not saying that any self-testimony he gives is false, but rather that its validity is inadmissible unless it is confirmed by other witnesses. Jesus’ claims are extraordinary. But if he is the only one making them, they will carry little weight with his audience. But if the claims are corroborated, they stand.

Jesus therefore identifies five witnesses whose words and deeds buttress his claims.

(a) The first witness is God, even though 5:32 does not say so explicitly (though cf. 5:37). The thought is not necessarily that God provides an audible voice of testimony, unless John has in mind the baptism of Jesus (1:32 – 34; cf. 12:28). Rather, here Jesus may be pointing to the inward presence of God that gives him confidence about his mission (17:1 – 6). God’s word and power are within Jesus, he has been sent by the Father, and these data point to the truth of who he is.

(b) The next witness is John the Baptist (5:33 – 35). John preceded Jesus, identified him, worked with him, and directed his followers to become Jesus’ disciples. Although his ministry was enjoyed (or indulged) for a time, in the end, it was rejected.

(c) Jesus points to his own works (5:36), which demand some explanation. These are not simply powerful miracles, but signs, culminating in the great works of the cross and resurrection. These point not merely to Jesus’ identity but to the Father, who alone can enable such things.

(d) Jesus adds the Scriptures to his list of witnesses (5:39 – 40). First-century Judaism was zealous in its study of the Scriptures. Yet, Jesus says, his contemporaries do not see the central message about Jesus and how he fulfills the Scripture. Luke shows a fascinating story about such use of the Scriptures in Luke 24 when Jesus comes to Emmaus. There he opens “Moses and all the Prophets” to these two disciples (Luke 24:27), who understand for the first time.

(e) The final witness is contained in the next element of Jesus’ defense. It is Moses (5:46 – 47), who is represented in Scripture, but his words about the Messiah are unequivocal (Deut. 18:15). Moses is the “patron saint” of Judaism, the defender of its people, an advocate on their behalf before God (see Moses’ farewell, Deut. 33). But, Jesus remarks, even Moses’ words have gone ignored.

John 8:14
The Pharisees’ argument in 8:13 echoes what occurred during Jesus’ last visit to Jerusalem in chapter 5, when he referred to the legal qualifications of judicial witnesses, “If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid” (5:31). The Jewish law required more than one witness to validate any testimony (Deut. 17:6; 19:15; Matt. 18:16; 2 Cor. 13:1; m. Ketuboth 2:9). Jesus knows this law (John 8:17). Unfortunately his opponents have forgotten that in the earlier Jerusalem debate, Jesus showed that there were ample witnesses verifying his claim: John the Baptist (5:33), his miraculous works (5:36), the Father (5:37), and even the Scriptures (5:39). Now Jesus must repeat again that his Father is a second witness (8:18).

But something important has now been added. Jesus would hardly say that whenever he speaks alone his words are invalid, as if they must be weighed by the double-witness judicial rule. This is what it means to judge “by human standards” (Gk. kata sarka, lit., “according to the flesh,” 8:15a). Jesus does not judge in this manner (8:15b), and he encourages others likewise: “Stop judging by mere appearances, and make a right judgment” (7:24). Jesus’ judgment is true, and his words are true, not because of their inherent persuasiveness, but because of their origins (8:16b). This is the new unexpected authority behind Jesus’ testimony.

Those who judge by worldly standards cannot understand this (see 2 Cor. 5:16). Jesus comes from the Father. He does not speak on his own authority but is echoing what the Father has told him to say (John 3:34; 14:10, 24; 17:8, 14). The root problem with Jesus’ opponents, then, is that they do not know the Father (8:19). They are incapable of having true spiritual discernment because they do not know the source of all spirituality, God himself. This criticism is the same one we heard in 5:42 during Jesus’ last visit to the temple. Without a deep knowledge of God and his love, it is impossible to recognize his Son.