Skip to main content

Full text of "The Gospel according to S. John, with maps, notes and introduction; edited for the syndics of the University Press"

See other formats 


iniinwiH 


'ffliipBRlDGE  BIBLE 

FOR  SCHOOLS  &  GOLi£G£S 


> 


mfim»/mtf*n '  i-ai-'ww^ 


&T:'  JWn  N 


EDITED  BY 


A.  PLUMMER 


«>i^pBiBMM>Ni*anM>aitMwnBaac^ 


l< 


lif  OF  PBTE HB (JHOUGH 


Cj[)e  Camiritise  35itile  for  ^cl)oote 


THE   GOSPEL  ACCORDING   TO 

S.   JOHN. 


Uonmx :    C.  J.  CLAY  and  SONS, 
CAMIiRIDGE  UNIVERSITY  PRESS  WAREHOUSE, 

AVE   MARIA   LANE. 


CamfariliBc:    DEIGHTON,   BELL  AND  CO. 

ILtipjig:  F.  A.   BROCKHAUS. 

ilou  riork:   MACMILLAN  AND  CO. 


V 
t 

:^-4 

1 

'    " 

f 

\,^^,,-,,->^''  t  j  ■ 

i 

'^^ — ^^i^- \ 

I 

z 

i 

■ 

^yi ^vy 

%\)t  Camfiritrse  BSiftle  for  ^tJ)CiciIs 

General  Editor:—}.  J.  S.  PEROVVNE,  D.D., 
Bishop  of  Worcester. 


THE   GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO 


S.    JOH  N. 


IV/TIf  MAPS,  NOTES  AND    INTRODUCTION 


THE    REV.    A.    PLUMMER,    M.A.,    D.D. 

MASTER    OF    UNIVERSITY    COLLEGE,    DURHAM, 
FORMERLY   FELLOW   AND   TUTOR    OF    TRINITY    COLLEGE.    OXFORD. 


EDITED  FOR    THE  SYNDICS  OF   THE   UNIVERSITY  PRESS 


©ambritigt : 

AT   THE   UNIVERSITY    PRESS- 
1891 

\AU  Rights  re  served. "l 


CTambritigc 

PRINTED    IIY   C.    J.    CLAY   M.A.    AND   SONS 
AT    THE   UNIVERSITY   PRKSS 


PREFACE 
BY    THE    GENERAL  EDITOR. 

The  General  Editor  of  The  Cambridge  Bible  for 
Schools  thinks  it  right  to  say  that  he  does  not  hold 
himself  responsible  either  for  the  interpretation  of 
particular  passages  which  the  Editors  of  the  several 
Books  have  adopted,  or  for  any  opinion  on  points  of 
doctrine  that  they  may  have  expressed.  In  the  New 
Testament  more  especially  questions  arise  of  the 
deepest  theological  import,  on  which  the  ablest  and 
most  conscientious  interpreters  have  differed  and 
always  will  differ.  His  aim  has  been  in  all  such 
cases  to  leave  each  Contributor  to  the  unfettered 
exercise  of  his  own  judgment,  only  taking  care  that 
mere  controversy  should  as  far  as  possible  be  avoided. 
He  has  contented  himself  chiefly  with  a  careful 
revision  of  the  notes,  with  pointing  out  omissions,  with 


PREFACE. 


suggesting  occasionally  a  reconsideration  of  some 
question,  or  a  fuller  treatment  of  difficult  passages, 
and  the  like. 

Beyond  this  he  has  not  attempted  to  interfere, 
feeling  it  better  that  each  Commentary  should  have  1 

its  own  individual  character,  and  being  convinced 
that  freshness  and  variety  of  treatment  are  more 
than  a  compensation  for  any  lack  of  uniformity  in 
the  Series. 


I 


CONTENTS. 


PAGES 

I.  Introduction. 

Chapter  I.    The  Life  of  S.  John 9—18 

Chapter  II.     The  Authenticity  of  the  Gospel  18 — 32 

Chapter  III.     The  Place  and  Date    32 — 34 

Chapter  IV.     The  Object  and  Plan   34—38 

Chapter  V.     The  Characteristics  of  the  Gospel    ...  38 — 46 

Chapter  VI.     Its  Relation  to  the  Synoptic  Gospels  46 — 50 

Chapter  VII.     Its  Relation  to  the  First  Epistle  ...  50—51 

Chapter  VIII.     The  Text  of  the  Gospel  51 — 52 

Chapter  IX,     The  Literature  of  the  Gospel 53 — 54 

Analysis  of  the  Gospel  in  Detail 55 — 58 

II.  Text  and  Notks    59 — 378 

III.  Appendices  379 — 382 

IV.  Indices  383—388 

Map  of  Galilee    .facing  title 

,,      ,,   Sea  OF  Galilee at  end  of  volume 

„      „   Palestine    in    the    time   ok    our 

Saviour    do. 

Plan  of  Jerusalem  do. 


The  Text  adopted  in  this  Edition  is  that  of  Dr  Scrivener's 
Cambridge  Faragraph  Bible.  A  few  variations  from  the  ordi- 
nary Text,  chiefly  in  the  spelling  of  certain  words,  and  in  the 
use  of  italics,  will  be  noticed.  For  the  principles  adopted  by 
Dr  Scrivener  as  regards  the  printing  of  the  Text  see  his  In- 
troduction to  the  Paragraph  Bible,  published  by  the  Cambridge 
University  Press. 


INTRODUCTION. 

CHAPTER   I. 

THE   LIFE   OF   S.    JOHN. 

The  life  of  S.  John  falls  naturally  into  two  divisions,  the 
limits  of  which  correspond  to  the  two  main  sources  of  infor- 
mation respecting  him.  (i)  From  his  birth  to  the  departure 
from  Jerusalem  after  the  Ascension  ;  the  sources  for  which  are 
contained  in  N.  T.  (2)  From  the  departure  from  Jerusalem 
to  his  death  ;  the  sources  for  which  are  the  traditions  of  the 
primitive  Church.  In  both  cases  the  notices  of  S.  John  are 
fragmentary,  and  cannot  be  woven  together  into  anything  like 
a  complete  whole  without  a  good  deal  of  conjecture.  But  the 
fragments  are  in  the  main  very  harmonious,  and  contain  definite 
traits  and  characteristics,  enabling  us  to  form  a  portrait,  which 
though  imperfect  is  unique. 

(i)     Before  the  Departure  froin  Jerusalem. 

The  date  of  S.  John's  birth  cannot  be  determined.  He  was 
probably  younger  than  his  Master  and  than  the  other  Apostles. 
He  was  the  son  of  Zebedee  and  Salome,  and  brother  of  James, 
who  was  probably  the  older  of  the  two.  Zebedee  was  a  fisher- 
man of  the  lake  of  Galilee,  who  seems  to  have  lived  in  or 
near  Bethsaida  (i.  44),  and  was  well  enough  off  to  have  hired 
servants  (Mark  i.  20).  He  appears  only  once  in  the  Gospel- 
narrative  (Matt.  iv.  21,  22;  Mark  i.  19,  20),  but  is  mentioned 
frequently  as  the  father  of  S.  James  and  S.  John.     Salome  (see 


lo  INTRODUCTION. 

on  xix.  25)  was  probably  the  sister  of  the  Virgin,  and  in  that 
case  S.  John  was  our  Lord's  first  cousin.  This  relationship 
harmonizes  well  with  the  special  intimacy  granted  to  the 
beloved  disciple  by  his  Lord,  with  the  fact  of  S.  James  also 
being  among  the  chosen  three,  and  with  the  final  committal  of 
the  Virgin  to  St  John's  care.  Salome  was  one  of  those  women 
who  followed  Christ  and  'ministered  to  Him  of  their  substance* 
(^L1rk  XV.  40  ;  comp.  Matt,  xxvii.  55  ;  Luke  viii.  3).  This  was 
probably  after  Zebedee's  death.  S.  John's  parents,  therefore, 
would  seem  to  have  been  people  of  means  ;  and  it  is  likely  from 
xix.  27  that  the  Apostle  himself  was  fairly  well  off,  a  conclusion 
to  which  his  acquaintance  with  the  high-priest  (xviii.  15)  also 
points. 

S.  John,  therefore,  like  all  the  Apostles,  excepting  the  traitor, 
was  a  Galilean  ;  and  this  fact  may  be  taken  as  in  some  degree 
accounting  for  that  fieriness  of  temper  which  earned  for  him 
and  his  brother  the  name  of  'sons  of  thunder'  (Mark  iii.  17). 
The  inhabitants  of  Galilee,  while  they  had  remained  to  a  large 
extent  untouched  by  the  culture  of  the  rest  of  the  nation,  re- 
mained also  untouched  by  the  enervation  both  in  belief  and 
habits  which  culture  commonly  brings.  Ignorant  of  the  glosses 
of  tradition,  they  kept  the  old  simple  faith  in  the  letter  of  the 
Law.  Uninterested  alike  in  politics  and  philosophy,  they  pre- 
ferred the  sword  to  intrigue,  and  industry  to  speculation.  Thus, 
while  the  hierarchy  jealously  scrutinise  all  the  circumstances  of 
Jesus'  position,  the  Galileans  on  the  strength  of  a  single  miracle 
would  'take  Him  by  force'  (vi.  14,  15)  and  make  Him  king. 
Population  was  dense  and  mixed,  and  between  the  Syrians  and 
Jews  there  were  often  fierce  disputes.  To  this  industrious, 
hardy,  and  warlike  race  S.  John  belonged  by  birth  and  resi- 
dence, sharing  its  characteristic  energy  and  its  impatience  of 
indecision  and  intrigue.  Hence,  when  the  Baptist  proclaimed 
the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah,  the  young  fisherman  at  once  be- 
came a  follower,  and  pressed  steadily  onwards  until  the  goal 
was  reached. 

Christian  art  has  so  familiarised  us  with  a  form  of  almost 
feminine  sweetness  as  representing  the  beloved  disciple,  that 


INTRODUCTION.  ii 


the  strong  energy  and  even  vehemence  of  his  character  is 
almost  lost  sight  of.  In  his  writings  as  well  as  in  what  is 
recorded  of  him  both  in  N.  T.  and  elsewhere  we  find  both 
sides  of  his  character  appearing.  And  indeed  though  ap- 
parently opposed  they  are  not  really  so ;  the  one  may  beget 
the  other,  and  did  so  in  him. 

In  yet  another  way  his  Galilean  origin  might  influence  S. 
John.  The  population  of  the  country,  as  has  been  said,  was 
mixed.  From  a  boy  he  would  have  the  opportunity  of  coming 
in  contact  with  Greek  life  and  language.  Hence  that  union  of 
Jewish  and  Greek  characteristics  which  are  found  in  h!m,  and 
which  have  led  some  to  the  conclusion  that  the  author  of  the 
Fourth  Gospel  was  a  Greek.  We  shall  find  as  we  go  along 
that  the  enormous  preponderance  of  Jewish  modes  of  thought 
and  expression,  and  of  Jewish  points  of  view,  renders  this  con- 
clusion absolutely  untenable. 

The  young  son  of  Zebedee  was  perhaps  never  at  one  of  the 
rabbinical  schools,  which  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  made 
Tiberias  a  great  centre  of  education,  and  probably  existed  in 
some  shape  before  that.  Hence  he  can  be  contemptuously 
spoken  of  by  the  hierarchy  as  an  'illiterate  and  common' 
person  (Acts  iv,  13).  No  doubt  he  paid  the  usual  visits  to 
Jerusalem  at  the  proper  seasons,  and  became  acquainted  with 
the  grand  liturgy  of  the  Temple  ;  a  worship  which  while  it 
kindled  his  deep  spiritual  emotions  and  gave  him  material  for 
reverent  meditation,  would  insensibly  prepare  the  way  for  that 
intense  hatred  of  the  hierarchy,  who  had  made  the  worship 
there  worse  than  a  mockery,  which  breathes  through  all  the 
pages  of  his  Gospel. 

While  he  was  still  a  lad,  and  perhaps  already  learning  to 
admire  and  love  the  impetuosity  of  his  older  friend  S.  Peter, 
the  rising  of 'Judas  of  Galilee  in  the  days  of  the  taxing'  (see  on 
Acts  V.  37)  took  place.  Judas,  like  our  own  Wat  Tyler,  raised 
a  revolt  against  a  tax  which  he  held  to  be  tyrannical,  and  pro- 
claimed that  the  people  had  'no  lord  or  master  but  God.' 
Whether  the  boy  and  his  future  friend  sympathized  with  the 
movement  we  have  no  means  of  knowing.     But   the  honest 


II  INTRODUCTION. 


though  ill-advised  cry  of  the  leaders  of  this  revolt  may  easily 
have  been  remembered  by  S.  John  when  he  heard  the  false  and 
renegade  priests  declare  to  Pilate,  'We  have  no  king  but 
Caesar'  (xix.  15). 

There  was  another  movement  of  a  very  different  kind,  with 
which  we  know  that  he  did  sympathize  heartily.  After  cen- 
turies of  dreary  silence,  in  which  it  seemed  as  if  Jehovah  had 
deserted  His  chosen  people,  a  thrill  went  through  the  land  that 
God  had  again  visited  them,  and  that  a  Prophet  had  once  more 
appeared.  His  was  a  call,  not  to  resist  foreign  taxation  or  to 
throw  off  the  yoke  of  Rome,  but  to  withstand  their  own  temp- 
tations and  to  break  the  heavy  bondage  of  their  own  crying 
sins:  'Repent  ye,  for  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  is  at  hand!' 
S.  John  heard  and  followed,  and  from  the  Baptist  learnt  to 
know  and  at  once  to  follow  'the  Lamb  of  God'  that  was  to  do 
(what  the  lambs  provided  by  man  in  the  Temple  could  never 
do' — '  take  away  the  sin  of  the  world.'  Assuming  that  the  un- 
named disciple  (i.  40)  is  S.  John,  we  infer  (i.  41)  that  he  pro- 
ceeded to  bring  his  brother  S.  James  to  Jesus  as  S.Andrew  had 
brought  S.  Peter.  But  from  'that  day'  (i.  39),  that  never  to  be 
forgotten  day,  the  whole  tenour  of  the  young  man's  life  was 
changed.  The  disciple  of  the  Baptist  had  become  the  disciple 
of  Christ. 

After  remaining  with  Jesus  for  a  time  he  seems  to  have 
gone  back  to  his  old  employment ;  from  which  he  was  again 
called,  and  possibly  more  than  once  (Matt.  iv.  18;  Luke  v. 
I — 11),  to  become  an  Apostle  and  fisher  of  men.  Then  the 
group  of  the  chosen  three  is  formed.  At  the  raising  of  Jairus' 
daughter,  at  the  Transfiguration,  and  in  the  Garden  of  Geth- 
semane,  'Peter,  James,  and  John'  are  admitted  to  nearer 
relationship  with  their  Lord  than  the  rest  ;  and  on  one  other 
solemn  occasion,  when  He  foretold  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
(Mark  xiii.  3),  S.  Andrew  also  is  with  them.  In  this  group, 
although  S.  Peter  takes  the  lead,  it  is  S.  John  who  is  nearest 
and  dearest  to  the  Lord,  'the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved.' 

On  three  different  occasions  the  burning  temper  of  the  'sons 
of  thunder'  displayed  itself,     (i)  'And  John  answered   Him, 


INTRODUCTION.  13 


saying,  Master,  we  saw  one  casting  out  devils  in  Thy  name,  and 
he  foUoweth  not  us  :  and  we  forbad  him,  because  he  foUoweth 
not  us '  (Mark  ix.  38 ;  Luke  ix.  49);  a  touch  of  zealous  intoler- 
ance which  reminds  us  of  Joshua's  zeal  against  Eldad  and 
Medad  (Numb.  xi.  28),  as  Christ's  reply  recalls  the  reply  of 
Moses.  Probably  his  brother  S.  James  is  included  in  the  ^we 
forbad  him.'  (2)  When  the  Samaritan  villagers  refused  to 
receive  Him,  '  because  His  face  was  as  though  He  would  go  to 
Jerusalem,'  His  disciples  James  and  John  said,  'Lord,  wilt 
Thou  that  we  command  fire  to  come  down  from  heaven  and 
consume  them  ? '  (Luke  ix.  54).  Once  again  their  zeal  for  their 
Master  makes  them  forget  the  spirit  of  their  Master.  (3)  On 
the  last  journey  to  Jerusalem  Salome,  as  the  mouthpiece  of  her 
two  sons  (Matt.  xx.  20 ;  Mark  x.  35),  begs  that  they  may  sit, 
the  one  on  the  Messiah's  right  hand,  and  the  other  on  His  left, 
in  His  kingdom.  This  is  their  bold  ambition,  shewing  that  in 
spite  of  their  close  intimacy  with  Him,  they  are  still  grossly 
ignorant  of  the  nature  of  His  kingdom.  And  in  their  reply  to 
His  challenge  the  same  bold  temper  and  burning  zeal  is  mani- 
fest. They  are  willing  to  go  through  the  furnace  in  order  to  be 
near  the  Son  of  God.  When  S.  John  and  his  mother  stood 
beside  the  Cross,  and  when  S.  James  won  the  crown  of  mar- 
tyrdom, Christ's  challenge  was  taken  up  and  their  aspiration 
fulfilled. 

It  will  not  be  necessary  to  recount  at  length  the  history  of 
the  last  Passover,  in  which  S.  John  is  a  prominent  figure.  As 
he  gives  us  so  much  more  than  the  Synoptists  about  the  family 
at  Bethany,  we  may  infer  that  he  was  a  more  intimate  friend  of 
Lazarus  and  his  sisters.  He  and  S.  Peter  prepare  the  Last 
Supper  (Luke  xxii.  8),  at  which  S.  Peter  gets  him  to  ask  who  is 
the  traitor  ;  and  after  the  betrayal  S.  John  gets  his  friend  intro- 
duced into  the  high-priest's  palace.  He  followed  his  Master 
to  judgment  and  death,  and  received  His  Mother  as  a  farewell 
charge  (xviii.  15,  xix.  26,  27).  His  friend's  fall  does  not  break 
their  friendship,  and  they  visit  the  sepulchre  together  on  Easter 
morning.  (On  the  characteristics  of  the  two  as  shewn  in  this 
incident  see  notes  on  xx.  4 — 6.)    We  find  them  still  together 


,4  INTRODUCTION. 


in  Galilee,  seeking  refreshment  in  their  suspense  by  resuming 
iheir  old  calling  (xxi.  2) ;  and  here  again  their  different  charac- 
ters shew  themselves  (see  notes  on  xxi.  7).  And  the  Gospel 
closes  with  Christ's  gentle  rebuke  to  S.  Peter's  natural  curiosity 
about  his  friend. 

In  the  Acts  S.  John  appears  but  seldom,  always  in  con- 
nexion with,  and  always  playing  a  second  part  to  his  fncnd 
(Acts  iii.,  iv.,  viii.  14—25).  We  lose  sight  of  him  at  Jerusalem 
(viii.  25)  after  the  return  from  Samaria  ;  but  he  was  not  there 
at  the  time  of  S.  Paul's  first  visit  (Gal.  i.  18,  19).  Some  twelve 
or  fifteen  years  later  (c.  A.D.  50)  he  seems  to  have  been  at  Jeru- 
salem again  (Acts  xv.  6),  but  for  how  long  we  cannot  tell.  Nor 
do  we  know  why  he  left.  Excepting  his  own  notice  of  himself,  as 
being  'in  the  island  called  Patmos  for  the  word  and  testimony 
of  Jesus'  (Rev.  i.  9),  the  N.  T.  tells  us  nothing  further  respect- 
ing him. 

(ii)     From  the  Departure  from  Jerusalem  to  his  death. 

For  this  period,  with  the  exception  of  the  notice  in  the 
Apocalypse  Just  quoted,  we  are  entirely  dependent  upon  tradi- 
tions of  very  different  value.  The  conjecture  that  S.  John  lived 
at  Jerusalem  until  the  death  of  the  Virgin,  and  that  this  set 
him  free,  is  unsupported  by  evidence.  Some  think  that  she 
accompanied  him  to  Ephesus.  It  would  be  during  this  pro- 
longed residence  at  Jerusalem  that  he  acquired  that  niinute 
knowledge  of  the  topography  of  the  city  which  marks  the 
Fourth  Gospel. 

It  is  quite  uncertain  whether  the  Apostle  went  direct  from 
Jerusalem  to  Ephesus ;  but  of  two  things  we  may  be  confident : 
(i)  that  wherever  he  was  he  was  not  idle,  (2)  that  he  was  not  at 
Ephesus  when  S.  Paul  bade  farewell  to  that  Church  (Acts  xx.), 
nor  when  he  wrote  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  nor  when  he 
wrote  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  That  S.  John  did  work  at 
E])hesus  during  the  latter  part  of  his  life  may  be  accepted  as 
certain,  unless  the  whole  history  of  the  subapostolic  age  is  to 
be  pronounced  doubtful ;  but  neither  the  date  of  his  arrival  nor 
of  his  death  can  be  fixed.     He  is  described  (Polycrates  in  Eus. 


INTRODUCTION.  15 


H.  E.  III.  xxxi.  3,  V.  xxiv.  3)  as  a  priest  wearing  the  sacerdotal 
plate  or  mitre  {pefalon)  which  was  a  special  badge  of  the  high- 
priest  (Exod.  xxxix.  30) ;  and  we  learn  from  the  Apocalypse  that 
from  Ephesus  as  a  centre  he  directed  the  churches  of  Asia 
Minor.  What  persecution  drove  him  to  Patmos  or  caused  him 
to  be  banished  thither  is  uncertain,  as  also  is  the  date  of  his 
death,  which  may  be  placed  somewhere  near  A.D.  100. 

Of  the  traditions  which  cluster  round  this  latter  part  of  his 
Ufe  three  deserve  more  than  a  passing  mention,  (i)  John,  the 
disciple  of  the  Lord,  going  to  bathe  at  Ephesus,  and  perceiving 
Cerinthus  within,  rushed  out  of  the  bath-house  without  bathing, 
crying  out,  'Let  us  fly,  lest  even  the  bath-house  fall  on  us, 
because  Cerinthus,  the  enemy  of  the  truth,  is  within'  (Iren. 
III.  iii.  4).  Epiphanius  {Haer.  xxx.  24)  substitutes  Ebion  for 
Cerinthus.  Both  Cerinthus  and  the  Ebionites  denied  the  reality 
of  the  Incarnation.  This  tradition,  like  the  incidents  recorded, 
Luke  ix.  49,  54,  shews  that  in  later  life  also  the  spirit  of  the 
'  son  of  thunder'  was  still  alive  within  him. 

(2)  Afier  his  return  from  Patmos  he  made  a  tour  to  appoint 
bishops  or  presbyters  in  the  cities.  In  one  place  a  lad  of  noble 
bearing  attracted  his  attention,  and  he  specially  commended 
him  to  the  bishop,  who  instructed  and  at  last  baptized  him. 
Then  he  took  less  care  of  him,  and  the  young  man  went  from 
bad  to  worse,  and  at  last  became  chief  of  a  set  of  bandits.  The 
Apostle  revisiting  the  place  remembered  him  and  said,  '  Come, 
bishop,  restore  to  me  my  deposit,'  which  confounded  the  bishop, 
who  knew  that  he  had  received  no  money  from  S.  John.  '  I  de- 
mand the  young  man,  the  soul  of  a  brother  ; '  and  then  the  sad 
story  had  to  be  told.  The  Apostle  called  for  a  horse,  and  rode 
at  once  to  the  place  infested  by  the  bandits  and  was  soon 
taken  by  them.  When  the  chief  recognised  him  he  turned  to 
fly.  But  the  aged  Apostle  went  after  him  and  entreated  him  to 
stay,  and  by  his  loving  tears  and  exhortations  induced  him  to 
return  with  him  to  the  church,  to  which  in  due  time  he  restored 
him  (Eus.  H.  E.  in.  xxiii.  from  Clement  of  Alexandria). 

(3)  Towards  the  very  end  of  his  life,  when  he  was  so  infirm 
that  he  had  to  be  carried  to  church  and  was  too  weak  to  preach, 


i6  INTRODUCTION. 


he  used  often  to  say  no  more  than  this,  '  Little  children,  love 
one  another.'  His  hearers  at  last  wearied  of  this,  and  said, 
'Master,  why  dost  thou  always  say  this?'  'It  is  the  Lord's 
command,'  he  replied,  '  and  if  this  alone  is  done,  it  is  enough  ' 
(Jerome,  Comm.  in  Ep.  ad  Gal.  vi.  lo). 

Other  traditions  may  be  dismissed  more  briefly ;  that  in  his 
old  age  he  amused  himself  with  a  partridge,  and  pleaded  that 
a  bow  could  not  always  be  bent,  but  needed  relaxation  ;  that  he 
was  thrown  into  a  cauldron  of  boiling  oil  at  Rome  and  was 
none  the  worse  ;  that  he  drank  hemlock  without  being  harmed 
by  it ;  that  after  he  was  buried  the  earth  above  him  heaved 
with  his  breathing,  shewing  that  he  was  only  asleep,  tarrying 
till  Christ  came.  This  last  strange  story  S.  Augustine  is  dis- 
posed to  believe  :  those  who  know  the  place  must  know  whether 
the  soil  does  move  or  not ;  and  he  has  heard  it  from  no  untrust- 
worthy people. 

These  fragments  form  a  picture,  which  (as  was  said  at  the 
outset)  although  very  incomplete  is  harmonious,  and  so  far  as 
it  goes  distinct.  The  two  sides  of  his  character,  tender  love 
and  stern  intolerance,  are  the  one  the  complement  of  the  other; 
and  both  form  part  of  the  intensity  of  his  nature.  Intensity  of 
action,  intensity  of  thought  and  word,  intensity  of  love  and 
liate — these  are  the  characteristics  of  the  beloved  disciple.  In 
the  best  sense  of  the  phrase  S.  John  was  '  a  good  hater,'  for  his 
hatred  was  part  of  his  love.  It  was  because  he  so  loved  the 
truth,  that  he  so  hated  all  lukewarmness,  unreality,  insincerity, 
and  falsehood,  and  was  so  stern  towards  'whosoever  lovclh  and 
maketh  a  lie.'  It  is  because  he  so  loved  his  Lord,  that  he  shews 
such  uncompromising  abhorrence  of  the  national  blindness  that 
rejected  Him  and  the  sacerdotal  bigotry  that  hounded  Him  to 
death.  Intolerance  of  evil  and  of  opposition  to  tlie  truth  was 
sometimes  expressed  in  a  way  that  called  for  rebuke  ;  but  this 
would  become  less  and  less  so,  as  his  own  knowledge  of  the 
Lord  and  of  the  spirit  of  the  Gospel  deepened.  With  his  eagle 
gaze  more  and  more  fixed  on  the  Sun  of  Righteousness,  he 
became  more  and  more  keenly  alive  to  the  awful  case  of  those 
who  'loved  the  darkness  rather  than  the  light,  because  their 


INTRODUCTION.  17 


works  were  evil'  (iii.  19).  Eternity  for  him  was  a  thing  not  of 
the  future  but  of  the  present  (iii.  36,  v.  24,  vi.  47,  54);  and 
whereas  the  world  tries  to  make  time  the  measure  of  eternity, 
he  knows  that  eternity  is  the  measure  of  time.  Only  from  the 
point  of  view  of  eternal  hfe,  only  from  its  divine  side,  can  this 
life,  both  in  its  nothingness  and  in  its  infinite  consequences, 
be  rightly  estimated  :  for  *  the  world  passeth  away  and  the  lust 
thereof,  but  he  that  doeth  the  will  of  God  abideth  for  ever' 
(i  John  ii.  17). 

We  thus  see  how  at  the  end  of  a  long  life  he  was  specially 
fitted  to  write  what  has  been  well  called  'the  Gospel  of  Eternity' 
and  'the  Gospel  of  Love.'  It  is  at  the  end  of  life,  and  when 
the  other  side  of  the  grave  is  in  sight,  that  men  can  best  form 
an  estimate  both  of  this  world  and  of  the  world  to  come.  If 
that  is  true  of  all  men  of  ordinary  seriousness,  much  more  true 
must  it  have  been  of  him,  who  from  his  youth  upwards  had 
been  an  Apostle,  whose  head  had  rested  on  the  Lord's  breast, 
who  had  stood  beside  the  Cross,  had  witnessed  the  Ascension, 
had  cherished  till  her  death  the  Mother  of  the  Lord,  had  seen 
the  Jewish  dispensation  closed  and  the  Holy  City  overthrown, 
and  to  whom  the  beatific  visions  of  the  Apocalypse  had  been 
granted.  No  wonder  therefore  if  his  Gospel  seems  to  be  raised 
above  this  world  and  to  belong  to  eternity  rather  than  to  time. 
And  hence  its  other  aspect  of  being  also  '  the  Gospel  of  Love  :' 
for  Love  is  eternal.  Faith  and  Hope  are  for  this  world,  but 
can  have  no  place  when  '  we  shall  see  Him  as  He  is '  and 
'  know  even  as  we  are  known.'  Love  is  both  for  time  and  for 
eternity. 

"They  sin  who  tell  us  Love  can  die, 
With  life  all  other  passions  fly, 
All  others  are  but  vanity. 
In  heaven  ambition  cannot  dwell, 
Nor  avarice  in  the  vaults  of  hell ; 
Earthly,  these  passions  of  the  earth 
They  perish  where  they  had  their  birth, 
But  Love  is  indestructible. 


s.  JOHN 


i8  INTRODUCTION. 


Its  holy  flame  for  ever  burnetii, 

From  heaven  it  came,  to  heaven  returneth. 

Too  oft  on  earth  a  troubled  guest, 

At  times  deceived,   at  times  oppressed, 

It  here  is  tried,  and  purified. 

Then  hath  in  heaven  its  perfect  rest : 

It  soweth  here  with  toil  and  care. 

But  the  harvest-time  of  Love  is  there." 

SOUTHEY. 


CHAPTER    II. 

THE  AUTHENTICITY  OF  THE  GOSPEL. 

The  Fourth  Gospel  is  the  battle  field  of  the  New  Testament, 
as  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  of  the  Old  :  the  genuineness  of  both 
will  probably  always  remain  a  matter  of  controversy.  With 
regard  to  the  Gospel,  suspicion  respecting  it  was  aroused  in 
some  quarters  at  the  outset,  but  very  quickly  died  out ;  to  rise 
again,  however,  with  immensely  increased  force  in  the  eighteenth 
century,  since  which  time  to  the  present  day  the  question  has 
scarcely  ever  been  allowed  to  rest.  The  scope  of  the  present 
work  admits  of  no  more  than  an  outline  of  the  argument  being 
prescnlei 

i.     The  Extcr)ial  Evidence. 

In  this  section  of  the  argument  two  objections  are  made  to 
the  Fourth  Gospel  :  (i)  the  sile7ice  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  ; 
(2)  its  rejection  by  Marcion,  the  Alogi,  and  perhaps  another 
sect. 

(i)  The  silence  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  if  it  were  a  fact, 
would  not  be  an  insuperable  difficulty.  It  is  admitted  on  all 
sides  that  the  Fourth  Gospel  was  published  long  after  the 
others,  and  when  they  were  in  possession  of  the  field.  There 
was  nothing  to  lead  men  to  suppose  that  yet  another  Gospel 
would  be  forthcoming  ;  this  alone  would  make  people  jealous 


INTRODUCTION.  19 


of  its  claims.  And  when,  as  we  shall  see,  it  was  found  that 
certain  portions  of  it  might  be  made  to  assume  a  Gnostic  ap- 
pearance, jealousy  in  some  quarters  became  suspicion.  The 
silence,  therefore,  of  the  first  circle  of  Christian  writers  is  no 
more  than  we  might  reasonably  expect ;  and  when  taken  in 
connexion  with  the  universal  recognition  of  the  Gospel  by  the 
next  circle  of  writers  (A.  D.  170  onwards),  who  had  far  more 
evidence  than  has  reached  us,  may  be  considered  as  telling  for, 
rather  than  against  the  authenticity. 

But  the  silence  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  is  by  no  means 
certain.  The  Epistle  of  Barnabas  (c.  a.d.  120 — 130)  pro- 
bably refers  to  it  :  Keim  is  convinced  of  the  fact,  although  he 
denies  that  S.  John  wrote  the  Gospel.  The  shorter  Greek  form 
of  the  IGNATIAN  Epistles  (c.  a.d.  150)  contains  allusions  to  it, 
and  adaptations  of  it,  which  cannot  seriously  be  considered 
doubtful.  Bishop  Lightfoot^  says  of  the  expression  'living 
water'  (Rom.  vii.)  "Doubtless  a  reference  to  John  iv.  10,  11,  as 
indeed  the  whole  passage  is  inspired  by  the  Fourth  Gospel," 
and  of  the  words  'knows  whence  it  cometh  and  whither  it 
goeth'  {Philad.  vii.),  "  The  coincidence  (with  John  iii.  8)  is  quite 
too  strong  to  be  accidental ;"  and  "  the  Gospel  is  prior  to  the 
passage  in  Ignatius ;"  for  "  the  application  in  the  Gospel  is 
natural :  the  application  in  Ignatius  is  strained  and  secondary." 
Again,  on  the  words  'being  Himself  the  Door  of  the  Father' 
{Philad.  ix.)  he  says,  "Doubtless  an  allusion  to  John  x.  9." 
The  Epistle  of  Polycarp  (c.  a.d.  150)  contains  almost 
certain  references  to  the  First  Epistle  of  S.  John  :  and  as  it  is 
admitted  that  the  First  Epistle  and  the  Fourth  Gospel  are  by 
the  same  hand,  evidence  in  favour  of  the  one  may  be  used  as 
evidence  in  favour  of  the  other. 

Besides  these,  Papias  (martyred  about  the  same  time  as 
Polycarp)  certainly  knew  the  First  Epistle  (Eus.  H.  E.  in. 
xxxix.).  Basilides  (c.  A.D.  125)  seems  to  have  made  use  of 
the  Fourth  Gospel.    Justin  Martyr  (c.  a.d.  150)  knew  the 

1  I  am  enabled  to  make  these  quotations  from  the  great  work  of  his 
life  through  the  great  kindness  of  the  Bishop  of  Durham. 

2 — 2 


20  INTRODUCTION, 


Fourth  Gospel.  This  may  now  be  considered  as  beyond 
reasonable  doubt.  Not  only  does  he  exhibit  types  of  language 
and  doctrine  closely  akin  to  S.  John's,  but  in  the  Dialogue  with 
Trypho,  Lxxxviil.  (c  a.d.  146)  he  quotes  the  Baptist's  reply, 
'  I  am  not  the  Christ,  but  the  voice  of  one  crying'  (comp.  John 
i.  20,  23)  and  in  the  First  Apology,  LXI.,  he  paraphrases  Christ's 
words  on  the  new  birth  (John  iii.  3—5).  Moreover  Justin 
teaches  the  great  doctrine  of  S.  John's  Prologue,  that  Jesus 
Christ  is  the  Word.  Keim  regards  it  as  certain  that  Justin 
knew  the  Fourth  Gospel. 

When  we  pass  beyond  A.D.  170  the  evidence  becomes  full 
and  clear:    Tatian,  the  Epistle   to    the  Churches   of 

ViENNE    AND    LYONS,   CELSUS,  the   MURATORIAN   FRAGMENT, 

the  Clementine  Homilies,  Theophilus  of  Antioch 
(the  earliest  writer  who  mentions  S.  John  by  name  as  the 
author  of  the  Gospel— c  A.D.  175),  Athenagoras,  Irenaeus, 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  Tertullian.  Of  these 
none  perhaps  is  more  important  than  Irenaeus,  the  pupil 
of  Polycarp,  who  was  the  friend  of  S.  John.  It  never 
occurs  to  him  to  maintain  that  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  the 
work  of  S.  John;  he  treats  it  as  a  universally  acknowledged 
fact.  He  not  only  knows  of  no  time  when  there  were  not  four 
Gospels,  but  with  the  help  of  certain  quaint  arguments  he 
persuades  himself  that  there  must  be  four  Gospels,  neither 
more  nor  less  {Haer.  ill.  i.  i,  XL  8:  comp.  v.  xxxvi.  2).  So 
firmly  established  had  the  Fourth  Gospel  become  considerably 
before  the  end  of  the  second  century. 

(2)  The  rejection  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  by  Marclon  and 
some  obscure  sects  is  of  no  serious  importance.  There  is  no 
evidence  to  shew  that  the  Gospel  was  rejected  on  critical 
grounds;  rather  because  the  doctrines  which  it  contained  were 
disliked.  This  is  almost  certain  in  the  case  of  Marcion,  and 
probable  enough  in  the  other  cases. 

Whether  the  obscure  sect  mentioned  by  Irenaeus  {Haer.  ill. 
xi.  9)  as  rejecting  the  Fourth  Gospel  and  the  promises  of  the 
Paraclete  which  it  contains  are  the  same  as  those  whom  Epi- 
phanius   with    a    contemptuous    double   entendre    calls   Alogi 


INTRODUCTION.  21 

('devoid  of  [the  doctrine  of]  the  Logos'  or  'devoid  of  reason'), 
is  uncertain.  But  we  can  easily  understand  how  a  party  might 
arise,  who  in  perfectly  good  faith  and  with  the  best  motives 
might  reject  the  Fourth  Gospel  both  for  the  doctrine  of  the 
Logos  and  for  other  peculiarities  which  seemed  to  favour  the 
Gnosticism  of  Cerinthus.  None  of  the  Synoptists,  none  of  the 
Apostles,  had  thus  far  used  the  term  'Logos' ;  and  the  fact  that 
Cerinthus  made  use  of  it  must  have  made  its  prominence  in  the 
Prologue  to  the  Fourth  Gospel  doubly  suspicious.  Cerinthus 
maintained  that  Jesus  was  a  mere  man  on  whom  the  Logos  or 
Christ  descended  in  the  form  of  a  dove  at  his  baptism :  and  the 
P'ourth  Gospel  says  nothing  about  the  miraculous  conception  of 
Christ,  or  about  the  wonders  that  attended  and  attested  His 
birth,  but  begins  with  the  Baptism  and  the  descent  of  the  Spirit. 
The  Evangelist  pointedly  remarks  that  the  miracle  at  Cana  was 
the  first  miracle  :  perhaps  this  was  to  insinuate  that  previous  to 
the  Baptism  Jesus  (being  a  mere  man)  could  do  no  miracle. 
This  Gospel  omits  the  Transfiguration,  an  incident  from  which 
a  participation  of  His  human  Body  in  the  glory  of  the  Godhead 
might  be  inferred.  The  'prince'  or  'ruler  of  this  world,'  an 
expression  not  used  previously  by  any  Evangelist  or  Apostle, 
might  possibly  be  understood  to  mean  the  Demiurgits  of  the 
Cerinthian  system,  the  Creator  of  the  world,  and  the  God  of  the 
Jews,  but  inferior  to  and  ignorant  of  the  Supreme  God.  Again, 
the  Fourth  Gospel  is  silent  about  the  wonders  which  attended 
Christ's  death;  and  this  also  harmonizes  with  the  system  of 
Cerinthus,  who  taught  that  the  Logos  or  Christ  departed  when 
Jesus  was  arrested,  and  that  a  mere  man  suffered  on  the  Cross ; 
for  what  meaning  would  there  be  in  the  sympathy  of  nature  with 
the  death  of  a  mere  man  ^  ?  All  this  tends  to  shew  that  if  the 
Fourth  Gospel  was  rejected  in  certain  quarters  for  a  time,  this 
tells  little  or  nothing  against  its  genuineness.  Indeed  it  may 
fairly  be  said  to  tell  the  other  way ;  for  it  shews  that  the  uni- 
versal recognition  of  the  Gospel,  which  we  find  existing  from 
A.D.  170  onwards,  was  no  mere  blind  enthusiasm,  but  a  victory 

^  See  Dollinger's  Hippolytus  and  Callistus,  Chap.  v. 


INTRODUCTION. 


of  truth  over  baseless  though  not  unnatural  suspicion.  More- 
over, the  fact  that  these  over- wary  Christians  assigned  the 
Gospel  to  Cerinthus  is  evidence  that  the  Gospel  was  in  their 
ojjinion  written  by  a  contemporary  of  S.  John.  To  concede 
this  is  to  concede  the  whole  question. 

ii.     TJic  I/ifcrna!  Evidence. 

We  have  seen  already  that  there  are  some  features  of  this 
Gospel  which  would  seem  to  harmonize  with  a  Gnostic  system, 
and  that  it  need  not  surprise  us  if  some  persons  in  the  second 
century  hastily  concluded  that  it  savoured  of  Cerinthus.  It  is 
more  surprising  that  modern  critics,  after  a  minute  study  of  the 
Gospel,  should  think  it  possible  to  assign  it  to  a  Greek  Gnostic  of 
the  second  century.  To  say  nothing  of  the  general  tone  of  the 
Gospel,  there  are  two  texts  which  may  almost  be  said  to  sum  up 
the  theology  of  the  Evangelist  and  which  no  Gnostic  would  even 
have  tolerated,  much  less  have  written  :  '  The  Word  became 
flesh'  (i.  14);  'Salvation  is  of  the  Jews'  (iv.  22).  That  the 
Infinite  should  limit  itself  and  become  finite,  that  the  ineffable 
purity  of  the  Godhead  should  be  united  with  impure  matter, 
was  to  a  Gnostic  a  monstrous  supposition ;  and  this  was  what 
was  implied  in  the  Word  becoming  flesh.  Again,  that  the 
longed-for  salvation  of  mankind  should  come  from  the  Jews  was 
a  flat  contradiction  of  one  of  the  main  principles  of  Gnosticism, 
viz.  that  man's  perfection  is  to  be  looked  for  in  the  attainment  of 
a  higher  knowledge  of  God  and  the  universe,  to  which  the  Jew 
as  such  had  no  special  claim;  on  the  contrary  (as  some  Gnostics 
held),  the  Jews  had  all  along  mistaken  an  inferior  being  for  the 
Supreme  (}od.  Other  passages  in  the  Gospel  which  are  strongly 
adverse  to  the  theory  of  a  Gnostic  authorship  will  be  pointed 
out  in  the  notes.  And  here  the  Gnostics  themselves  are  our 
witnesses,  and  that  in  the  second  century.  Although  the  Fourth 
Gospel  was  frequently  used  against  them,  they  never  denied  its 
genuineness.  They  tried  to  explain  away  what  told  against 
them,  but  they  never  attempted  to  question  the  Apostolic 
authority  of  the  Gospel. 


INTRODUCTION.  23 

But  the  Gospel  not  only  contains  both  direct  and  indirect 
evidence  which  contradicts  this  particular  hypothesis;  it  also 
supplies  both  direct  and  indirect  evidence  of  the  true  hypothesis. 

(1)  There  is  direct  evidence  that  the  author  was  an  eye- 
witness of  what  he  relates.  In  two  places  (according  to  far  the 
most  reasonable,  if  not  the  only  reasonable  interpretation  of 
the  words)  the  Evangelist  claims  for  himself  the  authority  of 
an  eyewitness :  in  a  third  he  either  claims  it  for  himself  or 
others  claim  it  for  him.  '  We  beheld  His  glory'  (i.  14),  especially 
when  taken  in  conjunction  with  'which  we  beheld  and  our  hands 
handled'  (i  John  i  i),  cannot  well  mean  anything  else.  Scarcely 
less  doubtful  is  'He  that  hath  seen  hath  borne  witness,  and  his 
witness  is  true,  &c.'  (xix.  35).  'This  is  the  disciple  who  wit- 
nesseth  concerning  these  things,  and  who  wrote  these  things ; 
and  we  know  that  his  witness  is  true'  (xxi.  24),  even  if  it  be  the 
addition  of  another  hand,  is  direct  testimony  to  the  fact  that  the 
Evangelist  gives  us  not  second-hand  information,  but  what  he 
himself  has  heard  and  seen.    (See  notes  in  all  three  places.) 

Of  course  it  would  be  easy  for  a  forger  to  make  such  a 
claim;  and  accomplices  or  dupes  might  support  him.  But  it 
would  also  be  easy  in  so  wide  a  field  of  narrative  to  test  the 
validity  of  the  claim,  and  this  we  will  proceed  to  do  by  ex- 
amining the  indir-ect  evidence.  But  first  it  will  be  well  to  state 
the  enormous  difficulties  which  would  confront  a  writer  who 
proposed  in  the  second  century  to  forge  a  Gospel. 

The  condition  of  Palestine  during  the  life  of  Jesus  Christ  was 
unique.  The  three  great  civilisations  of  the  world  were  inter- 
mingled there  ;  Rome,  the  representative  of  law  and  conquest ; 
Greece,  the  representative  of  philosophical  speculation  and  com- 
merce ;  Judaism,  the  representative  of  religion.  The  relations  of 
these  three  elements  to  one  another  were  both  intricate  and  varied. 
In  some  particulars  there  was  a  combination  between  two  or 
more  of  them  ;  as  in  the  mode  of  conducting  the  census  (Luke 
ii.  3)  and  of  celebrating  the  Passover  (see  on  xiii.  23) ;  in  others 
there  was  the  sharpest  opposition,  as  in  very  many  ceremonial 
observances.  Moreover,  of  these  three  factors  it  was  exceedingly 
difficult  for  the  two  that  were  Gentile  to  comprehend  the  third. 


24  INTRODUCTION. 


The  Jew  always  remained  an  enigma  to  his  neighbours,  especially 
to  those  from  the  West.   This  was  owing  partly  to  proud  resei-ve 
on  his  part  and  contempt  on  theirs,  partly  to  the  inability  of 
each  side  to  express  itself  in  terms  that  would  be  intelligible  to 
the  other,  so  utterly  different  were  and  still  are  Eastern  and 
Western  modes  of  thought.     Again,  if  a  Greek  or  Roman  of  the 
first  century  had  taken  the  pains  to  study  Jewish  literature  with 
a  view  to  becoming  thoroughly  acquainted  with  this  strange 
people,  his  knowledge  of  them  would  still  have  remained  both 
defective  and  misleading,  so  much  had  been  added  or  changed 
by  tradition  and  custom.     To  a  Gentile  of  the  snond  century 
this  difficulty  would  be  very  greatly  increased  ;  for  Jerusalem 
had  been  destroyed  and  the  Jewish  nation  had  been  once  more 
scattered  abroad  on  the  face  of  the  earth.     With  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  Temple  the  keeping  of  the  Mosaic  Law  had  become 
a  physical  impossibility ;    and   the   Jews   who  had   lost   their 
language  in  the  Captivity  had  now  to  a  large  extent  lost  the 
ceremonial  law.      Even   a  Jew  of  the   second  century  might 
easily  be  mistaken  as  to  the  usages  of  his  nation  in  the  early 
part  of  the  first.     How  much  more,  then,  would  a  Gentile  be 
likely  to  go  astray  !     We  may  say,  therefore,  that  the  intricate 
combination  of  Jewish  and  Gentile  elements  in  Palestine  be- 
tween A.D.  I  and  A.D.  50  was  such  that  no  one  but  a  Jew  living 
in  the  country'  at  the  time  would  be  able  to  master  them  ;  and 
that  the  almost  total  destruction  of  the  Jewish  element  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  century  would  render  a  proper  appreciation  of 
the  circumstances  a  matter  of  the   utmost   difficulty   even   to 
a  careful  antiquarian.     Finally,  we  must  remember  that  anti- 
quarian research  in  those  days  was  almost  unknown  ;  and  that 
to  undertake  it  in  order  to  give  an  accurate  setting  to  a  histo- 
rical fiction  was  an  idea  that  was  not  born  until  long  after  the 
second  century.     We  may  safely  say  that  no  Greek  of  that  age 
would  ever  have  dreamed  of  going  through  the  course  of  archaeo- 
logical study  necessary  for  attempting  the  Fourth  Gospel ;  and 
even  if  he  had,  the  attempt  would  still  have  been  a  manifest 
faihirc.     He  would  have  fallen  into  far  more  numerous  and  far 
more  serious  errors  than  those  which  critics  (with  what  success 


INTRODUCTION.  25 

we  shall  see  hereafter)  have  tried  to  bring  home  to  the  Fourth 
Evangelist  (see  on  xi.  49). 

(2)  There  is  abundant  indirect  evidence  to  shew  that  the 
writer  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  was  a  Jew,  and  a  Jew  of  Palestine, 
who  was  an  eyewitness  of  most  of  the  events  which  he  relates. 
If  this  can  be  made  out  with  something  like  certainty,  the  circle 
of  possible  authors  will  be  very  much  reduced.  But  in  this 
circle  of  possible  authors  we  are  not  left  to  conjecture  There 
is  further  evidence  to  shew  that  he  was  an  Apostle,  and  the 
Apostle  S.  John.  (See  Sanday,  Authorship  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  Chap,  xix.) 

The  Evangelist  was  a  Jew. 

He  is  perfectly  at  home  in  Jewisli  opinions  and  points  of 
view.  Conspicuous  among  these  are  the  ideas  respecting  the 
Messiah  current  at  the  time  (i.  19 — 28,  45 — 49,  51 ;  iv.  25  ;  vi. 
14,  15;  vii.  26,  27,  31,  40—42,  52;  xii.  13,  34;  xix.  15,  21). 
Besides  these  we  have  the  hostility  between  Jews  and  Samari- 
tans (iv.  9,  20,  22 ;  viii.  48) ;  estimate  of  women  (iv.  27),  of  the 
national  schools  {vn.  15),  of  the  ^Dispersion'  (vii.  35),  of  Abra- 
ham and  the  Prophets  (viii.  52,  53),  &c.  &c. 

He  is  quite  familiar  also  with  Jewisli  usages  and  observ- 
ances. Among  these  we  may  notice  baptisrn  (i.  25,  iii.  22,  23, 
iv.  2),  purification  (ii.  6,  iii.  25,  xi.  55,  xviii.  28,  xix.  31),  the 
Jewish  Feasts  (ii.  13,  23,  v.  i,  vi.  4,  vii.  2,  37,  x.  22,  xiii.  i,  xviii. 
28,  xix.  31,  42),  circumcision  and  the  Sabbath  (vii.  22,  23),  law 
oi  evidence  (viii.  17,  18). 

The  form  of  the  Gospel,  especially  the  style  of  the  narra- 
tive, is  essentially  Jewisli.  The  language  is  Greek,  but  the 
arrangement  of  the  thoughts,  the  structure  of  the  sentences,  and 
a  great  deal  of  the  vocabulary  are  Hebrew.  And  the  source  of 
this  Hebrew  form  is  the  O.  T.  This  is  shewn  not  only  by  fre- 
quent quotations  but  by  the  imagery  employed  ; — the  lamb,  the 
living  water,  the  manna,  the  shepherd,  the  vine,  &c.  And  not 
only  so,  but  the  Christian  theology  of  the  Evangelist  is  based 
upon  the  theology  of  the  O.  T.  'Salvation  is  of  the  Jews'  (iv. 
22);  Moses  wrote  of  Christ  (v.  46;  i.  45);  Abraham  saw  His 


26  INTRODUCTION. 


day  (viii.  56);  He  was  typified  in  the  brazen  serpent  (iii.  14),  the 
manna  (vi.  32),  the  paschal  lamb  (xix.  36) ;  perhaps  also  in  the 
water  from  the  rock  (vii.  37)  and  the  pillar  of  fire  (viii.  12). 
Much  that  He  did  was  done  'that  the  Scripture  might  be 
fulfilled'  (xiii.  18,  xvii.  12,  xix.  24,  28,  36,  37;  comp.  ii.  22,  xx. 
9):  and  these  fulfilments  of  Scripture  are  noticed  not  as  in- 
teresting coincidences,  but  'that  ye  may  believe'  (xix.  35). 
Judaism  is  the  foundation  of  the  Christian  faith.  No  one  but 
a  Jew  could  have  handled  the  O.T.  Scriptures  in  this  way. 

The  Evangelist  was  a  Jew  of  Palestine. 

This  is  shewn  chiefly  by  his  great  topographical  knowledge, 
which  he  uses  both  with  ease  and  precision.  In  mentioning 
a  fresh  place  he  commonly  throws  in  some  fact  respecting 
it,  adding  clearness  or  interest  to  the  narrative.  A  forger 
would  avoid  such  gratuitous  statements,  as  being  unnecessary 
and  likely  by  being  wrong  to  lead  to  detection.  Thus,  one 
Bethany  is  'nigh  unto  Jerusalem,  about  fifteen  furlongs  off' 
(xi.  18),  the  other  is  'beyond  Jordan'  (i.  28);  Bethsaida  is  'the 
city  of  Andrew  and  Peter'  (i.  44);  'Can  any  good  thing  come 
out  of  Nazareth^  (i.  46);  Cana  is  'of  Galilee'  (ii.  i,  xxi  2) ; 
Action  is  'near  to  Salim,'  and  there  are  'many  waters' there 
(iii.  23) ;  Sychar  is  '  a  city  of  Samaria,  near  to  the  parcel  of 
ground  that  Jacob  gave  to  his  son  Joseph.  Now  Jacob's  well 
was  there' (iv.  5);  EphraimK's.  a  city  'near  to  the  wilderness' 
(xi.  54).  Comp.  the  minute  local  knowledge  implied  in  vi.  22 — 
24,  iv.  II,  ii.  12. 

This  familiarity  with  topography  is  the  more  remarkable 
in  the  case  of  Jerusalem,  which  (as  ail  are  agreed)  was 
destroyed  before  the  Fourth  Gospel  was  written.  Bcthesda  is 
'a  pool  by  the  sheep-gate,  having  five  porches'  (v.  2);  Siloam 
is  'a  pool,  which  is  by  interpretation  Sent'(ix.  7);  Solotnon^s 
porch  is  'in  the  Temple'  (x.  23).  Comp.  the  minute  knowledge 
of  the  city  and  suburbs  implied  in  xviii.  i,  28,  xix.  13,  17 — 20, 
41,  42. 

The  way  In  which  the  author  quotes  the  0.  T.  points  to 
the  same  conclusion.      He    is    not   dependent   on   the    LXX. 


INTRODUCTION.  27 


for  his  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures,  as  a  Greek-speaking  Jew 
born  out  of  Palestine  would  very  likely  have  been  :  he  appears 
to  know  the  original  Hebrew,  which  had  become  a  dead  lan- 
guage, and  was  not  much  studied  outside  Palestine.  Out  of 
fourteen  quotations  three  agree  with  the  Hebrew  against  the 
LXX.  (vi.  45,  xiii.  18,  xix.  37);  not  one  agrees  with  the  LXX. 
against  the  Hebrew.  The  majority  are  neutral,  either  agreeing 
with  both,  or  differing  from  both,  or  being  free  adaptations 
rather  than  citations.     (See  also  on  xii.  13,  15.) 

The  Evangelist's  doctrine  of  tlie  Logos  or  Word  confirms 
us  in  the  belief  that  he  is  a  Jew  of  Palestine.  The  form  which 
this  doctrine  assumes  in  the  Prologue  is  Palestinian  rather  than 
Alexandrian.     (See  note  on  'the  Word,'  i.  i.) 

The  Evangelist  was  an  Eyewitness  of  most  of  the 
events  which  he  relates. 

The  narrative  is  crowded  with  figures,  which  are  no  mere  non- 
entities to  fill  up  space,  but  which  live  and  move.  Where  they 
appear  on  the  scene  more  than  once  their  action  throughout  is 
harmonious,  and  their  characteristics  are  indicated  with  a  sim- 
plicity and  distinctness  which  would  be  the  most  consummate 
art  if  it  were  not  taken  from  real  life.  And  where  in  the  lite- 
rature of  the  second  century  can  we  find  such  skilful  delineation 
of  fictitious  characters  as  is  shewn  in  the  portraits  given  to  us 
of  the  Baptist,  the  beloved  disciple,  Peter,  Andrew,  Philip, 
Thomas,  Judas  Iscariot,  Pilate,  Nicodemus,  Martha  and  Mary, 
the  Samaritan  woman,  the  man  born  blind.''  Even  the  less 
prominent  persons  are  thoroughly  lifelike  and  real ;  Nathanael, 
Judas  not  Iscariot,  Caiaphas,  Annas,  Mary  Magdalene,  Joseph. 

Exact  notes  of  time  are  frequent;  not  only  seasons,  as  the 
Jewish  Feasts  noticed  above,  but  days  (i.  29,  35,  43,  ii.  i,  iv.  40, 
43,  vi.  22,  vii.  14,  37,  xi.  6,  17,  39,  xii.  i,  12,  xix.  31,  xx.  i,  26) 
and  hours  (i.  39,  iv.  6,  52,  xix.  14;  comp.  iii.  2,  vi.  16,  xiii.  30, 
xviii.  28,  XX.  I,  19,  xxi.  4). 

The  Evangelist  sometimes  knows  the  exact  or  approximate 
number  of  persons  (i.  35,  iv.  18,  vi.  10,  xix.  23)  and  objects  (ii.  6, 
vi.  9,  19,  xix.  39,  xxi.  8,  11)  mentioned  in  his  narrative. 


28  INTRODUCTION. 


Throughout  the  Gospel  we  have  examples  of  graphic  and 
vivid  description,  which  would  be  astounding  if  they  were  not 
the  result  of  personal  observation.  Strong  instances  of  this 
would  be  the  accounts  of  the  cleansing  of  the  Temple  (ii. 
14 — 16),  the  feeding  of  the  5000  (vi.  5 — 14),  the  healing  of  the 
man  born  blind  (ix.  6,  7),  the  feet-washing  (xiii.  4,  5,  12),  the 
betrayal  (xviii.  i — 13),  almost  all  the  details  of  the  Passion 
(xviii.,  xix.),  the  visit  to  the  sepulchre  (xx.  3 — 8). 

To  this  it  must  be  added  that  the  state  of  the  text  of  the 
Gospel,  as  we  find  it  quoted  by  early  writers,  shews  that  before 
the  end  of  the  second  century  there  were  already  a  great  many 
variations  of  readings  in  existence.  Such  things  take  time  to 
arise  and  multiply.  This  consideration  compels  us  to  believe 
that  the  ori;jinal  document  must  have  been  made  at  a  time 
when  eyewitnesses  of  the  Gospel  history  were  still  living.  See 
notes  on  i.  13,  18  and  ix.  35. 

The  Evangelist  was  an  Apostle. 

He  knows  the  thoughts  of  the  disciples  on  certain  occasions, 
thoughts  which  sometimes  surprise  us,  and  which  no  writer  of 
fiction  would  have  attributed  to  them  (ii.  11,  17,  22,  iv.  27, 
vi.  19,  60,  xii.  16,  xiii.  22,  28,  xx,  9,  xxi.  12),  He  knows  also 
words  that  were  spoken  by  the  disciples  in  private  to  Christ  or 
among  themselves  (iv.  31,  33,  ix.  2,  xi.  8,  12,  16,  xvi.  17,  29). 
He  is  familiar  with  the  haunts  of  the  disciples  (xi.  54,  xviii.  2, 
XX.  19).  Above  all,  he  is  one  who  was  very  intimate  with  the 
Lord  ;  for  he  knows  His  motives  (ii.  24,  25,  iv.  i — 3,  v.  6,  vi.  6, 
15,  vii.  I,  xiii.  i,  3,  11,  xvi.  19,  xviii.  4,  xix.  28)  and  can  bear 
witness  to  His  feelings  (xi.  33,  38,  xiii.  21), 

The  Evangelist  was  the  Apostle  S.  John. 

The  contents  of  the  two  previous  sections  are  almost  suffi- 
cient to  prove  this  last  point.  We  know  from  the  Synoptists 
that  three  disciples  were  specially  intimate  with  Jesus,  Peter, 
James,  and  his  brother  John.  S.  Peter  cannot  be  our  Evan- 
gelist :  he  was  put  to  death  long  before  the  very  earliest  date 
to  which  the  Fourth  Gospel  can  be  assigned.     Moreover  the 


INTRODUCTION.  29 


style  of  the  Gospel  is  quite  unlike  the  undoubted  First  Epistle 
of  S.  Peter.  Still  less  can  S.  James  be  the  author,  for  he  was 
martyred  long  before  S.  Peter.  Only  S.  John  remains,  and  he 
not  only  entirely  fits  in  with  the  details  already  noticed,  but 
also  having  long  outlived  the  rest  of  the  Apostles  he  is  the  one 
person  who  could  have  written  a  Gospel  considerably  later  in 
date  than  the  other  three. 

But  we  have  not  yet  exhausted  the  evidence.  The  concluding 
note  (xxi.  24)  declares  that  the  Gospel  was  written  by  'the 
disciple  whom  Jesus  loved'  {egapa,  xxi.  20),  This  disciple  is 
•  mentioned  in  three  other  places  under  the  same  title  (xiii.  23, 
xix.  26,  xxi.  7 ; — xx.  2  is  different).  He  is  some  one  who  is 
intimate  with  S.  Peter  (xiii.  24,  xxi.  7;  comp.  xviii.  15,  xx.  2), 
and  this  we  already  know  from  the  Synoptists  that  S.  John  was, 
and  we  learn  from  the  Acts  that  he  remained  so  (iii.  i,  3,  11, 
iv.  13,  19,  viii.  14).  He  is  one  of  those  enumerated  in  xxi.  i, 
and  unless  he  is  one  of  the  two  unnamed  disciples  he  must  be 
S.  John. 

One  more  point,  a  small  one,  but  of  very  great  significance, 
remains.  The  Fourth  Evangelist  carefully  distinguishes  places 
and  persons.  He  distinguishes  Cana  'of  Galilee'  (ii.  i,  xxi.  2) 
from  Cana  of  Asher;  Bethany  'beyond  Jordan'  (i.  28)  from 
Bethany  'nigh  unto  Jerusalem'  (xi.  18);  Bethsaida,  'the  city  of 
Andrew  and  Peter'  (i.  44),  from  Bethsaida  Julias.  He  distin- 
guishes also  Simon  Peter  after  his  call  from  others  named 
Simon  by  invariably  adding  the  new  name  Peter,  whereas  the 
Synoptists  often  call  him  simply  Simon.  The  traitor  Judas  is 
distinguished  as  the  'son  of  Simon'  (vi.  71,  xii.  4,  xiii.  2,  26) 
from  the  other  Judas,  who  is  expressly  said  to  be  'not  Iscariot' 
(xiv.  22),  while  the  Synoptists  take  no  notice  of  the  traitor's 
parentage.  S.  Thomas  is  thrice  for  the  sake  of  additional 
clearness  pointed  out  as  the  same  who  was  called  Didymus 
(xi.  16,  XX.  24,  xxi.  2),  a  name  not  given  by  the  Synoptists. 
Comp.  the  careful  identification  of  Nicodemus  (xix.  39)  and  of 
Caiaphas  (xi.  49,  xviii.  13).  And  yet  the  Fourth  Evangelist 
altogether  neglects  to  make  a  distinction  which  the  Synoptists 
do  make.     They  distinguish  John  the  son  of  Zebedee  from  his 


30  INTRODUCTION, 


namesake  by  frequently  calling  the  latter  'the  Baptist'  (more 
than  a  dozen  times  in  all).  The  Fourth  Evangelist  never  does 
so  ;  to  him  the  Baptist  is  simply  'John.'  He  himself  being  the 
other  John,  there  is  for  him  no  chance  of  confusion,  and  it  does 
not  occur  to  him  to  mark  the  distinction. 

iii.     Ajiswers  to  objections. 

We  are  now  on  too  firm  ground  to  be  shaken  by  isolated 
difficulties.  It  would  take  a  great  many  difficulties  of  detail  to 
counterbalance  the  difficulty  of  believing  that  the  Fourth  Gospel 
was  written  by  some  one  who  was  neither  an  Apostle  nor  even 
a  contemporary.  But  there  are  certain  difficulties  supposed  to 
be  involved  in  the  theory  that  the  Evangelist  is  S.  John  the 
Apostle,  some  of  which  are  important  and  deserve  a  separate 
answer.     They  are  mainly  these  ; — 

(i)  The  marked  dissimilarity  between  the  Fourth  Gospel 
and  the  three  others. 

(2)  The  marked  dissimilarity  between  the  Fourth  Gospel 
and  the  Revelation. 

(3)  The  difficulty  of  believing  that  S.  John  {a)  would  have 
"studiously  elevated  himself  in  every  way  above  the  Apostle 
Peter;"  {b)  would  have  magnified  himself  above  all  as  'the 
disciple  whom  Jesus  loved.' 

(4)  The  use  made  by  S.  Polycarp  of  S.  John's  authority  in 
the  Paschal  controversy. 

(i)  The  answer  to  the  first  of  these  objections  will  be  found 
below  in  Chapter  vi.  of  the  Introduction,  and  in  the  introductory 
note  to  Chapter  iii.  of  the  Gospel. 

(2)  The  answer  to  the  second  belongs  rather  to  the  Intro- 
duction to  the  Apocalypse.  The  answer  to  it  is  to  a  large 
extent  a  further  answer  to  the  first  objection;  for  "the  Apo- 
calypse is  doctrinally  the  uniting  link  between  the  Synoptists 
and  the  Fourth  Gospel"  (Westcott).  Great  as  are  the  differ- 
ences between  the  Revelation  and  the  Gospel,  the  leading  ideas 
of  both  are  the  same.  The  one  gives  us  in  a  magnificent  vision, 
the  other  in  a  great  historic  drama,  the  supreme  conflict  be- 
tween good  and  evil  and  its  issue.     In  both  Jesus  Christ  is  the 


INTRODUCTION.  31 

central  figure,  whose  victory  through  defeat  is  the  issue  of  the 
conflict.  In  both  the  Jewish  dispensation  is  the  preparation 
for  the  Gospel,  and  the  warfare  and  triumph  of  the  Christ  is 
described  in  language  saturated  with  the  O.  T.  Some  re- 
markable similarities  of  detail  will  be  pointed  out  in  the  notes 
(see  on  i.  14;  xi.  44;  xix.  2,  5,  13,  17,  20,  37).  The  difference  of 
date  will  go  a  long  way  towards  explaining  the  difference  of 
style. 

(3  a)  The  question,  'How  could  S.  John  have  studiously 
elevated  himself  in  every  way  above  the  Apostle  Peter?'  reminds 
us  of  the  famous  question  of  Charles  II.  to  the  Royal  Society. 
The  answer  to  it  is  that  S.  John  does  nothing  of  the  kind. 
S.  Peter  takes  the  lead  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  as  in  the  other 
three.  His  introduction  to  Christ  and  significant  naming  stand 
at  the  very  opening  of  the  Gospel  (i.  41,  42) ;  he  answers  in  the 
name  of  the  Twelve  (vi.  68);  he  is  prominent  if  not  first  at  the 
feet-washing  (xiii.  6) ;  he  directs  S.  John  to  find  out  who  is  the 
traitor  (xiii.  24) ;  he  takes  the  lead  in  defending  his  Master  at 
the  betrayal  (xviii.  10);  the  news  of  the  Resurrection  is  brought 
to  him  first  (xx.  2);  his  companion  does  not  venture  to  enter  the 
sepulchre  until  he  has  done  so  (xx.  6 — 8) ;  he  is  mentioned  first 
in  the  list  of  disciples  given  xxi.  2,  and  there  takes  the  lead 
(xxi.  3) ;  he  continues  to  take  the  lead  when  Jesus  appears  to 
them  (xxi.  7,  11);  he  receives  the  last  great  charge,  with  which 
the  Gospel  concludes  (xxi.  15 — 22). 

(ff)  To  suppose  that  the  phrase  'the  disciple  whom  Jesus 
loved'  implies  self-glorification  at  the  expense  of  others  is  alto- 
gether to  misunderstand  it.  It  is  not  impossible  that  the 
designation  was  given  to  him  by  others  before  he  used  it  of 
himself.  At  any  rate  the  affection  of  the  Lord  for  him  was 
so  well  known  that  such  a  title  would  be  well  suited  for  an 
oblique  indication  of  the  author's  personality.  Besides  thus 
gently  letting  us  behind  the  scenes  the  phrase  serves  two 
purposes :  (i)  it  is  a  permanent  expression  of  gratitude  on  the 
part  of  the  Evangelist  for  the  transcendent  benefit  bestowed 
upon  him ;  (2)  it  is  a  modest  explanation  of  the  prominent  part 
which  he  was  called  upon  to  play  on  certain  occasions.     Why 


32  INTRODUCTION. 


was  he  singled  out  to  be  told  who  was  the  traitor  (xiii.  23)? 
Why  was  the  care  of  the  Lord's  mother  entrusted  to  him  (xix.  26)  ? 
Why  was  he  allowed  to  recognise  the  Lord  at  the  sea  of  Ti- 
berias (xxi.  7)  before  any  of  the  rest  did  so  ?  The  recipient  of 
these  honours  has  only  one  explanation  to  give :  Jesus  loved 
him. 

(4)  In  the  controversy  as  to  the  right  time  of  keeping 
Easter  S.  Polycarp  defended  the  Asiatic  custom  of  keeping  the 
Christian  Passover  at  the  same  time  as  the  Jewish  Passover, 
viz.  the  evening  of  the  14th  Nisan,  "because  he  had  always  (so) 
observed  it  with  John  the  disciple  of  our  Lord,  and  the  rest  of 
the  Apostles,  with  whom  he  associated"  (Eus.  H.  E.  v.  xxiv.  16). 
On  this  ground  he  refused  to  yield  to  Anicetus,  Bishop  of  Rome, 
though  he  did  not  require  Anicetus  to  give  way  to  him.  But, 
as  we  shall  see  (Appendix  A),  the  Fourth  Gospel  clearly  re- 
presents the  Crucifixion  as  taking  place  on  the  14th  Nisan,  and 
the  Last  Supper  as  taking  place  the  evening  before.  Therefore, 
either  Polycarp  falsely  appeals  to  S.  John's  authority  (which  is 
most  improbable),  or  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  not  by  S.  John.  But 
this  objection  confuses  two  things,  the  Christian  Passover  or 
Easter,  and  the  Last  Supper  or  institution  of  the  Eucharist.  The 
latter  point  was  not  in  dispute  at  all.  The  question  debated 
was  whether  the  Christian  Churches  in  fixing  the  time  of  Easter 
were  to  follow  the  Jewish  Calendar  exactly  or  a  Christian 
modification  of  it.  S.  Polycarp  claimed  S.  John  as  sanctioning 
the  former  plan,  and  nothing  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  incon- 
sistent with  such  a  view.  Schiirer,  who  denies  the  authenticity 
of  the  Gospel,  has  shewn  that  no  argument  against  the  au- 
thenticity can  be  drawn  from  the  Paschal  controversy. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE   PLACE   AND   DATE. 

Tradition  is  unanimous  in  giving  Ephcsus  as  the  place  where 
S.  John  resided  during  the  latter  part  of  his  life,  and  where  the 


IK^TRODUCTION.  33 

Fourth  Gospel  was  written.  There  is  no  sufficient  reason  for 
doubting  this  strong  testimony,  which  may  be  accepted  as 
practically  certain. 

There  is  also  strong  evidence  to  shew  that  the  Gospel  was 
written  at  the  request  of  the  elders  and  disciples  of  the  Chris- 
tian Churches  of  Asia.  We  have  this  on  the  early  and  inde- 
pendent authority  of  the  Muratorian  Fragment  (c.  a.d.  170) 
and  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  (c.  A.D.  190) ;  and  this  is  con- 
firmed by  Jerome.  No  doubt  S.  John  had  often  delivered  the 
contents  of  his  Gospel  orally ;  and  the  elders  wished  before  he 
died  to  preserve  it  in  a  permanent  form.  Moreover,  difficulties 
had  arisen  in  the  Church  which  called  for  a  recasting  of  Apos- 
tolic doctrine.  The  destruction  of  Jerusalem  had  given  alto- 
gether a  new  turn  to  Christianity:  it  had  severed  the  lingering 
and  hampering  connexion  with  Judaism;  it  had  involved  a 
readjustment  of  the  interpretations  of  Christ's  promises  about 
His  return.  Again,  the  rise  of  a  Christian  philosophy,  shading 
off  by  the  strangest  compromises  and  colouring  into  mere  pagan 
speculation,  called  for  a  fresh  statement,  in  terms  adequate  to 
the  emergency,  and  by  a  voice  sufficient  in  authority,  of  Chris- 
tian truth.  There  is  both  external  and  internal  evidence  to 
shew  that  a  crisis  of  this  kind  was  the  occasion  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel. 

The  precise  date  cannot  be  determined  with  certainty.  There 
are  indications  in  the  Gospel  itself  that  it  was  written  late  in  the 
author's  life  time.  In  his  narrative  he  seems  to  be  looking  back 
after  a  long  lapse  of  time  (vii.  39,  xxi.  19).  And  as  we  study  it, 
we  feel  that  it  is  the  result  of  a  larger  experience  of  God's  Pro- 
vidence and  of  a  wider  comprehension  of  the  meaning  of  His 
Kingdom  than  was  possible  at  the  time  when  the  other  Evan- 
gelists, especially  the  first  two  of  them,  wrote  their  Gospels. 
All  this  induces  us  to  place  the  date  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  as 
late  as  possible;  and  tradition  (as  we  have  seen  in  Chap,  r) 
represents  S.  John  as  living  to  extreme  old  age.  S.  John  would 
not  begin  to  teach  at  Ephesus  until  some  time  after  S.  Paul 
left  it,  i.e.  not  much  before  A.D.  70.  If  Irenaeus  is  right  in 
saying  that  S.  Luke's  Gospel  was  not  written  till  after  the  death 

S.  JOHN  ^ 


34  INTRODUCTION. 


of  S.  Peter  and  S.  Paul  {Haer.  ill.  i.  i),  this  would  again  place 
the  writing  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  considerably  later  than  A.D.  70. 
It  is  not  improbable  that  the  first  twenty  chapters  were  written 
a  considerable  time  before  the  Gospel  was  published,  that  the 
last  chapter  was  added  some  years  later,  and  then  the  whole 
given  to  the  church  (see  introductory  note  to  chap.  xxi.).  S.John 
may  have  lived  almost  if  not  quite  to  the  end  of  the  century; 
therefore  from  A.D.  80  to  95  would  seem  to  be  the  period  within 
which  it  is  probable  that  the  Gospel  was  published. 

Those  who  deny  that  S.  John  is  the  author  have  tried  almost 
every  date  from  A.D.  no  to  165.  Dividing  this  period  into  two, 
we  have  this  dilemma :— If  the  Gospel  was  published  between 
no  and  140,  why  did  not  the  hundreds  of  Christians,  who  had 
known  S.  John  during  his  later  years,  denounce  it  as  a  forgery.? 
If  it  was  not  published  till  between  140  and  165,  how  did  it 
become  universally  accepted  by  170? 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE   OBJECT   AND   PLAN. 

i.     The  Object. 

These  two  subjects,  the  object  and  the  plan,  naturally  go 
together,  for  the  one  to  a  large  extent  determines  the  other : 
the  purpose  with  which  the  Evangelist  wrote  his  Gospel  greatly 
influences  the  form  which  it  assumes.  What  that  purpose  was 
he  tells  us  plamly  himself  :  '  These  have  been  written  that  ye 
may  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  and  that 
believirtg ye  may  have  life  in  His  name'  (xx.  31).  His  object  is 
not  to  write  the  life  of  Christ ;  if  it  were,  we  might  wonder  that 
out  of  his  immense  stores  of  personal  knowledge  he  has  not 
given  us  a  great  deal  more  than  he  has  done.  Rather,  out  of 
these  abundant  stores  he  has  made  a  careful  and  self-denying 
selection  witii  a  view  to  producing  a  particular  effect  upon  his 
readers,  and  by  means  of  that  effect  to  open  to  them  an  inesti- 


INTRODUCTION.  35 

mable  benefit.  In.  this  way  his  object  manifestly  influences  his 
plan.  He  might  have  given  himself  the  delight  of  pouring 
forth  streams  of  information,  which  he  alone  possessed,  to 
a  community  ardently  thirsting  for  it.  But  such  prodigality 
would  have  obscured  rather  than  strengthened  his  argument : 
he  therefore  rigidly  limits  himself  in  order  to  produce  the  de- 
sired effect. 

The  effect  is  twofold  :  (i)  to  create  a  belief  that  Jesus  is  the 
Christ ;  (2)  to  create  a  belief  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God.  The 
first  truth  is  primarily  for  the  Jew  ;  the  second  is  primarily  for 
the  Gentile  ;  then  both  are  for  all  united.  The  first  truth  leads 
the  Jew  to  become  a  Christian  ;  the  second  raises  the  Gentile 
above  the  barriers  of  Jewish  exclusiveness ;  the  two  together 
bring  eternal  life  to  both. 

To  the  Jews  the  Evangelist  would  prove  that  Jesus,  the  Man 
who  had  been  known  to  them  personally  or  historically  by  that 
name,  is  the  Christ,  the  Messiah  for  whom  they  had  been  look- 
ing, in  whom  all  types  and  prophecies  have  been  fulfilled,  to 
whom  therefore  the  fullest  allegiance  is  due.  To  the  Gentiles 
the  Evangelist  would  prove  that  this  same  Jesus,  of  whom  they 
also  have  heard,  is  the  Son  of  God,  the  Only  God,  theirs  as 
well  as  His,  the  Universal  Father,  their  Father  as  well  as  His  ; 
whose  Son's  mission,  therefore,  must  be  coextensive  with  His 
Father's  family  and  kingdom.  Long  before  the  promise  was 
made  to  Abraham  'all  things  came  into  being  through  Him' 
(i.  3):  if  therefore  the  Jews  had  a  claim  on  the  Christ,  the  Gen- 
tiles had  a  still  older  claim  on  the  Son  of  God. 

These  two  great  truths,  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  and  that 
Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God,  being  recognised  and  believed,  the 
blessed  result  follows  that  believers  have  life  in  His  name,  i.e. 
in  Him  as  revealed  to  them  in  the  character  which  His  name 
implies.  There  is  neither  Gentile  nor  Jew,  circumcision  nor 
uncircumcision,  barbarian,  Scythian,  bond  nor  free  ;  but  Christ  is 
all  and  in  all ;  all  are  one  in  Christ  Jesus  (Col.  iii.  1 1  ;  Gal.  iii.  28). 

There  is  no  need  to  look  for  any  additional  object  over  and 
above  that  which  the  Evangelist  himself  states  ;  although  this 
is  frequently  done.      Thus  from  the  time  of  Irenaeus  {Haer. 

3-2 


36  INTRODUCTION. 


III.  xi.)  it  has  been  common  to  say  that  S.  John  wrote  his 
Gospel  against  Cerinthus  and  other  heretics.  By  clearly  teach- 
ing the  main  truths  of  the  Gospel  S.  John  necessarily  refutes 
errors ;  and  it  is  possible  that  here  and  there  some  particular 
form  of  error  was  in  his  mind  when  he  wrote :  but  the  refuta- 
tion of  error  is  not  his  object  in  writing.  If  his  Gospel  is  not 
a  Life  of  Christ,  still  less  is  it  a  polemical  treatise. 

Again,  from  the  time  of  Eusebius  [H.  E.  lii.  xxiv.  ii)  and 
earlier  it  has  been  maintained  that  S.  John  wrote  to  supplement 
the  Synoptists,  recording  what  had  not  been  recorded  by  them. 
No  doubt  he  does  supplement  them  to  a  large  extent,  especially 
as  regards  the  ministry  in  Judasa :  but  it  does  not  follow  from 
this  that  he  wrote  in  order  to  supplement  them.  Where  some- 
thing not  recorded  by  them  would  suit  his  purpose  equally 
well  he  would  naturally  prefer  it ;  but  he  has  no  hesitation  in 
retelling  what  has  already  been  told  by  one,  two,  or  even  all 
three  of  them,  if  he  requires  it  for  the  object  which  he  has  in 
view  (see  introductory  note  to  chap.  vi.). 

ii.  The  Plan. 
In  no  Gospel  is  the  plan  so  manifest  as  in  the  Fourth.  Per- 
haps we  may  say  of  the  others  that  they  scarcely  have  a  plan. 
We  may  divide  and  subdivide  them  for  our  own  convenience ; 
but  there  is  no  clear  evidence  that  the  three  Evangelists  had 
any  definite  scheme  before  them  in  putting  together  the  frag- 
ments of  Gospel  history  which  they  have  preserved  for  us.  It 
is  quite  otherwise  with  the  Fourth  Evangelist.  The  different 
scenes  from  the  life  of  Jesus  Christ  which  he  puts  before  us, 
are  not  only  carefully  selected  but  carefully  arranged,  leading 
up  step  by  step  to  the  conclusion  expressed  in  the  confession  of 
S.  Thomas,  '  My  Lord  and  my  God.'  But  if  there  is  a  develop- 
ment of  faith  and  love  on  the  one  side  in  those  who  accept  and 
follow  Jesus,  so  also  there  is  a  development  of  unbelief  and 
hatred  on  the  other  in  those  who  reject  and  persecute  Him. 
*  The  Word  became  flesh ; '  but,  in  as  much  as  He  was  not 
generally  recognised  and  welcomed.  His  presence  in  the  world 
necessarily  involved  a  separation  and  a  conflict ;  a  separation 


INTRODUCTION.  37 


of  light  from  darkness,  truth  from  falsehood,  good  from  evil, 
life  from  death,  and  a  conflict  between  the  two.  It  is  the 
critical  episodes  in  that  conflict  round  the  person  of  the  Incar- 
nate Word  that  the  Evangelist  places  before  us  one  by  one. 
These  various  episodes  taken  one  by  one  go  far  to  shew, — 
taken  all  together  and  combined  with  the  issue  of  the  conflict 
irrefragably  prove, — 'that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God.' 

The  main  outlines  of  the  plan  are  these  : — 

I.  The  Prologue  or  Introduction  (i.  i — 18). 

1.  The  Word  in  His  own  Nature  (i.  i — 5). 

2.  His  revelation  to  men  and  rejection  by  them 

(i.  6-13). 

3.  His  revelation  of  the  Father  (i.  14 — 18). 

II.  First  main  Division.     Christ's  Ministry,  or  His  Revela- 

tion OF  Himself  to  the  World  (i.  19 — xii.  50). 

a.  The  Testimony  (i.  19 — 51) 

1.  of  John  the  Baptist  (i.  19 — 37), 

2.  of  the  disciples  (i.  38 — 51), 
5.     of  the  first  sign  (ii.  i — 11). 

b.  The  Work  (ii.  13 — xi.  57) 

I.     among  Jews  (ii.  13 — iii.  36), 
1.     among  Samaritans  (iv.  i — 42), 

3.  among  Galileans  (iv.  43—54), 

(The  work  has  bccovte  a  Conflict).    4.  among  mixed  multitudes  (v. — xi.). 

c.  The  Judgment  (xii.) 

I.     of  men  (i — 36), 
1.     of  the  Evangelist  (37 — 43), 
3.     of  Christ  (44—50). 
Close  of  Christ's  public  ministry. 

III.  Second  main  Division.     The  Issues  of  Christ's  Ministry, 

or    His    Revelation    of   Himself   to    His    Disciples 
(xiii. — XX.). 

d.  The  inner  Glorification  of  Christ  in  His  last  Dis- 

courses (xiii. — xvii.). 

1.  His  love  in  humiliation  (xiii.  i — 30). 

2.  His  love  in  keeping  His  own  (xiii.  31  — xv.  27). 


38  INTRODUCTION. 


3.  The  promise  of  the  Comforter  and  of  His  re- 

turn (xvi.). 

4.  The  prayer  of  the  High-Priest  (xvii.). 

e.    The   outer  Glorification   of  Christ  in  His    Passion 
(xviii.,  xix.). 

1.  The  betrayal  (xviii.  i — 11). 

2.  The  ecclesiastical  and   civil   trials  (xviii.  12 — 

xix.  16). 

3.  The  crucifixion  and  burial  (xix.  17 — 4 ■2). 

/.     The  Resurrection  (xx.). 

1.  The  manifestation  to  Mary  Magdalene  (i — ^18). 

2.  The  manifestation  to  the  ten  (19 — 23). 

3.  The  manifestation  to  S.  Thomas  with  the  ten 

(24—29). 

4.  The  conclusion  (30,  31). 

IV.    The  Epilogue  or  Appendix  (xxi.). 

CHAPTER  V. 

THE   CHARACTERISTICS   OF   THE   GOSPEL. 

Here  again,  only  a  ^e\v  leading  points  can  be  noticed  :  the 
subject  is  capable  of  almost  indefinite  expansion. 

I.  From  the  time  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  (c.  A.  D.  190) 
this  Gospel  has  been  distinguished  as  a  'spiritual  Gospel' 
(Eus.  H.  E.  VI.  xiv.  7).  The  Synoptists  give  us  mainly  the 
external  acts  of  Jesus  Christ:  S.  John  lays  before  us  glimpses 
of  the  inner  life  and  spirit  of  the  Son  of  God.  Their  narrative 
is  chiefly  composed  of  His  manifold  and  ceaseless  dealings  with 
men:  in  S.  John  we  have  rather  His  tranquil  and  unbroken 
union  with  His  Father.  The  heavenly  element  which  forms 
the  background  of  the  first  three  Gospels  is  the  atmosphere  of 
the  Fourth. 

It  is  quite  in  harmony  with  this  characteristic  of  the  Gospel 
that  it  should  contain  such  a  much  larger  proportion  of  Christ's 


INTRODUCTION.  39 


words  than  we  find  in  the  others :  discourses  here  form  the 
principal  part,  especially  in  the  latter  half  of  the  Gospel.  Not 
even  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  do  we  learn  so  much  of  'the 
spirit  of  Christ'  as  in  the  discourses  recorded  by  S.  John.  And 
what  is  true  of  the  central  figure  is  true  also  of  the  numerous 
characters  which  give  such  life  and  definiteness  to  S.  John's 
narrative  :  they  also  make  themselves  known  to  us  by  what 
they  say  rather  than  by  what  they  do.  And  this  suggests  to  us 
a  second  characteristic. 

2.  No  Gospel  is  so  rich  in  typical  but  thoroughly  real 
AND  LIFELIKE  GROUPS  AND  INDIVIDUALS  as  the  Fourth.  They 
are  sketched,  or  rather  by  their  words  are  made  to  sketch  them- 
selves, with  a  vividness  and  precision  which,  as  already  observed, 
is  almost  proof  that  the  Evangelist  was  an  eyewitness  of  what 
he  records. 

Among  the  groups  we  have  the  disciples  strangely  misunder- 
standing Christ  (iv.  33,  xi.  12)  yet  firmly  believing  on  Him 
(xvi.  30) ;  His  brethf-eii,  dictating  a  policy  to  Him  and  not 
believing  on  Him  (vii.  3  —  5);  John's  disciples,  with  their 
jealousy  for  the  honour  of  their  master  (iii.  26)  ;  the  Samari- 
tans, proud  to  believe  from  their  own  experience  rather  than 
on  the  testimony  of  a  woman  (iv.  42) ;  the  tnultitude,  sometimes 
thinking  Jesus  possessed,  sometimes  thinking  Him  the  Christ 
(vii.  20,  26,  41) ;  the  Jews,  claiming  to  be  Abraham's  seed  and 
seeking  to  kill  the  Messiah  (viii.  33,  37,  40) ;  the  Pharisees, 
haughtily  asking,  'Hath  any  one  of  the  rulers  or  of  the  Phari- 
sees believed  on  Him?'  (vii.  48)  and  'are  we  also  blind?'  (ix.  40) ; 
the  chief  priests,  professing  to  fear  that  Christ's  success  will  be 
fatal  to  the  national  existence  (xi.  48),  and  declaring  to  Pilate 
that  they  have  no  king  but  Caesar  (xix.  15).  In  the  sketching 
of  these  groups  nothing  is  more  conclusive  evidence  of  the 
Evangelist  being  contemporary  with  his  narrative  than  the  way 
in  which  the  conflict  and  fluctuations  between  belief  and  un- 
belief among  the  multitude  and  'the  Jews'  is  indicated. 

The  types  of  individual  character  are  still  more  varied,  and 
as  in  the  case  of  the  groups  they  exemplify  both  sides  in  the 
great  conflict,  as  well  as  those  who  wavered  between  the  two. 


40  INTRODUCTION. 


On  the  one  hand  we  have  the  Mother  of  the  Lord  (ii.  3 — 5, 
xix.  25—27),  the  beloved  disciple  and  his  master  the  Baptist 
(i_  6—37,  iii.  23 — 36),  S.  Andrew  and  Mary  of  Bethany,  all  unfail- 
ing in  their  allegiance  ;  S.  Peter  falling  and  rising  again  to  deeper 
love  (xviii.  27,  xxi.  17);  S.  Philip  rising  from  eager  to  firm  faith 
(xiv.  8),  S.  Thomas  from  desponding  and  despairing  love  (xi.  16, 
XX.  25)  to  faith,  hope,  and  love  (xx.  28).  There  is  the  sober  but 
uninformed  faith  of  Martha  (xi.  21,  24,  27),  the  passionate  affec- 
tion of  Mary  Magdalene  (xx.  i — 18).  Among  conversions  we 
have  the  instantaneous  but  deliberate  conviction  of  Nathanael 
(i.  49),  the  gradual  but  courageous  progress  in  belief  of  the 
schismatical  Samaritan  woman  (see  on  iv.  19)  and  of  the  unin- 
structed  man  born  blind  (see  on  xi.  21),  and  in  contrast  with 
both  the  timid,  hesitating  confessions  of  Nicodemus,  the  learned 
Rabbi  (iii.  i,  vii.  50,  xix.  39).  On  the  other  side  we  have  the 
cowardly  wavering  of  Pilate  (xviii.  38,  39,  xix.  i — 4,  8,  12,  16), 
the  unscrupulous  resoluteness  of  Caiaphas  (xi.  49,  50),  and  the 
blank  treachery  of  Judas  (xiii.  27,  xviii.  2 — 5).  Among  the 
minor  characters  there  is  the  'ruler  of  the  feast'  (ii.  9,  10),  the 
'nobleman'  (iv.  49),  the  man   healed  at  Bethesda  (v.  7,   11, 

14,  15)- 

If  these  groups  and  individuals  are  creations  of  the  imagi- 
nation, it  is  no  exaggeration  to  say  that  the  author  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel  is  a  genius  superior  to  Shakspere. 

3.  From  typical  characters  we  pass  on  to  typical  or  sym- 
bolical events.  Symbolism  is  a  third  characteristic  of  this 
Gospel.  Not  merely  does  it  contain  the  three  great  allegories 
of  the  Sheep-fold,  the  Good  Shepherd,  and  the  Vine,  from  which 
Christian  art  has  drawn  its  symbolism  from  the  very  earliest 
times  ;  but  the  whole  Gospel  from  end  to  end  is  penetrated 
with  the  spirit  of  symbolical  representation.  In  nothing  is  this 
more  apparent  than  in  the  eight  miracles  which  the  Evangelist 
has  selected  for  the  illustration  of  his  Divine  Epic.  His  own 
word  for  them  leads  us  to  expect  this  :  to  him  they  are  not  so 
much  miracles  as  'signs.'  The  first  two  are  introductory,  and 
seem  to  be  pointed  out  as  such  by  S.  John  (ii.  11,  iv.  54).  The 
turning  of  the  water  into  wine  exhibits  the  Messiah's  sovereign 


INTRODUCTION,  41 


power  over  inanimate  matter,  the  healing  of  the  official's  son 
His  power  over  the  noblest  of  living  bodies.  Moreover  they 
teach  two  great  lessons  which  lie  at  the  very  root  of  Christianity ; 
(i)  that  Christ's  Presence  hallows  the  commonest  events  and 
turns  the  meanest  elements  into  the  richest ;  (2)  that  the  way  to 
win  blessings  is  to  trust  the  Bestower  of  them.  The  third  sign, 
healing  the  paralytic,  shews  the  Messiah  as  the  great  Restorer, 
repairing  the  physical  as  well  as  the  spiritual  ravages  of  sin 
(v.  14).  In  the  feeding  of  the  5000  the  Christ  appears  as  the 
Support  of  life,  in  the  walking  on  the  sea  as  the  Guardian  and 
Guide  of  His  followers.  The  giving  of  sight  to  the  man  born 
blind  and  the  raising  of  Lazarus  shew  that  He  is  the  Source  of 
Light  and  of  Life  to  men.  The  last  sign,  wrought  by  the  Risen 
Christ,  sums  up  and  concludes  the  whole  series  (xxi.  i — 12). 
Fallen  man,  restored,  fed,  guided,  enlightened,  delivered  from 
the  terrors  of  death,  passes  to  the  everlasting  shore  of  peace, 
where  the  Lord  is  waiting  to  receive  him. 

In  Nicodemus  coming  by  night,  in  Judas  going  out  into  the 
night,  in  the  dividing  of  Christ's  garments  and  the  blood  and 
water  from  His  side,  &c.  &c.  we  seem  to  have  instances  of  the 
same  love  of  symbolism.  These  historical  details  are  singled 
out  for  notice  because  of  the  lesson  which  lies  behind  them. 
And  if  we  ask  for  the  source  of  this  mode  of  teaching,  there 
cannot  be  a  doubt  about  the  answer  :  it  is  the  form  in  which 
almost  all  the  lessons  of  the  Old  Testament  are  conveyed. 
This  leads  us  to  another  characteristic, 

4.  Though  written  in  Greek,  S.  John's  Gospel  is  in  thought 
and   tone,   and    sometimes   in   the    form    of    expression    also, 

thoroughly  HEBREW,  AND  BASED  ON  THE  HEBREW  SCRIP- 
TURES. Much  has  been  already  said  on  this  point  in  Chap- 
ter II.  ii.  (2),  in  shewing  that  the  Evangelist  must  have  been  a 
Jew.  The  Gospel  sets  forth  two  facts  in  tragic  contrast :  (i)  that 
the  Jewish  Scriptures  in  endless  ways,  by  commands,  types,  and 
prophecies,  pointed  and  led  up  to  the  Christ ;  (2)  that  precisely 
the  people  who  possessed  these  Scriptures,  and  studied  them 
most  diligently,  failed  to  recognise  the  Christ  or  refused  to 
believe  in  Him,     In  this  aspect  the  Gospel  is  a  long  comment 


42  INTRODUCTION. 


on  the  mournful  text,  '  Ye  search  the  Scriptures  ;  because  in 
them  ye  think  ye  have  eternal  life  :  and  they  are  they  which 
testify  of  Me.  And  ye  will  not  come  to  Me,  that  ye  may  have 
life '  (v.  39,  40).  To  shew,  therefore,  the  way  out  of  this  tragical 
contradiction  between  a  superstitious  reverence  for  the  letter  of 
the  law  and  a  scornful  rejection  of  its  true  meaning,  S.  John 
writes  his  Gospel.  He  points  out  to  his  fellow-countrymen  that 
they  are  right  in  taking  the  Scriptures  for  their  guide,  ruinously 
wrong  in  the  use  they  make  of  them  :  Abraham,  Moses  and  the 
Prophets,  rightly  understood,  will  lead  them  to  adore  Him  whom 
they  have  crucified.  This  he  docs,  not  merely  in  genefal  slale- 
vtefits  (i.  45,  iv.  22,  v.  39,  46),  but  in  detail,  both  l^y  allusions; 
e.g.  to  Jacob  (i.  47,  51)  and  to  the  rock  in  the  wilderness  (vii.  37), 
and  by  direct  references;  e.g.  to  Abraham  (vii.  56),  to  the  brazen 
serpent  (iii.  14),  to  the  Bridegroom  (iii.  29),  to  the  manna  (vi.  49^ 
to  the  paschal  lamb  (xix.  36),  to  the  Psalms  (ii.  17,  .\.  34,  xiii.  18, 
xix.  24,  37),  to  the  Prophets  generally  (vi.  45,  [vii.  38]),  to  Isaiah 
(xii.  38,  40),  to  Zechariah  (xii.  15),  to  Micah  (vii.  42). 

All  these  passages  (and  more  might  easily  be  added)  tend  to 
shew  that  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  saturated  with  the  thoughts, 
imagery,  and  language  of  the  O.  T.  "Without  the  basis  of  the 
Old  Testament,  without  the  fullest  acceptance  of  the  unchanging 
divinity  of  the  Old  Testament,  the  Gospel  of  8.  John  is  an 
insoluble  riddle  "  (Westcott,  Introduction,  p.  Ixix.). 

5.  Yet  another  characteristic  of  this  Gospel  has  been  men- 
tioned by  anticipation  in  discussing  the  plan  of  it  (chap.  iv.  ii) ; 
— its  SYSTEMATIC  ARRANGEMENT.  It  is  the  only  Gospel  which 
clearly  has  a  plan.  What  has  been  given  above  as  an  outline 
of  the  plan  (iv.  ii.),  and  also  the  arrangement  of  the  miracles 
in  section  3  of  this  chapter,  illustrate  this  feature  of  the 
Gospel.  Further  examples  in  detail  will  be  pointed  out  in  the 
subdivisions  of  the  Gospel  given  in  the  notes. 

6.  The  last  characteristic  which  our  space  will  allow  us  to 
notice  is  its  style.  The  style  of  the  Gospel  and  of  the  First 
Epistle  of  S.  John  is  unique.  But  it  is  a  thing  to  be  felt  rather 
than  to  be  defined.  The  most  illiterate  reader  is  conscious  of 
it;  the  ablest   critic   cannot   analyse   it   satisfactorily.     A  few 


INTRODUCTION.  43 

main  features,  however,  may  be  pointed  out ;  the  rest  being  left 
to  the  student's  own  powers  of  observation. 

Ever  since  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  (c.  A.D.  250)  wrote  his 
masterly  criticism  of  the  differences  between  the  Fourth  Gospel 
and  the  Apocalypse  (Eus.  H.  E.  vil.  xxv.),  it  has  been  not  un- 
common to  say  that  the  Gospel  is  written  in  very  pure  Greek, 
free  from  all  barbarous,  irregular,  or  uncouth  expressions.  This 
is  true  in  a  sense ;  but  it  is  somewhat  misleading.  The  Greek 
of  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  pure,  as  that  of  a  Greek  Primer  is 
pure,  because  of  its  extreme  simplicity.  And  it  is  faultless  for 
the  same  reason  ;  blemishes  being  avoided  because  idioms  and 
intricate  constructions  are  avoided.  Elegant,  idiomatic,  clas- 
sical Greek  it  is  not. 

{fi)  This,  therefore,  is  one  element  in  the  style, — extreme 
simplicity.  The  clauses  and  sentences  are  connected  together 
by  simple  conjunctions  co-ordinately;  they  are  not  made  to  de- 
pend one  upon  another ;  '  In  Him  was  life,  and  the  life  was 
the  light  of  men  ; '  not  '  which  was  the  light,  &c.'  Even  where 
there  is  strong  contrast  indicated  a  simple  'and'  is  preferred  to 
'nevertheless'  or  'notwithstanding;'  'He  came  unto  His  own 
home,  and  His  own  people  received  Him  not.'  In  passages  of 
great  solemnity  the  sentences  are  placed  side  by  side  without 
even  a  conjunction  ;  'Jesus  answered...  Pilate  answered...  Jesus 
answered'  (xviii.  34 — 36).  The  words  of  others  are  given  in 
direct  not  in  oblique  oration.  The  first  chapter  (19 — 51),  and 
indeed  the  first  half  of  the  Gospel,  abounds  in  illustrations. 

{b)  This  simple  co-ordination  of  sentences  and  avoidance  of 
relatives  and  dependent  clauses  involves  a  good  deal  of  repeti- 
tion ;  and  even  when  repetition  is  not  necessary  we  find  it 
employed  for  the  sake  of  close  connexion  and  emphasis.  This 
constant  repetition  is  very  impressive.  A  good  example  of  it  is 
where  the  predicate  (or  part  of  the  predicate)  of  one  sentence 
becomes  the  subject  (or  part  of  the  subject)  of  the  next ;  or 
where  the  subject  is  repeated  ;  '  I  am  the  good  Shepherd;  the 
good  Shepherd  giveth  His  life  for  the  sheep  ; '  '  The  light  shineth 
in  the  darkness;  and  the  darkness  comprehended  it  not ; '  *  In 
the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and  the  Word  was  with  God,  and 


44  INTRODUCTION. 


the  Word  was  God.  Sometimes  instead  of  repeating  the  sub- 
ject S.  John  introduces  an  apparently  superfluous  demonstrative 
pronoun  ;  '  He  that  seeketh  the  glory  of  Him  that  sent  Him, 
this  one  is  true'  (vii.  i8);  'He  that  made  me  whole,  Mfl/ wa« 
said  unto  me'  (v.  ii).  The  personal  pronouns  are  frequently 
inserted  for  emphasis  and  repeated  for  the  same  reason.  This 
is  specially  true  of '  I  '  in  the  discourses  of  Christ. 

{c)  Although  S.  John  connects  his  sentences  so  simply,  and 
sometimes  merely  places  them  side  by  side  without  conjunc- 
tions, yet  he  very  frequently  points  out  a  sequence  in  fact  or  in 
thought.  His  two  most  characteristic  particles  are  'therefore' 
{oZv)  and  *  in  order  that '  (ii/a).  *  Therefore '  occurs  almost  ex- 
clusively in  narrative,  and  points  out  that  one  fact  is  a  conse- 
quence of  another,  sometimes  in  cases  where  this  would  not 
have  been  obvious  ;  '  He  came  therefore  again  into  Cana  of 
Galilee'  (iv.  46),  because  of  the  welcom.e  He  had  received  there 
before  ;  'They  sought  therefore  to  take  Him'  (vii.  30),  because 
of  His  claim  to  be  sent  from  God.— While  the  frequent  use  of 
'therefore'  points  to  the  conviction  that  nothing  happens  with- 
out a  cause,  the  frequent  use  of  'in  order  that'  points  to  the 
belief  that  nothing  happens  without  a  purpose.  S.  John  uses 
'  in  order  that' not  only  where  some  other  construction  would 
have  been  suitable,  but  also  where  another  construction  would 
seem  to  be  much  more  suitable  ;  '  I  am  not  worthy  in  order 
that  I  may  unloose'  (i.  27),  '  My  meat  is  /«  order  that  I  may  do 
the  will'  (iv.  34) ;  'This  is  the  work  of  God,  in  order  that  ye  may 
believe'  (vi.  29);  'Who  sinned,  this  man  or  his  parents,  in  order 
that  he  should  be  born  blind.?'  (ix.  2);  *  It  is  expedient  for  you, 
in  order  that  I  go  away'  (xvi.  7).  S.  John  is  specially  fond  of 
this  construction  to  point  out  the  working  of  the  Divine  pur- 
pose, as  in  some  of  the  instances  just  given  (comp.  v.  23,  vi.  40, 
50,  X.  10,  xi.  42,  xiv.  16,  &c.  &c.)  and  in  particular  of  the  fulfil- 
ment of  prophecy  (xviii.  9,  xix.  24,  28,  36).  In  this  connexion 
an  elliptical  expression  'but  in  order  that'  (  =  but  this  was 
done  in  order  that)  is  not  uncommon  ;  '  Neither  this  man 
sinned,  nor  his  parents,  Intt  in  order  that,  (!v:c.' (ix.  3;  comp.  xi. 
52,  xiv.  31,  XV.  25,  xviii.  28). 


INTRODUCTION.  45 

{d)  S.  John,  full  of  the  spirit  of  Hebrew  poetry,  frequently 
employs  that  parallelism  which  to  a  large  extent  is  the  very 
form  of  Hebrew  poetry:  'A  servant  is  not  greater  than  his 
lord  ;  neither  one  that  is  sent  greater  than  he  that  sent  him ' 
(xiii.  i6);  '  Peace  I  leave  with  you,  My  peace  I  give  unto  you... 
Let  not  your  heart  be  troubled,  neither  let  it  be  fearful '  (xiv. 
27).  Sometimes  the  parallelism  is  antithetic,  and  the  second 
clause  denies  the  opposite  of  the  first;  'He  confessed,  and 
denied  not '  (i.  20) ;  'I  give  unto  them  eternal  life,  and  they 
shall  never  perish '  (x.  28). 

{e)  Another  peculiarity,  also  of  Hebrew  origin,  is  mimtteness 
of  detail.  Instead  of  one  word  summing  up  the  whole  action, 
S.  John  uses  two  or  three  stating  the  details  of  the  action  ; 
'They  asked  him  and  said  to  him'  (i.  25);  'John  bare  witness, 
saying''  (i.  32);  '  Jesus  cried  aloud  m  the  Temple  teaching  and 
saying^  (vii.  28).  The  frequent  phrase  'answered  and  said,' 
illustrates  both  this  particularity  and  also  the  preference  for 
co-ordinate  sentences  {a).  '  Answered  and  said '  occurs  thirty- 
four  times  in  S.  John,  and  only  two  or  three  times  in  the 
Synoptists,  who  commonly  write  'having  answered  said,'  or 
'  answered  saying.' 

(/")  In  conclusion  we  may  notice  a  few  of  S.  John's  favour- 
ite words  and  phrases;  'Abide'  especially  in  the  phrases 
expressing  abiding  in  one  another;  'believe  on'  a  person; 
'true'  as  opposed  to  lying,  and  'true'  as  opposed  to  spurious, 
'truly,'  and  'truth;'  'witness'  and  'bear  witness;'  'the  dark- 
ness,' of  moral  darkness;  'the  light,'  of  spiritual  light;  'life;' 
'love;'  eternal  life;'  'in  frankness'  or  'openly;'  'keep  My 
word;'  'manifest;'  'the  Jews,'  of  the  opponents  of  Christ;  'the 
world,'  of  those  alienated  from  Christ.  The  following  words 
and  phrases  are  used  by  S.  John  only;  'the  Paraclete'  or  'the 
Advocate,'  of  the  Holy  Spirit;  'the  Word,'  of  the  Son;  'only- 
begotten,'  of  the  Son;  'come  out  from  God,'  of  the  Son;  'lay 
down  My  life,'  of  Jesus  Christ;  'Verily,  verily;'  'the  ruler  of 
this  world,'  of  Satan ;  '  the  last  day.' 

These  characteristics  combined  form  a  book  which  stands 
alone  in  Christian  literature,  as  its  author  stands  alone  among 


46  INTRODUCTION. 


Christian  teachers;  the  work  of  one  who  for  threescore  years 
and  ten  laboured  as  an  Apostle.  Called  to  follow  the  Baptist 
when  only  a  lad,  and  by  him  soon  transferred  to  the  Christ,  he 
may  be  said  to  have  been  the  first  who  from  his  youth  up  was  a 
Christian.  Who,  therefore,  could  so  fitly  grasp  and  state  in 
their  true  proportions  and  with  fitting  impressiveness  the  great 
verities  of  the  Christian  faith .-'  He  had  had  no  deep-seated 
prejudices  to  uproot,  like  his  friend  S.  Peter  and  others  who 
were  called  late  in  life.  He  had  had  no  sudden  wrench  to 
make  from  the  past,  like  S.  Paul.  He  had  not  had  the  trying 
excitement  of  wandering  abroad  over  the  face  of  the  earth,  like 
most  of  the  Twelve.  He  had  remained  at  his  post  at  Ephesus, 
directing,  teaching,  meditating  ;  until  at  last  when  the  fruit  was 
ripe  it  was  given  to  the  Church  in  the  fulness  of  beauty  which  it 
is  still  our  privilege  to  possess  and  learn  to  love. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

ITS  RELATION  TO  THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS. 

The  Fourth  Gospel  presupposes  the  other  three  ;  the  Evan- 
gelist assumes  that  the  contents  of  his  predecessors'  Gospels  are 
known  to  his  readers.  The  details  of  Christ's  birth  are  summed 
up  in  'the  Word  became  flesh.'  His  subjection  to  His  parents 
is  implied  by  contrast  in  His  reply  to  His  mother  at  Cana.  The 
Baptism  is  involved  in  the  Baptist's  declaration,  'I  have  seen 
(the  Spirit  descending  and  abiding  on  Him)  and  have  borne 
witness'  (i.  34).  The  Ascension  is  promised  through  Mary 
Magdalene  to  the  Apostles  (xx.  17),  but  left  unrecorded.  Chris- 
tian Baptism  is  assumed  in  the  discourse  with  Nicodemus,  and 
the  Eucharist  in  that  on  the  Bread  of  Life ;  but  the  reference 
in  each  case  is  left  to  speak  for  itself  to  Christians  familiar 
with  both  those  rites.  S.  John  passes  over  their  institution  in 
silence. 

The  differences  between  the  Fourth  Gospel   and  the   three 
first  are  real  and  very  marked :  but  it  is  easy  to  exaggerate 


INTRODUCTION.  47 


them.  They  are  conveniently  grouped  under  two  heads;  (i)  dif- 
ferences as  to  the  scene  and  extent  of  Christ's  ministry  ;  (2)  dif- 
ferences as  to  the  view  given  of  His  Person. 

(i)  With  regard  to  the  first,  it  is  urged  that  the  Synoptists 
represent  our  Lord's  ministry  as  lasting  for  one  year  only, 
including  only  one  Passover  and  one  visit  to  Jerusalem,  with 
which  the  ministry  closes.  S.  John,  however,  describes  the 
ministry  as  extending  over  three  or  possibly  more  years,  in- 
cluding at  least  three  Passovers  and  several  visits  to  Jerusalem. 

In  considering  this  difficulty,  if  it  be  one,  we  must  remember 
two  things  :  {a)  that  all  four  Gospels  are  very  incomplete  and 
contain  only  a  series  of  fragments ;  {b)  that  the  date  and  dura- 
tion of  Christ's  ministry  remain  and  are  likely  to  remain  un- 
certain, {a)  In  the  gaps  in  the  Synoptic  narrative  there  is 
plenty  of  room  for  all  that  is  peculiar  to  S.  John.  In  the  spaces 
deliberately  left  by  S.  John  between  his  carefully  arranged  scenes 
there  is  plenty  of  room  for  all  that  is  peculiar  to  the  Synoptists. 
"When  all  have  been  pieced  together  there  still  remain  large 
interstices  which  it  would  require  at  least  four  more  Gospels  to 
fill  (xxi.  25).  Therefore  it  can  be  no  serious  difficulty  that  so 
much  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  has  nothing  parallel  to  it  in  the 
other  three,  {b)  The  additional  fact  of  the  uncertainty  as  to 
the  date  and  duration  of  the  Lord's  public  ministry  is  a  further 
explanation  of  the  apparent  difference  in  the  amount  of  time 
covered  by  the  Synoptic  narrative  and  that  covered  by  the 
narrative  of  S.  John,  There  is  no  contradiction  between  the 
two.  The  Synoptists  nowhere  say  that  the  ministry  lasted  for 
only  one  year,  although  some  commentators  from  very  early 
times  have  proposed  to  understand  'the  acceptable  year  of  the 
Lord'  (Luke  iv.  19)  literally.  The  three  Passovers  of  S.  John 
(ii.  13,  vi.  4,  xi.  55  ;  V.  I  being  omitted  as  very  doubtful),  compel 
us  to  give  at  least  a  Httle  over  two  years  to  Christ's  ministry.  But 
S.  John  also  nowhere  implies  that  he  has  mentioned  all  the 
Passovers  within  the  period  ;  and  the  startling  statement  of 
Irenaeus  {Haer.  il.  xxii.  5)  must  be  borne  in  mind,  that  our 
Lord  fulfilled  the  office  of  a  Teacher  until  He  was  over  forty 
years  old,  "even  as  the  Gospel  and  all  the  elders  bear  witness, 


48  INTRODUCTION. 


who  consorted  with  John  the  disciple  of  the  Lord  in  Asia, 
(staling)  that  John  had  handed  this  down  to  them."  Irenaeus 
makes  the  ministry  begin  when  Christ  was  nearly  thirty  years 
of  age  (Luke  iii.  23) ;  so  that  he  gives  it  a  duration  of  more  than 
ten  years  on  what  seems  to  be  very  high  authority.  All  that 
can  be  affirmed  with  certainty  is  that  the  ministry  cannot  have 
begun  earlier  than  a.d.  28  (the  earlier  alternative  for  the 
fifteenth  year  of  Tiberius;  Luke  iii.  i),  and  cannot  have  ended 
later  than  A.D.  37,  when  Pilate  was  recalled  by  Tiberius  shortly 
before  his  death.  Indeed  as  Tiberius  died  in  March,  and  Pilate 
found  him  already  dead  when  he  reached  Rome,  the  recall 
probably  took  place  in  a.d.  36;  and  the  Passover  of  A.D,  36 
is  the  latest  date  possible  for  the  Crucifixion.  Chronology  is 
not  what  the  Evangelists  aimed  at  giving  us  ;  and  the  fact  that 
S.  John  spreads  his  narrative  over  a  longer  period  than  the 
Synoptists  will  cause  a  difficulty  to  those  only  who  have  mis- 
taken the  purpose  of  the  Gospels. 

(2)  As  to  the  second  great  difference  between  S.  John  and 
the  Synoptists,  it  is  said  that,  while  they  represent  Jesus  as 
a  great  Teacher  and  Reformer,  with  the  powers  and  authority 
of  a  Prophet,  who  exasperates  His  countrymen  by  denouncing 
their  immoral  traditions,  S.  John  gives  us  instead  a  mysterious 
Personage,  invested  with  Divine  attributes,  who  infuriates  the 
hierarchy  by  claiming  to  be  one  with  the  Supreme  God.  It  is 
urged,  moreover,  that  there  is  a  corresponding  difference  in  the 
teaching  attributed  to  Jesus  in  each  case.  The  discourses  in 
the  Synoptic  Gospels  are  simple,  direct,  and  easily  intelligible, 
inculcating  for  the  most  part  high  moral  principles,  which  are 
enforced  and  illustrated  by  numerous  parables  and  proverbs. 
Whereas  the  discourses  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  are  many  and 
intricate,  inculcating  for  the  most  part  deep  mystical  truths, 
which  are  enforced  by  a  ceaseless  reiteration  tending  to  obscure 
the  exact  line  of  the  argument,  and  illustrated  by  not  a  single 
parable  properly  so  called. 

These  important  differences  may  be  to  a  very  great  extent 
explained  by  two  considerations :  (a)  the  peculiarities  of  S. 
John's  own   temperament;   (d)  the  circumstances  under  which 


INTRODUCTION.  49 


he  wrote,  (a)  The  main  features  of  S.  John's  character,  so  far 
as  we  can  gather  them  from  history  and  tradition,  have  been 
stated  above  (chapter  l.  ii.),  and  we  cannot  doubt  that  they 
have  affected  not  only  his  choice  of  the  incidents  and  discourses 
selected  for  narration,  but  also  his  mode  of  narrating  them.  No 
doubt  in  both  he  was  under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
(xiv.  26):  but  we  have  every  reason  for  supposing  that  such 
guidance  would  work  with,  rather  than  against,  the  mental  en- 
dowments of  the  person  guided.  To  what  extent  the  substance 
and  form  of  his  Gospel  has  been  influenced  by  the  intensity  of 
his  own  nature  we  cannot  tell  :  but  the  intensity  is  there,  both 
in  thought  and  language,  both  in  its  devotion  and  in  its  stern- 
ness ;  and  the  difference  from  the  Synoptists  shews  that  so?/ie 
influence  has  been  at  work.  (^d)  The  circumstances  under 
which  S.  John  wrote  will  carry  us  still  further.  They  are  very 
different  from  those  under  which  the  first  Gospels  were  written. 
Christianity  had  grown  from  infancy  to  nianhood  and  believed 
itself  to  be  near  the  great  consummation  of  the  Lord's  return. 
It  was  'the  last  time.'  Antichrist,  who,  as  Jesus  had  foretold, 
was  to  precede  His  return,  was  already  present  in  manifold 
shapes  in  the  world  (i  John  ii.  18).  In  the  bold  speculations 
which  had  mingled  themselves  with  Christianity,  the  Divine 
Government  of  the  Father  and  the  Incarnation  of  the  Son  were 
being  explained  away  or  denied  (i  John  ii.  22,  iv.  3).  The 
opposition,  shewn  from  the  first  by  'the  Jews'  to  the  disciples 
of  the  Teacher  whom  they  had  crucified,  had  settled  down  into 
a  relentless  hostility.  And  while  the  gulf  between  Christianity 
and  Judaism  had  thus  widened,  that  between  the  Church  and 
the  world  had  also  become  more  evident.  The  more  the 
Christian  realised  the  meaning  of  being  '  born  of  God,'  the 
more  manifest  became  the  truth,  that  'the  whole  world  lieth  in 
wickedness'  (i  John  v.  18,  19).  A  Gospel  that  was  to  meet  the 
needs  of  a  society  so  changed  both  in  its  internal  and  external 
relations  must  obviously  be  very  different  from  those  which  had 
suited  its  infancy.  And  a  reverent  mind  will  here  trace  the 
Providence  of  God,  in  that  an  Apostle,  and  he  the  Apostle 
S.  John,  was  preserved  for  this  crisis.     It  is  scarcely  too  much 

S.  JOHN  A 


5°  INTRODUCTION. 


to  say  that,  had  a  Gospel,  claiming  to  have  been  written  by  him 
near  the  close  of  the  first  century,  greatly  resembled  the  other 
three  in  matter  and  form,  we  should  have  had  reasonable 
grounds  for  doubting  its  authenticity.  (The  special  difficulty 
with  regard  to  the  discourses  as  reported  by  the  Synoptists  and 
by  S.  John  is  discussed  in  the  introductory  note  to  chap,  iii.) 

It  must  be  remarked  on  the  other  side  that,  along  with  these 
important  differences  as  regards  the  things  narrated  and  the 
mode  of  narrating  them,  there  are  coincidences  less  conspicuous, 
but  not  less  real  or  important. 

Among  the  most  remarkable  of  these  are  the  characters  of 
the  Lord,  of  S.  Peter,  of  Mary  and  Martha,  and  of  Judas.  The 
similarity  in  most  cases  is  too  subtle  for  the  picture  in  the 
Fourth  Gospel  to  have  been  drawn  from  that  in  the  Synoptic 
account.  It  is  very  much  easier  to  believe  that  the  two  pictures 
agree  because  both  are  taken  from  life. 

The  invariable  use  by  the  Synoptists  of  the  expression  'Son 
of  Man '  is  rigidly  observed  by  S.  John.  It  is  always  used  by 
Christ  of  Himself;  never  by,  or  of,  any  one  else.  Sec  notes  on 
i.  51;  and  also  on  ii.  19  and  xviii.  11  for  two  other  striking 
coincidences. 

The  student  will  find  tabulated  lists  of  minor  coincidences  in 
Dr  Westcott's  Introduction,  pp.  Ixxxii.,  Ixxxiii.  He  sums  up 
thus  :  "  The  general  conclusion  stands  firm.  The  Synoptists 
offer  not  only  historical  but  also  spiritual  points  of  connexion 
between  the  teaching  which  they  record  and  the  teaching  in  the 
Fourth  Gospel ;  and  S.  John  himself  in  the  Apocalypse  com- 
pletes the  passage  from  the  one  to  the  other." 


CHAPTER  VII. 

ITS  RELATION  TO  THE   FIRST   EPISTLE. 

The  chronological  relation  of  the  Gospel  to  the  First  Epistle 
of  S.  John  cannot  be  determined  with  certainty.     The  Epistle 


INTRODUCTION.  51 


presupposes  the  Gospel  in  some  shape  or  other:  but  as  the 
Gospel  was  given  orally  for  many  years  before  it  was  written, 
it  is  possible  that  the  Epistle  may  have  been  written  first. 
Probably  they  were  written  within  a  few  years  of  one  another, 
whichever  was  written  first  of  the  two. 

In  comparing  the  Fourth  Gospel  with  the  Synoptists  we 
found  great  and  obvious  differences,  accompanied  by  real  but 
less  obvious  correspondences.  Here  the  opposite  is  rather  the 
case.  The  coincidences  both  in  thought  and  expression  be- 
tween the  Gospel  and  the  First  Epistle  of  S.  John  are  many 
and  conspicuous ;  but  closer  inspection  shews  some  important 
differences. 

The  object  of  the  Gospel,  as  we  have  seen,  is  to  create  a  con- 
viction 'that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God.'  The  object 
of  the  Epistle  is  rather  to  insist  that  the  Son  of  God  is  Jesus. 
The  Gospel  starts  from  the  historical  human  Teacher  and 
proves  that  He  is  Divine  ;  the  Epistle  starts  rather  from  the 
Son  of  God  and  contends  that  He  has  come  in  the  flesh.  Again, 
the  Gospel  is  not  polemical :  the  truth  is  stated  rather  than 
error  attacked.     In  the  Epistle  definite  errors  are  attacked. 

The  lesson  of  both  is  one  and  the  same  ;  faith  in  Jesus  Christ 
leading  to  fellowship  with  Him,  and  through  fellowship  with 
Him  to  fellowship  with  the  Father  and  with  one  another  :  or,  to 
sum  up  all  in  one  word,  Love. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE   TEXT   OF   THE   GOSPEL. 

The  authorities  are  abundant  and  various.  It  will  suffice  to 
mention  twelve  of  the  most  important;  six  Greek  MSS.  and 
six  Ancient  Versions. 

Greek  Manuscripts. 

Codex  Sinaiticus  (x).  4th  century.  Discovered  by  Tisch- 
endorf  in  1859  at  the  monastery  of  S.  Catherine  on  Mount 
Sinai,  and  now  at  St  Petersburg.     The  whole  Gospel. 

4—2 


52  INTRODUCTION. 


Codex  Alexaxdrinus  (A).  5th  century.  Brought  by  Cyril 
Lucar,  Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  from  Alexandria,  and  after- 
wards presented  by  him  to  Charles  I.  in  1628.  In  the  British 
Museum.     The  whole  Gospel,  excepting  vi.  50 — viii.  52. 

Codex  Vaticanus  (B).  4th  century,  but  perhaps  later  than 
the  Sinaiticus.     In  the  Vatican  Library.     The  whole  Gospel. 

Codex  Ephraemi  (C).  5th  century.  A  palimpsest  :  the 
original  writing  has  been  partially  rubbed  out  and  the  works  of 
Ephraem  the  Syrian  have  been  written  over  it.  In  the  National 
Library  at  Paris.  Eight  fragments  ;  i.  i — 41  ;  iii.  33 — v.  16 ; 
vi.  38 — vii.  3  ;  viii.  34— ix.  11  ;  xi.  8—46;  xiii.  8 — xiv.  7;  xvi. 
21 — xviii.  36;  XX.  26 — xxi,  25. 

Codex  Bezae  (D).  6th  or  7th  century.  Given  by  Beza  to 
the  University  Library  at  Cambridge  in  1581,  Remarkable  for 
its  interpolations  and  various  readings.  The  whole  Gospel, 
excepting  i.  16 — iii.  26  :  but  xviii.  13 — xx.  13  is  by  a  later  hand, 
possibly  from  the  original  MS. 

Codex  Regius  Parisiensis  (L).  8th  or  9th  century.  Nearly 
related  to  the  Vaticanus.  At  Tours.  The  whole  Gospel,  ex- 
cepting xxi.  15 — xxi.  25. 

Ancient  Versions. 

Old  Syriac  (Curetonian).  2nd  century.  Four  fragments  ; 
i. — 42;  iii.  5 — vii.  35  ;  vii.  y] — viii.  53,  omitting  vn.  53 — viii.  11; 
xiv.  1 1 — 29. 

Vulgate  Syriac  (rcscbito).  3rd  century.  The  whole  Gos- 
pel. 

Harclean  Syriac  (a  revision  of  the  Philoxenian  Syriac  ; 
5th  or  6th  century).     7th  century.     The  whole  Gospel. 

Old  Latin  (Vetus  Latina).  2nd  century.  The  whole  Gospel 
in  several  distinct  forms. 

Vulgate  Latin  (mainly  a  revision  of  the  Old  Latin  by  Je- 
rome, A.D.  383 — 5).     4th  century.     The  whole  Gospel. 

Memphitic  (Coptic,  in  the  dialect  of  Lower  Egypt).  3rd 
century.     The  whole  Gospel. 


INTRODUCTION.  53 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  LITERATURE  OF  THE  GOSPEL. 

It  would  be  impossible  to  give  even  a  sketch  of  this  within 
a  small  compass,  so  numerous  are  the  works  on  S.  John  and 
his  writings.  All  that  will  be  attempted  here  will  be  to  give 
more  advanced  students  some  information  as  to  where  they 
may  look  for  greater  help  than  can  be  given  in  a  handbook  for 
the  use  of  schools. 

Of  the  earliest  known  commentary,  that  of  Heracleon  (c.  A.D. 
150),  only  quotations  preserved  by  Origen  remain.  Of  Origen's 
own  commentary  (c.  A.D.  225 — 235)  only  portions  remain.  Of 
the  Greek  commentators  of  the  fourth  century,  Theodorus  of 
Heraclea  and  Didymus  of  Alexandria,  very  little  has  come 
down  to  us.  But  we  have  S.  Chrysostom's  88  Homilies  on  the 
Gospel,  which  have  been  translated  in  the  Oxford  '  Library  of 
the  Fathers.*  S.  Augustine's  124  Lectures  {Tractatus)  on  S. 
John  may  be  read  in  the  *  Library  of  the  Fathers,'  or  in  the  new 
translation  by  Gibb,  published  by  T.  &  T.  Clark,  Edinburgh. 
But  no  translation  can  fairly  represent  the  epigrammatic  fulness 
of  the  original.  The  Commentary  of  Cyril  of  Alexandria  has  been 
translated  by  P.  E.  Pusey,  Oxford,  1875.  With  Cyril  the  hne 
of  great  patristic  interpreters  of  S.  John  ends. 

The  Catena  Aurea  of  Thomas  Aquinas  (c.  A.D.  1250)  was 
published  in  an  English  form  at  Oxford,  1841 — 45.  It  consists 
of  a  'chain'  of  comments  selected  from  Greek  and  Latin 
authors.  Unfortunately  Thomas  Aquinas  was  the  victim  of  pre- 
vious forgers,  and  a  considerable  number  of  the  quotations  from 
early  authorities  are  taken  from  spurious  works. 

Of  modern  commentaries  those  of  Cornelius  k  Lapide  (Van 
der  Steen)  and  Maldonatus  in  the  sixteenth  century  and  of 
Lampe  in  the  eighteenth  must  be  mentioned.  The  last  has 
been  a  treasury  of  information  for  many  more  recent  writers. 

The  following  foreign  commentaries  have  all  been  published 
in  an  English  form  by  T.  &  T.  Clark,  Edinburgh  ;  Bengel, 


54  INTRODUCTION. 


Godet,  Luthardt,  Meyer,  Olshausen,  Tholuck.  Of  these  the 
works  of  Godet  and  Meyer  may  be  specially  commended.  The 
high  authority  of  Dr  Westcott  pronounces  the  commentary  of 
Godet,  "  except  on  questions  of  textual  criticism,"  to  be  "  un- 
surpassed"— we  may  add,  except  by  Dr  Westcott's  own. 

Among  original  English  commentaries  those  of  Alford,  Dun- 
well,  McClellan,  Watkins,  and  Wordsworth  are  or  are  becom- 
ing well  known  to  all  students.  But  immensely  superior  to  all 
preceding  works  is  the  one  noticed  above,  that  by  Dr  Westcott 
in  Vol.  II.  of  the  Speaker's  Coinmentary  ofi  N.  T.  Murray, 
1880. 

Other  works  which  give  very  valuable  assistance  are  EUicott's 
Historical  Lecticres  on  the  Life  of  our  Lord,  Liddon's  Bampton 
Lectures,  1866,  Sanday's  Anthorship  atid  Historical  Character 
of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  and  The  Gospels  i7i  the  Second  Century, 
and  Westcott's  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels. 

The  present  writer  is  bound  to  express  his  obligations,  in 
some  cases  very  great,  to  the  works  mentioned  above  of  Alford, 
Dunwell,  EUicott,  Liddon,  McClellan,  Sanday,  Meyer,  Watkins, 
and  Westcott,  as  well  as  to  many  others.  The  debt  to  Canon 
Westcott  would  probably  have  been  still  greater  if  the  notes  to 
the  first  fifteen  chapters  had  not  been  written  before  the  writer 
of  them  had  seen  Vol.  ll.  of  the  Speaker''s  Co7n»ie}itary :  but 
they  have  been  revised  with  its  help.  It  was  originally  intended 
that  Mr  Sanday  should  undertake  the  present  commentary,  but 
press  of  other  work  induced  him  to  ask  leave  to  withdraw  after 
having  written  notes  on  the  greater  part  of  the  first  chapter. 
His  successor  has  had  the  advantage  of  these  notes  and  has 
made  large  use  of  them,  and  throughout  has  aimed  at  in  some 
measure  remedying  the  loss  caused  by  Mr  Sanday's  retirement 
by  frccjuently  quoting  from  his  work  on  the  Fourth  Gospel. 
These  quotations  are  marked  simply  '  S,'  with  a  reference  to  the 
page. 


INTRODUCTION.  55 


ANALYSIS   OF   THE   GOSPEL   IN    DETAIL. 

I.   i_i8.     THE  PROLOGUE. 

r.     The  Word  in  His  own  nature  (1—5)- 

2.  His  revelation  to  men  and  rejection  by  them  (6—13). 

3.  His  revelation  of  the  Father  (14 — 18).      y 

I.  19-Xn.  50.     THE  MINISTRY. 

a,  I.  19— II.  II.     Tlie  Testimony. 

I.     The  Testimony  of  the  Baptist  (i.  19—37) 

to  the  depdation  from  Jerusalem  (19 — 28), 
to  the  people  (29 — 34), 
to  Andrew  and  John  (35 — 37). 
^.    The  Testimony  of  Disciples  (i.  38—51)- 
3.     The  Testimony  of  the  First  Sign  (ii.  i— 11). 

b.  II.   13— XI.   57-     Tbe  Work. 

1.  The  Work  among  Jews  (ii.  13 — iii.  36). 

First  cleansing  of  the  Tetnple  (13 — 22). 
Belief  without  devotion  (23 — 25). 

The  discourse  with  Nicodemus  (iii.  i — 21). 

The  baptism  and  final  testimony  of  John  (22 — 36). 

2.  The  Work  among  Samaritans  (iv.  i — 42). 

3.  The  Work  among  Galileans  (iv.  43—54). 

4.  The  Work  and  conflict  among  mixed  multitudes  (v. —  xi.). 

(a)    Christ  the  Source  of  Life  (v.). 

77^1?  sign  at  the  pool  of  Bethsaida  (i — 9). 
The  sequel  of  the  sign  (10 — 16). 
The  discourse  on  the  Son  as  the  Source  of  Life  (17- 
47). 


56  INTRODUCTION. 


((3)    Christ  the  Support  of  Life  (vi.). 

The  sign  on  the  land ;  feeding  the  5000  (i — 15). 

The  sign  on  the  lake ;  walking  on  the  water  (16 — 21). 

The  sequel  of  the  two  signs  (22 — 25). 

The  discourse  on  the  Son  as  the  Support  of  Life  (26 — 

59)- 
Opposite  results  of  the  discourse  (60—71). 

(7)    Christ  the  Source  of  Truth  and  Light  (vii.  viii.). 

The  controversy  zuiih  His  brethren  (vii.  i — 9). 
The  discourse  at  the  F.  of  Tabernacles  (10 — 39). 
Opposite  results  of  the  discourse  (40 — 52). 
\The  woman  taken  in  adultery  (vii.  53 — viii.  11)]. 
Christ's  true  witness  to  Himself  and  against  the  Jews 
(viii.  12 — 59). 

Christ  the  Source  of  Truth  and  Life  illustra- 
ted BY  A  Sign  (ix.). 
The  prelude  to  the  sign  (i — 5). 
The  sigtt  (6 — 12). 
Opposite  restilts  of  the  sign  (13 — 41). 

(5y    Christ  is  Love  (x.). 

Allegory  of  the  Door  of  the  Fold  (i — 9). 
Allegory  oft/ie  Good  Shepherd  {11  — 18). 
Opposite  results  of  the  teaching  (19 — 2  i). 
The  discourse  at  the  F.  of  the  Dedication  (22 — 38). 
Opposite  results  of  the  discourse  (39 — 42). 

Christ  is  Love  illustrated  by  a  Sign  (xi.) 
The  prebide  to  the  sign  (1—33). 
The  sign  (33—44)- 
Opposite  results  of  the  sign  (45 — 57). 

c.     XII.     Tlie  Judgment. 

1.     The  Judjjment  of  men  (i — 36). 

The  devotion  of  Mary  (i — 8). 
7' he  hostility  of  the  priests  (9 — 11). 
7'he  enthusiasm  of  the  people  (12 — 18). 
The  discomfiture  of  the  Pharisees  (19). 
7'he  desire  of  the  Gentiles  (20 — 33). 
The  perplexity  of  the  multitude  (34 — 36). 


INTRODUCTION.  57 


2.  The  Judgment  of  the  Evangelist  {37 — 43). 

3.  The  Judgment  of  Christ  (44 — 50). 

XIII.— XX.     THE  ISSUES  OF  THE  MINISTRY. 

d.  XIII.— XVII.     The  inner  Glorification  of  cnrist  in  His  last 

Discotirses. 

1.  His  love  in  Humiliation  (xiii.  i — 30). 

2.  His  Love  in  keeping  His  own  (xiii.  31 — xv.  if). 

Their  union  with  Hivi  illustrated  by  the  allegory  of 

the  Vine  {xv.  1  — 11). 
Their  union  with  one  another  (12 — 17). 
The  hatred  of  the  world  to  both  Him  and  them  (18 — 25). 

3.  The  Promise  of  the  Paraclete  and  of  Christ's  Return  (xvi.). 

The  World  and  the  Paraclete  (xvi.  i — 1 1). 
The  disciples  and  the  Paraclete  (t2 — 15). 
The  sorrow  turned  into  joy  (16 — 24). 
Summary  and  conclusion  (25 — 33). 

4.  The  Prayer  of  the  Great  High  Priest  (xvii.). 

The  prayer  for  Himself  (xvii.  i  —  5) , 
for  the  Disciples  (6 — 19), 
for  the  whole  Church  (20 — 26). 

e.  XVIII.  XIX.  The  outer  Glorification  of  Christ  in  His  Passion. 

I.     The  Betrayal  (xviii.  I — 11). 

1.     The  Jewish  or  Ecclesiastical  Trial  (12 — 27). 

3.  The  Roman  or  Civil  Trial  (xviii.  28— xix.  16). 

4.  The  Death  and  Burial  (xix.  17 — 42). 

The  crucifixion  and  the  title  on  the  cross  (17 — 22). 
The  foiir  enemies  and  the  four  frie^ids  (23 — 27). 
The  two  words,  '/  thirst,'  'It  is  finished''  (28—30). 
The  hostile  and  the  friendly  petitions  (31—42). 

/.   XX.   The  Eesurrection  and  threefold  Manifestation  of  Christ. 

1.  The  first  Evidence  of  the  Resurrection  (i  — 10). 

2.  The  Manifestation  to  Mary  Magdalene  (i i  — 18). 

3.  The  Manifestation  to  the  Ten  and  others  (19—23). 

4.  The  Manifestation  to  S.  Thomas  and  others  (24—29). 

5.  The  Conclusion  and  Purpose  of  the  Gospel  (30,  31). 


5^  INTRODUCTION. 


XXI.     THE  EPILOGUE  OR  APPENDIX. 

1.  The  Manifestation  to  the  Seven  and  the  Miraculous  Draught 

of  Fishes  (i — 14), 

2.  The  Commission  to  S.  Peter  and  Prediction  as  to  his  Death 

(15—19)- 

3.  The  misunderstood  Saying  as  to  the  Evangelist  (20—23). 

4.  Concluding  Notes  (24,  25). 


THE    GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO 

S.    JOHN. 

Chap.  I.  i — 18.     The  Prologue  or  Introduction. 

The  Gospel  according  to  St  John]  This  title  exists  in  very 
dififerent  forms,  both  ancient  and  modern,  and  is  not  original.  As  we 
might  expect,  the  oldest  authorities  are  the  simplest,  and  the  heading 
gradually  increases  in  fulness;  thus,  i.  According  to  John,  or  Ofyohn; 
1.  Gosp^l  according  to  yohn ;  3.  The  Gospel  according  to  yohn\  4.  The 
holy  Gospel,  &c.  So  also  with  the  English  Versions,  from  Wiclif's 
simplejoon,  or  The  Gospel  ofjoon,  to  The  Holy  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ 
according  to  John  of  the  Geneva  Bible. 

Chap.  I.  1 — 18.  The  Prologue  or  Introduction. 

That  the  first  eighteen  verses  are  introductory  is  universally  admitted: 
commentators  are  not  so  unanimous  as  to  the  main  divisions  of  this  in- 
troduction. A  division  into  three  nearly  equal  parts  has  much  to  com- 
mend it : 

r.     The  Word  in  His  orun  Nature  (i — 5). 

2.  His  Revelation  to  men  and  rejection  by  them  (6 — 13). 

3.  His  Revelation  of  the  Father  ( 1 4 —  1 8) . 

Some  throw  the  second  and  third  part  into  one,  thus : 
2.     The  historical  manifestation  of  the  Word  (6 — 18). 

Others  again  divide  into  two  parts  thus : 

1.  The  Word  in  His  absolute  eternal  Being  [v.  i). 

2.  The  Word  in  relation  to  Creation  (2 — 18). 

And  there  are  other  schemes  besides  these.  In  any  scheme  the 
student  can  scarcely  fail  to  feel  that  the  first  verse  is  unique.  Through- 
out the  prologue  the  three  great  characteristics  of  this  Gospel,  sim- 
plicity, subtlety,  and  sublimity,  are  specially  conspicuous  ;  and  the 
majesty  of  the  first  verse  surpasses  all.  The  Gospel  of  the  Son  of 
Thunder  opens  with  a  peal. 


6o  S.   JOHN,    I.  [vv.  I, 


!I 


I — 5.     The  Word  in  His  own  Nature. 

N  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and  the  Word  was  with 
God,  and  the  Word  was  God.     The  same  was  in  the 

1—5.     The  Word  in  His  own  Nature. 

1.  In  the  beginning]  The  meaning  must  depend  on  the  context. 
In  Gen.  i.  i  it  is  an  act  done  'in  the  beginning;'  here  it  is  a  Being 
existing  'in  the  beginning,'  and  therefore  prior  to  all  beginning.  That 
was  the  first  moment  of  time;  this  is  eternity,  transcending  time.  Thus 
we  have  an  intimation  that  the  later  dispensation  is  the  confirmation 
and  infinite  extension  of  the  first.  '  In  the  beginning '  here  equals 
'before  the  world  was,'  xvii.  5.  Compare  xvii.  24;  Eph.  i.  4;  and 
contrast  'the  beginning  of  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,'  Mark  i.  i,  which 
is  the  historical  beginning  of  the  public  ministry  of  the  Messiah  (John 
vi.  64):  'the  beginning'  here  is  prior  to  all  history.  To  interpret 
'Beginning'  of  God  as  the  Origin  of  all  things  is  not  correct,  as  the  con- 
text shews. 

was]  Not  'came  into  existence,'  but  was  already  in  existence  before 
the  creation  of  the  world.  The  generation  of  the  Word  or  Son  of  God  is 
thus  thrown  back  into  eternity.  Thus  S.  Paul  calls  Him  (Col.  i. 
15)  '  the  firstborn  of  every  creature,'  or  (more  accurately  translated) 
'begotten  before  all  creation,'  like  'begotten  before  all  worlds'  in 
the  Nicene  creed.  Comp.  Heb.  i.  8,  vii.  3 ;  Rev.  i.  8.  On  these 
passages  is  based  the  doctrine  of  the  Eternal  Generation  of  the  Son : 
see  Articles  of  Religion,  i.  and  II.  The  Arians  maintained  that  there 
was  a  period  when  the  Son  was  not:  S.  John  says  distinctly  that 
the  Son  or  Word  was  existing  before  time  began,  i.e.  from  all  eternity. 

the  Word]  As  early  as  the  second  century  Sermo  and  Verlntm  were 
rival  translations  of  the  Greek  term  Logos  =  '^qxA.  TerluUian  (fl.  a.d. 
195 — 210)  gives  us  both,  but  seems  himself  to  prefer  Ratio.  Sermo  first 
became  unusual,  and  finally  was  disallowed  in  the  Latin  Church.  The 
Latin  versions  all  adopted  Verbum,  and  from  it  comes  our  translation, 
'  the  Word.' 

None  of  these  translations  are  at  all  adequate:  but  neither  Latin  nor 
any  modern  language  supplies  anything  really  satisfactory.  Va-bitrn 
and  '  the  Word  '  do  not  give  the  whole  of  even  one  of  the  two  sides  of 
Logos:  the  other  side,  whicl^Tertullian  tried  to  express  by  Ratio,  is  not 
touched  at  all ;  for  6  \6yo's  means  not  only  '  the  spoken  word,'  but  '  the 
thought '  expressed  by  the  sjiokcn  word ;  it  is  the  spoken  word  as  expres- 
sive of  thought.     It  is  not  found  in  the  N.T.  in  the  sense  of '  reason.' 

The  expression  Logos  is  a  remarkable  one ;  all  the  more  so,  because 
S.  John  assumes  that  his  readers  will  at  once  understand  it.  This 
shews  that  his  Gospel  was  written  in  the  first  instance  for  his  own 
disciples,  who  would  be  familiar  with  his  teaching  and  phraseology. 

Whence  did  S.  John  derive  the  expression.  Logos  ?  It  has  its  origin 
in  the  Targums,  or  paraphrases  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  in  use  in 
Palestine,  rather  than  in  the  mixture  of  Jewish  and  Greek  philosophy 
prevalent  at  Alexandria  and  Epiiesus,  as  is  very  commonly  asserted. 


V.  i]  S.    JOHN,    I.  6i 

(i)  In  the  Old  Testament  we  find  the  Word  or  Wisdom  of  God  per- 
sonified, generally  as  an  instmment  for  executing  the  Divine  Will.  We 
have  a  faint  trace  of  it  in  the  'God  said  '  of  Gen.  i.  3,  6,  9,  1 1,  14,  &c. 
The  personification  of  the  Word  of  God  begins  to  appear  in  the 
Psalms,  xxxiii.  6,  cvii.  20,  cxix.  89,  cxlvii.  15.  In  Prov.  viii.  and  ix. 
the  Wisdom  of  God  is  personified  in  very  striking  terms.  This 
Wisdom  is  manifested  in  the  power  and  mighty  works  of  God ;  that 
God  is  love  is  a  revelation  yet  to  come.  (2)  In  the  Apocrypha  the 
personification  is  more  complete  than  in  O.  T.  In  Ecclesiasticus 
(c.  B.C.  150 — 100)  i.  I — 20,  xxiv.  I — 22,  and  in  the  Book  of  Wisdom 
(c.  B.C.  100)  vi.  22  to  ix.  18  we  have  Wisdom  strongly  personified.  In 
Wisd.  xviii.  15  the  'Almighty  Word'  of  God  appears  as  an  agent  of 
vengeance.  (3)  In  the  Targums,  or  Aramaic  paraphrases  of  O.T.,the 
development  is  carried  still  further.  These,  though  not  yet  written 
down,  were  in  common  use  among  the  Jews  in  our  Lord's  time;  and 
they  were  strongly  influenced  by  the  growing  tendency  to  separate  the 
Godhead  from  immediate  contact  with  the  material  world.  Where 
Scripture  speaks  of  a  direct  communication  from  God  to  man,  the 
Targums  substituted  the  Memra,  or  '  Word  of  God.'  Thus  in  Gen.  iii. 
8,  9,  instead  of  'they  heard  the  voice  of  the  Lord  God,'  the  Targums 
have  '  they  heard  the  voice  of  the  Word  of  the  Lord  God  ;'  and  instead 
of  'God  called  unto  Adam,'  they  put  'the  Word  of  the  Lord  called 
unto  Adam,'  and  so  on.  '  The  Word  of  the  Lord'  is  said  to  occur  150 
times  in  a  single  Targum  of  the  Pentateuch.  In  the  theo^ophy  of  ike 
Alexandrine  yexvs,  which  was  a  compound  of  theology  with  philo- 
sophy and  mysticism,  we  seem  to  come  nearer  to  a  strictly  personal 
view  of  the  Divine  Word  or  Wisdom,  but  really  move  further  away 
from  it.  Philo,  the  leading  representative  of  this  religious  specu- 
lation (fl.  A.D.  40 — 50),  admitted  into  his  philosophy  very  various, 
and  not  always  harmonious  elements.  Consequently  his  conception 
of  the  Logos  is  not  fixed  or  clear.  On  the  whole  his  Logos  means 
some  intermediate  agency,  by  means  of  which  God  created  material 
things  and  communicated  with  them.  But  whether  this  Logos  is  one 
Being  or  more,  whether  it  is  personal  or  not,  we  cannot  be  sure;  and 
perhaps  Philo  himself  was  undecided.  Certainly  his  L^ogos  is  very 
different  from  that  of  S.  John;  for  it  is  scarcely  a  Person,  and  it  is  not  the 
Messiah.  And  when  we  note  that  of  the  two  meanings  of  Aci70j,  Philo 
dwells  most  on  the  side  which  is  less  prominent,  while  the  Targums 
insist  on  that  which  is  more  prominent  in  the  teaching  of  S.  John,  we 
cannot  doubt  the  source  of  his  language.  The  Logos  of  Philo  is  pre- 
eminently the  Divine  Reason.  The  Memra  of  the  Targums  is  rather 
the  Divine  Word ;  i.e.  the  Will  of  God  manifested  in  personal  action; 
and  this  rather  than  a  philosophical  abstraction  of  the  Divine  Intelli- 
gence is  the  starting  point  of  S.  John's  expression. 

To  sum  up : — the  personification  of  the  Divine  Word  in  O.  T.  is 
poetical,  in  Philo  metaphysical,  in  S.  John  historical.  The  Apocrypha 
and  Targums  help  to  fill  the  chasm  between  O.T.  and  Philo;  history 
itself  fills  the  far  greater  chasm  which  separates  all  from  S.  John. 
Between  Jewish  poetry  and  Alexandrine  speculation  on  the  one  hand, 


62  S.   JOHN,    I.  [vv.  3,4. 

3  beginning  with  God.     All  things  were  made  by  him ;  and 

4  without  him  was  not  any  thi/ig  made  that  was  made.     In 

and  the  Fourth  Gospel  on  the  other,  lies  the  historical  fact  of  the  In- 
carnation of  the  Logos,  the  life  of  Jesus  Christ. 

The  Logos  of  S.  John,  therefore,  is  not  a  mere  attribute  of  God,  but 
the  Son  of  God,  existing  from  all  eternity,  and  manifested  in  space  and 
time  in  the  Person  of  Jesus  Christ.  In  the  Logos  had  been  hidden 
from  eternity  all  that  God  had  to  say  to  man ;  for  the  Logos  was  the 
living  expression  of  the  nature,  purposes,  and  Will  of  God.  (Comp.  the 
impersonal  designation  of  Christ  in  i  John  i.  i.)  Human  thought  had 
'  been  searching  in  vain  for  some  means  of  connecting  the  finite  with  the 
Infinite,  of  making  God  intelligible  to  man  and  leading  man  up  to  God. 
S.  John  knew  that  he  possessed  the  key  to  this  enigma.  He  therefore 
took  the  phrase  which  human  reason  had  lighted  on  in  its  gropings, 
stripped  it  of  its  misleading  associations,  fixed  it  by  identifying  it  with 
the  Christ,  and  filled  it  with  that  fulness  of  meaning  which  he  himself 
had  derived  from  Christ's  own  teaching. 

with  God]  i.e.  with  the  Father.  '  With'=<7/«^,  or  the  French  chez:  it 
expresses  the  distinct  Personality  of  the  Logos.  We  might  render  'face  to 
face  with  God,'  or  'at  home  with  God.'  So,  'His  sisters,  are  they  not 
all  wif/i  us?'  Matt.  xiii.  56;  comp.  Mark  vi.  3,  ix.  19,  xiv.  49;  1  Cor. 
xvi.  7;  Gal.  i.  18;   i  Thess.  iii.  4;  Philem.  13;   i  John  i.  2. 

i/ie  Word  was  God]  i.  e.  the  Word  partook  of  the  Divine  A^ature,  not 
was  identical  with  the  Divine  Person.  The  verse  may  be  thus  para- 
phrased, 'the  Logos  existed  from  all  eternity,  distinct  from  the  Father, 
and  equal  to  the  Father.'  Comp.  'neither  confounding  the  Persons  nor 
dividing  the  Substance.' 

2.  The  same]  More  literally,  He  or  This  (Word),  with  emphasis 
(comp.  vii.  18).  This  verse  takes  up  the  first  two  clauses  and  com- 
bines them.     Such  recapitulations  are  characteristic  of  S.  John. 

3.  dj  htm]  Rather,  tlirougli  ///m.  The  universe  was  created  l/jf 
the  Father  through  the  agency  of  the  Son.  Comp.  i  Cor.  viii.  6 ;  Col. 
i.  16  (where  see  Lightfoot's  note);  Rom.  xi.  36;  Heb.  xi.  10.  That  no 
inferiority  is  necessarily  implied  by  'through,'  as  if  the  Son  were  a  mere 
instrument,  is  shevra  by  1  Cor.  i.  9,  where  the  same  construction  is  used 
of  the  Father,  ^through  Whom  ye  were  called,  &c.'  Note  the  climax 
in  what  follows ;  the  sphere  contracts  as  the  blessing  enlarges :  existence 
for  everything ;  life  for  the  vegetable  and  animal  world ;  light  for  men. 

without  him,  &c.]  Better,  apart  from  Him,  &c.  Comp.  xv.  5. 
Antithetic  parallelism ;  emphatic  repetition  by  contradicting  the  opposite : 
frequent  in  Hebrew :  one  of  the  many  instances  of  the  Hebrew  cast  of 
S.  John's  style.  Comp.  v.  20,  x.  28;  i  John  i.  5,  ii.  4,  27,  28;  Ps. 
Ixxxix.  30,  31,  48,  &c.,  &c. 

not  anything]  No,  not  one ;  not  even  one :  stronger  than  'nothing.' 
Evei7  single  thing,  however  great,  however  small,  throughout  all  the 
realms  of  space,  came  into  being  through  Him.  No  event  takes  place 
without  Him, — apart  from  His  presence  and  power.  Matt.  x.  29;  Luke 
xii.  6. 


5.]  S.   JOHN,   I.  63 


him  was  life  ;  and  the  life  was  the  light  of  men.     And  the  5 
light  shineth  in  darkness;  and  the  darkness  comprehended 
it  not. 

i/iat  was  made]  Better,  that  hath  been  made.  The  aorist  refers  to 
the  fact  of  creation ;  the  perfect  to  the  permanent  result  of  that  fact. 
Contrast  'was  made'  and  'hath  been  made'  here  with  'was'  in  vv.  i 
and  2.  '  Was  made'  denotes  the  springing  into  life  of  what  was  once 
non-existent;   'was'  denotes  the  perpetual  pre-existence  of  the  Word. 

Some  both  ancient  and  modem  writers  would  give  the  last  part  of  v. 
3  to  V.  4,  thus:  IViat  which  hath  been  made  in  Him  was  life  ;  i.e.  those 
who  were  born  again  by  union  with  Him  felt  His  influence  as  life  with- 
in them.  It  is  very  difficult  to  decide  between  the  two  punctuations. 
Tatian  {Orat.  ad  Graecos,  XIX.)  has  'All  things  [were]  by  Him  and  with- 
out Him  hath  been  made  not  even  one  thing. '     See  on  v.  5. 

4.  In  him  was  life]  He  was  the  well-spring  from  which  every 
form  of  life — physical,  intellectual,  moral,  spiritual,  eternal — flows.  See 
on  V.  26. 

Observe  how  frequently  S.  John's  thoughts  overlap  and  run  into  one 
another.  Creation  leads  on  to  life,  and  life  leads  on  to  light.  Without 
life  creation  would  be  unintelligible;  without  light  all  but  the  lowest 
forms  of  life  would  be  impossible. 

the  light]  Not  'light,'  but  'the  Light,'  the  one  true  Light;  absolute 
Truth  both  intellectual  and  moral,  free  from  all  ignorance  and  all  stain. 
The  Source  of  life  is  the  Source  of  light. 

the  light  of  men]  Man  shares  life  with  all  organic  creatures ;  light,  or 
Revelation,  is  for  him  alone.  The  communication  of  Divine  truth  before 
the  Fall  is  specially  meant. 

5.  shineth]  Note  the  present  tense;  the  only  one  in  the  section.  It 
brings  us  down  to  the  Apostle's  own  day :  now,  as  of  old,  the  Light 
shines — in  reason,  in  creation,  in  conscience, — and  shines  in  vain. 
Note  also  the  progress :  in  vv.  i  and  2  we  have  the  period  before  Crea- 
tion; in  V.  3,  the  Creation;  v.  4,  man  before  the  Fall;  v.  5,  man  after 
the  Fall. 

in  darkness]     Better,  in  the  darkness.     The  Fall  is  presupposed. 

and  the  darkness]  Mark  the  strong  connexion  between  the  two 
halves  of  v.  5  as  also  between  v.  4  and  v.  5,  resulting  in  both  cases 
from  a  portion  of  the  predicate  of  one  clause  becoming  the  subject  of 
the  next  clause.  Such  strong  connexions  are  frequent  in  St  John. 
Sometimes  the  whole  of  the  predicate  is  taken ;  sometimes  the  subject 
or  a  portion  of  the  subject  is  repeated. — By  'the  darkness'  is  meant  all 
that  the  Divine  Revelation  does  not  reach,  whether  by  God's  decree  or 
their  own  stubbornness,  ignorant  Gentile  or  unbelieving  Jew.  'Dark- 
ness '  in  a  metaphorical  sense  for  spiritual  and  moral  darkness  is  peculiar 
to  S.  John,  viii.  12,  xii.  35,  46;  i  John  i.  5,  ii.  8,  9,  11. 

comprehended  it  not]  Or,  apprehended  it  not:  very  appropriate  of 
that  which  requires  mental  and  moral  effort.  Comp.  Eph.  iii.  18.  The 
darkness  remained  apart,  unyielding,  and  unpenetrated.  The  words 
'the  darkness  apprehendeth  not  the  light'  are  given  by  Tatian  as  a 


64 S.   JOHN,   I.  [vv.  6-g. 

6 — 13-     The  Word  revealed  to  Men  and  rejected  by  them, 

6  There  was  a  man  sent  from  God,  whose  name  was  John. 

7  The  same  came  for  a  witness,  to  bear  witness  of  the  Light, 

8  that  all  men  through  him  might  believe.     He  was  not  that 

9  Light,  but  was  sent  to  bear  witness  of  that  Light.      That 

quotation  {Orat.  ad  Graecos,  Xili.).  He  flourished  A.D.  150—170:  so 
this  is  early  testimony  to  the  existence  of  the  Gospel,  this  and  the 
reference  to  v.  3  (see  note)  are  quite  beyond  reasonable  dispute. 

We  have  here  an  instance  of  what  has  been  called  the  "tragic 
tone"  in  S.  John.  He  frequently  states  a  gracious  fact,  and  in  imme- 
diate connexion  with  it  the  very  opposite  of  what  might  have  been 
expected  to  result  from  it.  The  Light  shines  in  Darkness,  and  (instead 
of  yielding  and  dispersing)  the  darkness  shut  it  out.  Comp.  vv.  10  and 
II,  (ii.  24,)  iii.  II,  19,  32,  v.  39,  40,  vi.  36,  43,  viii.  45,  &c.  The  word 
rendered  'comprehended'  may  also  mean  'overcame;'  and  this  makes 
good  sense.     Comp.  xii.  35. 

6—13.     The  Word  revealed  to  Men  and  rejected  by  them. 

6.  There  was  a  man]  Rather,  TAere  arose  a  man,  in  contrast  to 
the  'was'  in  57.  i.  The  word  waj  from  all  eternity;  John  awjf,  came 
into  existence,  in  time.  Comp.  x.  19.  Note  once  more  the  noble  sim- 
plicity of  language. 

sent  from  God]  i.e.  a  Prophet.  Comp.  'I  will  j^W  my  messenger,' 
Mai.  iii.  \-,  'I  will  send yo\x  Elijah  the  Prophet,'  iv.  5.  From  the  Greek 
for  'send'  (apostello)  comes  our  word  'Apostle.' 

whose  name  was  John]  In  the  Fourth  Gospel  John  is  mentioned  20 
times,  and  is  never  once  distinguished  as  '  the  Baptist.'  The  other  three 
Evangelists  carefully  distinguish  the  Baptist  from  the  son  of  Zebedee : 
to  the  writer  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  there  is  only  one  John.  This  in  itself 
is  strong  incidental  evidence  that  he  himself  is  the  other  John.  See  on 
xi.  16. 

7.  for  a  wit7tess]  Better,  for  witness,  i.e.  to  bear  witness,  not  to 
be  a  witness:  what  follows  shews  the  meaning.  The  word  'witness' 
and  'to  bear  witness'  are  very  frequent  in  S.  John's  writings,  and  this 
frequency  should  be  marked  by  retaining  the  same  translation  through- 
out :  testimony  to  the  truth  is  one  of  his  favourite  thoughts. 

through  him]  i.e.  through  the  Baptist,  the  Herald  of  the  Truth. 
Comp.  V.  33;  Acts  X.  37,  xiii.  24. 

8.  7iot  that  Light]  Better,  not  the  Light.  The  Baptist  was  not 
the  Light,  but  'the  lamp  that  is  lighted  and  shineth'  (see  on  v.  35).  He 
was  lumen  illuminatiim,  not  lumen  illut?iinans.  At  the  close  of  the 
first  century  it  was  still  necessary  for  S.  John  to  insist  on  this.  At 
Ephesus,  where  this  Gospel  was  written,  S.  Paul  in  his  third  missionary 
journey  had  found  disciples  still  resting  in  'John's  baptism,'  Acts  xix. 
I — 6.     'By  lamp-light  we  may  advance  to  the  day'  (Augustine). 

but  was  sent  to]  'was  sent'  is  not  in  the  Greek.      'But  (in  order)  that' 


vv.  lo,  II.]  S.   JOHN,    I.  6$ 

Avas  the  true  Light,  which  lighteth  every  man  fAaf  cometh 
into  the  world.     He  was  in  the  world,  and  the  world  was  1° 
made  by  him,  and  the  world  knew  him  not.     He  came  unto  " 

is  an  elliptical  phrase  occurring  several  times  in  this  Gospel.     It  calls 
attention  to  the  Divine  purpose.     Comp.  ix.  3,  xiii.  18,  xiv.  31,  xv.  25. 

9.  7'Aa(  7vas,  &c.]  This  verse  is  ambiguous  in  the  Greek.  Most 
of  the  Ancient  Versions,  Fathers,  and  Reformers  agree  with  our  trans- 
lators. Many  modern  commentators  translate — the  true  Light,  which 
lighteth  every  man,  was  coming  into  the  world :  but  'was'  and  'com- 
ing' are  almost  too  far  apart  in  the  Greek  for  this.  There  is  yet  a 
third  way ; — there  was  the  true  Light,  which  lighteth  every  man  by 
coming  into  the  world.  'Was'  is  emphatic :  'there  was  the  true  Light,' 
even  while  the  Baptist  was  preparing  the  way  for  Him.  The  Baptist 
came  once  for  all ;  the  Light  was  ever  coming. 

The  word  for  'true'  {alethinos)  is  remarkable:  it  means  true  as  op- 
posed to  'spurious,'  not  true  as  opposed  to  'lying.'  It  is  in  fact  the 
old  English  'very,'  e.g.  'very  God  of  very  God.'  Christ  then  is  the 
true,  the  genuine,  the  perfect  Light,  just  as  He  is  'the  perfect  Bread' 
(vi.  32)  and  'the  perfect  Vine'  (xv.  i) :  not  that  He  is  the  only  Light, 
and  Bread,  and  Vine,  but  that  He  is  in  reality  what  all  others  are  in 
figure  and  imperfectly.  All  words  about  t7-iith  are  very  characteristic 
of  S.  John. 

eve>y  man^  not  'all  men:'  the  Light  illumines  each  one  singly,  not  all 
collectively.  God  deals  with  men  separately  as  individuals,  not  in 
masses.  But  though  every  man  is  illumined,  not  every  man  is  the 
lietter  for  it :  that  depends  upon  himself. 

that  cometh  into  the  worldl  A  Jewish  phrase  for  being  born,  fre- 
quent in  S.  John  (ix.  39,  xi.  27,  xvi.  28);  see  on  xviii.  37.  'The  world' 
is  another  of  the  expressions  characteristic  of  S.  John :  it  occurs  nearly 
80  times  in  the  Gospel  and  22  in  the  First  Epistle.  This  verse,  Hippo- 
lytus  tells  us  {Reftct.  VII.  x.),  was  used  by  Basilides  in  defending  his 
doctrine,  and  as  he  began  to  teach  about  a.d.  125,  this  is  very  early 
evidence  of  the  use  of  the  Gospel. 

10.  and  the  %vorld'\  Note  three  points;  (i)  the  close  connexion 
obtained  by  repetition,  as  in  vv.  4  and  5 ;  (2)  the  tragic  tone,  as  in  v.  5; 
(3)  the  climax.  'He  was  in  the  world'  (therefore  the  world  should  have 
known  Him);  'and  the  world  was  His  own  creature' (therefore  still 
more  it  should  have  known  Him);  'and  (yet)  the  world  knew  Him 
not.'  'And '  =  'and  yet'  is  very  frequent  in  S.  John  ;  but  it  is  best  not 
to  put  in  the  'yet;'  the  simple  'and' is  more  forcible.  Comp.  vv.  5 
and  II. 

Note  that  'the  world  '  has  not  the  same  meaning  in  vv.  9  and  10. 
Throughout  N.T.  it  is  most  important  to  distinguish  the  various  mean- 
ings of  'the  world.'  It  means  (i)  'the  universe;'  Rom.  i.  20:  (2)  'the 
earth;'  v.  9;  Matt.  iv.  8:  (3)  'the  inhabitants  of  the  earth;'  v.  29,  iv. 
42  :  (4)  'those  outside  the  Church,'  alienated  from  God;  xii.  31,  xiv.  17, 
and  frequently.     In  this  verse  the  meaning  slips  from  (2)  to  (4). 

S.  JOHN  e 


66  S.   JOHN,   I.  [vv.  12,  13. 

,2  his  own,  and  his  own  received  him  not.     Rut  as  many  as 

received  him,  to  them  gave  he  power  to  become  the  sons  of 

13  God,  eveii  to  them  that  beheve  on  his  name  :  which  were 

huw  him  nof\  Did  not  acquire  knowledge  of  its  Creator ;  did  not 
recognise  and  acknowledge  Him.    Comp.  Acts  xix.  15. 

11.  tuUo  his  (Twn]  In  the  Greek  the  first '  own '  is  neuter,  the  second  is 
masculine,  and  this  difference  should  be  preserved :  He  came  unto  His 
0Z071  inlieritaiice ;  and  His  own  people  received  Him  tiot  (see  on  vi.  37). 
In  the  parable  of  the  Wicked  Husbandmen  (Matt.  xxi.  33 — 41)  the 
vineyard  is  '  His  own  inheritance, '  the  husbandmen  are  '  His  own 
people,'  the  Jews.  Or,  for  'His  own  inheritance^  we  might  say  'His 
own  home,''  as  in  xix.  27,  where  the  Greek  is  the  same.  The  tragic 
tone  is  very  strong  here  as  in  vv.  5  and  10. 

received'^  A  stronger  word  than  'knew.'  The  exact  meaning  of  the 
Greek  word  is  'to  accept  what  is  offered.^  Mankind  in  general  did  not 
recognise  the  Messiah;  the  Jews,  to  whom  He  was  specially  sent,  did 
not  welcome  Him.     See  on  xix.  16. 

Once  more  there  is  a  climax; — 'He  was'  [v.  9);  'He  was  in  the 
world'  {v.  10) ;  'He  came  unto  His  own  inheritance'  {v.  1 1). 

12.  received^  Not  the  same  Greek  word  as  before :  this  denotes  the 
spontaneous  acceptance  of  the  Messiah  by  individuals,  whether  Jews  or 
Gentiles.  He  was  not  specially  offered  to  any  individuals  as  He  was  to 
the  Jewish  nation. 

power"]  i.e.  right,  liberty,  authority.  We  are  bom  with  a  capa- 
city for  becoming  sons  of  God ;  that  we  have  as  men.  He  gives  us  a 
right  io  become  such  ;  that  we  receive  as  Christians.  Comp.  v.  27,  x. 
18. 

to  becomel  Christ  is  from  all  eternity  the  Son  of  God ;  men  are  em- 
powered to  become  sons  of  God.     Comp.  Matt.  v.  45. 

the  sons  of  God]  Omit  'the:'  cMldren  0/ God.  Both  S.  John  and 
S.  Paul  insist  on  the  fundamental  fact  that  the  relation  of  believers  to 
God  is  2i filial  one.  S.  John  gives  us  this  fact  on  the  human  side;  man 
'must  be  born  again'  (iii.  3).  S.  Paul  gives  us  the  Divine  side;  God  by 
'adoption'  makes  us  sons  (Rom.  viii.  16,  17,  21,  23;  Gal.  iv.  5). 

eveti  to  them  that  believe]  Explains  who  are  the  sons  of  God.  The 
test  of  a  child  of  God  is  no  longer  descent  from  Abraham,  but  belief 
in  God's  Son. 

on  his  name]  The  construction  '  to  believe  on'  is  characteristic  of  S. 
John :  it  occurs  about  35  times  in  the  Gospel  and  3  times  in  the  First 
Epistle;  elsewhere  in  N.T.  about  10  times.  It  expi-esses  the  very 
strongest  belief;  motion  to  and  repose  on  the  object  of  belief  'His 
Name'  is  a  frequent  phrase  in  Jewish  literature,  both  O.  and  N.T.  It 
is  not  a  mere  periphrasis.  Names  were  so  often  significant,  given  some- 
times by  God  Himself,  that  a  man's  name  told  not  merely  7vho  he  was, 
but  what  he  was:  it  was  an  index  of  character.  So  'the  Name  of  the 
Lord'  is  not  a  mere  periphrasis  for  'the  Lord;'  it  suggests  His  attributes 
and  His  relations  to  us  as  Lord.  Perhaps  the  name  of  Logos  is  specially 
meant  here;  and  the  meaning  would  then  be  to  give  one's  entire  ad- 


V.  14.]  S.    JOHN,    I.  (fj 

born,  not  of  blood,  nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh,  nor  of  the 
will  of  man,  but  of  God. 

14 — 18.     The  Incarnate  Word's  revelation  of  the  Father. 
And  the  Word   was  made  flesh,  and   dwelt   among  us,  14 

hesion  to  Him  as  the  Incarnate  Son,  the  expression  of  the  Will  and 
Nature  of  God.     Comp.  iii.  18,  xx.  31. 

13.  S.  John  denies  thrice  most  emphatically  that  human  generation 
has  anything  to  do  with  Divine  regeneration.  Man  cannot  become  a 
child  of  God  in  right  of  human  parentage :  descent  from  Abraham  con- 
fers no  such  'power.'     A  bitter  word  to  Jewish  exclusiveness. 

were  born'\     Literally,  •j^^  begotten.      Comp.  i  John  v.  i,  4,  i8. 

not  of  blood]  The  blocJT was  regarded  as  the  seat  of  physical  life. 
Gen.  ix.  4;  Lev.  xvii.  11,  14,  &c. 

nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh]  Better,  nor  yet  from  will  of  flesh,  i.e. 
from  any  fleshly  impulse.     A  second  denial  of  any  physical  process. 

nor  of  the  will  of  man]  Better,  nor  yet  from  will  of  man,  i.e.  from 
the  volition  of  any  earthly  father:  it  is  the  Heavenly  Father  who  wills 
it.     A  third  denial  of  any  physical  process. 

There  is  an  interesting  false  reading  here.  Tertullian  (c.  A.D.  200) 
had  'was  born'  for  'were  born,'  making  it  refer  to  Christ;  and  he  ac- 
cused the  Valentinians  of  corrupting  the  text  in  reading  'were  born,' 
which  is  undoubtedly  right.  This  shews  that  as  early  as  A.D.  200  there 
were  corruptions  in  the  text,  the  origin  of  which  was  already  lost.  Such 
things  take  some  time  to  grow :  by  comparing  them  and  tracing  their 
roots  and  branches  we  arrive  at  a  sure  conclusion  that  this  Gospel  can- 
not have  been  written  later  than  a.d.  85 — 100.     See  on  v.  18  and  ix. 

14 — 18.    The  Incarnate  Word's  revelation  of  the  Father, 

14.  And  the  Woj'd  was  made  flesh]  Ox,  "bQCSiVixe  flesh.  This  is  the 
gulf  which  separates  S.  John  from  Philo.  Philo  would  have  assented  to 
what  precedes;  from  this  he  would  have  shrunk.  From  v.  9  to  13  we 
have  the  subjective  side ;  the  inward  result  of  the  Word's  coming  to  those 
who  receive  Him.  Here  we  have  the  objective;  the  coming  of  the  Word 
as  a  historical  fact.  The  Logos,  existing  from  all  eternity  with  the 
Father  [w.  i  and  2),  not  only  manifested  His  power  in  Creation  (v.  3) 
and  in  influence  on  the  minds  of  men  {vv.  9,  12,  13),  but  manifested 
Himself  in  the  form  of  a  man  of  flesh.  The  important  point  is  that  the 
Word  became  terrestrial  and  material :  and  thus  the  inferior  part  of  man 
is  mentioned,  the  flesh,  to  mark  His  humiliation.  He  took  the  whole 
of  man's  nature,  including  its  frailty.  "The  majestic  fulness  of  this 
brief  sentence,"  the  Word  became  flesh,  which  afhrms  once  for  all  the 
union  of  the  Infinite  and  the  finite,  "is  absolutely  unique."  The  Word 
became  flesh ;  did  not  merely  assume  a  body :  and  the  Incarnate  Word 
is  one,  not  two  personalities.  Thus  various  heresies,  Gnostic  and  Eu- 
tychian,  are  refuted  by  anticipation. 

5—2 


68  S.   JOHN,    I.  [v.  15. 

(and  we  beheld  liis  glory,  the  glory  as  of  the  only  begotten 

15  of  the  Father,)  full  of  grace  and  truth.    John  bare  witness  of 

him,  and  cried,  saying,  This  was  he  of  whom  I  spake,  He 

dwelt  among  us\  Literally,  tabernacled  among  us,  dwelt  as  in  a  tent. 
The  Tabernacle  had  been  the  seat  of  the  Divine  Presence  in  the  wilder- 
ness :  when  God  became  incarnate  in  order  to  dwell  among  the  Chosen 
People,  'to  tabernacle'  was  a  natural  word  to  use.  The  word  forms  a 
link  between  this  Gospel  and  the  Apocalypse :  it  occurs  here,  four  times 
in  the  Apocalypse,  and  nowhere  else.  Our  translators  render  it  simply 
'dwell,'  which  is  inadequate.     Rev.  vii.  15,  xii.  12,  xiii.  6,  xxi.  3 

among  us'\     In  the  midst  of  those  of  us  who  witnessed  His  life. 

we  beheld'\  Or,  contemplated.  Comp.  i  John  i.  i.  No  need  to 
make  a  parenthesis. 

his  glory]  The  Shechinah.  Comp.  ii.  ri,  xi.  40,  xii.  41,  xvii.  5,  24; 
2  Cor.  iii.  7 — 18;  Rev.  xxi.  11.  There  is  probaiily  a  special  reference 
to  the  Transfiguration  (Luke  ix.  32;  2  Pet.  i.  17);  and  possibly  to  the 
vision  at  the  beginning  of  the  Apocalypse.  In  any  case  it  is  the 
Evangelist's  own  experience  that  is  indicated.  Omit  'the'  before  the 
second  'glory.' 

as  of]  i.e.  exactly  like.  The  glory  is  altogether  such  as  that  of  an 
only-begotten  son.  Comp.  Matt.  vii.  29.  He  taught  exactly  as  one 
havdng  full  authority.  No  article  before  'only-begotten;'  He  was  an 
only-begotten  Son,  whereas  Moses  and  the  Prophets  were  but  servants. 

only  begotten]  Unigenitiis.  The  Greek  word  is  used  of  the  widow's 
son  (Luke  vii.  12),  Jairus'  daughter  (viii.  42),  the  demoniac  boy  (ix.  38), 
Isaac  (Heb.  xi.  17).  As  applied  to  Christ  it  occurs  only  in  S.  John's 
writings;  here.Z'.  18,  iii.  16,  18;  r  John  iv.  g.  It  marks  off  His  unique 
Sonship  from  that  of  the  'sons  of  God'  {v.  12). 

of  the  Father]  Literally,  from  the  presence  of  a  father;  an  only  son 
sent  on  a  mission  from  a  father:  comp.  v.  6. 

full]     Looks  forward  to  'fulness'  in  v.  16. 

grace]  The  original  meaning  of  the  Greek  word  is  'that  which  causes 
pleasure.'  Hence  (r)  comeliness,  winsomeness:  'the  words  of  grace'  in 
Luke  iv.  22  are  'winning  words.'  (2)  Kindliness, goodwill:  Luke  ii.  52; 
Acts  ii.  47.  (3)  'Y\\G.  favour  of  God  towards  sinners.  This  distinctly 
theological  sense  has  for  its  central  point  \\-\&freencss  of  God's  gifts  :  they 
are  not  earned,  He  gives  them  spontaneously  through  Christ.  'Grace' 
covers  all  these  three  meanings.  The  third  at  its  fullest  and  deepest  is 
the  one  here.  It  is  as  the  Idfe  that  the  Word  is  'full  of  grace,'  for 
it  is  'by  grace'  that  we  come  to  eternal  life.     Eph.  ii.  5. 

truth]     It  is  as  the  Light  that  the  Word  is  'full  of  truth.' 

15.  ba7-e  witness]  Better,  bears  witness.  At  the  end  of  a  long  life 
this  testimony  of  the  Baptist  abides  still  fresh  in  the  heart  of  the  aged 
Apostle.  Three  times  in  20  verses  (15,  27,  30)  he  records  the  cry  which 
was  such  an  epoch  in  his  own  life.  The  testimony  remains  as  a  memoiy 
for  him,  a  truth  for  all. 

and  cried]  Better,  and  cries.  The  word  indicates  strong  emotion, 
characteristic  of  a  prophet.     Comp.  vii.  28,  37,  xii.  44;  Is.  xl.  3. 


vv.  i6,  17.]  S.   JOHN,   I.  69 

that  cometh  after  me  is  preferred  before  me :  for  he  was 
before  me.     And  of  his  fulness  have  all  we  received,  and  16 
grace  for  grace.     For  the  law  was  given  by  Moses,  but  grace  '7 


of  whom  I  spahe\  As  if  his  first  utterance  under  the  influence  of  the 
Spirit  had  been  scarcely  intelligible  to  himself. 

He  that  cometh  after,  &c.]  The  exact  meaning  seems  to  be — 'He  who 
is  coming  after  me  (in  His  ministry  as  in  His  birth)  has  become  superior 
to  me,  for  He  was  in  existence  from  all  eternity  before  me.'  Christ's 
pre-existence  in  eternity  a  great  deal  more  than  cancelled  John's  pre- 
existence  in  the  world ;  and  as  soon  as  He  appeared  as  a  teacher  He  at 
once  eclipsed  His  forerunner.  But  this  is  not  quite  certain.  The  words 
translated  'is  preferred  before  me,'  or  'is  become  superior  to  me,' 
literally  mean  'has  come  to  be  before  me;'  and  this  may  refer  to  time 
and  not  to  dignity.  But  the  perfect  tense  'has  come  to  be,  has  become' 
points  to  dignity  rather  than  time.  Moreover  if  'has  become  before  me' 
refers  to  time,  this  is  almost  tautology  with  'for  He  was  before  me,' 
which  must  refer  to  time. 

he  was  before  me\  The  Greek  is  peculiar,  being  the  superlative  instead 
of  the  comparative ;  not  simply  ^ prior  to  me, '  but  '■first  of  me. '  Perhaps 
it  means  'before  me  and  first  of  all.' 

16.  The  testimony  of  the  Baptist  to  the  incarnate  Word  is  con- 
firmed by  the  experience  of  all  believers.  The  Evangelist  is  the 
speaker. 

And'\     The  true  reading  gives  Because. 

fulness']  The  Greek  word,  pleronia,  is  'a  recognised  technical  term 
in  theology,  denoting  the  totality  of  the  Divine  powers  and  attributes.' 
This  fulness  of  the  Divine  attributes  belonged  to  Christ  [v.  14),  and  by 
Him  was  imparted  to  the  Church,  which  is  His  Body  (Eph.  i.  23);  and 
through  the  Church  each  individual  believer  in  his  degree  receives  a 
portion  of  it.  See  Ligbtfoot  on  Colossians,  i.  19  and  ii.  9.  'Of  His 
fulness'  means  literally  'out  of  His  fulness,'  as  from  an  inexhaustible 
store. 

all  we]  shews  that  the  Evangelist  and  not  the  Baptist  is  speaking. 

grace  for  grace]  lAtexsWy ,  gi'ace  in.  the  place  Of  grace,  one  grace  suc- 
ceeding another,  and  as  it  were  taking  its  place.  There  is  no  reference 
to  the  Christian  dispensation  displacing  the  Jewish.  The  Jewish  dis- 
pensation would  have  been  called  'the  Law,'  not  'grace;'  see  next 
verse,  and  comp.  xvii.  22. 

17.  The  mention  of  'grace'  reminds  the  Evangelist  that  this  was  the 
characteristic  of  the  Gospel  and  marked  its  superiority  to  the  Law;  for 
the  Law  could  only  condemn  transgressors,  grace  forgives  them. 

For]     Better,  Because. 

by  Afoses]  The  preposition  translated  'by'  in  zjv.  3,  10,  17,  and 
'through'  in  v.  7,  is  one  and  the  same  in  the  Greek.  The  meaning  in  all 
five  cases  is  'by  means  of.'  Moses  did  not  give  the  Law  any  more  than 
he  gave  the  manna  (vi.  32) :  he  was  only  the  mediate  agent  by  whose 
hand  it  was  given  (Gal.  iii.  19). 


•JO  S.  JOHN,   I.  [v.  i8. 

i8  and  truth  came  by  Jesus  Christ.  No  7nan  hath  seen  God 
at  any  time ;  the  only  begotten  Son,  which  is  in  the  bosom 
of  the  Father,  he  hath  declared  hi>n. 


trutK\  Like  grace,  truth  is  opposed  to  the  Law,  not  as  truth  to  false- 
hood, but  as  perfection  to  imperfection. 

came\  Note  the  change  from  'was  given.'  The  grace  and  truth  which 
came  through  Christ  were  His  own;  the  Law  given  through  Moses  was 
not  his  own. 

Jesus  Christ'\  S.  John  no  longer  speaks  of  the  Logos :  the  Logos  has 
become  incarnate  (v.  14)  and  is  spoken  of  henceforth  by  the  names 
which  He  has  borne  in  history. 

18.  The  Evangelist  solemnly  sums  up  the  purpose  of  the  Incarnation 
of  the  Logos — to  be  a  visible  revelation  of  the  invisible  God.  It  was  in 
this  way  that  'the  truth  came  through  Jesus  Christ, 'for  the  truth  cannot 
be  fully  known,  while  God  is  not  fully  revealed. 

No  man]  Not  even  Moses.  Until  we  see  'face  to  face'  (i  Cor.  xiii. 
12)  our  knowledge  is  only  partial.  Symbolical  visions,  such  as  Ex. 
xxiv.  10,  xxxiii.  23;  i  Kings  xix.  13;  Is.  vi.  i,  do  not  transcend  the 
limits  of  partial  knowledge. 

hath  seeii]     With  his  bodily  eyes. 

at  any  time]  Better,  ever  yet ;  'no  one  hath  ever  yet  seen  God;'  but 
some  shall  see  Him  hereafter. 

the  only  begotten  Son]  The  question  of  reading  here  is  very  interest- 
ing. Most  MSS.  and  versions  have  'the  only-begotten  Son'  or  'only- 
begotten  Son.'  But  the  three  oldest  and  best  MSS.  and  two  others  of 
great  value  have  'only-begotten  God.^  The  test  of  the  value  of  a  MS., 
or  group  of  MSS.,  on  any  disputed  point,  is  the  extent  to  which  it 
admits  false  readings  on  other  points  not  disputed.  Judged  by  this  test 
the  group  of  MSS.  which  read  'only-begotten  God'  is  very  strong; 
while  the  far  larger  group  of  MSS.  which  have  'Son'  for  'God'  is  com- 
paratively weak,  for  the  same  group  of  MSS.  might  be  quoted  in  de- 
fence of  a  multitude  of  readings  which  no  one  would  think  of  adopting. 
Again,  the  revised  Syriac,  which  is  among  the  minority  of  versions  that 
support  'God,'  is  here  of  special  weight,  because  it  agrees  with  MSS. 
from  which  it  usually  differs.  We  conclude,  therefore,  that  the  very  un- 
usual expression  'only-begotten  God'  is  the  true  reading,  which  has  been 
changed  to  the  usual  'only-begotten  Son,'  a  change  which  in  an  old 
Greek  MS.  would  involve  the  alteration  of  only  a  single  letter.  Both 
readings  can  be  traced  up  to  the  second  century,  which  again  is  evidence 
that  the  Gospel  was  written  in  the  first  century.  Such  dilTerences  take 
time  to  spread  themselves  widely.     See  ox\v.  13  and  ix.  35. 

in  the  dosom]  Literally,  into  the  bosom,  which  may  mean  that  the 
return  to  glory  after  the  Ascension  is  meant.  Comp.  Mark  ii.  1,  xiii. 
16;  I>uke  ix.  6r.  On  the  other  hand  the  Greek  for  'which  is'  points 
to  a  timeless  relation. 

hath  declared]  Better,  declared,  acted  as  His  interpreter.  The  Greek 
word  is  used  both  in  the  LXX.  and  in  classical  authors  of  interpreting 


V.  19.]  S.   JOHN,   I.  71 

19 — 37.     The  Testimony  of  the  Baptist. 
19 — 28.    His  Testimony  to  the  Deputation  from  J^ erusalem. 
And   this  is  the  record  of  John,  when  the  Jews   sent  19 

the  Divine  Will.  On  the  emphatic  use  of  'He'  here  comp.  v.  33  and 
see  on  X.  i.  In  the  First  Epistle  this  pronoun  {ekeinos)  is  used  specially 
for  Christ;  ii.  6,  iii.  3,  5,  7,  16,  iv.  17. 

In  this  prologue  we  notice  what  may  be  called  a  spiral  movement. 
An  idea  comes  to  the  front,  like  the  strand  of  a  rope,  retires  again,  and 
reappears  later  on  for  development  and  further  definition.  Meanwhile 
another  idea,  like  another  strand,  comes  before  us,  and  retires  to  re- 
appear in  like  manner.  Thus  the  Word  is  presented  to  us  in  v.  i,  is 
withdrawn,  and  again  presented  to  us  in  v.  14.  The  Creation  comes 
next  in  v.  3,  disappears,  and  returns  again  in  v.  10.  Then  'the  Light' 
is  introduced  in  v.  5,  withdrawn,  and  reproduced  in  vv.  10,  11.  Next 
the  rejection  of  the  Word  is  put  before  us  in  v.  5,  removed,  and  again 
put  before  us  in  zrv.  10,  11.  Lastly,  the  testimony  of  John  is  mentioned 
in  vv.  6,  7,  repeated  in  v.  15,  taken  up  again  in  v.  19,  and  developed 
through  the  next  two  sections  of  the  chapter. 

We  now  enter  upon  the  first  main  division  of  the  Gospel,  which  ex- 
tends to  the  end  of  chap,  xii.,  the  subject  being  Christ's  Ministry, 
or.  His  Revelation  of  Himself  to  the  World,  and  that  in  three 
parts;  THE  Testimony  (i.  19 — ii.  11),  the  Work  (ii.  13 — xi.  57),  and 
THE  Judgment  (xii.).  These  parts  will  be  subdivided  as  we  reach 
them.  19 — 37  The  Testimony  of  the  Baptist  (i)  to  the  deputation 
from  Jerusalem,  (2)  to  the  people,  (3)  to  S.  Andrew  and  S.  John  : 
38 — 51  The  Testitnony  oj  the  Disciples:  ii.  i — 11  The  Testitnony  of  the 
First  Sign. 

19 — 37.    The  Testimony  of  the  Baptist. 

19 — 28.     His  Testimony  to  the  Deputation  from  Jerusalem. 

This  section  describes  a  crisis  in  the  Baptist's  ministry.  He  had 
already  attracted  the  attention  of  the  Sanhedrin.  It  was  a  time  of 
excitement  and  expectation  respecting  the  Messiah.  John  evidently 
spoke  with  an  authority  greater  than  other  teachers,  and  his  success  was 
greater  than  theirs.  The  miracle  attending  his  birth,  connected  with 
the  public  ministry  of  Zacharias  in  the  Temple,  was  probably  well 
known.  He  had  proclaimed  that  a  new  dispensation  was  at  hand 
(Matt.  iii.  2),  and  this  was  believed  to  refer  to  the  Messiah.  But  what 
was  John's  own  position?  Was  he  the  Messiah  ?  This  uncertainty  led 
the  authorities  at  Jerusalem  to  send  and  question  John  himself  as  to  his 
mission.  No  formal  deputation  from  the  Sanhedrin  seems  to  have  been 
sent.  The  Sadducee  members,  acquiescing  in  the  Roman  dominion,  would 
not  feel  much  interest.  But  to  the  Pharisee  members,  who  represented 
the  religious  and  national  hopes  of  their  countiymen,  the  question  was 
vital ;  and  they  seem  to  have  sent  an  informal  though  influential  depu- 


72  S.    JOHN,    I.  [vv.  20,  21. 

priests  and  Levites  from  Jerusalem  to  ask  him,  Who  art 

20  thou  ?   And  he  confessed,  and  denied  not ;  but  confessed,  I 

21  am  not  the  Christ.     And  they  asked  him,  What  then  ?    Art 


tation  of  ministers  of  religion  (v.  19)  from  their  own  party  (v.  24).  S. 
John  was  probably  among  the  Baptist's  disciples  at  this  time,  and  heard 
his  master  proclaim  himself  not  the  Messiah,  but  His  Herald.  It  was 
a  crisis  for  him  as  well  as  for  his  master,  and  as  such  he  records  it. 

19.  (Ae  record]  Better,  tAe  witness ;  see  on  v.  7  and  comp.  iii.  1 1, 
V.  31. 

(Ae  yews]  This  term  in  S.  John's  Gospel  commonly  means  iAe 
opponents  of  CArist,  a  meaning  not  found  in  the  Synoptists,  who  seldom 
use  the  term.  Matt,  xxviii.  15;  Mark  vii.  3;  Lul<e  vi.  3,  xxiii.  51,  are 
the  only  instances  excepting  the  title  '  King  of  the  Jews. '  In  them  it  is  the 
sects  and  parties  (Pharisees,  Scribes,  Herodians,  &c.)  that  are  the  typical 
representatives  of  hostility  to  Christ.  But  S.  John,  writing  later,  with 
a  fuller  realisation  of  the  national  apostasy,  and  a  fuller  experience  of 
Jewish  malignity  in  opposing  the  Gospel,  lets  the  shadow  of  this  know- 
ledge fall  back  upon  his  narrative,  and  '  the  Jews '  are  to  him  not  his 
fellow  countrymen,  but  the  persecutors  and  murderers  of  the  Messiali. 
'  The  name  of  a  race  has  become  the  name  of  a  sect.'  He  uses  the 
term  about  70  times,  almost  always  with  this  shade  of  meaning. 

priests]  The  Baptist  himself  was  of  priestly  family  (Luke  i.  5); 
hence  priests  were  suitable  emissaries.  The  combination  '  priests  and 
Levites '  occurs  nowhere  else  in  N.  T.  Together  they  represent  tlie 
hierarchy. 

Levites]  Levites  were  commissioned  to  teacA  (2  Chron.  xxxv.  3 ;  Neh. 
viii.  7 — 9)  as  well  as  serve  in  the  Temple ;  and  it  is  as  teachers,  similar 
to  the  Scribes,  that  they  are  sent  to  the  Baptist.  The  mention  of  Levites 
as  part  of  the  deputation  is  the  mark  of  an  eyewitness.  Excepting 
in  the  parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan  (Luke  x.  32),  Levites  are 
not  mentioned  by  the  Synoptists,  nor  elsewhere  in  N.T.,  excepting 
Acts  iv.  36.  Had  the  Evangelist  been  constructing  a  story  out  of 
borrowed  materials,  we  should  probably  have  had  Scribes  or  Elders 
instead  of  Levites.  These  indications  of  eyewitness  are  among  the 
strong  proofs  of  the  authenticity  of  this  Gospel. 

WAo  art  tAou?]  with  a  strong  emphasis  on  the  'thou.' 

20.  confessed,  and  denied  not]     Antithetic  parallelism,  as  in  v.  3. 
but  confessed]     Rather,  and.  lie  confessed,  to  introduce  7vkat  he  con- 
fessed. 

/  am  not  tAe  CArist]  'I '  is  emphatic,  implying  that  some  one  else  not 
far  distant  is  the  Christ.  Throughout  the  section  (20  —  34)  John 
contrasts  himself  with  the  Christ  by  an  emphasis  on  'I.' 

tAe  CArist]  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  our  translators  have  so  often 
omitted  the  definite  article  before  'Christ,'  although  it  is  inserted  in  the 
Greek.  In  the  Gospel  narratives  the  article  should  always  be  preserved 
in  English  as  here.  Comp.  Matt.  xvi.  16,  xxvi.  63;  Mark  viii.  29;  and 
contrast  Malt.  xxiv.  5;  Luke  xxiii.  35,  39,  &c.     To  us   'Christ'  is  a 


vv.  22—24.]  S.   JOHN,    I.  -]■}, 

thou  Elias?  And  he  saith,  I  am  not.  Art  thou  that 
prophet  ?  And  he  answered,  No.  Then  said  they  unto  22 
him,  Who  art  thou?  that  we  may  give  an  answer  to  them 
that  sent  us.  What  sayest  thou  of  thyself?  He  said,  I  am  23 
the  voice  of  one  crying  in  the  wilderness,  Make 
straight  the  way  of  the  Lord,  as  said  the  prophet 
Esaias.    And  they  which  were  sent  were  of  the  Pharisees.  24 

proper  name,  but   to   the  Evangelists  it  is  a  title,   '■the  Christ,'  the 
Messiah  so  long  expected.     See  Lightfoot,  On  Revision,  p.  100. 

21.  What  then  ?]  '  What  then  are  we  to  think?'  or,  '  What  then  art 
thou?' 

Art  thou  Eliasl\  The  Scribes  taught  that  Elijah  would  come  again 
before  the  coming  of  the  Messiah  (Matt.  xvii.  10),  and  this  belief  is  re- 
peatedly alluded  to  in  the  Talmud.     Comp.  Mai.  iv.  5. 

I  a7n  not]  A  forger  would  scarcely  have  ventured  on  this  in  the  face 
of  Matt.  xi.  14,  where  Christ  says  that  John  is  Elijah.  But  Christ  is 
there  speaking  figuratively  (comp.  Luke  i.  17);  John  is  here  speaking 
literally.     He  says  he  is  not  Elijah  returned  to  the  earth  again. 

that  prophet]  Rather,  the  Prophet,  the  well-known  Prophet  of  Deut. 
xviii.  15,  who  some  thought  would  be  a  second  Moses,  others  a  second 
Elijah,  others  the  Messiah.  From  vii.  40,  41  we  see  that  some  distin- 
guished 'the  Prophet'  from  the  Messiah;  and  from  Matt.  xvi.  14  it 
appears  that  Jeremiah  or  other  prophets  were  expected  to  return. 
Comp.  2  Esdras  ii.  18;  i  Mace.  xiv.  41.  This  verse  alone  is  almost 
enough  to  prove  that  the  writer  is  a  Jew.  Who  but  a  Jew  would 
know  of  these  expectations?  Or  if  a  Gentile  chanced  to  know  them, 
would  he  not  explain  them  to  his  readers?  In  v.  25,  vi.  14,  48,  69  our 
translators  have  repeated  the  error  of  translating  the  definite  article  by 
'that'  instead  of 'the.' 

No]  The  Baptist  knows  that  'the  Prophet'  is  the  Messiah.  His 
replies  grow  more  and  more  abrupt;  '  I  am  not  the  Christ,'  'I  am  not,' 
'No.' 

22.  Who  art  thou?]  They  continue  asking  as  to  his  person;  he 
replies  as  to  his  office.  In  the  presence  of  the  Messiah  the  personality 
of  His  Forerunner  is  lost. 

23.  I  am  the  voice,  &c.]  Or,  I  am  a  7)oice.  The  Synoptists  use  these 
words  of  the  Baptist  as  fulfilling  prophecy.  From  this  verse  it  would 
seem  as  if  they  were  first  so  used  by  himself.  The  quotation  is  almost 
exact  from  the  LXX.  John  was  a  Voice  making  known  the  Word, 
meaningless  without  the  Word.  There  is  an  almost  certain  reference  to 
this  passage  (19 — 23)  in  Justin  Martyr,  Trypho,  Lxxxviii.,  which  is 
evidence  that  this  Gospel  was  known  before  a.d.  150. 

24.  And  they  which,  &c.]  Perhaps  the  better  reading  is,  ««</ there 
had  been  sent  some  of  the  Pharisees.  S.  John  mentions  neither  Sad- 
ducees  nor  Herodians;  only  the  Pharisees,  the  sect  most  opposed  to 
Christ,  is  remembered  by  the  Evangelist  who  had  gone  furthest  from 
Judaism. 


74  S.  JOHN,   I.  [vv.  25—29. 

25  And  they  asked  him,  and  said  unto  him,  Why  baptizest 
thou  then,  if  thou  be  not  that  Christ,  nor  Elias,  neither 

26 //i^/ prophet  ?  John  answered  them,  saying,  I  baptize  with 
water :  but  there  standeth  one  among  you,  whom  ye  know 

27  not ;  he  it  is,  who  coming  after  me  is  preferred  before  me, 

28  whose  shoe's  latchet  I  am  not  worthy  to  unloose.  These 
things  were  done  in  Bethabara  beyond  Jordan,  where  John 
was  baptizing. 

29 — 34.    The  Testimony  of  the  Baptist  to  the  people. 

29  The  next  day  John  seeth  Jesus  coming  unto  him,  and 

26.  Why  baptizest  thou  then  ?]  *  What  right  have  you  to  treat  Jews 
as  if  they  were  proselytes  and  make  them  submit  to  a  rite  which  im- 
plies that  they  are  impure?'  Had  they  forgotten  Zech.  xiii.  i;  Ezek. 
xxxvi.  25? 

be  not  that  Christ,  &c.]  Better,  art  not  the  Christ,  nor  yet  Elijah, 
nor  yet  the  Prophet,     See  on  z*.  21. 

26.  '  You  ask  for  my  credentials;  and  all  the  while  He  Who  is  far 
more  than  credentials  to  me  is  among  you.  I  am  not  a  prophet  to  fore- 
tell His  coming,  but  a  herald  to  proclaim  that  He  has  come.' 

27.  He  it  w]  These  words  and  '  is  preferred  before  me  '  are  want- 
ing in  authority :  the  sentence  should  run,  He  that  cometh  after  me, 
wiiose  shoe's  latchet,  &c.,  is  standing  in  the  midst  of  you,  and 
ye  know  Him  not.  '  Ye '  is  emphatic  ;  '  Whom  ye  who  question  me 
know  not,  but  Whom  I,  the  questioned,  know.' 

28.  Bethabara]  The  true  reading  is  Bethany,  which  was  changed  to 
Bethabara  owing  to  the  powerful  influence  of  Origen,  who  could  find  no 
Bethany  beyond  Jordan  known  in  his  day.  But  in  200  years  the  very 
name  of  an  obscure  place  might  easily  perish.  Origen  found  '  Bethany' 
in  almost  all  the  MSS.  The  site  of  Bethabara  or  Bethany  is  lost  now, 
but  it  must  have  been  near  Galilee :  comp.  v.  29  with  v.  43,  and  see  on 
the  'four  days,'  xi.  17.  It  is  possible  to  reconcile  the  two  readings. 
Bethabara  has  been  identified  with  'Abarah,  one  of  the  main  Jordan 
fords  about  14  miles  south  of  the  sea  of  Galilee :  and  '  Bethania  beyond 
Jordan '  has  been  identified  with  Bashan ;  Bethania  or  Batanea  being 
the  Aramaic  form  of  the  Hebrew  Bashan,  meaning  '  soft  level  ground.' 
Thus  Bethabara  is  the  village  or  ford  ;  Bethania,  the  district  on  the 
east  side  of  the  ford.  See  Condcr,  Handbook  0/  the  Bible,  pp.  315, 
320.     Bui  see  Appendix  D. 

29 — 34.    The  Testimony  of  the  Baptist  to  the  peoi'le. 

29.  The  next  day]  These  words  prevent  us  from  inserting  the 
Temptation  between  vv.  28  and  29.  The  fact  of  the  Baptist  knowing 
who  Jesus  is  shews  that  the  Baptism,  and  therefore  the  Temptation', 
must  have  preceded  the  deputation  from  Jcnisalem.     The  Evangelist 


vv.  30—32.]  S.   JOHN,   I.  75 

saith,   Behold  the  Lamb  of  God,  which  taketh  away  the 
sin  of  the  world.     This  is  he  of  whom  I  said,  After  me  30 
Cometh  a  man  which  is  preferred  before  me  :    for  he  was 
before  me.     And  I  knew  him  not :  but  that  he  should  be  31 
made  manifest  to   Israel,  therefore   am  I  come   baptizing 
with   water.     And   John   bare   record,   saying,   I    saw    the  32 
Spirit  descending  from  heaven  like  a  dove,  and  it  abode 

assumes  that  his  readers  are  well  acquainted  with  the  history  of  the 
Baptism  and  Temptation. 

the  Lamb  of  God'\  Evidently  some  Lamb  well  known  to  John's 
hearers  is  meant,  viz.  the  Lamb  of  Is.  liii.  (comp.  Acts  viii.  32);  but 
there  may  be  an  indirect  allusion  to  the  Paschal  Lamb.  With  '  Behold' 
comp.  xix.  5,  14:  with  'of  God'  comp.  Gen.  xxii.  8. 

which  taketh  away,  &c.]  These  words  seem  to  make  the  reference  to 
Is.  liii.,  esp.  vv.  4,  5,  10,  clear.  The  marginal  reading,  beat-etk,  is  not 
right  here  (i  John  iii.  5). 

the  sin]     Regarding  it  as  one  great  burden  or  plague. 

of  the  zvorld]  Isaiah  (liii.  8)  seems  to  see  no  further  than  the  redemp- 
tion of  the  Jews  :  '  for  the  transgression  of  my  people  was  he  stricken.' 
The  Baptist  knows  that  the  Messiah  comes  to  save  the  whole  human 
race,  even  those  hostile  to  Him. 

30.  of  whom]     The  best  text  gives,  in  toehalf  of  whom. 

31.  And  I  knevj  him  not]  Or,  /  also  knew  Him  not ;  I,  like  you, 
did  not  at  first  know  Him  to  be  the  Messiah.  There  is  no  contradiction 
between  this  and  Matt.  iii.  14.  (i)  'I  knew  Him  not '  need  not  mean 
'  I  had  no  knowledge  of  Him  whatever.'  (2)  John's  professing  that  he 
needed  to  be  baptized  by  Jesus  does  not  prove  that  he  had  already 
recognised  Jesus  as  the  Messiah,  but  only  as  superior  to  himself. 

tliat  he  should  be  made  manifest]  This  was  the  Baptist's  second  duty. 
He  had  (i)  to  prepare  for  the  Messiah  by  preaching  repentance;  (■2)  to 
point  out  the  Messiah.  The  word  for  'manifest'  is  one  of  S.  John's 
favourite  words  {phaneroun);  ii.  11,  iii.  21,  vii.  4,  ix.  3,  xvii.  6,  xxi.  i, 
14;  I  John  i.  2,  ii.  19,  28,  iii.  2,  5,  8,  9;  Rev.  iii.  18,  xv.  4. 

therefore  am  I  corn e]  Better,  for  this  cause  (xii.  18,  27)  came  I  (comp. 
v.  16,  18,  vii.  22,  viii.  47). 

baptizing  with  water]  In  humble  contrast  to  Him  Who  baptizeth 
with  the  Holy  Ghost'  {v.  33).  '  With  water'  is  literally  'in  water ^ 
here  and  v.  26. 

32.  bare  record]     Better,  ^ar^  witness  ;  comp.  w.  7,  8,  15,  19,  34. 
J  saw]     Better,  /bave  beheld,  or  contetnplated  {i  Johniv.  12,  14),  the 

perfect  of  the  verb  used  in  vv.  14  and  38. 

like  a  dove]  This  was  perhaps  visible  to  Christ  and  the  Baptist  alone. 
A  real  appearance  is  the  natural  meaning  here  and  is  insisted  on  by  S. 
Luke  (iii.  22)..  And  if  we  admit  the  'bodily  shape'  at  all,  there  can  be 
no  sound  reason  for  rejecting  the  dove.  The  marvel  is  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  should  be  visible  in  any  way  (comp.  '  the  tongues  of  fire,'  Acts 
ii.  3),  not  that  He  should  assume  the  form  of  a  dove  in  particular.     Of 


76 S.   JOHN,   I. [vv.  33,  34- 

33  upon  him.  And  I  knew  him  not :  but  he  that  sent  me  to 
baptize  with  water,  the  same  said  unto  me,  Upon  whom 
thou  shalt  see  the  Spirit  descending,  and  remaining  on  him, 

34  the  same  is  he  which  baptizeth  with  the  Holy  Ghost.  And 
I  saw,  and  bare  record  that  this  is  the  Son  of  God. 


course  this  visible  descent  of  the  Spirit  made  no  chnnge  in  the  nature  of 
Christ.  It  served  two  purposes,  (i)  to  make  the  Messiah  ]<no\vn  to  the 
Baptist,  and  through  him  to  the  world ;  (2)  to  mark  the  olhcial  com- 
mencement of  the  ministry  of  the  Messiah,  like  the  anointing  of  a  king. 
The  whole  incident  is  very  parallel  to  the  Transfiguration.  In  both 
Christ  is  miraculously  glorified  previous  to  setting  out  to  suffer;  in 
both  a  voice  from  heaven  bears  witness  to  Him;  at  both  'the  goodly 
fellowship  of  the  Prophets  '  is  nobly  represented. 

33.  And  I kiiezu  him  not}  Or,  as  before,  /also  knew  Him  not.  The 
Baptist  again  protests,  that  but  for  a  special  revelation  he  was  as  ignorant 
as  others  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah. 

he  that  sent  me]     The  special  mission  of  a  Prophet.     Comp.  v.  6. 
the  same  said  unto  me]     Better,  lie  said  unto  me :  see  on  x.  i.     l-Vhen 
this  revelation  was  made  we  are  not  told. 

a}id  remaining  on  him]  Better,  and  abiding  on  Hi/n.  It  is  the  same 
word  as  is  used  in  v.  32,  and  one  of  which  S.  John  is  very  fond;  but 
our  translators  have  obscured  this  fact  by  capriciously  varying  the  trans- 
lation, sometimes  in  the  same  verse  [v.  39,  iv.  40;  i  John  ii.  24,  iii. 
24).  Thus,  though  most  often  rendered  'abide,'  it  is  also  rendered 
'remain'  (ix.  41,  xv.  11,  16),  'dwell'  (i.  39,  vi.  56,  xiv.  10,  17),  '  con- 
tinue'(ii.  12,  viii.  31),  'tarry'  (iv.  40,  xxi.  22,  23),  '  endure  '  (vi.  27), 
'  be  present '  (xiv.  25).  In  i  John  ii.  24  it  is  translated  in  three  different 
ways.     See  on  xv.  9. 

which  baptizeth  with  the  Holy  Ghost]  See  on  xiv.  26.  This  phrase, 
introduced  without  explanation  or  comment,  assumes  that  the  readers 
of  this  Gospel  are  well  aware  of  this  office  of  the  Messiah,  i.  e.  are 
well-instructed  Christians.  The  word  baptizeth  is  appropriate,  (1)  to 
mark  the  analogy  and  contrast  between  the  office  of  the  Baptist  and 
that  of  the  Messiah;  (2)  because  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  is  constantly 
represented  as  an  out-pouring,  '  With,'  as  in  vv.  26  and  31,  is  liter- 
ally 'in.' 

34.  And  I  saw,  and  bare  record]  Better,  And /ha.Ye  seen  a/.-d  ha,ve 
borne  witness.  '  I  have  seen '  is  in  joyous  contrast  to  '  I  knew  Him 
not,'  ■w.  31,  33.  'Have  borne  witness'  is  the  same  verb  as  in  z^'. 
7,  8  and  32  :  hence  '  witness '  is  preferable  to  '  record  '  both  here  and  in 
V.  32. 

the  Son  of  God]  The  Messiah.  This  declaration  of  the  Baptist 
agrees  with  and  confirms  the  account  of  the  voice  from  heaven  (Matt.  iii. 
17)- 

These  verses,  32 — 34,  prove  that  S.  John  does  not,  as  Philo  does, 
identify  the  Logos  with  the  Spirit, 


vv.  35—38.]  S.   JOHN,    I.  77 

35 — 37.    The  Testimony  of  the  Baptist  to  Atidrew  and  yohn. 

Again  the  next  day  after  John  stood,  and  two  of  his  35 
disciples ;  and  looking  upon  Jesus  as  he  walked,  he  saith,  36 
Behold  the  Lamb  of  God.  And  the  two  disciples  heard  37 
him  speak,  and  they  followed  Jesus, 

38 — 51.     The  Testi??tony  of  Disciples. 
Then  Jesus  turned,  and  saw  them  following,  and  saith  38 

35—37.    The  Testimony  of  the  Baptist  to  Andrew  and  John. 

35.  Again]  Referring  to  7/.  29 :  it  should  come  second;  The  ttext 
day  again  Jo/m  was  standing. 

The  difference  between  this  narrative  and  that  of  the  Synoptists 
(Matt.  iv.  18;  Mark  i.  16;  Luke  v.  2)  is  satisfactorily  explained  by  sup- 
posing this  to  refer  to  an  earlier  and  less  formal  call  of  these  first  four 
disciples,  John  and  Andrew,  Peter  and  James.  Their  call  to  be  Apostles 
was  a  very  gradual  one.  Two  of  them,  and  perhaps  all  four,  began  by 
being  disciples  of  the  Baptist,  who  directs  them  to  the  Lamb  of  God 
{v.  36),  Who  invites  them  to  His  abode  {v.  39) :  they  then  witness  His 
miracles  (ii.  2,  &c. );  are  next  called  to  he  'fishers  of  men'  (Matt.  iv.  19); 
and  are  finally  enrolled  with  the  rest  of  the  Twelve  as  Apostles  (Mark 
iii.  13).     See  note  on  Mark  i.  20. 

Two  of  his  disciples']  One  of  these  we  are  told  was  S.  Andrew  {v.  40) ; 
the  other  was  no  doubt  S.  John  himself.  The  account  is  that  of  an 
eyewitness;  and  his  habitual  reserve  with  regard  to  himself  hilly  ac- 
counts for  his  silence,  if  the  other  disciple  ruas  himself.  If  it  was  some 
one  else,  it  is  difficult  to  see  why  S.  John  pointedly  omits  to  mention 
his  name. 

There  was  strong  antecedent  probability  that  the  first  followers  of 
Christ  would  be  disciples  of  the  Baptist.  The  fact  of  their  being  so  is 
one  reason  of  the  high  honour  in  which  the  Baptist  has  been  held  from 
the  earliest  times  by  the  Church. 

36.  looking  upon]  having  looked  on  with  a  fixed  penetrating  gaze. 
Comp.  V.  42;  Mark  x.  21,  27;  Luke  xx.  17,  xxii.  61. 

Behold  the  Lamb  of  God]  This  seems  to  shew  that  these  disciples 
were  present  the  previous  day  [v.  29) :  hence  there  was  no  need  to  say 
more  than  this.  This  appears  to  have  been  the  last  meeting  between 
the  Baptist  and  Christ. 

37.  heard  him  speak]  Although  the  declaration  had  not  been  ad- 
dressed to  them  in  particular. 

they  followed  Jestis]  The  first  beginning  of  the  Christian  Church. 
But  we  are  not  to  understand  that  they  have  already  determined  to  be- 
come His  disciples. 

38 — 51.    The  Testimony  of  Disciples. 

38.  saw  them]  Same  verb  as  in  vv.  14  and  32.  The  context  shews 
that  He  saw  into  their  hearts  as  well.     For  '  Then '  read  But. 


78  S.   JOHN,    I.  [vv.  39—41. 

unto  them,  What  seek  ye?     They  said  unto  him.  Rabbi, 
(which  is  to  say,  being  interpreted,  Master,)  where  dwellest 

39  thou?    He  saith  unto  tliem,  Come  and  see.     They  came 
and  saw  where  he  dwelt,  and  abode  with  him   that  day : 

40  for  it  was  about  the  tenth  hour.      One  of  the  two  which 
heard  John  speak,  and  followed  him,  was  Andrew,  Simon 

41  Peter's  brother.     He  first  findeth  his  own  brother  Simon, 


IVhat  seek  ye?]  i.e.  in  Me.  He  does  not  ask  '  Whom  seek  ye?'  It 
was  evident  that  tiiey  sought  Him. 

Kabbi\  A  comparatively  modern  word  when  S.  John  wrote,  and  there- 
fore all  the  more  requiring  explanation  to  Gentile  readers.  S.  John 
often  interprets  between  Hebrew  and  Greek;  thrice  in  this  section. 
(Comp.  w.  41,  42.) 

where  dwellest  thou?]  Better,  ivhere  abidest  Thou?  (See  on  v.  33.) 
They  have  more  to  ask  than  can  be  answered  on  the  spot.  Perhaps 
they  think  Him  a  travelling  Rabbi  staying  with  friends  close  by;  and 
they  intend  to  visit  Him  at  some  future  time.  He  bids  them  come  at 
once :  now  is  the  day  of  salvation. 

39.  Come  and  see]  The  more  probable  reading  gives,  Come  and  ye 
shall  see. 

they  came]     Insert,  tlierefore. 

that  day]     That  memorable  day. 

it  was  about  the  tenth  hojir]  S.  John  remembers  the  very  hour  of  this 
crisis  in  his  life:  all  the  details  of  the  narrative  are  very  lifelike. 

It  is  sometimes  contended  that  S.  John  reckons  the  hours  of  the  day 
according  to  the  modern  method,  from  midnight  to  midnight,  and  not 
according  to  the  Jewish  method,  from  sunset  to  sunset,  as  everywhere 
else  in  N.T.  and  in  Josephus.  It  is  antecedently  improbable  that 
S.  John  should  in  this  point  vary  from  the  rest  of  N.  T.  writers;  and  we 
ought  to  require  strong  evidence  before  accepting  this  theory,  which 
has  been  adopted  mainly  in  order  to  escape  from  the  difliculty  of  xix. 
14,  where  see  notes.  Setting  aside  xix.  14  as  the  cause  of  the  question, 
we  have  four  passages  in  which  S.  John  mentions  the  hour  of  the  day, 
this,  iv.  6,  52  and  xi.  9.  None  of  them  are  decisive:  but  in  no  single 
case  is  the  iDalance  of  probability  strongly  in  favour  of  the  modern 
method.  See  notes  in  each  place.  Here  either  10  A.M.  or  4  p.m. 
would  suit  the  context :  and  while  the  antecedent  probability  that 
S.  John  reckons  time  like  the  rest  of  the  Evangelists  will  incline  us 
to  4  P.M.,  the  fact  that  a  good  deal  still  remains  to  be  done  on  this  day 
makes  10  a.m.  rather  more  suitable.  Origen  knows  nothing  of  S.  Jolm's 
using  the  modern  method  of  reckoning. 

40.  Andrew,  Simon  Peter  s  brother]  Before  the  end  of  the  first  cen- 
tury, therefore,  it  was  natural  to  describe  Andrew  by  his  relationship  to 
his  far  belter  known  brother.  In  Church  History  S.  Peter  is  everything 
and  S.  Andrew  nothing :  but  would  there  have  been  an  Apostle  Peter 
but  for  Andrew.     In  the  lists  of  the  Apostles  S.  Andrew  is  always  in 


V.  42.]  S.   JOHN,   I.  79 

and  saith  unto  him,  We  have  found  the  Messias,  which  is, 
being  interpreted,  the  Christ.    And  he  brought  him  to  Jesus.  42 
And  when  Jesus  beheld  him,  he  said.  Thou  art  Simon  the 
son  of  Jona :  thou  shalt  be  called  Cephas,  which  is  by  in- 
terpretation, A  stone. 

the  first  group  of  four,  but  he  is  outside  the  chosen  three,  in  spite  of 
this  early  call. 

41.  He  first  findeth,  &c.]  The  meaning  of  'first'  becomes  almost 
certain  when  we  remember  S.  John's  characteristic  reserve  about  him- 
self. Both  disciples  hurry  to  tell  their  own  brothers  the  good  tidings, 
that  the  Messiah  has  been  found  :  S.  Andrew  finds  his  brother  yfrj-/,  and 
afterwards  S.  John  finds  his;  but  we  are  left  to  infer  the  latter  point. 

S.  Andrew  thrice  brings  others  to  Christ;  Peter,  the  lad  with  the 
loaves  (vi.  8),  and  certain  Greeks  (xii.  11);  and  excepting  Mark  xiii.  3 
we  know  scarcely  anything  else  about  him.  Thus  it  would  seem  as  if  in 
these  three  incidents  S.  John  had  given  us  the  key  to  his  character. 
And  here  we  have  another  characteristic  of  this  Gospel — the  lifelike 
way  in  which  the  less  prominent  figures  are  sketched.  Besides 
Andrew  we  have  Philip,  i.  44,  vi.  5,  xii.  21,  xiv.  8;  Thomas,  xi.  16,  xiv. 
5  ;  XX.  24 — 29  ;  Nathanael,  i.  45 — 52  ;  Nicodemus,  iii.  i — 12,  vii.  50 — 52, 
xix.  39;  Martha  and  Mary,  xi.,  xii.  i — 3. 

We  have  found'\  This  does  not  prove  that  S.  John  is  still  with  him, 
only  that  they  were  together  when  their  common  desire  and  expecta- 
tion were  fulfilled. 

Messias"]  The  Hebrew  form  of  this  name  is  used  by  S.  John  only, 
here  and  iv.  25.  Elsewhere  the  LXX.  translation,  'the  Christ,'  is  used. 
Here  'the'  before  '  Christ'  should  be  omitted. 

42.  beheld]  Same  word  as  in  v.  36,  implying  a  fixed  earnest  look ; 
what  follows  shews  that  Christ's  gaze  penetrated  to  his  heart  and  read 
his  character. 

Simon  the  son  of  jfojia]  The  true  reading  here  and  xxi.  15,  16,  17 
is  Sitnon  the  son  ofiolasi..  There  is  a  tradition  that  his  mother's  name  was 
Johanna.  The  Greek  form  lond  may  represent  two  distinct  Hebrew 
names,  Jonah  and  Johanan=John.  There  is  no  need  to  make  Christ's 
knowledge  of  his  name  and  parentage  miraculous ;  Andrew  in  bringing 
Simon  would  naturally  mention  them. 

A  stone]  The  margin  and  text  should  change  places,  Peter,  being  in 
the  text  and  'a  stone'  in  the  margin,  like  'the  Anointed'  in  v.  41.  This 
new  name  is  given  with  reference  to  the  new  relation  into  which  the 
person  named  enters ;  comp.  the  cases  of  Abraham,  Sarah,  Israel.  It 
points  to  the  future  office  of  Simon  rather  than  to  his  present  character. 
The  form  Cephas  occurs  nowhere  else  in  the  Gospels  or  Acts:  but 
comp.  I  Cor.  i.  12,  iii.  22,  ix.  5;  xv.  5,  Gal.  i.  18,  ii.  9,  11,  14. 

There  is  no  discrepancy  between  this  and  Matt.  xvi.  18.  Here  Christ 
gives  the  name  Peter;  there  he  reminds  S.  Peter  of  it.  It  is  quite  clear 
from  this  that  S.  Peter  was  not  first  called  among  the  Apostles,  a  point 
on  which  the  Synoptists  leave  us  in  doubt. 


8o  S.   JOHN,    I.  [vv.  43— 46. 

43  The  day  following  Jesus  would  go  forth  into  Galilee,  and 

44  findeth  Philip,  and  saith  unto  him.  Follow  me.     Now  Philip 

45  was  of  Bethsaida,  the  city  of  Andrew  and  Peter.  Philip 
findeth  Nathanael,  and  saith  unto  him,  We  have  found  him, 
of  whom  Moses  in  the  law,  and  the  prophets,  did  write, 

46  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the   son   of  Joseph.     And   Nathanael 

43.  The  day  following]  Better,  as  in  vv.  29,  35,  The  next  day;  the 
Greek  is  the  same  in  all  three  verses.  We  thus  have  four  days  accu- 
rately marked,  (i)  v.  19;  (2)  v.  29;  (3)  v.  35;  (4)  v.  44.  A  writer  of 
fiction  would  not  have  cared  for  such  minute  details;  they  might 
entangle  him  in  discrepancies.  They  are  thoroughly  natural  as  coming 
from  an  eyewitness.     See  on  ii.  i. 

Folloru  me\  In  the  Gospels  these  words  seem  always  to  be  the  call 
to  become  a  disciple.  Matt.  viii.  22,  ix.  9,  xix.  21 ;  Mark  ii.  14,  x.  21; 
Luke  v.  27,  ix.  59;  John  xxi.  19.  With  two  exceptions  they  are  always 
addressed  to  those  who  afterwards  became  Apostles. 

44.  PhUlp  was  of  Bethsaida']  In  the  Synoptists  Philip  is  a  mere 
name  in  the  lists  of  the  Apostles:  our  knowledge  of  him  comes  from  S. 
John.  See  above  on  v.  42  and  on  xiv.  8.  The  local  knowledge  dis- 
played in  this  verse  is  very  real.  S.  John  would  possess  it ;  a  writer  in 
the  second  century  would  not,  and  would  not  care  to  invent.  This  is 
Bethsaida  of  Galilee  on  the  western  shore,  not  Bethsaida  Julias.  See 
note  on  Matt.  iv.  13. 

45.  N^athanael]=' G'l^i  of  God.'  The  name  occurs  Num.  i.  8 ;  i 
Chron.  ii.  14;  i  Esdras  i.  9,  ix.  22.  Nathanael  is  commonly  identified 
with  Bartholomew;  (i)  Bartholomew  is  only  a  patronymic  and  the 
bearer  would  be  likely  to  have  another  name  (comp.  Barjona  of  Simon, 
Barnabas  of  Joses);  (2)  S.  John  never  mentions  Bartholomew,  the  Sy- 
noptists never  mention  Nathanael ;  (3)  the  Synoptists  in  their  lists  place 
Bartholomew  next  to  Philip,  as  James  next  his  probable  caller  John, 
and  Peter  (in  Matt,  and  Luke)  next  his  caller  Andrew;  (4)  all  the  other 
disciples  mentioned  in  this  chapter  become  Apostles,  and  none  are  so 
highly  commended  as  Nathanael;  (5)  All  Nathanael's  companions 
named  in  xxi.  2  were  Apostles  (see  note  there).  But  all  these  rea- 
sons do  not  make  the  identification  more  than  probable.  The  framers 
of  our  Liturgy  do  not  countenance  the  identification:  this  passage  ap- 
pears neither  as  the  Gospel  nor  as  a  Lesson  for  S.  Bartholomew's  Day. 

We  have  found  him,  of  whom,  &c.]  "A  most  correct  representation 
of  the  current  phraseology,  both  in  regard  to  the  divisions  of  the  O.T., 
and  the  application  of  the  Messianic  idea."     S.  p.  35. 

Moses]  viz.  in  Deut.  xviii.  15  and  in  all  the  Messianic  types,  promises 
to  Adam,  Abraham,  &c. 

Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  son  of  Joseph]  The  words  are  Philip's,  and 
express  the  common  belief  about  Jesus.  It  was  natural  to  say  He  was 
•of  or  'from  Nazareth,'  as  His  home  had  been  there;  still  more  natural 
to  call  him  'the  son  of  Joseph.'  The  conclusion  that  the  Evangelist  is 
ignorant  of  the  birth  at  Bethlehem,  or  of  the  miraculous  nature  of  that 


w.  47— 49-]  S.  JOHN,  I.  8i 

said  unto  him,  Can  there  any  good  thing  come  out  of 
Nazareth  ?  Philip  saith  unto  him,  Come  and  see.  Jesus  47 
saw  Nathanael  coming  to  him,  and  saith  of  him,  Behold  an 
Israelite  indeed,  in  whom  is  no  guile.  Nathanael  saith  48 
unto  him.  Whence  knowest  thou  me  ?  Jesus  answered  and 
said  unto  him.  Before  that  Philip  called  thee,  when  thou 
wast  under  the  fig  tree,  I  saw  thee.     Nathanael  answered  49 


birth,  cannot  be  drawn  from  this  passage.  Rather,  we  may  conclude 
that  he  is  a  scrupulously  honest  historian,  who  records  exactly  what  was 
said,  without  making  additions  of  his  own. 

46.  Can  there  a7iy  good  thing,  &c.]  All  Galileans  were  despised  for 
their  want  of  culture,  their  rude  dialect,  and  contact  with  Gentiles. 
They  were  to  the  Jews  what  Boeotians  were  to  the  Athenians.  But  here 
it  is  a  Galilean  who  reproaches  Nazareth  in  particular.  Apart  from  the 
Gospels  we  know  nothing  to  the  discredit  of  Nazareth;  neither  in  O.T. 
nor  in  Josephus  is  it  mentioned ;  but  what  we  are  told  of  the  people  by 
the  Evangelists  is  mostly  bad.  Christ  left  them  and  preferred  to  dwell 
at  Capernaum  (Matt.  iv.  13);  He  could  do  very  little  among  them, 
'because  of  their  unbelief  (xiii.  58),  which  was  such  as  to  make  Him 
marvel  (Mark  vi.  6);  and  once  they  tried  to  kill  Him  (Luke  iv.  29). 
S.  Augustine  would  omit  the  question.  Nathanael  'who  knew  the 
Scriptures  excellently  well,  when  he  heard  the  name  Nazareth,  was 
filled  with  hope,  and  said.  From  Nazareth  something  good  can  come.' 
But  this  is  not  probable.  Possibly  he  meant  no  more  than  '  Can  any 
good  thing  come  out  of  despised  Galilee? '     Nazareth  being  in  Galilee. 

Covie  and  see]  The  best  cure  for  ill-founded  prejudice.  Philip  shews 
the  depth  of  his  own  conviction  in  suggesting  this  test,  which  seems  to 
have  been  in  harmony  with  the  practical  bent  of  his  own  mind.  See  on 
xii.  21  and  xiv.  8. 

47.  saw  Nathanael  coming]  This  contradicts  the  theory  that  Christ 
overheard  Nathanael's  question.  S.  John  represents  Christ's  knowledge 
of  Nathanael  as  miraculous;  as  in  v,  42  He  appears  as  the  searcher  of 
hearts. 

flw  Israelite  indeed]  In  character  as  well  as  by  birth:  what  follows 
shews  what  is  meant.  The  'guile'  may  refer  to  the  'subtilty'  of  Jacob 
(Gen.  xxvii.  35)  before  he  became  Israel :  'Behold  a  son  of  Israel,  who 
is  in  no  way  a  son  of  Jacob. '  The  'supplanter'  is  gone;  the  'prince' 
remains.  His  guilelessness  appears  in  his  making  no  mock  repudiation 
of  the  character  attributed  to  him  (^.  48).  He  is  free  from  'the  pride 
that  apes  humility.' 

48.  under  the  fig  tree]  This  probably  means  'at  home,'  in  the  re- 
tirement of  his  own  garden  (i  Kings  iv.  25;  Mic.  iv.  4;  Zee.  iii.  10); 
the  Greek  implies  motion  to  under.  Nathanael  had  perhaps  been  pray- 
ing or  meditating  there;  he  seems  to  see  that  Christ  knew  what  his 
thoughts  had  been  there.  It  was  under  a  fig  tree  that  S.  Augustine 
heard  the  famous  '  Tolle,  lege. ' 

S.  JOHN  6 


82  S.    JOHN,    I.  [vv.  50,  51. 

and  saith  unto  him,  Rabbi,  thou  art  the  Son  of  God ;  thou 

50  art  the  King  of  Israel.  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  him, 
Because  I  said  unto  thee,  I  saw  thee  under  the  fig  tree, 
beUevest  thou?    thou  shalt  see  greater  things  than  these. 

51  And  he  saith  unto  him,  Venly,  verily,  I  say  unto  you, 
Hereafter  ye  shall  see  heaven  open,  and  the  angels  of  God 
ascending  and  descending  upon  the  Son  of  man. 


49.  '  ihou  art  the  Son  of  God'\  We  know  from  other  passages  that 
this  was  one  of  the  recognised  titles  of  the  Messiah;  xi.  27;  Matt.  xxvi. 
63;  Markiii.  11, v.  7;  Luke  iv. 41.   'Son  of  David' was  more  common. 

the  King  of  Israel\  Omit  'the.'  This  phrase  "is  especially  important, 
because  it  breathes  those  politico-theocratic  hopes,  which  since  the 
taking  of  Jerusalem,  Christians  at  least,  if  not  Jews,  must  have  entirely 
laid  aside."  S.  How  could  a  Christian  of  the  second  century  have 
thrown  himself  back  to  this? 

50.  believcst  thou?\  Or  possibly,  thou  bdievcst.  Comp.  xvi.  31, 
XX.  29.  The  interrogative  form  is  here  best:  He  who  marvelled  at  the 
unbelief  of  the  people  of  Nazareth  here  expresses  joyous  surprise  at  the 
ready  belief  of  the  guileless  Israelite  of  Cana. 

61.  Verily,  verily}  The  double  'verily'  occurs  25  times  in  this 
Gospel,  and  nowhere  else,  always  in  the  mouth  of  Christ.  It  introduces 
a  truth  of  special  solemnity  and  importance.  The  single  'verily'  occurs 
about  30  times  in  Matt.,  14  in  Mark,  and  7  in  Luke.  The  word  repre- 
sents the  Hebrew  'Amen,'  which  in  the  LXX.  never  means  'verily.'  In 
the  Gospels  it  has  no  other  meaning.  The  'Amen'  at  the  end  of 
sentences  (Matt.  vi.  13,  xxviii.  20;  Mark  xvi.  20;  Luke  xxiv.  53;  John 
xxi.  25)  is  in  every  case  of  doubtful  authority. 

unto  you]  Plural;  all  present  are  addressed,  Andrew,  John,  Peter 
(James),  and  Philip,  as  well  as  Nathanael. 

Hereafter]  Better,  from  hencefortli ;  from  this  point  onwards 
Christ's  Messianic  work  of  linking  earth  to  heaven,  and  re-establishing 
free  intercourse  between  man  and  God,  goes  on.  But  the  word  is 
wanting  in  the  best  MSS. 

heaven  open]  Better,  the  heaven  opened;  made  open  and  remaining 
so. 

the  angels  of  God]  Like  v.  47,  an  apparent  reference  to  the  life  of 
Jacob,  perhaps  suggested  by  the  scene,  which  may  have  been  near  to 
Bethel.  This  does  not  refer  to  the  angels  which  appeared  after  the 
Temptation,  at  the  Agony,  and  at  the  Ascension  :  rather  to  the  perpetual 
intercourse  between  God  and  the  Messiah  during  His  ministry. 

the  Son  of  man]  This  phrase  in  all  four  Gospels  is  invariably  used 
by  Christ  Himself  of  Himself  as  the  Messiah,  upwards  of  80  times  in 
all.  None  of  the  Evangelists  direct  our  attention  to  this  strict  limitation 
in  the  use  of  the  expression:  their  agreement  on  this  striking  point  is 
evidently  undesigned,  and  therefore  a  strong  mark  of  their  veracity. 
See  notes  on  Matt.  viii.  20;  Mark  ii.  10.     In  O.  T.  the  phrase  'Son  of 


vv.  1—4.]  S.   JOHN,   II.  B3 

Chap.  II.  i — 11.     T/ie  Testi77iony  of  the  First  Sign. 

And  the  third  day  there  was  a  marriage  in  Cana  of  Gali-  2 
lee ;  and  the  mother  of  Jesus  was  there  :    and  both  Jesus  2 
was  called,  and  his  disciples,  to  the  marriage.     And  when  3 
they  wanted  wine,  the  mother  of  Jesus  saith  unto  him,  They 
have  no  v/ine.     Jesus  saith  unto  her,  Woman,  what  have  I  4 

Man'  has  three  distinct  uses;  (i)  in  the  Psalms,  for  the  ideal  man;  viii. 
4—8,  Ixxx.  17,  cxliv.  3,  cxlvi.  3  :  (2)  in  Ezekiel,  as  the  name  by  which  the 
Prophet  is  addressed  by  God;  ii.  i,  3,  6,  8,  iii.  i,  3,  4,  &c.,  &c.,  more 
than  80  times  in  all ;  probably  to  remind  Ezekiel,  that  in  spite  of  the 
favour  shewn  to  him,  and  the  wrath  denounced  against  the  children  of 
Israel,  he,  no  less  than  they,  had  a  mortal's  frailty:  (3)  in  the  'night 
visions'  of  Dan.  vii.  13,  14,  where  'One  like  a  son  of  man  came  with 
the  clouds  of  heaven,  and  came  to  the  Ancient  of  Days. ..and  there  was 
given  Him  dominion,  and  glory,  and  a  kingdom,  that  all  people, 
nations,  and  languages  should  serve  Him,  &c.'  That  'Son  of  man 
henceforth  became  one  of  the  titles  of  the  looked-for  Messiah'  may  be 
doubted.  Rather,  the  title  was  a  nno  one  assumed  by  Christ,  and  as 
yet  only  dimly  understood  (comp.  Matt.  xvi.  13). 

This  first  chapter  alone  is  enough  to  shew  that  the  Gospel  is  the  work 
of  a  Jew  of  Palestine,  well  acquainted  with  the  Messianic  hopes,  and 
traditions,  and  phraseology  current  in  Palestine  at  the  time  of  Christ's 
ministry,  and  able  to  give  a  lifelike  picture  of  the  Baptist  and  of  Christ's 
first  disciples. 

Chap.  II.     1—11.     The  Testimony  of  the  First  Sign, 

1.  the  tJiird  day]  From  the  calling  of  Philip  (i.  43),  the  last  date 
given,  making  a  week  in  all ;  the  first  week,  perhaps  in  contrast  to  the 
last  week  (xii.  i). 

Cana  of  Galilee]  To  distinguish  it  from  Cana  of  Asher  (Josh.  xix. 
■28).  This  Cana  is  not  mentioned  in  O.T. ;  it  was  the  home  of 
Nathanael  (xxi.  2),  and  \%  now  generally  identified  with  Kanet  el-Jelil, 
about  six  miles  N.  of  Nazareth. 

was  there]  Staying  as  a  friend  or  relation  of  the  family;  she  speaks 
to  the  servants  as  if  she  were  quite  at  home  in  the  house  {v.  5).  Joseph 
has  disappeared  :  the  inference  (not  quite  certain)  is  that  in  the  interval 
between  Luke  ii.  51  and  this  marriage — about  17  years— he  had  died. 

2.  a7id  his  disciples]  Now  five  or  six  in  number,  Andrew,  John, 
Peter,  Philip,  Nathanael,  and  probably  James.  For  'both  Jesus'  read 
'Jesus  also.' 

3.  when  they  wanted  wine]  Better,  when  the  wine  failed.  Perhaps 
the  arrival  of  these  six  or  seven  guests  caused  the  want ;  certainly  it 
would  make  it  more  apparent.  To  Eastern  hospitality  such  a  mishap 
on  such  an  occasion  would  seem  a  most  disgraceful  calamity. 

They  have  no  wine]  Much  comment  has  here  obscured  a  simple  text. 
The  family  in  which  she  was  a  guest  was  in  a  serious  difficulty.     Per- 

6—2 


84 S.   JOHN,    II.  [vv.  s,  6. 

;  to  do  with  thee?  mine  hour  is  not  yet  come.  His  mother 
saith  unto  the  servants,  Whatsoever  he  saith  unto  you,  do  //. 

3  And  there  were  set  there  six  waterpots  of  stone,  after  the 
manner  of  the  purifying  of  the  Jews,  containing  two  or  three 

haps  she  felt  herself  partly  responsible  for  the  arrangements :  certainly 
she  would  wish  to  help.  What  more  natural  than  that  she  should  turn 
to  her  Son  and  tell  Him  the  difficulty  ?  Probably  she  did  not  expect  a 
miracle,  still  less  wish  Him  to  break  up  the  party,  or  begin  a  discourse 
to  distract  attention  from  the  want.  The  meaning  simply  is — 'They 
have  no  wine;  what  is  to  be  done?' 

4.  Woman,  what  have  I  to  do  with  theefl  S.  John  alone  of  all  the 
Evangelists  never  gives  the  Virgin's  name.  Here,  as  so  often,  he 
assumes  that  his  readers  know  the  main  points  in  the  Gospel  narrative: 
or  it  may  be  part  of  the  reserve  which  he  exhibits  with  regard  to  all 
that  nearly  concerns  himself.  Christ's  Mother  had  become  his  mother 
(xix.  26,  27).     He  nowhere  mentions  his  brother  James. 

Treatises  Iiave  been  written  to  shew  that  these  words  do  not  contain 
a  rebuke ;  for  if  Christ  here  rebukes  His  Mother,  it  cannot  be  main- 
tained that  she  is  immaculate.  '  Woman'  of  course  implies  no  rebuke; 
the  Greek  might  more  fairly  be  rendered  'Lady'(comp.  xix.  26).  At  the 
same  time  it  marks  a  difference  between  the  Divine  Son  and  the  earthly 
parent :  He  does  not  say,  'Mother.'  But  'what  have  I  to  do  with  thee?' 
does  imply  rebuke,  as  is  evident  from  the  other  passages  where  the 
phrase  occurs,  Judg.  xi.  12;  i  Kings  xvii.  18;  2  Kings  iii.  13;  Matt, 
yiii.  29 ;  Mark  i.  24 ;  Luke  viii.  28.  Only  in  one  passage  does  the  mean- 
ing seem  to  vary:  in  2  Chron.  xxxv.  21  the  question  seems  to  mean 
'why  need  we  quarrel?'  rather  than  'what  have  we  in  common?'  But 
such  a  meaning,  if  possible  there,  would  be  quite  inappropriate  here. 
The  further  question  has  been  asked,— what  was  she  rebuked  for? 
Chrysostom  thinks  for  vanity;  she  wished  to  glorify  herself  through  her 
Son.  More  probably  for  interference :  He  will  help,  but  in  His  own 
way,  and  in  His  own  time.     Comp.  Luke  ii.  51. 

mine  hour]  The  meaning  of  'My  hour''  and  'His  hour'  in  this 
Gospel  depends  in  each  case  on  the  context.  There  cannot  here  be  any 
reference  to  His  death;  rather  it  means  His  hour  for  'manifesting  forth 
His  glory'  {v.  11)  as  the  Messiah  by  working  miracles.  The  exact 
moment  was  still  in  the  future.  Comp.  vii.  8,  where  He  for  the  moment 
refuses  what  He  soon  after  does;  and  xii.  23,  xvii.  i,  which  confirm  the 
meaning  here  given  to  'hour.' 

5.  Between  the  lines  of  His  refusal  her  faith  reads  a  better  answer  to 
her  appeal. 

6.  six  waterpots  of  stone']  As  an  eyewitness  S.  John  remembers 
their  number,  material,  and  size.  The  surroundings  of  the  first  miracle 
would  not  easily  be  forgotten.  It  is  idle  to  seek  for  any  special  mean- 
ing in  the  number  six.  Vessels  of  stone  were  preferred  as  being  less 
liable  to  impurity. 

purifying]     Comp.  Matt.  xv.  2;  Mark  vii.  3  (see  note);  Luke  xi.  39. 


vv.  7— lo.]  S.   JOHN,   II.  85 

firkins  apiece.     Jesus  saith  unto  them,  Fill  the  waterpots  7 
with  water.     And  they  filled  them  up  to  the  brim.     And  he  8 
saith  unto  them,  Draw  out  now,  and  bear  unto  the  governor 
of  the  feast.     And  they  bare   //.     When  the  ruler  of  the  9 
feast  had  tasted  the  water  that  was  made  wine,  and  knew 
not  whence  it  was :  (but  the  servants  which  drew  the  water 
knew ;)  the  governor  of  the  feast  called  the  bridegroom,  and  10 
saith  unto  him,  Every  man  at  the  beginning  doth  set  forth 
good  wine ;  and  when  men  have  well  drunk,  then  that  which 

tjvo  or  three  firkins'\  'Firkin'  is  an  almost  exact  equivalent  of  the 
Greek  metretes,  which  was  about  nine  gallons.  The  six  pitchers, 
therefore,  holding  from  18  to  -27  gallons  each,  would  together  hold  106 
to  162  gallons. 

7.  Fill  the  waterpots]  It  is  difficult  to  see  the  meaning  of  this  command, 
if  (as  some  contend)  only  the  water  which  was  drawn  out  was  turned 
into  wine.  The  pitchers  had  been  partially  emptied  by  the  ceremonial 
ablutions  of  the  company,  i.e.  pouring  water  over  their  hands.  Note 
that  in  His  miracles  Christ  does  not  create  ;  He  increases  the  quantity, 
or  changes  the  quality  of  things  already  existing. 

to  the  bj-inil  His  Mother's  words  {v.  5)  have  done  their  work.  Our 
attention  seems  here  to  be  called  to  the  great  quantity  of  water  changed 
into  wine. 

9.  ruler  of  the  feast]  Perhaps  manager  of  the  feast  would  be  better. 
It  is  doubtful  whether  the  head-waiter,  who  managed  the  feast  and 
tasted  the  meat  and  drink,  is  meant,  or  the  rex  convivii,  arbiter  bibendi, 
the  guest  elected  by  the  other  guests  to  preside.  The  bad  taste  of  his 
remark  inclines  one  to  the  former  alternative :  Ecclus.  xxxii.  i,  1  is  in 
favour  of  the  second.  In  any  case  the  translation  should  be  uniform  in 
these  two  verses,  not  sometimes  'governor,'  sometimes  'ruler.'  It  is 
the  same  Greek  word  in  all  three  cases,  a  word  occurring  nowhere 
else  in  N. T.  The  words  also  for  'water-pot'  or  'pitcher'  and  for 
'draw  out'  are  peculiar  to  this  Gospel;  but  they  occur  again  iv.  7, 
15,  28. 

the  water  that  was  made  wine]  Or,  the  water  now  become  wine.  The 
Greek  seems  to  imply  that  all  the  water  had  become  wine;  there  is 
nothing  to  mark  a  distinction  between  what  was  now  wine  and  what  still 
remained  water.  It  is  idle  to  ask  at  what  precise  moment  the  water 
became  wine  :  nor  is  much  gained  by  representing  the  miracle  as  a  series 
of  natural  processes  (rain  passing  through  the  vine  into  the  grapes, 
being  pressed  out  and  fermented,  &c.)  compressed  into  an  instant. 
Such  compression  is  neither  more  nor  less  intelligible  than  simple 
transition  from  water  to  wine.     Moreover  there  was  no  vine. 

which  drew]     Better,  who  had  drawn. 

called]     Rather,  calleth. 

10.  when  men  have  well  drmik]  Our  translators  have  timidly 
shrunk  from  giving  the  full  coarseness  of  the  man's  joke:  it  should  be 


86  S.  JOHN,   II.  [v.  II. 


is  worse :    hit  thou    hast   kept  the  good  wine  until  now. 
II  This  beginning  of  miracles  did  Jesus  in  Cana  of  Galilee,  and 
manifested  forth  his  glory;   and  his  disciples  believed  on 
him. 

zvhcn  they  have  become  drunken,  when  they  are  drtink.  In  Matt.  xxiv. 
49;  Acts  ii.  15;  I  Cor.  xi.  21 ;  i  Thess.  v.  7;  Rev.  xvii.  ■2,  6,  we  have 
the  same  word  rightly  translated.  Tyndall  and  Cranmcr  were  more 
courageous  here ;  they  have  '  be  dronke ; '  and  the  Vulgate  has  inebrlati 
fuerint.  The  error  comes  from  the  Geneva  Bible.  Of  course  he  does 
not  mean  that  the  guests  around  him  are  intoxicated  :  it  is  a  jocular 
statement  of  his  own  experience  at  feasts.     Omit  '  then.' 

thou  hast  kept  the  good  wine  until  now]  This  was  true  in  a  sense  of 
which  he  never  dreamed.  The  True  Bridegroom  was  there,  and  had 
indeed  kept  the  best  dispensation  until  the  last. 

11.  This  beginning,  Sec]  Better,  this,  as  a  beginning  of  His 
signs,  did  j'esus  in  Cana  ;  i.e.  it  is  the  first  miracle  of  all,  not  merely 
the  first  at  Cana.  Thus  S.  John  agrees  with  the  Synoptists  in  repre- 
senting the  Messianic  career  as  beginning  in  Galilee.  This  verse  is 
conclusive  against  the  miracles  of  Christ's  childhood  recorded  in  the 
Aprocryphal  Gospels.  See  on  iv.  48.  Our  translators  often  in  this 
Gospel,  though  very  rarely  in  the  other  three,  turn  'signs'  into 
'  miracles.' 

manifested]  The  same  Greek  word  occurs  in  connexion  with  His  last 
miracle,  xxi.  i,  14,  and  the  same  English  word  should  be  used  in  all  the 
passages.     Comp.  vii.  4  and  see  on  i.  31. 

his  glory]  This  is  the  final  cause  of  Christ's  'signs,'  His  own  and 
His  Father's  glory  (xi.  4),  and  these  two  are  one. 

and  his  disciples  believed  on  him]  What  a  strange  remark  for  a  writer 
in  the  second  century  to  make!  His  disciples  believed  on  Him?  Of 
course  they  did.  Assume  that  a  disciple  himself  is  the  writer,  and  all 
is  explained :  he  well  remembers  how  his  own  imperfect  faith  was  con- 
firmed by  the  miracle.  A  forger  would  rather  have  given  us  the  effect  on 
the  guests.  Three  times  in  this  chapter  does  S.  John  give  us  the  disciples' 
point  of  view,  here,  v.  17  and  v.  22;  very  natural  in  a  disciple,  not 
natural  in  a  later  writer.     See  on  xi.  15  and  xxi.  12. 

Two  objections  have  been  made  to  this  miracle  (1)  on  rationalistic, 
(2)  on  'Temperance'  grounds,  (i)  It  is  said  that  it  is  a  wasteful 
miracle,  a  parade  of  power,  unworthy  of  a  Divine  Agent :  a  tenth  of 
the  quantity  of  wine  would  have  been  ample.  But  the  surplus  was  not 
wasted  any  more  than  the  twelve  baskets  of  fragments  (vi.  13);  it 
would  be  a  valuable  present  to  a  bridal  pair.  (2)  It  is  urged  that  Christ 
would  not  have  supplied  the  means  for  gross  excess;  and  to  avoid  this 
supposed  difficulty  it  is  suggested  that  the  wine  made  was  not  in- 
toxicating, i.e.  was  not  wine  at  all.  But  in  all  His  dealings  with  men 
God  allows  the  possibility  of  a  temptation  to  excess.  All  His  gifts  may 
be  thus  abused.  The  5000  might  have  been  gluttonous  over  the  loaves 
and  fishes. 


V.  12.]  S.   JOHN,   II.  87 

After   this   he   went   down   to  Capernaum,  he,  and   his  i* 
mother,  and  his  brethren,  and  his  disciples :  and  they  con- 
tinued there  not  many  days. 


Christ's  honouring  a  marriage-feast  with  His  first  miracle  gives  His 
sanction  (i)  to  marriage,  (2)  to  times  of  festivity. 

Four  hundred  years  had  elapsed  since  the  Jews  had  seen  a  miracle. 
The  era  of  Daniel  was  the  last  age  of  Jewish  miracles.  Since  the 
three  children  walked  in  the  burning  fiery  furnace,  and  Daniel  had 
remained  unhurt  in  the  lions'  den,  and  had  read  the  hand-writing  on 
the  wall,  no  miracle  is  recorded  in  the  history  of  the  Jews  until  Jesus 
made  this  beginning  of  His  'signs'  at  Cana  of  Galilee.  No  wonder 
therefore,  that  the  almost  simultaneous  appearance  of  a  Prophet  like 
John  and  a  worker  of  miracles  like  Jesus  attracted  the  attention  of  all 
classes. 

12.  "Now  follows  a  section  of  which  we  can  only  say  with  M. 
Renan,  that  it  constitutes  a  decisive  triumph  for  our  Gospel.  ...If  it 
is  at  all  an  artificial  composition,  with  a  dogmatic  object,  why  should 
the  author  carry  his  readers  thus  to  Capernaum — for  nothing?"  S.  p.  52. 
If  S.  John  wrote  it,  all  is  simple  and  natural.  He  records  this  visit  to 
Capernaum  because  it  actually  took  place,  and  because  he  well  remem- 
bers those  '  not  many  days.' 

7uent  d(nvn\  Capernaum  (the  modern  Tell-Hum)  being  on  the  shore 
of  the  lake.  It  was  situated  in  one  of  the  most  busy  and  populous  dis- 
tricts of  Palestine,  and  was  therefore  a  good  centre. 

his  mother,  and  his  brethren']  Natural  ties  still  hold  Him;  in  the 
next  verse  they  disappear.  On  the  vexed  question  of  the  '  brethren  of 
the  Lord '  see  the  Introduction  to  the  Epistle  of  S.  jfames.  It  is  im- 
possible to  determine  with  certainty  whether  they  are  (i)  the  children  of 
Joseph  and  Mary,  born  after  the  birth  of  Jesus;  {2)  the  children  of 
Joseph  by  a  former  marriage,  whether  levirate  or  not;  or  (3)  adopted 
children.  There  is  nothing  in  Scripture  to  warn  us  against  (i),  the  most 
natural  view  antecedently ;  but  it  has  against  it  the  general  consensus  of 
the  Fathers,  and  the  prevailing  tradition  of  the  perpetual  virginity  of 
S.  Mary.  Jerome's  theory,  that  they  were  our  Lord's  cousins,  sons  of 
Alphaeus,  is  the  one  most  commonly  adopted,  but  vii.  5  (see  note  there) 
is  fatal  to  it,  and  it  labours  under  other  difficulties  as  well.  (2)  is  on  the 
whole  the  most  probable. 

continued  there]     Better,  abode  there.     See  on  i.  33. 

not  7Jiany  days]  Because  the  Passover  was  at  hand,  and  He  must  be 
about  His  Father's  business. 


II.  13— XI.  57.    The  Work. 

We  here  enter  on  the  second  portion  of  the  first  main  division  of  the 
Gospel,  thus  subdivided: — The  Work  (i)  among  Jezvs,  (2)  among 
Samaritans,  (3)  among  Galileans,  (4)  among  mixed  multitudes. 


88  S.  JOHN,  II.  [vv.  13—16. 

II.  13— XL  57.     The  Work. 
II.  13 — III.  36.     The  Work  among  Jews. 
13      And  the  Jews'  passover  was  at  hand,  and  Jesus  went  up 
to  Jerusalem, 

14 — 22.     The  First  Cleansmg  of  the  Temple. 

,4      And  found  in  the  temple  those  that  sold  oxen  and  sheep 

,5  and  doves,  and  the  changers  of  money  sitting  :  and  when  he 

had  made  a  scourge  of  small  cords,  he  drove  them  all  out  of 

the  temple,  and  the  sheep  and  the  oxen ;  and  poured  out 

,6  the  changers'  money,  and  overthrew  the  tables ;  and  said 

II.  13— III.  36.     The  Work  among  Jews. 

13.  Attd  the  Jews'  passover\  Or,  the  passover  of  the  Jews.  An 
indication  that  this  Gospel  was  written  outside  Palestine :  one  writing 
in  the  country  would  hardly  have  added  'of  the  Jews.'  It  is  perhaps 
also  an  indication  that  this  Gospel  was  written  after  a  Passover  of  the 
Christians  had  come  into  recognition.  Passovers  were  active  times  in 
Christ's  ministry ;  and  this  is  the  first  of  them.  It  was  possibly  the 
nearness  of  the  Passover  which  caused  this  traffic  in  the  Temple  Court. 
It  existed  for  the  convenience  of  strangers.  Certainly  the  nearness  of 
the  Feast  would  add  significance  to  Christ's  action.  While  the  Jews 
were  purifying  themselves  for  the  Passover  He  purified  the  Temple. 
S.  John  groups  his  narrative  round  the  Jewish  festivals  :  we  have 
(i)  Passover;  (2)  Purim  (?),  v.  i;  (3)  Passover,  vi.  4;  (4)  Tabernacles, 
vii.  2;  (5)  Dedication,  x.  22;  (6)  Passover,  xi.  55. 

14 — 22.     The  First  Cleansing  of  the  Temple. 

14.  in  the  temple]  i.e.  within  the  sacred  enclosure,  in  the  Court  of 
the  Gentiles.  The  traffic  would  be  very  great  at  the  approach  of  the 
Passover.  The  account  is  very  graphic,  as  of  an  eyewitness.  Note 
especially  '  the  changers  of  money  sitting:'  the  sellers  of  cattle,  &c., 
would  stand.  . 

changers  of  money]  Not  the  same  Greek  word  as  m  v.  15.  Ihere 
the  word  points  to  the  commission  paid  on  exchanges;  here  the  word 
indicates  a  change  from  large  to  small  coins. 

15.  when  he  had  made  a  scourge]  Peculiar  to  this  account ;  not  in 
the  similar  narrative  of  the  Synoptists. 

and  the  sheep,  &ic.]  Rather,  Tooth,  the  sheep  and  the  oxen.  'AH  does  not 
refer  to  the  sellers  and  exchangers,  but  anticipates  the  sheep  and  the 
oxen.  The  men  probably  fled  at  once.  The  order  is  natural;  first  the 
driving  out  of  the  cattle,  then  the  pouring  out  of  the  money  and  over- 
turning the  tables.  The  word  for  'money'  literally  means  'somethmg 
cut  up  small,'  hence  'change.'  The  common  exchange  would  be  foreign 
money  for  Jewish,  payments  to  the  Temple  being  necessarily  made  in 
Jewish  coin. 


vv.  17,  18.]  S.   JOHN,    II.  89 

unto  them  that  sold  doves,  Take  these  things  hence ;  make 
not  my  Father's  house  a  house  of  merchandise.     And  his  17 
disciples  remembered  that   it  was  written,   The   zeal   of 
thine  house  hath  eaten  me  up. 

Then  answered  the  Jews  and  said  unto  him.  What  sign  18 
shewest  thou  unto  us,  seeing  that  thou  doest  these  things  ? 

16.  said  unto  them  that  sold  doves']  The  doves  could  not  be  driven 
out.  He  calls  to  the  owners  to  take  the  cages  away.  Comp.  Luke 
ii.  24. 

my  Father's  house\  A  distinct  claim  to  Messiahship :  it  reminds 
us  of  '  about  My  Father's  business  '  (which  may  also  mean  *  in  My 
Father's  house')  spoken  in  the  same  place  some  17  years  before,  Luke 
ii.  49.  Possibly  some  who  heard  the  Child's  claim  heard  the  Man's 
claim  also. 

an  house  of  trierchandise]  Two  years  later  things  seem  to  have  grown 
worse  instead  of  better ;  the  Temple  has  then  become  '  a  den  of 
robbers'  or  'a  bandits'  cave.'  See  notes  on  Matt.  xxi.  13  and  Mark 
xi.  17. 

17.  remembered]  Then  and  there.  Who  could  know  this  but  a 
disciple?     Who  would  think  of  inventing  it?     See  above  on  z*.  1 1. 

ivas  written]  Better,  is  tvritten  ;  in  the  Greek  it  is  the  perf.  part, 
pass,  with  the  auxiliary,  which  S.  John  almost  always  uses  in  quotations, 
while  the  Synoptists  commonly  use  the  perf.  pass.  Comp.  vi.  31,45,  x. 
34,  xii.  14  (xix.  19). 

hath  eaten  me  tip]  Rather,  will  devour,  or  consume  me,  i.e.  wear 
me  out.    Ps.  Ixix.  9,  a  psalm  referred  to  again  xv.  25  and  xix.  28. 

It  is  difficult  to  believe  that  this  cleansing  of  the  Temple  is  identical 
with  the  one  placed  by  the  Synoptists  at  the  last  Passover  in  Christ's 
ministry;  difficult  also  to  see  what  is  gained  by  the  identification.  If 
tliey  are  the  same  event,  either  S.  John  or  the  Synoptists  have  made  a 
gross  blunder  in  chronology.  Could  S.  John,  who  was  with  our  Lord 
at  both  Passovers,  make  such  a  mistake?  Could  S-  Matthew,  who  was 
with  Him  at  the  last  Passover,  transfer  to  it  an  event  which  took  place 
at  the  first  Passover,  a  year  before  his  conversion?  When  we  consider  the 
immense  differences  which  distinguish  the  last  Passover  from  the  first  in 
Christ's  ministry,  it  seems  incredible  that  anyone  who  had  contemporary 
evidence  could  through  any  lapse  of  memory  transfer  a  very  remarkable 
incident  indeed  from  one  to  the  other.  On  the  other  hand  the  diffi- 
culty of  believing  that  the  Temple  was  twice  cleansed  is  very  slight. 
Was  Christ's  preaching  so  universally  successful  that  one  cleansing  would 
be  certain  to  suffice?  And  if  two  years  later  He  found  that  the  evil  had 
returned,  would  He  not  be  certain  to  drive  it  out  once  more?  Differ- 
ences in  the  details  of  the  narratives  corroborate  this  view. 

18.  the  yews]    See  on  i.  19. 

What  sign  shewest  thou]  We  have  a  similar  question  Matt.  xxi.  23, 
but  the  widely  different  answer  shews  that  the  occasion  is  not  the  same. 
Such  demands  would  be  made  often. 


90  S.   JOHN,    II.  [vv.  19—21. 

19  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  them,  Destroy  this  temple, 

20  and  in  three  days  I  will  raise  it  up.     Then  said  the  Jews, 
Forty  and  six  years  was  this  temple  in  building,  and  wilt 

21  thou  rear  it  up  in  three  days  ?    But  he  spake  of  the  temple 

19.  Destroy  this  temple]  It  is  S.  Matthew  (xxvi.  61)  and  S.  Mark 
(xiv.  58,  see  notes)  who  tell  us  that  this  saying  was  twisted  into  a 
charge  against  Christ,  but  they  do  not  record  the  saying.  S.  John,  who 
does  record  the  saying,  does  not  mention  the  charge.  Such  coincidence 
can  scarcely  be  designed,  and  is  therefore  evidence  of  the  truth  of  both 
statements.  See  on  xviii.  11.  The  word  used  in  these  three  verses  for 
'temple'  means  the  central  sacred  building  {naos),  whereas  that  used  in 
z/.  14  means  the  whole  sacred  enclosure  {hieron).  The  latter  is  never 
used  figviratively. 

raise  it  up\  In  the  charge  His  accusers  turn  this  into  build,  a  word 
not  appropriate  to  raising  a  dead  body.  There  is  no  contradiction 
between  Christ's  declaration  and  the  ordinary  N.T.  theology,  that  the 
Son  was  raised  by  the  Father.  The  expression  is  figurative  throughout ; 
and  'I  and  My  Father  are  one.'  Comp.  x.  18.  This  throwing  out 
seeds  of  thought  for  the  future,  which  could  not  bear  fruit  at  the  time, 
is  one  of  the  characteristics  of  Christ's  teaching. 

20.  Forty  and  six  years,  &c.]  This  was  the  third  Temple.  Solomon's 
Temple  was  destroyed  by  Nebuchadnezzar.  Zerubbabel's  was  rebuilt 
by  Herod  the  Great.  The  Greek  implies  that  the  building  began  46 
years  ago,  but  not  that  it  is  now  completed.  "The  building  of  the 
Temple,  we  are  told  by  Josephus  {Ant.  XV.  ii.  1),  was  begun  in 
tjie  1 8th  year  of  Herod  the  Great,  734 — 735  a. u.c.  Reckoning  46 
years  from  this  point,  we  are  brought  to  781  or  782  A. U.C.  =  28  or  29 
A.D.  Comparing  this  with  the  data  given  in  Luke  iii.  i,  the  question 
arises,  whether  we  are  to  reckon  the  15th  year  of  Tiberius  from  his 
joint  reign  with  Augustus,  which  began  A.D.  12;  or  from  his  sole  reign 
after  the  death  of  Augustus,  A.D.  14.  This  would  give  us  A.D.  27  or  29 
for  the  first  public  appearance  of  the  Baptist,  and  at  the  earliest  A.D.  28 
or  30  for  the  Passover  mentioned  in  this  chapter."  S.  p.  65.  So  that 
there  seems  to  be  exact  agreement  between  this  date  and  that  of  S. 
Luke,  if  we  count  S.  Luke's  15  years  from  the  joi/tt  reign  of  Tiberius. 
It  is  incredible  that  this  coincidence  can  have  been  planned ;  it  involves 
an  intricate  calculation,  and  even  with  the  aid  of  Josephus  absolute  cer- 
tainty cannot  be  obtained.  "  By  what  conceivable  process  could  a 
Greek  in  the  second  century  have  come  to  hit  upon  this  roundabout  ex- 
pedient for  giving  a  fictitious  date  to  his  invention?"     S.  p.  67. 

rear  it  up]  Better,  raise  zV  «/;  the  same  verb  as  in  7/.  19.  For  other 
instances  of  gross  misunderstanding  of  Christ's  words  comp.  iii.  4,  9, 
iv.  II,  15,  33,  vi.  34,  52,  vii.  35,  viii.  22,  33,  52,  xi.  12,  xiv.  5. 

21.  spal'e]  Or,  was  speaking.  Setting  aside  inspiration,  S.  John's 
explanation  must  be  admitted  as  the  true  one.  What  better  in- 
terpreter of  the  mind  of  Jesus  can  be  found  than  'the  disciple  whom 
Jesus   loved?'     And   he  gives   the   explanation   not  as  his  only,  but 


vv.  22—25.]  S.   JOHN,    II.  91 

of  his  body.     When  therefore  he  was  risen  from  the  dead,  22 
his  disciples  remembered  that  he  had  said  this  unto  them ; 
and  they  believed  the  scripture,  and  the  word  which  Jesus 
had  said. 

23 — 25.    Belief  without  Devotion. 

Now  when  he  was  in  Jerusalem  at  the  passover,  in  the  23 
feast  day,  many  believed  in  his  name,  when  they  saw  the 
miracles  which  he  did.     But  Jesus  did  not  commit  himself  24 
unto  them,  because  he  knew  all  me?i,  and  needed  not  that  25 
any  should  testify  of  man :  for  he  knew  what  was  in  man. 

as  that  of  the  disciples  generally.  Moreover  it  explains  the  'three 
days,'  which  interpretations  about  destroying  the  old  Temple  religion 
and  raising  up  a  new  spiritual  theocracy  do  not. 

22.  was  risen]  Better,  was  raised.  Comp.  xxi.  14;  Acts  iii.  15, 
iv.  10,  V.  30. 

/lis  disciples  remembered]  They  recollected  it  when  the  event  that 
explained  it  took  place  ;  meanwhile  what  had  not  been  understood  had 
been  forgotten.  Would  anyone  but  a  disciple  give  us  these  details 
about  the  disciples'  thoughts  ?     See  on  v.  11. 

the  scripture]     O.T.  prophecy,  viz.,  Ps.  xvi.  10  ;  see  on  x.  35. 

had  said]     Better,  spake,  on  the  present  occasion. 

23 — 25.    Belief  without  Devotion. 

23.  in  Jerusalem  at,  &c.]  More  accurately,  in  yeriisalem,  at  the 
Passover,  during  the  Feast.     Note  the  exactness  of  detail. 

when,  they  saw  the  miracles]  None  of  these  have  been  recorded. 
Comp.  iv.  45,  XX.  30.  Faith  growing  out  of  such  soil  would  be  likely 
to  cease  when  the  miracles  ceased.  '  When  they  saw  '  should  perhaps 
be  ^whilst  they  saw,'  as  if  implying  'and  no  longer.'  For  'miracles' 
read  signs,  as  in  z/.  11. 

24.  did  not  commit]  The  same  verb  as  'many  beliez'ed''  in  v.  23. 
'Many  trusted  in  His  name;  but  Jesus  did  not  trust  Himself  unto 
them.'     The  antithesis  is  probably  intentional. 

25.  And  needed  tiot]     Better,  a;/^  because  He  had  no  need. 

for  he  knew]  Better,  for  He  of  Himself  knew.  We  have  instances 
of  this  supernatural  knowledge  in  the  cases  of  Peter,  i.  42;  Nathanael, 
i.  47,  48  ;  Nicodemus,  iii.  3  ;  the  woman  at  the  well,  iv.  29 ;  the 
disciples,  vi.  61,  64;  Lazarus,  xi.  4,  15  ;  Judas,  xiii.  11  ;  Peter,  xxi.  17. 

Chap.  III.  1 — 21.     The  discourse  with  Nicodemus. 

This  is  the  first  of  the  eleven  discourses  of  our  Lord  which  form 
the  main  portion,  and  are  among  the  great  characteristics,  of  tliis 
Gospel.  They  have  been  used  as  a  powerful  argument  against  its 
authenticity ;  (i)  because  they  are  unlike  the  discourses  in  the  Sy- 
noptic Gospels,  (2)  because  they  are  suspiciously  like  the  First  Epistle 


92 S.   JOHN,   III.  [v.  I. 

Chap.  III.  i — 21.     The  discourse  with  Nicodemus. 
There  was  a  man  of  the  Pharisees,  named  Nicodemus,  a 

of  S.  John,  which  all  admit  was  written  by  the  author  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  (3)  Ijecause  this  likeness  to  the  First  Epistle  pervades  not 
only  the  discourses  of  our  Lord,  but  those  of  the  Baptist  also,  as  well 
as  the  writer's  own  reflections  throughout  the  Gospel.  The  inference 
is  that  they  are,  as  much  as  the  speeches  in  Thucydides,  if  not  as 
much  as  those  in  Livy,  the  ideal  compositions  of  the  writer  himself 

On  the  question  as  a  whole  we  may  say  at  once  with  Matthew 
Arnold  {Literature  and  Dogma,  p.  170),  "the  doctrine  and  discourses 
of  Jesus  cannot  in  the  main  be  the  writer's,  because  in  the  main  they 
are  clearly  out  of  his  reach."  '  Never  man  spake  like  this  man '  (vii. 
46) ;  not  even  S.  John,  and  still  less  any  one  else,  could  invent  such 
words. 

But  the  objections  urged  above  are  serious  and  ought  to  be  answered, 
(i)  The  disccarses  in  S.  John  are  unlike  those  in  the  Synoptists,  but 
we  must  beware  of  exaggerating  the  unlikeness.  They  are  longer, 
more  reflective,  less  popular.  But  they  are  for  the  most  part  addressed 
to  the  educated  and  learned,  to  Elders,  Pharisees,  and  Rabbis:  even 
the  discourse  on  the  Bread  of  Life,  which  is  spoken  before  a  mixed 
multitude  at  Capernaum,  is  largely  addressed  to  the  educated  portion 
of  it  (vi.  41,  52),  the  hierarchial  party  opposed  to  Him.  The  discourses 
in  the  first  three  Gospels  are  mostly  spoken  among  the  rude  and 
simple-minded  peasants  of  Galilee.  Contrast  the  University  Sermons 
with  the  Parish  Sermons  of  an  eminent  modern  preaclier,  and  we 
should  notice  similar  differences.  This  fact  will  account  for  a  good 
deal.  But  (a)  the  discourses  both  in  S.  John  and  in  the  Synoptists 
are  translations  from  an  Aramaic  dialect.  Two  translations  may  differ 
very  widely,  and^  yet  both  be  faithful ;  they  may  each  bear  the  impress 
of  the  translator's  own  style,  and  yet  accurately  represent  the  original. 
This  will  to  a  large  extent  answer  objections  (2)  and  (3).  And  we 
must  _  remember  that  it  is  possible,  and  perhaps  probable,  that  the 
peculiar  tone  of  S.  John,  so  unmistakeable,  yet  so  difficult  to  analyse 
satisfactorily,  may  be  a  reproduction,  more  or  less  conscious,  of  that 
of  his  Divine  Master. 

But  on  the  other  hand  we  must  remember  that  an  eventful  life 
of  half  a  century  separates  the  time  when  S.  John  heard  these  dis- 
courses from  the  time  when  he  committed  thern  to  writing.  Christ 
had  promised  (xiv.  26)  that  the  Holy  Spirit  should  'bring  all  things 
to  the  remembrance '  of  the  Apostles ;  but  we  have  no  right  to  assume 
that  in  so  doing  He  would  override  the  ordinary  laws  of  psychology. 
Material  stored  up  so  long  in  the  breast  of  the  Apostle  could  not 
fail  to  be  moulded  by  the  working  of  his  own  mind.  And  therefore 
we  may  admit  that  in  his  report  of  the  sayings  of  Christ  and  of  the 
Baptist  there  is  an  element,  impossible  to  separate  now,  which  comes 
from  himself.  His  report  is  sometimes  a  literal  translation  of  the 
very  words  used,  sometimes  the  substance  of  what  was  said  put  into 


V.  2.]  S.   JOHN,   III.  93 

ruler  of  the  Jews  :  the  same  came  to  Jesus  by  night,  and  2 
said  unto  him,  Rabbi,  we  know  that  thou  art  a  teacher  come 
from  God  :    for  no  man  can  do  these  miracles  that  thou 


his  own  words  :  but  he  gives  us  no  means  of  distinguishing  where  the 
one  shades  off  into  the  other. 

Cardinal  Newman  has  kindly  allowed  the  following  to  be  quoted 
from  a  private  letter  written  by  him,  July  15th,  1878.  "Every  one 
writes  in  his  own  style.  S.  John  gives  our  Lord's  meaning  in  his 
own  way.  At  that  time  the  third  person  was  not  so  commonly  used 
in  history  as  now.  When  a  reporter  gives  one  of  Gladstone's  speeches 
in  the  newspaper,  if  he  uses  the  first  person,  I  understand  not  only  the 
matter,  but  the  style,  the  words,  to  be  Gladstone's  :  when  the  third,  I 
consider  the  style,  &c.  to  be  the  reporter's  own.  But  in  ancient  times 
this  distinction  was  not  made.  Thucydides  uses  the  dramatic  method, 
yet  Spartan  and  Athenian  speak  in  Thucydidean  Greek.  And  so  every 
clause  of  our  Lord's  speeches  in  S.  John  may  be  in  S.  John's  Greek, 
yet  every  clause  may  contain  the  matter  which  our  Lord  spoke  in 
Aramaic.  Again,  S.  John  might  and  did  select  or  condense  (as  being 
inspired  for  that  purpose)  the  matter  of  our  Lord's  discourses,  as  that 
with  Nicodemus,  and  thereby  the  wording  might  be  S.  John's,  though 
the  matter  might  still  be  our  Lord's." 

1.  There  was  a  man]  Better,  Now  f/iere  was  a  man.  The  con- 
junction shows  the  connexion  with  what  precedes  :  Nicodemus  was 
one  of  the  'many'  who  'believed  in  His  name,'  when  they  beheld 
His  signs  (ii.  23). 

Nicodemiis\  He  is  mentioned  only  by  S.  John.  It  is  impossible 
to  say  whether  he  is  identical  with  the  Nicodemus  of  the  Talmud, 
also  called  Bunai,  who  survived  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  The 
name  was  common  both  among  Greeks  and  Jews.  Love  of  truth  and 
fear  of  man,  candour  and  hesitation,  seem  to  be  combined  in  his  cha- 
racter. Comp.  vii.  50,  xix.  39.  In  xix.  39  his  timidity  is  again  noted 
and  illustrated. 

a  ritler  of  the  yexvs'\  A  member  of  the  Sanhedrin,  vii.  50.  Comp. 
xii.  42  ;  Luke  xxiii.  13,  xxiv.  20.  His  coming  by  night  is  to  avoid 
the  hostility  of  his  colleagues :  the  Sanhedrin  was  opposed  to  Jesus. 
Whether  or  no  S.  John  was  present  at  the  interview  we  cannot  be 
certain :  probably  he  was.  Nicodemus  would  not  fear  the  presence  of 
the  disciples. 

2.  we  knowl     Others  are  disposed  to  believe  as  well  as  Nicodemus. 
a  teacher  come  from   God]     In  the   Greek  the   order  is,  that  Thou 

art  come  from  God  as  teacher.  We  are  not  sure  that  '  come  from  God ' 
points  to  the  Messiah,  '  He  that  should  come.'  But  if  so,  we  see  the 
timidity  of  Nicodemus  ;  he  begins  with  an  admission  of  Christ's  Messiah- 
ship,  and  ends  with  the  weak  word  '  teacher ;'  the  Messiah  was  never 
thought  of  as  a  mere  teacher.  But  '  come  from  God  '  may  only  mean 
divinely  se^it,  as  a  Prophet  (i.  6),  or  even  less. 
these  miracles]     Better,  these  signs,  as  in  ii.  11. 


94  S.   JOHN,   III.  [vv.  3-5- 

3  doest,  except  God  be  with  him.  Jesus  answered  and  said 
unto  him,  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  thee.  Except  a  man  be 

4  born  again,  he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  God.  Nicodemus 
saith  unto  him,  How  can  a  man  be  born  when  he  is  old? 
can  he  enter  the  second  time  into  his  mother's  womb,  and 

5 be  born?  Jesus  answered.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  thee, 
Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot 

except  God  be  with  /lim]  A  similarly  weak  conclusion,  shewing 
timidity  :  one  expects  'unless  he  be  a  Prophet,'  or  '  the  Messiah.' 

3.  yesus  answered]  He  answers  his  thoughts  before  they  are  ex- 
pressed.    See  on  ii.  25,  and  on  i.  51. 

liorti  again]  The  word  translated  'again'  may  mean  either  'from 
the  beginning,'  or  '  from  above.'  By  itself  it  cannot  exactly  mean 
'again.'  S.  John  uses  the  same  word  v.  31;  xix.  11,  23.  In  all  three 
places,  (see  especially  xix.  11),  it  means  'from  above,'  which  is  perhaps 
to  be  preferred  here:  '  from  the  beginning'  would  make  no  sense.  To 
be  'bom  from  above'  recalls  being  'born  of  God'  in  i.  13,  (comp. 
I  John  iii.  9,  iv.  7,  v.  i,  4,  18).  Of  course  being  'born  from  above' 
is  necessarily  being  '  born  again ;'  but  '  again  '  comes  not  so  much 
from  the  Greek  word,  as  from  the  context.  Comp.  '  v,Tt/j/ 1  say  tinto 
you,  except  ye  be  converted  and  become  as  little  children ,  ye  shall  not 
enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven.''     Matt,  xviii.  3. 

There  is  a  probable  reference  to  this  passage  (3 — 5)  in  Justin  Martyr, 
Apol.  I.  Ixi.  If  so,  we  have  evidence  that  this  Gospel  was  known 
before  a.d.  150.     See  on  i.  23  and  ix.  i. 

he  cannot  see]  i.e.  so  as  to  partake  of  it.  Comp.  to  'see  corruption,' 
Ps.  xvi.  10;  to  'see  evil,'  xc.  15;  to  'see  death,'  John  viii.  51;  Luke 
ii.  26. 

the  kingdom  of  God]  This  i^hrase,  so  frequent  in  the  Synoptists, 
occurs  only  here  and  z/.  5  in  S.  John.  We  may  conclude  that  it  was 
the  very  phrase  used. 

4.  whe7t  he  is  old]  He  purposely  puts  the  most  impossible  case; 
the  words  do  not  imply  that  he  was  an  old  man  himself.  It  is  difficult 
to  believe  that  Nicodemus  really  supposed  Christ  to  be  speaking  of 
ordinary  birth;  the  metaphor  of  'new  birth'  for  spiritual  regeneration 
cannot  have  been  unfamiliar  to  him.  Either  he  purposely  misunder- 
stands, in  order  to  reduce  Christ's  words  to  an  absurdity;  or,  more 
probably,  not  knowing  what  to  say,  he  asks  what  he  knew  to  be  a 
foolish  question. 

the  second  time]  This  expression  has  contributed  to  the  word  which 
probably  means  'from  above,' being  translated  'again.'  But 'to  enter 
a  second  time  into  his  mother's  womb'  is  simply  a  periphrasis  for  'to  be 
born'  in  the  case  of  an  adult.  The  word  which  means  'from  above'  is 
not  included  in  the  periphrasis.  It  is  precisely  that  which  perplexes 
Nicodemus  ;  so  he  leaves  it  out. 

5.  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit]  Christ  leaves  the  foolish  question  of 
Nicodemus  to  answer  itself:   He  goes  on  to  explain  what  is  the  real 


vv.  6—8.]  S.   JOHN,   III.  95 

enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God.     That  which  is  born  of  the  6 
flesh  is  flesh ;  and  that  which  is  born  of  the  Spirit  is  spirit. 
Marvel  not  that  I  said  unto  thee,  Ye  must  be  born  again.  ^ 
The  wind  bloweth  where  it  Usteth,  and  thou  hearest  the  s 

point,  and  what  Nicodemus  has  not  asked,  the  meaning  of  'from  above:' 
'of  water  and  (of  the)  Spirit.'  The  outward  sign  and  inward  grace  of 
Christian  baptism  are  here  clearly  given,  and  an  unbiassed  mind  can 
scarcely  avoid  seeing  this  plain  fact.  This  becomes  still  more  clear 
when  we  compare  i.  26  and  33,  where  the  Baptist  declares  'I  baptize 
with  water;'  the  Messiah  'baptizeth  with  the  Holy  Ghost.'  The  Fathers, 
both  Greek  and  Latin,  thus  interpret  the  passage  with  singular  una- 
nimity. Thus  once  more  S.  John  assumes  without  stating  the  primary 
elements  of  Christianity.  Baptism  is  assumed  here  as  well  known  to  his 
reader,  as  the  Eucharist  is  assumed  in  chap.  vi.  To  a  well-instructed 
Christian  there  was  no  need  to  explain  what  was  meant  by  being  born 
of  water  and  the  Spirit.  The  words  therefore  had  a  threefold  meaning, 
past,  present,  and  future.  In  the  past  they  looked  back  to  the  time 
when  the  Spirit  moved  upon  the  water  causing  the  birth  from  above  of 
Order  and  Beauty  out  of  Chaos.  In  the  present  they  pointed  to  the 
divinely  ordained  (i.  33)  baptism  of  John  :  and  through  it  in  the  future 
to  that  higher  rite,  to  which  John  himself  bore  testimony. 

6.  The  meaning  of  'birth  from  above'  is  still  further  explained  by  an 
analogy.  What  a  man  inherits  from  his  parents  is  a  body  with  animal 
life  and  passions;  what  he  receives  from  above  is  a  spiritual  nature  with 
heavenly  aspirations  and  capabilities.  What  is  born  of  sinful,  human 
nature  is  sinful  and  human;  what  is  born  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  spiritual 
and  divine. 

7.  Ye  7nust\  The  declaration  is  brought  more  closely  home.  In 
■ini.  3  and  5  Christ  had  made  a  very  general  statement,  'except  a  man.' 
He  now  shews  that  none  are  exempt  from  it.  'Ye,  the  chosen  people, 
ye,  the  Pharisees,  ye,  the  rulers,  must  all  be  born  from  above.' 

8.  The  tvind  hlcnveth,  &c.  ]  This  verse  is  sometimes  taken  very 
differently  :  the  Spirit  breatketh  where  He  willeth,  and  thou  hearest  His 
voice,  but  canst  not  tell  whence  He  cometh  and  whither  He  goeth;  so  is 
every  07ie  {born)  who  is  born  of  the  Spirit.  The  advantages  of  this 
rendering  are  (i)  that  it  gives  to  Pnenma  the  meaning  which  it  almost 
invariably  has  in  more  than  350  passages  in  N.T.  in  which  it  occurs,  of 
which  more  than  20  are  in  this  Gospel.  Although /w^z^wa  may  mean 
'the  breath  of  the  wind,'  yet  its  almost  invariable  use  in  N.T.  is  'spirit' 
or  'the  Spirit, 'while  a«i?W(7j  is  used  for  'wind:'  (2)  that  it  gives  a  better 
meaning  to  'willeth,'  a  word  more  appropriate  to  a  person  than  to  any- 
thing inanimate:  (3)  that  it  gives  io phone  the  meaning  which  it  has  in 
14  other  passages  in  this  Gospel,  viz.,  'articulate  voice,'  and  not  'inar- 
ticulate sound.'  On  the  other  hand  this  rendering  (i)  gives  to/««the 
meaning  'breathes,'  a  meaning  quite  unknown  in  N.T. :  (2)  uses  the 
expression  'the  voice  of  the  Spirit,'  also  unknown  to  Scripture:  (3)  re- 
quires the  insertion  of  'born'  in  the  last  clause,  in  order  to  make  sense. 


96  S.  JOHN,   III.  [vv.  9—11. 

sound   thereof,  but   canst  not  tell  whence  it  cometh,  and 

whither  it  goeth  :  so  is  every  one  that  is  born  of  the  Spirit. 

9  Nicodemus  answered  and  said  unto  him,  How  can  these 

lothmgs  be?     Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  him,  Art   thou 

II  a  master  of  Israel,  and  knowest  not  these  things  ?     Verily, 

verily,  I  say  unto  thee,  We  speak  that  we  do  know,  and 

testify  that  we  have  seen ;  and  ye  receive  not  our  witness. 

For  the  usual  rendering  maybe  pleaded  (r)  that  it  gives  io  fttci  the 
meaning  which  it  has  everywhere  else  in  N.T.,  viz.  in  vi.  i8  and  five 
other  passages.  Although /««'  may  mean  'breathes,'  yet  its  invariable 
use  in  N.  T.  is  of  the  'blowing'  of  the  wind,  while  another  word  (xx. 
22)  is  used  for  'breathe:'  (2)  that  it  gives  the  most  literal  meaning  to 
'hearest:'  (3)  that  the  last  clause  makes  excellent  sense  without  any 
repetition  of  'born.'  The  Aramaic  word  probably  used  by  our  Lord 
has  both  meinings,  'wind'  and  'spirit,'  so  that  it  is  not  impossible  that 
both  meanings  are  meant  to  run  concurrently  through  the  passage. 
"It  was  late  at  night  when  our  Lord  had  this  interview  with  the  Jewish 
teacher.  At  the  pauses  in  the  conversation,  we  may  conjecture,  they 
heard  the  wind  without,  as  it  moaned  along  the  narrow  streets  of 
Jerusalem;  and  our  Lord,  as  was  His  wont,  took  His  creature  into  His 
service — the  service  of  spiritual  truth.  The  wind  was  a  figure  of  the 
Spirit.  Our  Lord  would  have  used  the  same  word  for  both."  (I-iddon.) 
There  is  a  clear  reference  to  this  passage  in  the  Ignatian  Epistles, 
Philad.  VII.  Thus  we  have  evidence  of  the  Gospel  being  known 
certainly  as  early  as  A. D.  150,  and  probably  A.D.  115. 

so  is  every  one]  i.e.  such  is  the  case  of  every  one:  he  feels  the  spiritual 
influence,  but  finds  it  incomprehensible  in  its  origin,  which  is  from 
.  above,  and  in  its  end,  which  is  eternal  life. 

l?orn  of  the  Spirit]  The  Sinaitic  MS.  and  two  ancient  versions  read, 
born  of -water  and  of  the  Spirit.     The  inserted  words  are  a  gloss. 

9.  Hoiv  can  these  things  be?]  He  is  bewildered ;  there  is  no  appear- 
ing not  to  understand,  as  in  v.  4.     'Be,'  come  to  pass  (see  on  i.  6). 

10.  Art  thou  a  master  of  Israel]  Better,  a;V  thou  the  teacher  of 
Israel,  the  well-known  Rabbi,  a  representative  of  the  supreme  authority 
in  the  Church? 

11.  We  speak  that  we  do  know]  The  plural  is  no  proof  that  any  of 
the  disciples  were  present,  though  S.  John  at  least  may  have  been ;  nor 
does  it  necessarily  include  more  than  Christ  Himself.  The  plurals  may 
be  rhetorical,  giving  the  saying  the  tone  of  a  proverb;  but  the  next  verse 
seems  to  shew  that  they  do  include  others.  Christ  and  his  disciples  tcU 
of  earthly  things,  Christ  alone  of  heavenly. 

testify^    Or,  bear  witness  of  (see  on  i.  7). 

tue  have  scoi]  Of  which  we  have  immediate  knowledge.  Comp. 
i.  18;  xiv.  7,  9. 

and  ye  receive  not]  The  tragic  tone  once  more;  see  on  i.  5.  *Ye 
teachers  of  Israel,'  the  very  men  who  should  receive  it. 


vv.  12—16.]  S.   JOHN,   III.  97 

If  I  have  told  you  earthly  things,  and  ye  believe  not,  how  12 
shall  ye  believe,  if  I  tell  you  of  heavenly  thmgs  ?  And  no  13 
j/ia?i  hath  ascended  up  to  heaven,  but  he  that  came  down 
from  heaven,  evefi  the  Son  of  man  which  is  in  heaven.  And  14 
as  Moses  lifted  up  the  serpent  in  the  wilderness,  even  so 
must  the  Son  of  man  be  lifted  up  :  that  whosoever  believeth  15 
in  him  should  not  perish,  but  have  eternal  life.     For  God  16 

12.  earthly  things]  Things  which  take  place  on  earth,  even  though 
originating  in  heaven,  e.g.  the  'new  birth,'  which  though  'from 
above,'  must  take  place  in  this  world.  See  notes  on  i  Cor.  xv.  40  and 
James  iii.  15. 

heavenly  things]  The  mysteries  which  are  not  of  this  world,  the 
Divine  counsels  respecting  man's  salvation. 

13.  tio  man  hath  ascended  up  to  heaven]  No  man  has  been  in 
heaven,  so  as  to  see  and  know  these  heavenly  things,  excepting  Christ. 

came  down  from  heaven]  Literally,  out  of  heaven;  at  the  Incarna- 
tion.    On  '  the  Son  of  Man '  see  on  i.  51. 

■which  is  in  heaven]  These  words  are  omitted  in  the  best  MSS.  If 
they  are  retained,  the  meaning  is  'Whose  proper  home  is  heaven.' 
Or  the  Greek  participle  may  be  the  imperfect  tense  (comp.  vi.  62,  ix. 
25,  xvii.  f,),  which  was  in  heaven  before  the  Incarnation.  It  is  doubtful 
whether  in  this  verse  we  have  any  direct  allusion  to  the  Ascension, 
though  this  is  sometimes  assumed. 

14.  the  serpent]  We  here  have  some  evidence  of  the  date  of  the 
Gospel.  The  Ophitic  is  the  earliest  Gnostic  system  of  which  we  have 
full  information.  The  serpent  is  the  centre  of  the  system,  at  once  its 
good  and  evil  principle.  Had  this  form  of  Gnosticism  been  prevalent 
before  this  Gospel  was  written,  this  verse  would  scarcely  have  stood 
thus.  An  orthodox  writer  would  have  guarded  his  readers  from 
error:  an  Ophitic  writer  would  have  made  more  of  the  serpent. 

even  so]  Christ  here  testifies  to  the  prophetic  and  typical  character  of 
the  O.T. 

vnist]     It  is  so  ordered  in  the  counsels  of  God.      Heb.  ii.  9,  10. 

be  lifted  tip]  On  the  cross :  the  lifting  up  does  not  refer  to  the  exalta- 
tion of  Christ  to  glory.  The  glory  to  which  the  cross  led  {crux  scala 
coeli)  is  not  included.  Comp.  viii.  28  and  xii.  32;  and  for  other 
symbolic  language  about  His  death  comp.  Matt.  xii.  40. 

15.  That]  The  eternal  life  of  believers  is  the  purpose  of  the  'must' 
in  V.  14.     For  'should'  read  may  both  here  and  in  v.  16. 

not  perish,  but]  These  words  are  not  genuine  here,  but  have  been 
taken  from  the  next  verse.  When  they  are  struck  out  it  is  better  to  take 
'in  Him'  with  'have'  than  with  'believeth:'  that  every  one  who  be- 
lieveth may  have  in  Him  eternal  life. 

16 — 21.  It  is  much  disputed  whether  what  follows  is  a  continuation 
of  Christ's  discourse,  or  the  comment  of  the  Evangelist  upon  it.  The 
fact  that  terms  characteristic  of  S.  John's  theology  are  put  into  the 
mouth  of  Christ,  e.g.  'only- begotten'  and  'the  Light,'  cannot  settle  the 

S.  JOHN  7 


98  S.   JOHN,   III.  [w.  17,  18. 

so  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that 
whosoever  believeth  in  him   should   not  perish,  but  have 

17  everlasting  life.  For  God  sent  not  his  Son  into  the  world 
to  condemn  the  world;    but  that  the  world  through   him 

,8  might  be  saved.  He  that  believeth  on  him  is  not  con- 
demned :  but  he  that  believeth  not  is  condemned  already, 
because  he  hath  not   believed   in   the   name  of  the  only 


question :  the  substance  may  still  be  our  Lord's,  though  the  wording  is 
S.  John's.  It  seems  unlikely  that  S.  John  would  give  us  no  indication 
of  the  change  from  Christ's  words  to  his  own,  if  the  discourse  with 
Nicodemus  really  came  to  a  full  stop  in  v.  15.     See  on  vv.  31 — 36. 

16.  For\  Explaining  how  God  wills  eternal  life  to  every  one  that 
believeth. 

loved  the  world^  The  whole  human  race:  see  on  i.  10.  This  would 
be  a  revelation  to  the  exclusive  Pharisee,  brought  up  to  believe  that  God 
loved  only  the  chosen  people.  The  word  for  'love,'  agapAn,  is  very 
frequent  both  in  this  Gospel  and  in  the  First  Epistle,  and  may  be  con- 
sidered characteristic  of  S.  John. 

that  he  gave  his  only  begotteit]  This  would  be  likely  to  remind 
Nicodemus  of  the  offering  of  Isaac.  Comp.  i  John  iv.  9;  Heb.  xi.  17; 
Rom.  viii.  32.     See  note  on  i.  14. 

everlasting  life']  The  Greek  is  the  same  as  in  the  previous  verse,  and 
the  translation  should  be  the  same,  eternal  life.  'Eternal  life'  is  one 
of  the  phrases  of  which  S.  John  is  fond.  It  occurs  17  times  in  the 
Gospel  (only  eight  in  the  Synoptics)  and  six  times  in  the  First  Epistle. 
In  neither  Gospel  nor  Epistle  is  'eternal'  (aionios)  applied  to  anything 
but  'life.'  On  aiSnios,  which  of  itself  does  not  necessarily  mean  'ever- 
lasting' or  'unending,'  see  note  on  Matt.  xxv.  46. 

17.  the  world]  Note  the  emphatic  repetition :  the  whole  human 
race  is  meant,  as  in  v.  16,  not  the  Gentiles  in  particular. 

not. ..to  condemn]  This  does  not  contradict  ix.  39,  'For  judgment 
am  I  come  into  this  world.'  Comp.  Luke  ix.  56.  Since  there  are 
sinners  in  the  world  Christ's  coming  involves  a  separation  of  them  from 
the  good,  a  judgment,  a  sentence:  but  this  is  not  the  purpose  of  His 
coming;  the  purpose  is  salvation.  'Condemn'  is  too  strong  here  for 
the  Greek  word,  which  is  simply  to  Judge  between  good  and  bad ;  but 
the  word  frequently  acquires  the  notion  of  '  condemn  '  from  the  context 
(see  on  v.  29).  Note  the  change  of  construction;  not,  'to  save  the 
world,'  but  'that  the  world  might  be  saved  through  Him.'  The  world 
can  reject  Him  if  it  pleases. 

18.  is  not  condemned... is  condemned  already]  Better,  is  «c/ Judged 
...hath  been  Judged  already.  The  change  of  tense  from  present  to 
perfect  must  be  preserved.  Unbelievers  have  no  need  to  be  sentenced 
by  the  Messiah;  their  unbelief  is  of  itself  their  sentence.  The  next 
verse  explains  how  this  is.  'Judge '  and  'judgment '  are  among  S.  John's 
characteristic  words. 


21 


vv.  19—21.]  S.   JOHN,   III.  99 

begotten  Son  of  God.  And  this  is  the  condemnation,  that  ,9 
light  is  come  into  the  world,  and  men  loved  darkness  rather 
than  light,  because  their  deeds  were  evil.  For  every  one  so 
that  doeth  evil  hateth  the  light,  neither  cometh  to  the  light, 
lest  his  deeds  should  be  reproved.  But  he  that  doeth 
truth  cometh  to  the  light,  that  his  deeds  may  be  made 
manifest,  that  they  are  wrought  in  God. 

19.  And  this  is  the  condeninatioii\  Rather,  But  the  Judgment  is 
tMs  ;  this  is  what  it  consists  in:  comp.  xv.  12,  xvii.  3. 

and  vien  loved  darkfiess,  &c.]  The  tragic  tone  again  (see  on  i.  5). 
Both  words  should  have  the  article,  loved  the  darkness  rather  than  the 
light.  An  understatement;  they  hated  the  Light.  There  is  probably 
no  allusion  to  Nicodemus  coming  to  Jesus  by  night.  He  chose  the 
darkness,  not  because  his  deeds  were  evil,  but  because  they  were  good. 
He  wished  to  conceal,  not  an  evil  deed  from  good  men,  but  a  good  deed 
from  evil  men. 

deeds']     Better,  works  here  and  vv.  20,  21. 

20.  doeth  evil]  The  Greek  word  for  'doeth'  is  not  the  same  as  that 
in  the  next  verse;  but  it  is  not  quite  certain  that  any  distinction  of 
meaning  is  intended,  although  v.  29  inclines  one  to  think  so.  There 
the  words  are  paired  in  precisely  the  same  way  as  here.  On  the  other 
hand  in  Rom.  vii.  15 — 20  these  same  two  words  are  interchanged 
indifferently,  each  being  used  both  of  doing  good  and  of  doing  evil. 
In  order  to  make  a  distinction  practiseth  evil  has  been  suggested.  But 
'  evil'  also  requires  re-translation,  for  in  the  Greek  it  differs  from  '  evil '  in 
v.  19.  The  meaning  in  this  verse  is  rather  'frivolous,  good-for-nothing, 
worthless.'  He  that  practiseth  worthless  things  (the  aimless  trifler), 
hateth  the  light,  which  would  show  him  the  true  value  of  the  inanities 
which  fill  up  his  existence. 

lest  his  deeds  should]     Better,  in  order  that  his  works  may  not. 

reproved]  The  margin  gives  'discovered.'  In  viii.  9  the  same  word 
is  translated  'convict,'  in  viii.  46  'convince,'  and  in  xvi.  8  'reprove' 
with  'convince'  in  the  margin.  Of  all  these  'convict'  is  perhaps  the 
best ;  in  order  that  his  works  may  not  be  convicted  of  being  worth- 
less, proved  to  be  what  they  really  are.     See  note  on  Matt,  xviii.  15. 

21.  doeth  truth]  Or,  as  in  i  John  i.  6,  doeth  the  ti'ttth,  the  opposite  of 
'doing'  or  'making  a  lie,'  Rev.  xxi.  27,  xxii.  15.  It  is  moral  rather 
than  intellectual  truth  that  is  meant.  To  '  do  the  truth '  is  to  do  that 
which  is  true  to  the  moral  law  (comp.  viii.  32),  that  which  has  true 
moral  worth,  as  opposed  to  'practising  worthless  things.'  In  i  Cor. 
xiii.  6  we  have  a  similar  antithesis:  'rejoicing  with  the /n^//? '  is  opposed 
to  'rejoicing  in  i>iiquity.^ 

that  his  deeds  rnay  be  made  manifest]  '  His  '  is  emphatic,  ^  his  deeds ' 
as  opposed  to  those  of  him  that  doeth  evil.  '  Be  made  manifest ' 
balances  'be  reproved.'  The  one  fears  to  be  convicted;  the  other 
courts  the  light,  not  for  self-glorification,  but  as  loving  that  to  which  he 
feels  his  works  are  akin.     See  on  i.  31. 


loo  S.   JOHN,   III.  [vv.  22,  23. 

22 — $6.     The  Baptism  and  Filial  Testimony  of  John. 

22  After  these  things  came  Jesus  and  his  disciples  into  the 
land  of  Judea ;  and  there  he  tarried  with  them,  and  baptized. 

23  And  John  also  was   baptizing   in   Aenon   near   to   Salim, 

wrought  in  God]     Better,  have  been  wrought  in  God.     This  is  his 

reason  for  wishing  them  to  be  made  manifest;  it  is  a  manifestation  of  some- 
thing divine.  The  Greelc  for  '  that  ihey  are  '  may  mean  '  because  they 
are.' 

These  three  verses  (19 — 21)  shew  that  before  the  Incarnation  there 
were  two  classes  of  men  in  the  world ;  a  majority  of  evil-doers,  whose 
antecedents  led  them  to  shun  the  Messiah;  and  a  small  minority  of 
righteous,  whose  antecedents  led  them  to  welcome  the  Messiah.  They 
had  been  given  to  Him  by  the  Father  (vi.  37,  xvii.  6);  they  recognised 
His  teaching  as  of  God,  because  they  desired  to  do  God's  will  (vii.  17). 
Such  would  be  Simeon,  Anna  (Luke  ii.  25,  36),  Nathanael,  the  dis- 
ciples, &c. 

We  have  no  means  of  knowing  how  Nicodemus  was  affected  by  this 
interview,  beyond  the  incidental  notices  of  him  vii.  50,  51,  xix.  39, 
which  being  so  incidental  shew  that  he  is  no  fiction. 

22—36.     The  Baptism  and  Final  Testimony  of  John. 

22,  23.  We  have  here  a  mark  of  authenticity  similar  to  ii.  12.  These 
passages  "it  is  impossible  to  regard  as  embodiments  of  dogma.  It  is 
equally  impossible  to  regard  them  as  fragments  detached  from  the  mass 
of  tradition.  The  only  conclusion  remains,  that  they  axe  facts  lodged  iu 
the  memory  of  a  living  'uiitness  of  the  eveftts  described."  S.  p.  86. 
8.  John  records  them,  not  for  any  theological  purpose,  but  because  he 
was  there,  and  remembers  what  took  place. 

and  baptized^  Or,  was  baptizing  during  his  stay  there,  through  his 
disciples  (iv.  2).  Christ's  baptism  was  not  yet  in  the  Name  of  the 
Trinity  (vii.  39)  as  ordered  to  the  Apostles  (Matt,  xxviii.  19).  It  was  a 
continuation  of  John's  baptism,  accompanied  by  the  operation  of  the 
Spirit  {v.  5).  We  have  abundant  evidence  that  John  baptized  before 
Christ's  public  ministry  commenced,  and  that  the  disciples  baptized 
after  His  ministry  closed.  That  the  one  baptism  should  be  the  off- 
spring of  the  other  is  probable  enough  antecedently;  "yet  this  is  the 
one  passage  in  which  it  is  positively  stated  that  our  Lord  authorised 
baptism  during  His  lifetime."     S.  p.  85. 

23.  John  also  7vas  baptizing]  Not  as  a  rival  to  the  Messiah,  but  still 
in  preparation  for  Ilim.  Although  John  knew  that  the  Messiah  had 
come,  yet  He  had  not  yet  taken  the  public  position  which  John  had  ex- 
pected Him  to  take,  and  hence  John  was  by  no  means  led  to  suppose 
that  his  own  office  in  preaching  repentance  was  at  an  end.  There  is  no 
improbability  in  Jesus  and  John  baptizing  side  by  side.  But  with  this 
difference;  Jesus  seldom,  if  ever,  administered  His  own  baptism;  John 
apparently  always  did  administer  his. 

Aenon]    The   name   means    'springs.'    The   identifications  of  both 


vv.  24—27.]  S.    JOHN,   III.  loi 

because  there  was  much  water  there :  and  they  came,  and 
were  baptized.     For   John   was   not   yet  cast  into  prison.  24 
Then  there  arose  a  question  between  sotjie  of  John's  disciples  25 
and  the  Jews  about  purifying.     And  they  came  unto  John,  26 
and  said  unto  him,  Rabbi,  he  that  was  with  thee  beyond 
Jordan,   to  whom  thou  barest   witness,  behold,  the   same 
baptizeth,  and  all  men  come  to  him.     John  answered  and  27 
said,  A  man  can  receive  nothing,  except  it  be  given  him 

Aenon  and  Salim  remain  uncertain.  The  most  probable  conjecture  is 
the  Wady  Far'ah,  running  from  Mount  Ebal  to  Jordan,  an  open  vale, 
full  of  springs.  There  is  a  Salim  three  miles  south  of  the  valley,  and 
the  name  of  Aenon  survives  in  'Ainftn,  a  village  four  miles  north  of  the 
waters. 

7}iuch  watei-X  For  immersion ;  the  Greek  means  literally  many 
waters.  The  remark  shews  that  these  places  were  not  on  the  Jordan. 
It  would  be  gratuitous  to  say  of  the  Jordan  that  '  there  was  much  water 
there.' 

24.  This  corrects  the  impression,  naturally  derived  from  the  Synop- 
tists,  that  Christ's  public  ministry  did  not  commence  till  after  the  im- 
prisonment of  the  Baptist.  The  whole  of  these  first  three  chapters  and 
part  of  the  fourth  must  be  placed  before  Matt.  iv.  12,  where  there  are 
great  gaps  in  the  history. 

25.  Then  there  arose]  Better,  there  arose  therefore;  i.e.  in  conse- 
quence of  John's  baptizing  at  Aenon. 

a  question']    Or,  questioning. 

between  some  of  John^  disciples  and  the  yeivs]  Better,  on  the  part 
of  yohn^s  disciples  with  a  Jew.  'A  Jew  '  for  'Jews  '  is  the  reading  of 
the  best  authorities.  We  do  not  know  what  the  question  was ;  probably 
the  efficacy  of  John's  baptism  as  compared  with  Christ's,  or  as  com- 
pared with  the  ordinary  ceremonial  washings,  for  purifying  from  sin. 
There  is  noilue  as  to  who  this  Jew  was.  His  question  makes  the  dis- 
ciples of  John  go  at  once  to  their  master  for  his  opinion  about  Jesus  and 
His  success. 

26.  to  whom  thou  barest  witness]  Rather,  to  whom  thou  hast 
borne  witness.  This  was  the  monstrous  thing  in  their  eyes ;  that  One 
who  seemed  to  owe  His  position  to  the  testimony  of  John  should  be  con- 
peting  with  him  and  surpassing  him. 

behold,  the  same]  Or  perhaps,  behold,  this  fellow,  expressing  astonish- 
ment and  chagrin,  and  perhaps  contempt. 

all  men]  An  exaggeration  very  natural  in  their  excitement.  The 
picture  is  very  true  to  life.  Comp.  the  excited  statement  of  the 
Samaritan  woman,  iv.  29  ;  and  of  the  Pharisees,  xii.  19  ;  contrast 
V.  32  and  see  on  vi.  15. 

27.  A  man  can  receive  nothing,  &c.]  Comp.  xix.  11.  The  meaning 
of  John's  declaration  is  given  in  two  ways:  (i)  'Jesus  could  not  have 
this  great  success,   unless  it  were  granted  Him  from  Heaven.     This 


I02  S.   JOHN,    III.  [vv.  28—30. 

28  from  heaven.     Ye  yourselves  bear  me  witness,  that  I  said,  I 

29  am  not  the  Christ,  but  that  I  am  sent  before  him.  He  that 
hath  the  bride  is  the  britlegroom  :  but  the  friend  of  the 
bridegroom,  which  standeth  and  heareth  him,  rejoiceth 
greatly  because  of  the    bridegroom's    voice  :    this    my   joy 

30  therefore  is  fulfilled.    He  must  increase,  but  I  must  decrease. 

ought  to  satisfy  you  that  He  is  sent  by  God  ;'  (2)  '  I  cannot  accept  the 
position  of  supremacy,  which  you  would  thrust  upon  me;  because  I 
have  not  received  it  from  Heaven.'  The  former  is  better,  as  being  a 
more  direct  answer  to  'all  men  come  to  Him.'  But  it  is  quite  possible 
that  both  meanings  are  intended. 

be givenl    More  literally,  have  \iBen  given. 

28.  Y'e yoiirsclves'\     Though  you  are  so  indignant  on  my  account. 
bear  me  wilness,  that  I  said\    They  had  appealed  to  his  testimony 

(v.  ■26);  he  turns  it  against  them. 

before  hi?n'\  'Before  Him,  of  whom  you  complain,  whom  I  proclaim 
to  be  the  Christ.'     In  i.  26,  30,  John  spoke  less  clearly. 

29.  John  explains  by  a  figure  his  subordination  to  the  Messiah. 

He  that  hath  the  bride\  Here  only  in  this  Gospel  does  this  well- 
known  symbol  occur.  It  is  frequent  both  in  O.  T.  and  N.  T.  Is.  liv. 
5;  Hos.  ii.  19,  20;  Eph.  V.  32;  Rev.  xix.  7;  xxi.  2,  9.  Comp. 
Song  of  Solomon, /aw/w ;  Matt.  ix.  15,  xxv.  i.  In  O.  T.  it  syni- 
Dolizes  the  relationship  between  Jehovah  and  His  chosen  people,  in 
N.  T.  that  between  Christ  and  His  Church. 

the  friend  of  tlie  bridegroom]  The  special  friend,  appointed  to 
arrange  the  preliminaries  of  the  wedding,  to  manage  and  preside  at 
the  marriage  feast.  Somewhat  analogous  to  our  'best  man,' but  his 
duties  were  very  much  more  considerable.  A  much  closer  analogy 
may  be  found  among  the  lower  orders  in  the  Tyrol  at  the  present 
day.  Here  the  Messiah  is  the  Bridegroom  and  the  Church  His  Bride  ; 
John  is  His  friend  who  has  prepared  the  heart  of  the  Bride  and 
arranged  the  espousal.  He  rejoices  to  see  the  consummation  of  his 
labours. 

heareth  him"]  i.e.  listens  attentively  to  do  his  bidding. 

because  of  the  bridegroom^ s  voice\  Heard  in  the  midst  of  the 
marriage-festivities. 

is  fulfilhd]  i.e.  has  'be&nfulfiHed&ndi  still  remains  complete.  Comp. 
XV.  II,  xvi.  24,  xvii.  13;   I  John  i.  4. 

30.  mtcsti  It  is  so  ordained  in  the  counsels  of  God.  Comp.  zv.  7, 
14,  ix.  4,  x.  16,  XX.  9.  This  joy  of  the  friend  of  the  Bridegroom,  in  full 
view  of  the  inevitable  wane  of  his  own  influence  and  dignity,  is  in 
marked  contrast  to  the  jealousy  and  vexation  of  his  disciples. 

31 — 36.  A  question  is  raised  with  regard  to  this  section  similar 
to  that  raised  about  vv.  16 — 21.  Some  regard  what  follows  not  as 
a  continuation  of  the  Baptist's  speech,  but  as  the  Evangelist's  comment 
upon  it.  But,  as  in  the  former  case,  seeing  that  the  Evangelist  gives 
us  no  intimation  that  he  is  taking  the  place  of  the  speaker,  and  that 


32 


vv.  31,  32.]  S.   JOHN,   III.  103 

He  that  cometh  from  above  is  above  all :  he  that  is  of  the  31 
earth  is  earthly,  and  speaketh  of  the  earth  :  he  that  cometh 
from  heaven  is  above  all.     And  what  he  hath   seen   and 
heard,  that  he  testifieth ;  and  no  man  receiveth  his  testimony. 

there  is  nothing  in  what  follows  to  compel  us  to  suppose  that  there 
is  such  a  transition,  it  is  best  to  regard  the  Baptist  as  still  speaking. 
It  is,  however,  quite  possible  that  this  latter  part  of  the  discourse  is 
more  strongly  coloured  with  the  Evangelist's  own  style  and  phrase- 
ology, while  the  substance  still  remains  the  Baptist's.  Indeed  a  change 
of  style  may  be  noticed.  The  sentences  become  less  abrupt  and  more 
connected;  the  stream  of  thought  is  continuous. 

"The  Baptist,  with  the  growing  inspiration  of  the  prophet,  unveils 
before  his  narrowing  circle  of  disciples  the  full  majesty  of  Jesus ; 
and  then,  as  with  a  swan-like  song,  completes  his  testimony  before 
vanishing  from  history."     Meyer,  in  loco. 

There  is  no  contradiction  between  this  passage  and  Matt.  xi.  2 — 6, 
whatever  construction  we  put  on  the  latter  (see  notes  there).  John 
was  'of  the  earth,'  and  therefore  there  is  nothing  improbable  in  his 
here  impressing  on  his  disciples  the  peril  of  not  believing  on  the 
Messiah,  and  yet  in  prison  feeling  impatience,  or  despondency,  or  even 
doubt  about  the  position  and  career  of  Jesus. 

31.  that  coviethfrotn  above\  i.e.  Christ.  Comp.  v.  13,  viii.  23,  He 
'is  above  all,'  John  included.  No  one,  however  exalted  a  Prophet, 
can  rival  Him. 

is  earthly']  There  is  loss  instead  of  gain  in  obliterating  the  em- 
phatic repetition  of  the  words  'of  the  earth'  as  they  appear  in  the 
Greek.  He  that  is  of  the  earth,  of  the  earth  he  is,  and  of  the  earth 
he  speaketh.  This  was  John's  case  :  he  spoke  of  '  earthly  things '  (see 
on  V.  12),  Divine  Truth  as  manifested  in  the  world,  and  as  revealed 
to  him.  He  could  not,  like  Christ,  speak  from  immediate  knowledge 
of  'heavenly  things.'  Note  that  'speaking  of  the  earth  ^  is  a  very 
different  thing  from  'speaking  of  the  tvorld^  (i  John  iv.  5).  The  one 
is  to  speak  of  God's  work  on  earth ;  the  other  of  what  opposes,  or  at 
least  is  other  than,  God's  work. 

he  that  cometh  from  heaven]  A  repetition  with  further  development, 
very  characteristic  of  S.  John's  style. 

32.  what  he  hath  seen  and  heard]  In  His  pre-existence  with 
God  ;  V.  II,  i.  18.     He  has  immediate  knowledge  of  heavenly  things. 

that  he  testifieth]  Better,  that  he  witnessetli  (see  on  i.  7).  Precisely 
this  is  the  substance  of  His  witness. 

and  710  man]  The  tragic  tone  again;  see  on  i.  5,  and  comp.  v.  11. 
'  No  man '  is  an  exaggeration  resulting  from  deep  feeling  :  com- 
paratively speaking  none,  so  few  were  those  who  accepted  the  Messiah. 
Comp.  the  similar  exaggeration  on  the  other  side,  v.  26,  'all  men 
come  to  Him.'  These  extreme  contradictory  statements,  placed  in 
such  close  proximity,  confirm  our  trust  in  the  Evangelist  as  faithfully 
reporting  what  was  actually  said.  He  does  not  soften  it  down  to  make 
it  look  plausible. 


104  S.   JOHN,    III.  [vv.  33-36. 

33  He  that  hath  received  his  testimony  hath  set  to  his  seal  that 

34  God  is  true.     For  he  whom  God  hath  sent  speaketh  the 
words  of  God  :  for  God  giveth  not  the  Spirit  by  measure 

35  unto  him.     The  Father  loveth  the  Son,  and  hath  given  all 
56  tilings  into  his  hand.     He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  hath 

everlasting  life :    and  he  that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall 
not  see  life ;  but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him. 

receiveth  his  testimony]  Better,  receiveth  His  witness.  The  Baptist 
takes  up  Christ's  words  in  v.  11. 

33.  The  Baptist  shews  at  once  that  'no  man'  is  hyperbolical;  there 
are  some  who  received  the  testimony. 

hatk  received. ..hath  sel  to  his  seat]     Better,  received... set  his  seal. 

his  testimony]  his  witness.  'His'  is  emphatic,  balancing  'God.' 
'  He  that  received  Christ^s  witness,  set  his  seal  that  God  is  true.'  To 
believe  the  Messiah  is  to  believe  God,  for  the  IVIessiah  is  God's  inter- 
preter, i.  18.  The  metaphor  is  from  sealing  a  document  to  express 
one's  trust  in  it  and  adherence  to  it.  Comp.  vi.  27  ;  i  Cor.  ix.  2.  On 
'  true '  see  note  on  i.  9 ;  '  true '  here  is  opposed  to  '  lying '  not  to 
'  spurious.' 

34.  whom  God  hath  sent]  Better,  whom  God  sent,  viz.  Christ  '  who 
Cometh  from  above,'  v.  31. 

God  giveth  not  the  Spirit  by  measure  unto  him]  '  God  '  is  of  doubtful 
authority;  'unto  Him'  is  not  in  the  Greek.  We  must  translate  He 
giveth  not  the  Spirit  by  fneasure  ;  or,  the  Spirit  giveth  not  by  measure. 
The  former  is  better,  and  '  He '  probably  means  God ;  so  that  the  only 
question  is  whether  '  unto  Him  '  is  rightly  supplied  or  not.  In  trans- 
lation it  is  best  to  omit  the  words,  altliough  there  is  a  direct  reference 
to  Jesus.  'Not  by  measure  giveth  He  the  Spirit,'  least  of  all  to 
Jesus,  'for  it  pleased  (the  Father)  thct  in  Him  the  whole  plenitude  (of 
Divinity)  should  have  its  permanent  abode,'  Col.  i.  19.  Some  take 
'  He'  as  meaning  Christ,  who  gives  the  Spirit  fully  to  His  disciples. 

35.  toveth  the  Son]  Comp.  v.  20.  This  is  the  reason  for  His 
giving  all  things  into  His  hand.  Christ  is  thus  made  'Head  over 
all  things  '  (Eph.  i.  22),  and  '  Lord  of  all '  (Acts  x.  36). 

36.  hath  everlasting  life]  Or,  eternal  life  (see  on  v.  16).  Note 
the  tense  ;  'hath'  not  'shall  have.'  Believers  are  already  in  possession 
of  eternal  life.  Christians  often  think  of  eternal  life  as  something  yet 
to  be  won.  It  has  been  already  given  to  them  ;  the  question  is  whether 
they  will  lose  it  again  or  not.  The  struggle  is  not  to  gain  but  to  retain. 
Comp.  xvii.  3. 

he  that  believeth  not]  This  may  also  mean  he  that  obeyeth  not,  and 
this  is  better,  for  it  is  not  the  same  word  as  '  he  that  believeth  '  with 
the  negative  added.  The  same  correction  seems  to  be  needed.  Acts 
xiv.  2,  xix.  9;  Rom.  xi.  30  (see  margin).  Comp.  Ileb.  iv.  6,  11; 
I  Pet.  iv.  17. 

shall  not  see]  Not  only  has  not  beheld,  but  has  no  prospect  of 
beholding. 


vv.  1—5.]  S.    JOHN,   IV.  105 

Chap.  IV.  i — 42.     The  Work  among  Sa?naritans. 

When  therefore  the  Lord  knew  how  the  Pharisees  had  4 
heard  that  Jesus  made  and  baptized  moe   disciples   than 
John,  (though  Jesus  himself  baptized  not,  but  his  disciples,)  ^ 
he  left  Judea,  and  departed  again  into  Galilee.     And   he  \ 
must  needs  go  through  Samaria.     Then  cometh  he  to   a 

the  wrath  of  God"]  This  phrase  occurs  nowhere  else  in  the  Gospels. 
It  is  the  necessary  complement  of  the  love  of  God.  If  there  is  love 
for  those  wfho  believe,  there  must  be  wrath  for  those  who  refuse  to 
believe.     Comp.  Matt.  iii.  7;  Luke  iii.  7;  Rom.  i.  18,  ix.  22,  xii.  19. 

abideth'X  Not  'shall  come  to  him  :'  this  is  his  portion  already.  He 
is  under  a  ban  until  he  believes,  and  he  refuses  to  believe  :  therefore 
the  ban  remains.  He,  like  the  believer,  not  only  ivill  have  but  has 
his  portion ;  it  rests  with  him  also,  whether  the  portion  continues  his. 
He  has  to  struggle,  not  to  avert  a  sentence,  but  to  be  freed  from  it. 

Chap.  IV.  1 — 42.     The  Work  among  Samaritans. 

1.  When  therefore  the  Lord  hnew]  The  '  therefore  '  refers  us  back 
to  iii.  26.  Of  the  many  who  came  to  Christ  some  told  the  Pharisees  of 
His  doings,  just  as  others  told  John. 

the  Pharisees]     See  on  i.  24. 

made  and  baptized]  Literally,  is  making  and  baptizing,  the  very 
words  of  the  report  are  given.  This  is  important  as  shewing  the 
meaning  of  the  next  verse,  which  is  a  correction  not  of  the  Evangelist's 
own  statement  but  of  the  report.  In  the  Authorised  Version  S.  John 
seems  to  be  correcting  himself :  he  is  really  correcting  the  report  carried 
to  the  Pharisees. 

than  John]  They  did  not  object  so  much  to  John's  making  dis- 
ciples. He  disclaimed  being  the  Messiah,  and  he  took  his  stand  on 
the  Law.  Moreover,  he  '  did  no  miracle.'  They  could  understand 
his  position  much  better  than  that  of  Jesus,  and  feared  it  less.  See  on 
vi.  15. 

2.  Jesus  himself  baptized  not]  Because  baptizing  is  the  work  of 
a  minister,  not  of  the  Lord.     Christ  baptizes  with  the  Holy  Spirit 

3.  He  left  JtidcEci]  The  stronghold  of  the  Pharisees  and  of  the  party 
opposed  to  Christ.  We  are  to  infer,  therefore,  that  this  report  made 
them  commence  operations  against  Him. 

departed  again  into  Galilee]  '  Again '  is  somewhat  wanting  in  au- 
thority. It  points  to  the  period  from  i.  43  to  ii.  12.  Christ  had  come 
up  from  Capernaum  to  Jerusalem  for  the  Passover  (ii.  13)  :  He  now 
returns  to  Galilee.  It  is  sometimes  assumed  that  this  visit  to  Galilee 
marks  the  beginning  of  the  Galilean  ministry  recorded  by  the  Sy- 
noptists  (comp.  Matt.  iv.  12).  This  may  be  correct,  but  it  is  not  quite 
certain.     See  note  on  Mark  i.  14,  15. 

4.  he  must  needs  go  through  Samaria]     There  was  no  other  way, 


io6  S.  JOHN,   IV.  [v.  s. 

city  of  Samaria,  which  is  called  Sychar,  near  to  the  parcel 

unless  he  crossed  the  Jordan  and  went  round  by  Perea,  as  Jews  some- 
times did  to  avoid  annoyance  from  the  Samaritans  (on  the  Samari- 
tans, see  note  on  Matt.  x.  5).  As  Christ  was  on  his  way /rciw  Jerusalem, 
and  escaping  from  the  ruling  party  there,  He  had  less  reason  to  fear 
molestation.     Comp.  Luke  ix.  53. 

5 — 42.  Doubt  has  been  thrown  on  this  narrative  in  three  different 
ways,  (i)  On  a  priori  grounds.  How  could  the  Samaritans,  who  re- 
jected the  prophetical  books,  and  were  such  bitter  enemies  of  the  Jews, 
be  expecting  a  Messiah?  The  narrative  is  based  on  a  fundamental 
mistake.  But  it  is  notorious  that  the  Samaritans  did  look  for  a  Mes- 
siah, and  are  looking  for  one  to  the  present  day.  Though  they  rejected 
the  Prophets,  they  accepted  the  Pentateuch,  with  all  its  Messianic 
prophecies.  (2)  On  account  of  Acts  viii.  5.  How  could  Philip  go  and 
convert  the  Samaritans,  if  Christ  had  already  done  so?  But  is  it  to  be 
supposed  that  in  two  days  Christ  perfected  Christianity  in  Samaria  (even 
allowing,  whaL  is  not  certain,  that  Christ  and  Philip  went  to  the  same 
town),  so  as  to  leave  nothing  for  a  preacher  to  do  afterwards?  Many 
acknowledged  Jesus  as  the  Messiah  who  afterwards,  on  finding  Him  to  be 
very  different  from  the  Messiah  they  expected,  fell  away.  This  would 
be  likely  enough  at  Samaria.  The  seed  had  fallen  on  rocky  ground. 
(3)  On  the  supposition  that  the  narrative  is  an  allegory,  of  which  the 
whole  point  lies  in  the  words  'thou  hast  had  five  husbands,  and  he  whom 
thou  now  hast  is  not  thy  husband.'  The  five  husbands  are  the  five 
religions  from  Babylon,  Culhah,  Ava,  Hamath,  and  Sepharvaim, 
brought  to  Samaria  by  the  colonists  from  Assyria  (^  Kings  xvii.  24) ; 
and  the  sixth  is  the  adulterated  worship  of  Jehovah.  If  our  interpreting 
Scripture  depends  upon  our  guessing  such  riddles  as  this,  we  may  well 
despair  of  the  task.  But  the  allegory  is  a  pure  fiction,  i.  When  S. 
John  gives  us  an  allegory,  he  leaves  no  doubt  that  it  is  an  allegory 
There  is  not  the  faintest  hint  here.  2.  It  would  be  extraordinary  that 
in  a  narrative  of  38  verses  the  whole  allegory  should  be  contained  in  less 
than  one  verse,  the  rest  being  mere  setting.  This  is  like  a  frame  a  yard 
w  ide  round  a  miniature.  3.  There  is  a  singular  impropriety  in  making 
the  five  heathen  religions  'husbands,'  while  the  worship  of  Jehovah  is 
represented  by  a  paramour. 

The  narrative  is  true  to  what  we  know  of  Jews  and  Samaritans  at 
this  time.  The  topography  is  well  preserved.  'The  gradual  develop- 
ment of  the  woman's  belief  is  psychologically  true.'  These  and  other 
points  to  be  noticed  as  they  occur  may  convince  us  that  this  narrative 
cannot  be  a  fiction.  Far  the  easiest  supposition  is  that  it  is  a  faithful 
record  of  actual  facts. 

6.  I'heti  Cometh  he\  Better, /^^  r<?OT^/A  therefore ;  because  that  was 
His  route. 

a  city  of  Satnaria\  City  is  used  loosely,  and  must  not  be  supposed 
to  imply  anything  large.  Capernaum,  which  Josephus  calls  a  village, 
the  Evangelists  call  a  city.  'Town'  would  be  belter  as  a  transla- 
tion.    Samaria   is   the   insignificant   province   of  Samaria  into  which 


vv.  6—8.]  S.    JOHN,   IV.  107 

of  ground  that  Jacob  gave  to  his  son  Joseph.     Now  Jacob's  6 
well  was   there.     Jesus  therefore,  being  wearied  with   his 
journey,  sat  thus  on  the  well :  and  it  was  about  the  sixth 
hour.     There  cometh  a  woman  of  Samaria  to  draw  water :  ^ 
Jesus  saith  unto  her.  Give  me  to  drink.     (For  his  disciples  8 

the  old  kingdom  of  Jeroboam  had  dwindled.  Omit  'which  is'  before 
'called.' 

called  Sychar]  'Called'  may  be  another  indication  that  this  Gospel 
was  written  outside  Palestine  or  it  may  mean  that  Sychar  was  a  nick- 
name ('liar'  or  'drunkard').  In  the  one  case  Sychar  is  a  different  place 
from  Sychem  or  Shechem,  though  close  to  it,  viz.  the  modern  Askar : 
in  the  other  it  is  another  name  for  Sychem,  the  Neapolis  of  S.  John's 
day,  and  the  modern  Naplus.  The  former  view  is  preferable,  though 
certainty  is  impossible.  Would  S.  John  have  written  'Neapolis'  if 
Sychem  were  meant?  He  writes  Tiberias  (vi.  i,  23,  xxi.  i):  but 
Tiberias  was  probably  a  new  town  as  well  as  a  new  name,  whereas 
Neapolis  was  a  new  name  for  an  old  town;  so  the  analogy  is  not  perfect. 
Eusebius  and  Jerome  distinguish  Sychar  from  Sychem.  Naplus  has 
many  wells  close  at  hand. 

that  y acob  gave  to  his  son  Joseph']  Gen.  xxxiii.  19,  xlviii.  22;  Josh, 
xxiv.  32.  Abraham  bought  the  ground,  Jacob  gave  it  to  Joseph,  and 
Joseph  was  buried  there. 

6.  Jacob's  well]  Or,  spring  {v.  11).  It  still  exists,  but  without 
spring-water;  one  of  the  few  sites  about  which  there  is  no  dispute,  in 
the  entrance  to  the  valley  between  Ebal  and  Gerizim. 

sat  thus  on  the  ivcll]  Or,  'Was  sitting  thus  (just  as  He  was)  by  the 
spring.  All  these  details  mark  tlie  report  as  of  one  who  had  full 
information. 

about  the  sixth  hour]  See  on  i.  39.  This  case  again  is  not  decisive 
as  to  S.  John's  mode  of  reckoning  the  hours.  On  the  one  hand,  noon 
was  an  unusual  hour  for  drawing  water.  On  the  other,  a  woman  whose 
life  was  under  a  cloud  [v.  18)  might  select  an  unusual  hour;  and  at 
6  P.M.  numbers  would  probably  have  been  coming  to  draw,  and  the 
conversation  would  have  been  disturbed.  Again,  after  6  p.  M.  there 
would  be  rather  short  time  for  all  that  follows.  These  two  instances 
(i.  39  and  this)  lend  no  strong  support  to  the  antecedently  improbable 
theory  that  S.  John's  method  of  counting  the  hours  is  different  from  the 
Synoptists. 

7.  a  woman  of  Sama7-ia'\  i.e.  of  the  province;  not  of  the  city  of 
Samaria,  at  that  time  called  Sebaste,  in  honour  of  Augustus,  who  had 
given  it  to  Herod  the  Great.  Herod's  name  for  it  survives  in  the  modern 
Sebustieh.  A  woman  of  the  city  of  Samaria  would  not  have  come  all 
that  distance  to  fetch  water.     In  legends  this  woman  is  called  Photina. 

Give  tne  to  drink]  Quite  literal,  as  the  next  verse  shews.  He  asked 
her  for  refreshment  because  His  disciples  had  gone  away.  'Give  me  the 
spiritual  refreshment  of  thy  conversion '  is  a  meaning  read  into  the  words 
and  not  found  in  them. 


io8  S.   JOHN,    IV.  [vv.  9- 1 1. 

9  were  gone  away  unto  the  city  to  buy  meat.)  Then  saith 
the  woman  of  Samaria  unto  him,  How  is  it  that  thou,  being 
a  Jew,  askest  drink  of  me,  which  am  a  woman  of  Samaria  ? 

'°  For  the  Jews  have  no  deaHngs  with  the  Samaritans.  Jesus 
answered  and  said  unto  her,  If  thou  knewest  the  gift  of 
(iod,  and  who  it  is  that  saith  to  thee.  Give  me  to  drink ; 
thou  wouldest  have  asked  of  him,  and  he  would  have  given 

■  I  thee  Hving  water.  The  woman  saith  unto  him.  Sir,  thou 
hast  nothing  to  draw  with,  and  the  well   is   deep :    from 

8.  to  buy  mcat'\  i.  e.  food,  not  necessarily  flesh.  The  meat-offering 
was  tine  flour  and  oil  without  any  flesh.  Lev.  ii.  i.  The  Greek  word 
here  means  'nourishment.' 

9.  woman  of  Samaria]  In  both  places  in  this  verse  we  should 
rather  have  Samaritan  woman :  the  Greek  is  not  the  same  as  in  v.  7. 
The  adjective  lays  stress  011  the  national  and  religious  characteristics. 
For  'then'  read  therefore,  as  in  v.  5. 

How  is  iV]  Feminine  pertness.  She  is  half-amused  and  half- 
triumphant. 

being  a  J  civ]  She  knew  Him  to  be  such  by  His  dress  and  by  His 
language. 

for  the  Jnvs,  &c.]  Omit  the  articles;  for  Jews  have  no  dealings  with 
Samaritans.  This  is  a  remark,  not  of  the  woman,  but  of  S.  John,  to 
explain  the  woman's  question.  As  He  was  on  his  way  from  Jenisalem 
she  probably  thought  He  was  a  Judaean.  The  Galileans  seem  to  have 
been  less  strict ;  and  hence  His  disciples  went  to  buy  food  of  Samaritans. 
Some  important  authorities  omit  tlie  remark. 

10.  the  gift  of  God}  What  lie  is  ready  to  give  thee,  what  is  now 
held  out  to  thee,  thy  salvation.  For  'knewest'  read  hadst  known. 
Comp.  xi.  21,  32,  xiv.  28,  where  we  have  the  same  construction;  and 
contrast  v.  46  and  viii.  19,  where  the  A.  V.  makes  the  converse  mistake 
of  translating  imperfects  as  if  they  were  aorists. 

thou  wouldest  have  asked  of  hi//!]  instead  of  His  asking  of  thee: 
•thou'  is  emphatic.  'Spiritually  our  positions  are  reversed.  It  is 
thou  who  art  weary,  and  foot-sore,  and  parched,  close  to  the  well,  yet 
unable  to  drink ;  it  is  I  who  can  give  thee  the  water  from  the  well,  and 
quench  thy  thirst  for  ever.'  There  is  a  scarcely  doubtful  reference  to 
this  passage  in  the  Ignatian  Epistles,  Ko/nans,  vii.  See  on  vi.  33,  to 
which  there  is  a  clear  reference  in  this  same  chapter.  The  passage  with 
these  references  to  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  found  in  the  Syriac  as  well  as 
in  the  shorter  Greek  versions  of  Ignatius;  so  that  we  have  almost  certain 
evidence  of  this  Gospel  being  known  as  early  as  A.  D.  115.  See  on 
iii.  3. 

11.  ^■/r]  A  decided  change  from  the  pert  'How  is  it?'  in  v.  9.  His 
words  and  manner  already  begin  to  impress  her. 

the  well  is  deep]  Not  the  same  word  for  'well'  as  in  v.  6.  There  the 
spring  in  the  well  is  the  chief  feature:  here  it  is  rather  the  deej>  hole 


vv.  12—14.]  S.   JOHN,   IV.  109 

whence  then  hast  thou  that  living  water  ?    Art  thou  greater  12 
than  our  father  Jacob,  which  gave  us  the  well,  and  drank 
thereof  himself,  and  his  children,  and   his   cattle?    Jesus  13 
answered  and  said  unto  her.  Whosoever  drinketh   of  this 
water  shall   thirst  again :    but  whosoever  drinketh  of  the  14 

in  which  the  spring  was.     Earlier  travellers  have  called  it  over  a  100 
feet  deep :  at  the  present  time  it  is  about  75  feet  deep. 

that  living  ■water'\  Better,  the  living  7vater,  of  which  Thou  speakest. 
She  thinks  He  means  spring-water  as  distinct  from  cistern-water. 
Comp.  Jer.  ii.  13,  where  the  two  are  strongly  contrasted.  In  Gen.  xxvi. 
19,  as  the  margin  shews,  'springing  water'  is  literally  'living  water,' 
viva  aqna.  What  did  Christ  mean  by  the  'living  water?'  Among  the 
various  answers  we  may  at  once  set  aside  any  reference  to  baptism. 
Faith,  God's  grace  and  truth,  Christ  Himself,  are  other  answers.  The 
difference  between  them  is  at  bottom  not  so  great  as  appears  on  the 
surface,  Christ  here  uses  the  figure  of  water,  as  elsewhere  of  bread 
(vi.)  and  light  (viii.  12),  the  three  most  necessary  things  for  life.  But 
lie  does  not  here  idc7itify  Himself  with  the  living  water,  as  He  does 
with  the  Bread,  and  the  Light:  therefore  it  seems  better  to  understand 
the  living  water  as  the  'grace  and  truth'  of  which  He  is  full  (i.  14). 
Comp.  Ecclus.  XV.  3;  Baruch  iii.  12. 

12.  Art  thoic  greater']  'Thou'  is  very  emphatic;  Stirely  Thou  art 
not  greater.  Comp.  viii.  53.  The  loquacity  of  the  woman  as  con- 
trasted with  the  sententiousness  of  Nicodemus  is  very  natural,  while  on 
the  other  hand  she  shews  a  similar  perverseness  in  misunderstanding 
spiritual  metaphors. 

our  father  Jacob]  The  Samaritans  claimed  to  be  descended  from 
Joseph;  with  how  much  justice  is  a  question  very  much  debated. 
Some  maintain  that  they  were  of  purely  heathen  origin,  although  they 
were  driven  by  calamity  to  unite  the  worship  of  Jehovah  with  their  own 
idolatries:  and  this  view  seems  to  be  in  strict  accordance  with  2  Kings 
xvii.  23 — 41.  Renegade  Jews  took  refuge  among  them  from  time  to 
time;  but  such  immigrants  would  not  affect  the  texture  of  the  nation 
more  than  the  French  refugees  among  ourselves.  Others  hold  that  the 
Samaritans  were  from  the  first  a  mongrel  nation,  a  mixture  of  heathen 
colonists  with  Jewish  inhabitants,  left  behind  by  Shalmaneser.  But 
there  is  nothing  to  shew  that  he  did  leave  any  behind  (2  Kings 
xviii.  11);  Josephus  says  {Attt.  IX.  xiv.  i)  that  'he  transplanted  a// the 
people.'  When  the  Samaritans  asked  Alexander  the  Great  to  excuse 
them  from  tribute  in  the  Sabbatical  year,  because  as  true  sons  of 
Joseph  they  did  not  till  their  land  in  the  seventh  year,  he  pronounced 
their  claim  an  imposture,  and  destroyed  Samaria.  Our  Lord  calls  a 
Samaritan  a  'stranger'  (Luke  xvii.  18),  literally  'one  of  a  different 
race.' 

which  gave  us  the  well]  This  has  no  foundation  in  Scripture,  but  no 
doubt  was  a  Samaritan  tradition.  She  means,  the  well  was  good  enough 
for  him,  and  is  good  enough  for  us;  hast  Thou  a  better? 


no  S.   JOHN,    IV.  [vv.  15—20. 

water  that  I  shall  give  him  shall  never  thirst ;  but  the  water 
that  I  shall  give  him  shall  be  in  him  a  well  of  water  spring- 
is  ing  up  into  everlasting  life.     The  w-oman  saith  unto  him, 
Sir,  give  me  this  water,  that   I   thirst   not,  neither   come 
,6  hither  to  draw.     Jesus  saith  unto  her,  Go,  call  thy  husband, 

17  and  come  hither.     The  woman  answered  and  said,  I  have 
no  husband.     Jesus  said  unto  her,  Thou  hast  well  said,  I 

18  have  no  husband  :  for  thou  hast  had  five  husbands  ;  and  he 
whom  thou  now  hast  is  not  thy  husband  :    in  that   saidst 

19  thou  truly.     The  woman  saith  unto  him,  Sir,  I  perceive  that 

20  thou  art  a  prophet.     Our  fathers  worshipped  in  this  moun- 

13.  14.  Christ  leaves  her  question  unanswered,  like  that  of  Nicodemus 
(iii.  4,  5),  and  passes  on  to  develop  the  metaphor  rather  than  explain 
it,  contrasting  the  literal  with  the  figurative  sense.     Comp.  iii.  6. 

14.  shall  7iever  tliirst\  Literally,  Will  certainly  not  tMrst  for  ever, 
for  the  craving  is  satisfied  as  soon  as  ever  it  recurs.      See  on  viii.  51. 

springing  up  into  everlasting  lifc\  Not  that  eternal  life  is  some 
yi//?^r^  result  to  be  realised  hereafter;  it  is  the  immediate  result.  The 
soul  in  which  the  living  water  flows  has  eternal  life.  See  on  v,  36  and 
iii.  t6. 

15.  She  still  does  not  understand,  but  does  not  wilfully  misunder- 
stand. This  wonderful  water  will  at  any  rate  be  worth  having,  and  she 
asks  quite  sincerely  (not  ironically)  for  it.  Had  she  been  a  Jew,  she 
could  scarcely  have  thus  misunderstood,  this  metaphor  of  '  water'  and 
'  living  water '  is  so  frequent  in  the  Prophets.  Comp.  Isa.  xii.  3,  xliv.  3; 
Jer.  ii.  13;  Zech.  xiii.  i,  xiv.  8.  But  the  Samaritans  rejected  all  but 
the  Pentateuch. 

to  dra7a]    Same  word  as  in  ii.  8,  9;  peculiar  to  this  Gospel. 

18.  Go,  call  thy  Iiusband'\  Not  tliat  the  man  was  wanted,  either  as 
a  concession  to  Jewish  propriety,  which  forbad  a  Rabl)i  to  talk  with  a 
woman  alone,  or  for  any  other  reason.  By  a  seemingly  casual  request 
Christ  lays  hold  of  her  inner  life,  convinces  her  of  sin,  and  leads 
her  to  repentance,  without  which  her  request,  'Give  me  this  water,' 
could  not  be  granted.  The  husband  who  was  no  husband  was  the 
plague-spot  where  her  healing  must  begin. 

17.  hast  well  said~\  i.e.  saidst  rightly.  Comp.  viii.  48;  Matt.  xv. 
7;  Luke  xx.  39.     There  is  perhaps  a  touch  of  irony  in  the  'well.' 

18.  five  husbands^  To  be  understood  quite  liter.ally.  They  were 
cither  dead  or  divorced,  and  she  was  now  living  with  a  man  without 
being  married  to  him. 

in  that  saidst  thou  trulyl  Better,  this  (one  thing)  thou  hast  saA^  truly. 
Christ  exposes  the  falsehood  which  lurks  in  the  literal  truth  of  her 
statement. 

19.  a  prophet^  One  divinely  inspired  with  supernatural  knowledge, 
I  Sam.  ix.  9.     Note  the  gradual  change  in  her  attitude  of  mind  towards 


V.  21.]  S.   JOHN,   IV.  Ill 

tain ;  and  ye  say,  that  in  Jerusalem  is  the  place  where  men 
ought  to  worship.     Jesus  saith   unto  her,  Woman,  believe  n 
me,  the  hour  cometh,  when  ye  shall  neither  in  this  moun- 

Him.  First,  off-hand  pertness  (v.  9);  then,  respect  to  His  gravity  of 
manner  and  serious  words  (z/.  11);  next,  a  misunderstanding  belief  in 
what  He  says  {v.  15);  and  now,  reverence  for  Him  as  a  '  man  of  God.' 
Comp.  the  parallel  development  of  faith  in  the  man  born  blind  (see  on 
ix.  11)  and  in  Martha  (see  on  xi.  21). 

20.  Convinced  that  He  can  read  her  life  she  shrinks  from  inspection 
and  hastily  turns  the  conversation  from  herself.  In  seeking  a  new 
subject  she  naturally  catches  at  one  of  absorbing  interest  to  every 
Samaritan.  Mount  Gerizim  shorn  of  its  temple  suggests  the  great 
national  religious  question  ever  in  dispute  between  them  and  the  Jews. 
Here  was  One  who  could  give  an  authoritative  answer  about  it;  she 
will  ask  Him.  To  urge  that  such  a  woman  would  care  nothing  about 
the  matter  is  unsound  reasoning.  Are  irreligious  people  never  keen 
about  religious  questions  now-a-days?  Does  an  immoral  life  destroy  all 
interest  in  Romanism,  Ritualism,  and  the  like? 

in  this  ?noimtaiii\  Gerizim ;  her  not  naming  it  is  very  lifelike.  The 
Samaiitans  contended  that  here  Abraham  offered  up  Isaac,  and  after- 
wards met  Melchisedek.  The  former  is  more  credible  than  the  latter. 
A  certain  Manasseh,  a  man  of  priestly  family,  married  the  daughter  of 
Sanballat  the  Horonite  (Neh.  xiii.  28),  and  was  thereupon  expelled 
from  Jerusalem.  He  fled  to  Samaria  and  helped  Sanballat  to  set  up  a 
rival  worship  on  Gerizim.  It  is  uncertain  whether  the  temple  on 
Gerizim  was  built  then  (about  B.C.  410)  or  a  century  later;  but  it  was 
destroyed  by  John  Hyrcanus  B.C.  130,  after  it  had  stood  200  years  or 
more.  Yet  the  Samaritans  in  no  way  receded  from  their  claims,  but 
continue  their  worship  on  Gerizim  to  the  present  day. 

ye  say'\  Unconsciously  she  admits  that  One,  whom  she  has  just  con- 
fessed to  be  a  Prophet,  is  against  her  in  the  controversy.  Comp. 
Deut.  xii.  13. 

21 — 24.  "We  shall  surely  be  justified  in  attributing  the  wonderful 
words  of  verses  21,  23,  24,  to  One  greater  even  than  S.  John.  They 
seem  to  breathe  the  spirit  of  other  worlds  than  ours — *  of  worlds  whose 
course  is  equable  and  pure;'  where  media  and  vehicles  of  grace  are  un- 
needed,  and  the  soul  knows  even  as  it  is  known.  There  is  nothing  so  - 
like  them  in  their  sublime  infinitude  of  comprehension,  and  intense 
penetration  to  the  deepest  roots  of  things,  as  some  of  the  sayings  in  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount  (Matt.  v.  45,  vi.  6).  It  is  words  like  these  that 
strike  home  to  the  hearts  of  men,  as  in  the  most  literal  sense  Divine. " 
S.  p.  95. 

21.  believe  me]  This  formula  occurs  here  only ;  thi  usual  one  is  '  I 
say  unto  you.' 

ike  hour  cometh]  No  article  in  the  Greek;  there  cometh  an  hour. 
Christ  decides  neither  for  nor  against  either  place.  The  utter  ruin  on 
Gerizim  and  the  glorious  building  at  Jerusalem  will  soon  be  on  an 
equality.     Those  who  would  worship  the  Father  must  rise  above  such 


112  S.   JOHN,    IV.  [vv.  22,  23. 

22  tain,  norj<?/at  Jerusalem,  worship  the  Father.     Ye  worship 
ye  know  not  what :  we  know  what  we  worship  :  for  salvation 

23  is  of  the  Jews.     But  the  hour  cometh,  and  now  is,  when  the 
true  worshippers  shall  worship  the  Father  in  spirit  and  in 

distinctions  of  place.     A  time  is  coming  when  all  limitations  of  worship 
will  disappear. 

22.  ye  know  not  what']  Or,  that  which  ye  know  not.  The  Samaritan 
religion,  even  after  being  purified  from  the  original  mixture  with  idolatry 
(2  Kings  xvii.  33,  41),  remained  a  mutilated  religion;  the  obscurity  of 
the  Pentateuch  (and  of  that  a  garbled  text)  unenlightened  by  the  clearer 
revelations  in  the  Prophets  and  other  books  of  O.T.  Such  a  religion 
when  contrasted  with  that  of  the  Jews  might  well  be  called  ignorance. 

we  know  what  we  worships  Or,  we  worship  that  which  we  know. 
The  first  person  plural  here  is  not  similar  to  that  in  iii.  1 1  (see  note  there), 
though  some  would  take  it  so.  Christ  here  speaks  as  a  Jew,  and  in 
such  a  passage  there  is  nothing  surprising  in  His  so  doing.  As  a  rule 
Christ  gives  no  countenance  to  the  view  that  He  belongs  to  the  Jewish 
nation  in  any  special  way,  though  the  Jewish  nation  specially  belongs  to 
Him  (i.  ii):  He  is  the  Saviour  of  the  world,  not  of  the  Jews  only. 
But  here,  where  it  is  a  question  whether  Jew  or  Samaritan  has  the 
larger  share  of  religious  truth,  He  ranks  Himself  both  by  birth  and 
by  religion  among  the  Jews.     'We,'  therefore,  means  'we  Jews.' 

salvation  is  of  the  'Jcivs'\  Literally,  the  salvation.,  the  expected  salva- 
tion, is  of  the  yews;  i.e.  proceeds  from  them  (not  belongs  to  \\\tvcv),  in 
virtue  of  the  promises  to  Abraham  (Gen.  xii.  3,  xviii.  18,  xxii.  18)  and 
Isaac  (xxvi.  4).  This  verse  is  absolutely  fatal  to  the  theory  that  this 
Gospel  is  the  work  of  a  Gnostic  Greek  in  the  second  century  (see  on 
xix.  35).  That  salvation  proceeded  from  the  Jews  contradicts  the  fun- 
damental principle  of  Gnosticism,  that  salvation  was  to  be  sought  in  the 
higher  knowledge  of  which  Gnostics  had  the  key.  Hence  those  who 
uphold  such  a  theory  of  authorship  assume,  in  defiance  of  all  evidence, 
that  this  verse  is  a  later  interpolation.  The  verse  is  found  in  all  MSS. 
and  versions. 

23.  the  hour  cotncth']  As  before,  there  cometh  an  hour.  What 
follows,  and  it  is  now  here,  could  not  be  added  in  v.  21.  The  local 
worship  on  Gerizim  and  Zion  must  still  contuiue  for  a  while;  but  there 
are  already  a  few  who  are  rising  above  these  externals  to  the  spirit  of 
true  worship,  in  which  the  opposition  between  Jew  and  Samaritan 
disappears. 

the  true  worshippers']  The  same  word  for  'true'  as  in  i.  9  (see  note 
there);  'true'  as  opposed  to  what  is  'spurious'  and  'unreal.'  Worship 
to  be  genuine,  real,  and  perfect  must  be  offered  in  spirit  and  truth. 

in  spirit]  This  is  opposed  to  all  that  is  carnal,  material,  and  of  the 
earth  earthy; — 'this  mountain,'  the  Temple,  limitations  of  time  and 
place.  Not  that  such  limitations  are  wrong  ;  but  they  are  not  of  the 
essence  of  religion,  and  become  wrong  when  they  are  mistaken  for  the 
essence  of  religion. 


vv.  24— 26.]  S.   JOHN,    IV.  113 

truth  :  for  the  Father  seeketh  such  to  worship  him.     God  is  24 
a  Spirit :  and  they  that  worship  him  must  worship  him  in 
spirit  and  in  truth.     The  woman  saith  unto  him,  I  know  25 
that  Messias  cometh,  which  is  called  Christ :    when  he  is 
come,  he  will  tell  us  all  things.     Jesus  saith  unto  her,  I  that  26 
speak  unto  thee  am  he. 

in  truth\  (Omit  'in')  i.e.  in  harmony  with  the  Nature  and  Will  of 
God.  In  the  sphere  of  intellect,  this  means  recognition  of  His  Pre- 
sence and  Omniscience ;  in  the  sphere  of  action,  conformity  with  His 
absolute  Holiness.  'Worship  in  spirit  and  truth,'  therefore,  implies 
prostration  of  the  inmost  soul  before  the  Divine  Perfection,  submission 
of  every  thought  and  feeling  to  the  Divine  Will. 

for  the  Father  seeketh,  &c.]  Better,  for  such  the  Father  also  seeketh 
for  His  worshippers.  '  Such'  is  very  emphatic;  'this  is  the  character 
which  He  also  desires  in  His  worshippers.'  The  'also'  must  not  be 
lost.  That  worship  should  be  'in  spirit  and  truth'  is  required  by  the 
fitness  of  things:  moreover  God  Himself  desires  to  have  it  so,  and 
works  for  this  end.  Note  how  three  times  in  succession  Christ  speaks 
of  God  as  the  Father  (vv.  11,  23) :  perhaps  it  was  quite  a  new  aspect 
of  Him  to  the  woman. 

24.  God  is  spirit,  and  must  be  approached  in  that  part  of  us  which 
is  spirit,  in  the  true  temple  of  God,  '  which  temple  ye  are.'  Even  to 
the  chosen  three  Christ  imparts  no  truths  more  profound  than  these. 
He  admits  this  poor  schismatic  to  the  very  fountain-head  of  religion. 

25.  Alessias']  See  note  on  i.  41.  There  is  nothing  at  all  improbable 
in  her  knowing  the  Jewish  name  and  using  it  to  a  Jew.  The  word 
being  so  rare  in  N.T.  we  are  perhaps  to  understand  that  it  was  the 
very  word  used;  but  it  may  be  S.  John's  equivalent  for  what  she  said. 
Comp.  V.  29.  Throughout  this  discourse  it  is  impossible  to  say  how 
much  of  it  is  a  translation  of  the  very  words  used,  how  much  merely 
the  substance  of  what  was  said.  S.  John  would  obtain  his  information 
from  Christ,  and  possibly  from  the  woman  also  during  their  two  days' 
stay.  The  idea  that  S.  John  was  left  behind  by  the  disciples,  and 
heard  the  conversation,  is  against  the  whole  tenour  of  the  narrative  and 
is  contradicted  by  w.  8  and  27. 

xvhich  is  called  Christ']  Probably  a  parenthetic  explanation  of  the 
Evangelist's  (but  contrast  i.  41),  not  the  woman's.  The  Samaritan 
name  for  the  expected  Saviour  was  'the  Returning  One,'  or  (according 
to  a  less  probable  derivation)  'the  Converter.'  'The  Returner'  points 
to  the  belief  that  Moses  was  to  appear  again. 

-wheft  he  is  come\  Or,  when  He  comes.  'He'  is  in  emphatic  con- 
trast to  other  teachers. 

all  things]     In  a  vague  colloquial  sense. 

26.  am  he]  This  is  correct,  although  '  He'  is  not  expressed  in  the 
Greek.  It  is  the  ordinary  Greek  affirmative  (comp.  Luke  xxii.  70) ; 
there  is  no  reference  to  the  Divine  name  'I  AM,'  Ex.  iii.  14;  Deut. 
xxxii.  39.     This  open  declaration  of  His  Messiahship  is  startling  wher 

s.  JOHN  8 


114  S.   JOHN,    IV.  [vv.  27— 31. 

27  And  upon  this  came  his  disciples,  and  marvelled  that  he 
talked  with  the  woman  :    yet  no  man  said,  What  seekest 

i8  thou?  or,  Why  talkest  thou  with  her?  The  woman  then 
left  her  waterpot,  and  went  her  way  into  the  city,  and  saith 

29  to  the  men,  Come,  see  a  man,  which  told  me  all  things  that 

30  ever  I  did  :  is  not  this  the  Christ  ?  Then  they  went  out  of 
the  city,  and  came  unto  him. 

31  In   the   mean   while   his   disciples   prayed   him,   saying, 


we  remember  Matt.  xvi.  20,  xvii.  9;  Mark  viii.  30.  But  one  great 
reason  for  reserve  on  this  subject,  lest  the  people  should  '  take  him  by 
force  to  make  him  a  king'  (vi.  15),  is  entirely  wanting  here.  There 
was  no  fear  of  the  Samaritans  making  political  capital  out  of  Him. 
Moreover  it  was  one  thing  for  Christ  to  avow  Himself  when  He  saw 
that  hearts  were  ready  for  the  announcement;  quite  another  for  disci- 
ples and  others  to  make  Him  known  promiscuously. 

27.  talked  with  the  womaii\  Rather,  was  talking  with  a  woman, 
contrary  to  the  precepts  of  the  Rabbis.  '  Let  no  one  talk  with  a  wo- 
man in  the  street,  no  not  with  his  own  wife.'  The  woman's  being  a 
Samaritan  would  increase  their  astonishment. 

What  seekest  thou  ?]  Probably  both  questions  are  addressed  (hypo- 
thelically)  to  Christ;  not  one  to  the  woman,  and  the  other  to  Him. 

28.  The  wotnan  then']  Better,  The  wo/nan  therefore;  because  of 
the  interruption. 

left  her  •waterpot]  Same  word  for  'waterpot'  as  in  the  miracle  at 
Cana,  and  used  nowhere  else.  Her  leaving  it  shews  that  her  errand  is 
forgotten,  or  neglected  as  of  no  moment  compared  with  what  now  lies 
before  her.  This  graphic  touch  comes  from  one  who  was  there,  and 
saw,  and  remembered. 

29.  all  things  that  ever  I  did]  How  natural  is  this  exaggeration  ! 
In  her  excitement  she  states  not  what  He  had  really  told  her,  but  wliat 
she  is  convinced  He  could  have  told  her.  Comp.  'all  men'  in  iii.  2C1, 
and  'no  man'  in  iii.  32.  This  strong  language  is  in  all  three  cases 
thoroughly  in  keeping  with  the  circumstances. 

is  not  this  the  Christ?]  Rather,  Is  this,  can  this  be,  the  Christ?  A 
similar  error  occurs  xviii.  17,  25.  Although  she  believes  it  she  thinks  it 
almost  too  good  to  lie  true.  Moreover  she  does  not  wish  to  seem  too 
positive  and  dogmatic  to  those  who  do  not  yet  know  the  eviilence. 
The  form  of  question  is  similar  to  that  in  v.  33 :  both  are  put  in  a  form 
that  anticipates  a  negative  answer ;  ;/«;«  not  no/ine. 

30.  went  out and  came]  Literally,  went  out rtM(/ were  com- 
ing. The  change  of  tense  from  aorist  to  imperfect  gives  vividness. 
We  are  to  see  them  coming  along  across  the  fields  as  we  listen  to  the 
conversation  that  follows,  31  —  38. 

31.  In  the  mean  while]  Between  the  departure  of  the  women  and 
the  arrival  of  her  fellow-townsmen. 


vv.  32— 36.]  S.   JOHN,    IV.  115 

Master,  eat.     But  he  said  unto  them,  I  have  meat  to  eat  32 
that  ye  know  not  of.     Therefore  said  the  disciples  one  to  33 
another,  Hath  any  man  brought  him  ought  to  eat  ?     Jesus  34 
saith  unto  them.  My  meat  is  to  do  the  will  of  him  that 
sent  me,  and  to  finish  his  work.     Say  not  ye,  There  are  35 
yet  four  months,  and  then  cometh  harvest?  behold,  I   say 
unto  you.  Lift  up  your  eyes,  and  look  on  the.  fields ;  for 
they  are  white  already  to  harvest.     And  he  that   reapeth  36 

Master,  mi]  Better,  Rabbi,  eat.  Here  and  in  ix.  7  and  xi.  8  our 
translators  have  rather  regrettably  turned  'Rabbi'  into  'Master,'  (comp. 
Matt.  xxvi.  ■25,  49;  Mark  ix.  5,  xi.  21,  xiv.  45);  while  'Rabbi'  is 
retained  i.  38,  49,  iii.  2,  26,  vi.  25  (comp.  Matt,  xxiii.  7,  8).  Appa- 
rently their  principle  was  that  wherever  a  disciple  addresses  Christ, 
'Rabbi'  is  to  be  translated  'Master;'  in  other  cases  'Rabbi'  is  to  be 
retained;  thus  obscuring  the  view  which  the  disciples  took  of  their  own 
relation  to  Jesus.     He  was  their  Rabbi. 

32.  I  have  meat,  &c.]  The  pronouns  'I'  and  'ye'  are  emphatically 
opposed.  His  joy  at  the  woman's  conversion  prompts  Him  to  refuse 
food:  not  of  course  that  His  human  frame  could  do  without  it,  but 
that  in  His  delight  He  feels  for  the  moment  no  want  of  food. 

33.  Hath  any  man  brought  him]  The  emphasis  is  on  'brought.' 
'  Surely  no  one  hath  brought  Him  any  thing  to  eat.'  Another  instance 
of  dulness  as  to  spiritual  meaning.  In  ii.  20  it  was  the  Jews;  in  iii.  4 
Nicodemus;  in  z/.  11  the  Samaritan  woman;  and  now  the  disciples. 
Comp.  xi.  12,  xiv.  5.  These  candid  reports  of  what  tells  against  the 
disciples  add  to  the  trust  which  we  place  in  the  narratives  of  the  Evan- 
gelists. 

34.  My  meat  is  to  do  the  will,  &c.]  Literally,  My  food  is  that  I 
may  do  the  ivill  of  Him  that  sent  Me  and  thus  finish  His  work.  It  is 
Christ's  aim  and  purpose  that  is  His  food.  Comp.  v.  36,  viii.  56.  These 
words  recall  the  reply  to  the  tempter  '  man  doth  not  live  by  bread 
alone,'  and  the  reply  to  His  parents  '  Wist  ye  not  that  I  must  be  about 
my  Father's  business.'     Luke  iv.  4,  ii.  49. 

35.  Say  not ye\     The  pronoun  is  again  emphatic. 

There  are  yet  four  months,  &c.]  This  cannot  be  a  proverb.  No 
such  proverb  is  known ;  and  a  proverb  on  the  subject  would  have  to  be 
differently  shaped ;  e.g.  '  From  seedtime  to  harvest  is  four  months,'  or 
something  of  the  kind.  So  that  we  may  regard  this  saying  as  a  maik 
of  time.  Harvest  began  in  the  middle  of  Nisan  or  April.  Four 
months  from  that  would  place  this  event  in  the  middle  of  December: 
or,  if  (as  some  suppose)  this  was  a  year  in  which  an  extra  month  was 
inserted,  in  the  middle  of  January. 

are  white  already  to  harvest]  In  the  green  blades  just  shewing 
through  the  soil  the  faith  of  the  sower  sees  t'ne  white  ears  that  will 
soon  be  there.  So  also  in  the  flocking  of  these  ignorant  Samaritans  to 
Him  for  instruction  Christ  sees  the  abundant  harvest  of  souls  that  is 

8—2 


fi6  S.   JOHN,    IV.  [vv.  37— 39. 

receiveth  wages,  and  gathereth  fruit  unto  life  eternal :  that 

both  he  that  soweth  and  he  that  reapeth  may  rejoice  to- 

37  gether.     And  herein  is  that  saying  true,  One  soweth,  and 

3S  another   reapeth.     I    sent   you   to   reap   that  whereon    ye 

bestowed  no  labour :  other  men  laboured,  and  ye  are  entered 

33  into  their  labours.        And  many  of  the  Samaritans  of  that 

to  follow.  'Already'  is  the  last  word  in  the  Greek  sentence;  and  from 
very  ancient  times  there  has  been  a  doubt  whether  it  belongs  to  this 
sentence  or  the  next.  Some  of  the  best  MSS.  give  'aheady'  to  the 
next  sentence;  'already  he  that  reapeth  receiveth  wages.'  But  MS. 
authority  in  punctuation  is  not  of  much  weight.  The  received  punc- 
tuation is  perhaps  better;  'already'  at  the  end  of  v.  35  being  in 
emphatic  contrast  to  '  yet'  at  the  beginning  of  it. 

36.  %into  life  eterna[\  Another  small  change  without  reason  (comp. 
xii.  25,  xvi'.  3).  Our  translators  vary  between  'eternal  life,'  'life 
eternal,'  'everlasting  life,'  and  'life  everlasting'  (xii.  50).  The  Greek 
is  in  all  cases  the  same,  and  should  in  all  cases  be  translated  '  eternal 
life.'  See  on  iii.  16.  Here  '■into  eternal  life'  would  perhaps  be  better: 
'eternal  life'  is  represented  as  the  granary  into  which  the  fruit  is 
gathered,  not  the  future  result  of  the  gathering.  See  on  v.  14.  Comp. 
for  similar  imagery,  '  The  harvest  truly  is  plenteous,  but  the  labourers 
are  few,  Sic'     Matt.  ix.  37,  38. 

that  both\  i.e.  In  order  that  both:  shewing  that  this  was  God's  pur- 
pose and  intention. 

he  that  soiveth'\  Christ,  not  the  Prophets.  The  Gospel  is  not  the 
fruit  of  which  the  O.  T.  is  the  seed ;  rather  the  Gospel  is  the  seed  for 
which  the  O.  T.  prepared  the  ground. 

he  that  reapeth^    Christ's  ministers. 

37.  And  herein  is  that  saying  trtte]  Rather,  For  herein  is  the  say- 
i'^S  (pi'oved)  true,  i.e.  is  shown  to  be  the  genuine  proverb  capable  of 
realisation,  not  a  mere  empty  phrase.  'True'  is  opposed  to  'unreal' 
not  to  'lying.'  See  on  v.  23,  i.  9  and  vii.  28.  '  Herein  '  refers  to  what 
precedes:  comp.  xv.  8  and  'by  this'  which  represents  the  same  Greek 
in  xvi.  30. 

38.  I  sent  you,  &c.]  The  pronouns  are  again  emphatically  opposed, 
as  in  V.  32. 

other  men]  Christ,  the  Sower;  but  put  in  the  plural  to  balance  'ye' 
in  the  next  clause.  In  ?'.  37  both  are  jiut  in  the  singular  for  the  sake 
of  harmony;  'One  soweth'  (Christ),  'another  reapeth'  (the  disciples). 
All  the  verbs  in  this  verse  are  perfects  excepting  'sent;'  have  not 
laboured,  have  laboured,  have  entered. 

39.  many  of  the  Samaritans]  Strong  proof  of  the  truth  of  v.  35. 
These  Samaritans  outstrip  the  Jews,  and  even  the  Apostles,  in  their 
readiness  to  believe.  The  Jews  rejected  the  testimony  of  their  own 
Scriptures,  of  the  Baptist,  of  Christ's  miracles  and  teaching.  The 
Samaritans  accept  the  testimony  of  the  woman,  who  had  suddenly  be- 
come an  Apostle  to  her  countrymen. 


vv.  40— 44-]  S.   JOHN,    IV.  117 

city  believed  on  him  for  the  saying  of  the  woman,  which 
testified,  He  told  me  all  that  ever  I  did.  So  when  the  40 
Samaritans  were  come  unto  him,  they  besought  him  that 
he  would  tarry  with  them  :  and  he  abode  there  two  days. 
And  many  moe  believed  because  of  his  own  word ;  and  ^^ 
said  unto  the  woman.  Now  we  believe,  not  because  of  thy 
saying :  for  we  have  heard  him  ourselves,  and  know  that 
this  is  indeed  the  Christ,  the  Saviour  of  the  world. 

43 — 54.     The  Work  among  Galileatis. 

Now  after  two  days  he  departed  thence,  and  went  into  43 
Galilee.     For  Jesus  himself  testified,  that  a  prophet  hatli  no  44 

40.  besought  hini]  Or,  kept  beseeching  Him.  How  different  from 
His  own  people  at  Nazareth;  Matt.  xiii.  58;  Luke  iv.  29.  Comp.  the 
thankful  Samaritan  leper,  Luke  xvii.  16,  17. 

tarry  with  tliem\  Better,  atoide  zvith  them.  See  on  i.  33.  They  per- 
haps mean,  take  up  His  abode  permanently  with  them,  or  at  any  rate 
for  some  time. 

42.  thy  saying]  Not  the  same  word  as  in  v.  39,  the  Greek  for 
which  is  the  same  as  that  translated  'word'  in  v.  41.  Vv.  39  and  41 
should  be  alike,  viz.  'word,'  meaning  'statement'  in  v.  39  and  'teach- 
ing' in  V.  41.  Here  we  should  have  'speech'  or  'talk.'  In  classical 
Greek  lalia  has  a  slightly  uncomplimentary  turn,  'gossip,  chatter.'  But 
this  shade  of  meaning  is  lost  in  later  Greek,  though  there  is  perhaps  a 
slight  trace  of  it  here;  'not  because  of  thy  talk;'  but  this  being  doubt- 
ful, 'speech'  will  be  the  safer  translation.  The  whole  should  run,  no 
longer  is  it  because  of  thy  speech  that  we  believe.  In  viii.  43  lalia 
is  used  by  Christ  of  His  own  words ;  see  note  there. 

we  have  heard  him  ourselves]  Better,  we  have  heai-d  for  ourselves. 
There  is  no  'Him'  in  the  Greek.  'The  Christ'  is  also  to  be  omitted. 
It  is  wanting  in  the  best  MSS. 

the  Saviour  of  t)ie  world]  It  is  not  improbable  that  such  ready  hearers 
would  arrive  at  this  great  truth  before  the  end  of  those  two  days.  It 
is  therefore  unnecessary  to  suppose  that  S.  John  is  here  unconsciously 
giving  one  of  his  own  expressions  (i  John  iv.  14)  for  theirs. 

43—54.     The  Work  among  Galileans. 

43.  after  two  days]  Literally,  after  the  two  days  mentioned  in 
V.  40. 

and  went]     These  words  are  wanting  in  the  best  MSS. 

44.  For  Jesus  himself  testified]  This  is  a  well-known  difficulty.  As 
in  XX.  17,  we  have  a  reason  assigned  which  seems  to  be  the  very 
opposite  of  what  we  should  expect.  This  witness  of  Jesus  would 
account  for  His  not  going  into  Galilee:  how  does  it  account  for  His 
going  thither?      It  seems  best  to  fall  back  on  the  old  explanation  of 


ii8  S.   JOHN,    IV.  [vv.  45— 49. 

45  honour  in  his  own  country.  Then  when  he  was  come  into 
Gahlee,  the  GaUleans  received  him,  having  seen  all  the 
ihitigs  \\-\dX\iQ  did  at  Jerusalem  at  the  feast:  for  they  also 

46  went  unto  the  feast.  So  Jesus  came  again  into  Cana  of 
Galilee,  where  he  made  the  water  wine.  And  there  was 
a  certain  nobleman,  whose  son   was  sick   at   Capernaum. 

47  When  he  heard  that  Jesus  was  come  out  of  Judea  into 
Galilee,  he  went  unto  him,  and  besought  him  that  he  would 
come  down,  and  heal  his  son :  for  he  was  at  the  point  of 

48  death.     Then  said  Jesus  unto  him,  Except  ye  see  signs  and 
4y  wonders,  ye   will  not  believe.     The  nobleman  saith  unto 


Ori'T-en,  that  by  'his  own  countiy'  is  meant  Juclaea,  'the  home  of  the 
rrophets.'  Moreover,  Judaea  fits  in  with  the  circumstances.  He  had 
not  only  met  with  Httle  honour  in  Judaea;  He  had  been  forced  to 
retreat  from  it.  No  Apostle  had  been  found  there.  The  appeal  to 
Judaea  had  in  the  main  been  a  failure. 

45.  all  the  things  that  he  did]  Of  these  we  have  a  passing  notice  ii. 
-23.  'The  Feast'  means  the  Passover,  but  there  is  no  need  to  name  it, 
because  it  has  already  been  named,  ii.  -23. 

46.  tvhere  he  made  the  zvater  wine]  and  therefore  would  be  likely  to 
find  a  favourable  hearing.  For  '  So  Jesus  came '  read  He  caj/te  there- 
fore.    See  on  vi.  14. 

7iobleman'\  Literally,  kin^s  man,  i.e.  officer  in  the  service  of  the 
king,  Herod  Antipas ;  but  whether  in  a  civil  or  military  office,  there  is 
nothing  to  shew.  'Nobleman'  is,  therefore,  not  at  all  accurate:  the 
word  has  nothing  to  do  with  birth.  It  has  been  conjectured  that  this 
official  was  Cliuza  (Luke  viii.  3),  or  Manaen  (Acts  xiii.  i). 

47.  that  he  would  come  down]  Literally,  in  order  that  he  might 
eotne  do-cun  ;  comp.  v.  34,  v.  7,  36,  vi.  29,  50. 

at  Capernaum]  20  miles  or  more  from  Cana. 

48.  signs  and  tvonders]  Christ's  miracles  are  never  mere  '  wonders' 
to  excite  astonishment;  they  are  'signs'  of  heavenly  truths  as  well,  and 
this  is  their  primary  characteristic.  Where  these  two  words  are  joined 
together  'signs'  always  precedes,  excepting  four  passages  in  the  Acts, 
where  we  have  'wonders  and  signs.'  This  is  the  only  passage  in 
which  S.  John  uses  'wonders'  at  all.  In  ii.  11  the  word  translated 
'  miracles  '  is  the  same  as  the  one  here  translated  'signs.'     See  below, 

V.  54. 

ye  will  not  believe]  In  marked  contrast  to  the  ready  belief  of  the 
Samaritans.  The  form  of  negation  in  the  Greek  is  of  the  strong 
kind  ;  ye  will  in  no  wise  heliroe.  See  note  on  1  Cor.  i.  ir.  Faith  based 
on  miracles  is  of  a  low  type  comparatively,  but  Christ  does  not  reject  it. 
Comp.  X.  38,  xiv.  1 1,  XX.  29.  This  man's  faith  is  strengthened  by  being 
put  to  test.  The  words  are  evidently  addressed  to  him  and  those  about 
him,  and  they  imply  that  those  addressed  are  Jews. 


vv.  50-54.]  S.   JOHN,   IV. 


him,  Sir,  come  down  ere  my  child  die.     Jesus  saith  unto  so 
him,  Go  thy  way ;  thy  son  hveth.     And  the  man  beheved 
the  word  that  Jesus  had  spoken  unto  him,  and  he  went  his 
way.     And  as  he  was  now  going  down,  his  servants  met  51 
him,  and  told  hhn,  saying,  Thy  son  liveth.     Then  inquired  52 
he  of  them  the  hour  when  he  began  to  amend.     And  they 
said  unto  him,  Yesterday  at  the  seventh  hour  the  fever  left 
him.     So  the  father  knew  that  //  was  at  the  same  hour,  in  53 
the  which  Jesus  said  unto  him,  Thy  son  liveth:  and  himself 
believed,  and  his  whole  house.     This  is  again  the  second  54 

49.  ere  my  child  diel  This  shews  both  the  man's  faith  and  its 
weakness.  He  believes  that  Christ's  presence  can  save  the  child ; 
he  does  not  believe  that  He  can  save  him  without  being  present. 

50.  the  man  believed'^  The  father's  faith  is  healed  at  the  same  time 
as  the  son's  body. 

had spoken'\     Better,  spake;  aorist,  not  pluperfect. 

52.  began  to  atnend\  Or,  was  somewhat  better;  a  colloquial 
expression.  The  father  fancies  that  the  cure  will  be  gradual.  The 
fever  will  depart  at  Christ's  word,  but  will  depart  in  the  ordinary  way. 
He  has  not  yet  fully  realised  Christ's  power.  The  reply  of  the  servants 
shews  that  the  cure  was  instantaneous. 

Yesterday  at  the  seventh  hour]  Once  more  we  have  to  discuss  S.  John's 
method  of  counting  the  hours  of  the  day.  (See  on  i.  39  and  iv.  6.) 
Obviously  the  father  set  out  as  soon  after  Jesus  said  'thy  son  liveth'  as 
possible;  he  had  20  or  25  miles  to  go  to  reach  home,  and  he  would  not 
be  likely  to  loiter  on  the  v/ay.  7  A.M.  is  incredible;  he  would  have 
been  home  long  before  niglitfall,  and  the  servants  met  him  some  dis- 
tance from  home.  7  P.  M.  is  improbable  ;  the  servants  would  meet  him 
before  midnight.  Thus  the  modern  method  of  reckoning  from  midnight 
to  midnight  does  not  suit.  Adopting  the  Jewish  method  from  sunset  to 
sunset,  the  seventh  hour  is  i  p.  M.  He  would  scarcely  start  at  once  in  the 
mid-day  heat ;  nor  would  the  servants.  Supposing  they  met  him  after 
sunset,  they  might  speak  of  i  P.M.  as  '  yesterday.'  (But  see  on  xx.  19, 
where  S .  John  speaks  of  the  late  hours  of  the  evening  as  belonging  to 
the  day  be/ore  sunset.)  Still,  7  P.M.  is  not  impossible,  and  this  third  in- 
stance must  be  regarded  as  not  decisive.  But  the  balance  here  seems  to 
incline  to  what  is  antecedently  more  probable,  that  S.  John  reckons 
the  hours,  like  the  rest  of  the  Evangelists,  according  to  the  Jewish 
method. 

53.  himself  believed]  This  is  the  last  stage  in  the  growth  of  the 
man's  faith,  a  growth  which  S.  John  sketches  for  us  here  as  in  the  case 
of  the  Samaritan  woman.  In  both  cases  the  spiritual  development  is 
thoroughly  natural,  as  also  is  the  incidental  way  in  which  S.  John  places 
it  before  us. 

and  his  whole  house']    The  first  converted  family. 

54.  This  is  again  the  second,  &c.]     Rather,  This  again  as  a  second 


I20  S.   JOHN,   IV.  [v.  54. 

miracle  that  Jesus  did,  when  he  was  come  out  of  Judea  into 
Gahlee. 

miracle  (or  sign)  did  Jesus,  after  He  had  come  out  ofyudaea  into  Galilee. 
Both  first  and  second  had  similar  results :  the  first  confirmed  the  faith  of 
the  disciples,  the  second  that  of  this  official. 

The  question  whether  this  foregoing  narrative  is  a  discordant  account 
of  the  healing  of  the  centurion's  servant  (Matt.  viii.  5 ;  Luke  vii.  2)  has 
been  discussed  from  very  early  times,  for  Origen  and  Chrysostom  con- 
tend against  it.  Irenaeus  seems  to  be  in  favour  of  the  identification, 
but  we  cannot  be  sure  that  he  is.  He  says,  'He  healed  the  son  of  the 
centurion  though  absent  with  a  word,  saying.  Go,  thy  son  liveth.' 
Irenaeus  may  have  supposed  that  this  official  was  a  centurion,  01  'cen- 
turion '  may  be  a  slip.  Eight  very  marked  points  of  difference  be- 
tween the  two  narratives  have  been  noted.  Together  they  amount  to 
something  like  proof  that  the  two  narratives  cannot  refer  to  one  and  the 
same  fact,  unless  we  are  to  attribute  an  astonishing  amount  of  care- 
lessness or  misinformation  either  to  the  Synoptists  or  to  S.  John. 

(i)  Here  a  'king's  man'  pleads  for  his  son;  there  a  centurion  for  his 
servant. 

(2)  Here  he  pleads  in  person ;  there  the  Jewish  elders  plead  for 
him. 

(3)  Here  the  father  is  probably  a  Jew;  there  the  centurion  is  cer- 
tainly a  Gentile. 

(4)  Here  the  healing  words  are  spoken  at  Cana ;  there  at  Caper- 
naum. 

(5)  Here  the  malady  is  fever;  there  paralysis. 

(6)  Here  the  father  wishes  Jesus  to  come;  there  the  centurion  begs 
him  not  to  come. 

(7)  Here  Christ  does  not  go;  there  apparently  he  does. 

(8)  Here  the  father  has  weak  faith  and  is  blamed  (z/.  48);  there  the 
centurion  has  strong  faith  and  is  commended. 

And  what  difficulty  is  there  in  supposing  two  somewhat  similar 
miracles?  Christ's  miracles  were  'signs;'  they  were  vehicles  for  con- 
veying the  spiritual  truths  which  Christ  came  to  teach.  If,  as  is 
almost  certain.  He  often  repeated  the  same  instructive  sayings,  may  He 
not  sometimes  have  repeated  the  same  instructive  acts?  Here,  there- 
fore, as  in  the  case  of  the  cleansing  of  the  Temple  (ii.  13 — 17),  it 
seems  wisest  to  believe  that  S.  John  and  the  Synoptists  record  dilTerent 
events. 

Chaps.  V.— XI.    The  Work  among  mixkd  multiti;des, 
CHIEFLY  Jews. 

The  Work  now  becomes  a  conflict  between  Christ  and  "the  Jews;" 
for  as  Christ  reveals  Himself  more  fully,  the  opposition  between  Him 
and  the  ruling  party  becomes  more  intense;  and  the  fuller  revelation 
which  excites  the  hatred  of  His  opponents  serves  also  to  sift  the 
disciples;  some  turn  back,  others  are  strengthened  in  their  faith  by  what 
they  see  and  hear.     The  Evangelist  from  time  to  time  points  out  the 


V.  I.]  S.  JOHN,   V.  121 

Chaps.  V, — XI.     The  Work  among  mixed  inidtitiideSy 

chiefly  Jews. 

Chap.  V.     Christ  the  Source  of  Life. 

I — g.      The  Sign  at  the  Pool  of  Bethesda. 

After  this  there  was  a  feast  of  the  Jews;  and  Jesus  went  5 

opposite  results  of  Christ's  work:  comp.  vi.  60 — 71,  vii.  40 — 52,  ix. 
13—41,  X.  19,  21,  39—42,  xi.  45—57. 

Thus  far  we  have  had  the  announcement  of  the  Gospel  to  the  world, 
and  the  reception  it  is  destined  to  meet  with,  set  forth  in  four  typical 
instances;  Nathanael,  the  guileless  Israelite,  truly  religious  according 
to  the  light  allowed  him;  Nicodemus,  the  learned  ecclesiastic, skilled  in  the 
Scriptures,  but  ignorant  of  the  first  elements  of  religion ;  the  Samaritan 
tvoman,  immoral  in  life  and  schismatical  in  religion,  but  simple  in  heart 
and  readily  convinced;  and  the  royal  official,  weak  in  faith,  but  pro- 
gressing gradually  to  a  full  conviction.  But  as  yet  there  is  little  evi- 
dence of  hostility  to  Christ,  although  the  Evangelist  prepares  us  for  it 
(i.  II,  ii.  18 — 20,  iii.  18,  19,  26,  iv.  44).  Henceforth,  however,  hos- 
tility to  Him  is  manifested  in  every  chapter  of  this  division.  Two 
elements  are  placed  in  the  sharpest  contrast  tliroughout ;  the  Messiah's 
clearer  manifestation  of  His  Person  and  Work,  and  the  growing 
animosity  of  *  the  Jews'  in  consequence  of  it.  Two  miracles  form  the 
introduction  to  two  great  discourses:  two  miracles  illustrate  two  dis- 
courses. The  healing  at  Bethesda  and  the  feeding  of  the  5000  lead  to  dis- 
courses in  which  Christ  is  set  forth  as  the  Source  and  the  Stipport  of  Life 
(v.,  vi.).  Then  He  is  set  forth  as  the  Source  of  Truth  and  Light ;  and 
this  is  illustrated  by  His  giving  physical  and  spiritual  sight  to  the  blind 
(vii. — ix.).  Finally  He  is  set  forth  as  Love  under  the  figure  of  the  Good 
Shepherd  giving  His  life  for  the  sheep;  and  this  is  illustrated  by  the 
raising  of  Lazarus,  a  work  of  love  which  costs  Him  His  life  (x.,  xi.). 
Thus,  of  four  typical  miracles,  two  form  the  introduction  and  two  form 
the  sequel  to  great  discourses.  The  prevailing  idea  throughout  is  truth 
and  love  provoking  contradiction  and  enmity. 

Chap.  V.     Christ  the  Source  of  Life. 

In  chaps,  v.  and  vi.  the  word  'life'  occurs  18  times;  in  the  rest 
of  the  Gospel  18  times. 

This  chapter  falls  into  two  main  divisions ;  (i)  The  Sign  at  the  Pool  of 
Bethesda  and  its  Sequel  {^i — 16);  (2)  The  Discourse  on  the  Son  as  the 
Source  of  Life  (17 — 47). 

1 — 9.    The  Sign  at  the  Pool  of  Bethesda. 

1.  After  this'\  Better,  After  these  things,  a  more  indefinite  se- 
quence. 

a  feast  of  the  Jexvs\  This  is  the  reading  of  highest  authority,  although 
some  important  MSS.  read  ^  the  feast  of  the  Jews,'  probably  because 
from  very  early  times   this  feast   was   believed   to  be  the   Passover. 


122  S.   JOHN,   V.  [vv.  2,  3. 

2  up  to  Jerusalem.     Now  there  is  at  Jerusalem  by  the  sheep 
7fiar/:d  a,  pool,  which,  is  called  in  the   Hebrew  tongue  Be- 

3  thesda,  having  five  porches.     In  these  lay  a  great  multitude 


If  'a  feast'  is  the  true  reading,  this  alone  is  almost  conclusive  against 
its  being  the  Passover;  S.  John  would  not  call  the  Passover  'a  feast  of 
the  Jews.'  Moreover  in  all  other  cases  where  he  mentions  Passovers 
he  lets  us  know  that  they  are  Passovers  and  not  simply  feasts,  ii.  13, 
vi.  4,  xi.  55,  &c.  He  gives  us  three  Passovers;  to  make  this  a  fourth 
would  be  to  put  an  extra  year  into  our  Lord's  ministry  for  which 
scarcely  any  events  can  be  found,  and  of  which  there  is  no  trace  else- 
where. Almost  every  other  feast,  and  even  the  Day  of  Atonement, 
have  been  suggested;  but  the  only  one  which  fits  in  satisfactorily  is 
Purim.  We  saw  from  iv.  35  that  the  two  days  in  Samaria  were  eitlier 
in  December  or  January.  The  next  certain  date  is  vi.  4,  the  eve  of 
the  Passover,  i.  e.  April.  Purim,  which  was  celebrated  in  March 
(14th  and  15th  Adar),  falls  just  in  the  right  place  in  the  interval. 
This  feast  commemorated  the  deliverance  of  the  Jews  from  Haman, 
and  took  its  name  from  the  lois  which  he  caused  to  be  cast  (Esther  iii. 
7,  ix.  24,  ■26,  78).  It  was  a  boisterous  feast,  and  some  have  thought  it 
unlikely  that  Christ  would  have  anything  to  do  with  it.  But  we  are  not 
told  that  He  went  to  Jerusalem  in  order  to  keep  the  feast ;  Purim  might 
be  kept  anywhere.  More  probably  He  went  because  the  multitudes  at 
the  feast  would  afford  great  opportunities  for  teaching.  Moreover,  it 
does  not  follow  that  because  some  made  this  feast  a  scene  of  unseemly 
jollity,  therefore  Christ  would  discountenance  the  feast  itself. 

2.  there  is  at  yeriisaleni]  This  is  no  evidence  whatever  that  the 
Gospel  was  written  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  The  pool 
would  still  exist,  even  if  the  building  was  destroyed;  and  such  a  build- 
ing, as  being  of  the  nature  of  a  hospital,  would  be  likely  to  be  spared. 
Even  if  all  were  destroyed  the  present  tense  would  be  natural  here. 
See  on  xi.  18. 

by  the  sheep  market']  There  is  no  '  market '  in  the  Greek,  and  no 
reason  for  supposing  that  it  ought  to  be  supplied.  The  margin  is  pro- 
bably right:  s/ieep-gaXe.  We  know  from  Neh.  iii.  i,  32,  xii.  39  that 
there  was  a  sheep-gate;  so  called  probably  from  sheep  for  sacrifice  being 
sold  there.  It  was  near  the  Temple.  The  adjective  for  '  sheep-'  occurs 
nowhere  else  in  N.T.  but  here,  and  nowhere  in  O.T.  but  in  the 
passages  in  Neheniiah.  But  so  little  is  known  of  this  gate,  and  the 
ellipsis  of  'gate'  is  so  unparalleled  that  we  cannot  regard  this  explana- 
tion as  certain.  Another  translation  is  possible,  with  a  change  of  case 
in  the  word  for  pool ;  Now  there  is  in  Jerusalem,  by  the  sheep-pool,  a 
place  called  in  the  J L  brew  tongue  Bethesda. 

in  the  HebrrM  tongue\  '  Hebrew '  means  Aramaic,  the  language 
spoken  at  the  time,  not  the  old  Hebrew  of  the  Scriptures.  See  on 
XX.  16. 

Bethesda]  '  House  of  mercy,'  or  possibly  '  House  of  the  Portico,'  or 
again  '  of  the  Olive.'     The  name  Bethesda  does  not  occur  elsewhere. 


vv.  4-7-]  S.   JOHN,   V.  123 


of  impotent  folk^  of  blind,  halt,  withered,  waiting  for  the 
moving  of  the  water.     For  an  angel  went  down  at  a  certain  4 
season  into  the  pool,  and  troubled  the  water :  whosoever 
then  first  after  the  troubling  of  the  water  stepped  in,  was 
made  whole  of  whatsoever  disease  he  had.     And  a  certain  5 
man   was   there,   which  had  an  infirmity  thirty  and  eight 
years.     When   Jesus  saw  him  lie,  and  knew  that   he  had  6 
been  now  a  long  time  in  that  case,  he  saith  unto  him,  Wilt 
thou  be  made  whole  ?     The  impotent  ma7i  answered  him,  ^ 

The  traditional  identification  with  Birket  Israil  is  not  commonly  advo- 
cated now.  The  '  Fountain  of  the  Virgin '  is  an  attractive  identifica- 
tion, as  the  water  is  intermittent  to  this  day.  This  fountain  is  connected 
with  the  pool  of  Siloam,  and  some  think  that  Siloam  is  Bethesda. 
That  S.  John  speaks  of  Bethesda  here  and  Siloam  in  ix.  7,  is  not  con- 
ckisive  against  this :  for  Bethesda  might  be  the  name  of  the  building 
and  Siloam  of  the  pool;  and  the  Greek  for  'called'  here  is  strictly 
'called  in  addition''  or  'j?<mamed,'  as  if  the  place  had  some  other 
name. 

five  porches\  Or,  colonnades.  These  would  be  to  shelter  the  sick.  The 
place  seems  to  have  been  a  kind  of  charitable  institution. 

3.     lay  a  great  multitude^     Better,  were  lying  a  multitude. 

blind,  halt,  7vithered~\  These  are  the  special  kinds  of  '  impotent  folk.' 

waiting  for  the  moving  of  the  water']  These  words  and  the  whole  of 
V.  4  are  almost  certainly  an  interpolation,  though  a  very  ancient  one. 
They  are  omitted  by  the  best  MSS.  Other  important  MSS.  omit  v.  4 
or  mark  it  as  suspicious.  Moreover,  those  MSS.  which  contain  the 
passage  vary  very  much.  The  passage  is  one  more  likely  to  be  inserted 
without  authority  than  to  be  omitted  if  genuine ;  and  very  probably  it 
represents  the  popular  belief  with  regard  to  the  intermittent  bubbling 
of  the  healing  water,  first  added  as  a  gloss,  and  then  inserted  into  the 
text.  The  water  was  probably  mineral  in  its  elements,  and  the  people 
may  or  may  not  have  been  right  in  supposing  that  it  was  most  efficacious 
when  the  spring  was  most  violent. 

5.  which  had  an  infirmity,  &c.]  Literally,  ivho  had  passed  thirty- 
eight  years  in  his  infirmity.  Not  that  he  was  38  years  old;  evidently 
he  was  more;  but  he  had  had  this  malady  38  years. 

6.  kneti'X  Or,  perceived,  perhaps  supernaturally  (see  on  xvi.  19), 
but  He  might  learn  it  from  the  bystanders:  the  fact  was  very  likely 
notorious. 

Wilt  thou'?']  Or,  more  strongly.  Dost  thou  will?  Note  that  the 
man  does  not  ask  first.  Here  and  in  the  case  of  the  man  bom  blind 
(ix.),  as  also  of  Malchus'  ear  (Luke  xxii.  51),  Christ  heals  without  being 
asked  to  do  so.  Excepting  the  healing  of  the  royal  official's  son  all 
Christ's  miracles  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  are  spontaneous.  On  no  other 
occasion  does  Christ  ask  a  question  without  Ijeing  addressed  first:  why 
does  He  now  ask  a  question  of  which  the  answer  was  so  obvious? 


124 


S.   JOHN,   V.  [vv.  8— II. 

Sir,  I  have  no  man,  when  the  water  is  troubled,  to  put  me 
into  the  pool:  but  while  I  am  coming,   another  steppeth 

8  down  before  me.     Jesus  saith   unto   him,  Rise,   take   up 

9  thy  bed,  and  walk.  And  immediately  the  man  was  made 
whole,  and  took  up  his  bed,  and  walked  :  and  on  the  same 
day  was  the  sabbath. 

I  o — 1 6 .     T]ie  Sequel  of  the  Sign. 

10  The  Jews  therefore  said  unto  him  that  was  cured.  It  is 
the   sabbath  day  :    it  is   not  lawful  for  thee   to   carry  thy 

.1  bed.     He  answered  them.   He  that  made  me  whole,  the 


Probably  in  order  to  rouse  the  sick  man  out  of  his  lethargy  and  de- 
spondency. It  was  the  first  step  towards  the  man's  having  sufficient 
faith:  he  mr.st  be  inspired  with  some  expectation  of  being  cured. 
The  question  has  nothing  to  do  with  rehgious  scruples;  'Art  thou 
willing  to  be  made  whole,  although  it  is  the  Sabbath?' 

7.     /  have  no  man]     He  is  not  only  sick  but  friendless. 

is  troubled]  No  doubt  this  took  place  at  irregular  intervals,  else 
there  would  be  no  need  to  wait  and  watch  for  it. 

to  put  me  bito  the  pool]  Literally,  in  order  to  (iv.  47)  throw  me  into 
the  pool;  perhaps  implying  that  the  gusli  of  water  did  not  last  long  and 
there  was  no  time  to  be  lost  in  quiet  carrying.  But  in  this  late  tireek 
ballein  (  =  throw)  has  become  weakened  in  meaning.     Comp.  xiii.  2, 

XX*   2 ^" 

while  I  am  co7)iing]     Unaided,  and  therefore  slowly. 

another  steppeth  dowti]  This  seems  to  shew  that  tlie  place  where  the 
bubbling  appeared  was  not  large.  He  does  not  say  '  others  step  down 
before  me  :'  one  is  hindrance  enough. 

8.  Rise,  take  tip  thy  bed]  As  in  the  case  of  the  paralytic  (Mark 
ii.  9),  Christ  makes  no  enquiry  as  to  the  man's  faith.  Christ  knew 
that  he  had  faith ;  and  the  man's  attempting  to  rise  and  carry  his  bed 
after  ^8  years  of  impotency  was  an  open  confession  of  faith.  His  bed 
would  probably  be  only  a  mat  or  rug,  still  common  in  the  East. 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  discuss  whether  this  miracle  can  be  iden- 
tical with  the  healing  of  the  jiaralytic  let  down  through  the  roof  (Mall. 
ix.;  Mark  ii.;  Luke  v.).  Time,  place,  details  and  context  are  all  dif- 
ferent, especially  the  important  point  that  this  miracle  was  wrought  on 
the  Sabbath. 

10—16.    The  Sequel  of  the  Sign. 

10.  The  Javs]  The  hostile  party,  as  usual :  probably  members  of 
the  Sanhedrin  (see  on  i.  19).  They  ignore  the  cure  and  notice  only 
what  can  be  attacked.  They  had  the  letter  of  the  law  very  strongly  on 
their  side.  Comp.  Exod.  xxiii.  12,  xxxi.  14,  xxxv.  2,  3;  Num.  xv.  32; 
Neh.  xiii.  15;  and  especially  Jer.  xvii.  21. 

11.  He  that  made  me  whole]     The  man's  defiance  of  them  in  the 


w.  12—14.]  S.   JOHN,  V.  T25 

same  said  unto  me,  Take   up  thy  bed,  and  walk.     Then  12 
asked  they  him,  What  man  is  that  which  said  unto  thee, 
Take  up  thy   bed,  and  walk?     And  he  that  was  healed  13 
wist  not  who  it  was  :  for  Jesus  had  conveyed  himself  away, 
a  multitude  being  in  that  place.     Afterward  Jesus  findeth  m 
him  in  the  temple,  and  said  unto  him,  Behold,  thou  art 
made  whole :  sin  no  more,  lest  a  worse  thing  come  unto 

first  flush  of  his  recovered  health  is  very  natural.  He  means,  'if  He 
could  cure  me  of  a  sickness  of  38  years  He  had  authority  to  tell  me  to 
take  up  my  bed.'  They  will  not  mention  the  cure;  he  flings  it  in  their 
face.  There  is  a  higher  law  than  that  of  the  Sabbath,  and  higher 
authority  than  theirs,     Comp.  the  conduct  of  the  blind  man,  chap.  ix. 

the  same  said  unto  we]  Better,  'He  said  to  me,'  'He'  being  em- 
phatic: see  on  X.  i. 

12.  ]Vhat  man  is  that  ■which']  Better,  Wlio  is  tlie  man  that,  'man' 
being  contemptuous,  almost  = 'fellow.'  Once  more  they  ignore  the 
miracle,  and  attack  the  command.  They  ask  not,  '  Who  cured  thee, 
and  therefore  must  have  Divine  authority?'  but,  '  Who  told  thee  to 
break  the  Sabbath,  and  therefore  could  not  have  it?'  Christ's  com- 
mand was  perhaps  aimed  at  these  erroneous  views  about  the  Sabbath. 

13.  had  conveyed  himself  aivay]  Better,  withdrew.  Originally  the 
word  signified  'to  stoop  out  of  the  way  of,'  'to  bend  down  as  if  to 
avoid  a  blow.'  Here  only  in  N.T.  The  word  might  also  mean,  •jwfl;« 
out  of,'  which  would  be  a  graphic  expression  for  making  one's  way 
through  a  crowd. 

a  miiliitnde  being  in  that  place]  This  is  ambiguous.  It  may  explain 
either  why  Jesus  withdrew,  viz.  to  avoid  the  crowd,  or  how  he  with- 
drew, viz.  by  disappearing  among  the  crowd.     Both  make  good  sense. 

14.  Afteiivard]  Literally,  cyfter  these  things,  as  \n  v.  i.  Proba- 
bly the  same  day;  we  may  suppose  that  one  of  his  first  acts  after  his 
cure  would  be  to  offer  his  thanks  in  the  Temple.  On  vv.  13  and  14 
Augustine  writes,  'It  is  difficult  in  a  crowd  to  see  Christ;  a  certain 
solitude  is  necessary  for  our  mind ;  it  is  by  a  certain  solitude  of  con- 
templation that  God  is  seen He  did  not  see  Jesus  in  the  crowd,  he 

saw  Him  in  the  Temple.  The  Lord  Jesus  indeed  saw  him  both  in  the 
crowd  and  in  the  Temple.  The  impotent  man,  however,  does  not 
know  Jesus  in  the  crowd;  but  he  knows  Him  in  the  Temple.' 

sin  no  more]  Or  perhaps,  continue  no  longer  in  sin.  Comp.  [viii. 
II,]  XX.  17.  The  man's  conscience  would  tell  him  what  sin.  Comp. 
[viii.  7].  What  follows  shews  plainly  not  merely  that  physical  suffering 
in  the  aggregate  is  the  result  of  sin  in  the  aggregate,  but  that  this 
man's  38  years  of  sickness  were  the  result  of  his  own  sin.  This  was 
known  to  Christ's  heart-searching  eye  (ii.  24,  •25),  but  it  is  a  conclusion 
which  we  may  not  draw  without  the  clearest  evidence  in  any  given 
case.  Suffering  serves  other  ends  than  being  a  punishment  for  sin : 
'whom  the  Lord  loveth  He  chasteneth;'  and  comp.  ix.  3. 

a  worse  thing]    Not  necessarily  hell :  even  in  this  life  there  might  be 


126  S.   JOHN,   V.  [vv.  15-17. 

15  thee.     The  man  departed,  and  told  the  Jews  that  it  was 
Jesus,  which  had  made  him  whole. 

16  And  therefore  did  the  Jews  persecute  Jesus,  and  sought  to 
slay  him,  because  he  had  done  these  thmgs  on  the  sabbath  day. 

17 — 47.    The  Discourse  on  the  Son  as  the  Source  of  Life. 
t7      But  Jesus  answered  them,  My  Father  worketh  hitherto, 

a  worse  thing  than  the  sickness  which  had  consumed  more  than  half 
man's  threescore  and  ten.  So  terrible  are  God's  judgments;  so  awful 
is  our  responsibity.     Comp.  Matt.  xii.  45 ;  2  Pet.  ii.  20. 

15.  told  the  yeivs\  Not  in  malice  against  Jesus,  nor  in  any  hope  of 
converting  His  opponents.  Neither  of  these  is  probable,  nor  is  there 
the  least  evidence  of  either.  Rather,  he  continues  his  defiance  of  them 
(v.  \i).  He  had  given  as  his  authority  for  breaking  the  Sabbath  'He 
that  made  me  whole.'  Having  found  out  that  it  was  the  famous 
teacher  from  Galilee,  he  returns  to  give  them  this  additional  proof  of 
autliority. 

16.  And  therefore^  Better,  And  on  this  account,  or,  and  for  thia 
cause  (xii.  18,  27).  It  is  not  St  John's  favourite  particle  'therefore.'  but 
a  preposition  and  pronoun.     Comp.  v.  18. 

and  sought  to  slay  hint]  These  words  are  not  genuine  here,  but 
have  been  inserted  from  v.  18.  The  other  two  verbs  are  both  in  the 
imperfect  tense  expressing  continued  action;  'used  to  persecute,  con- 
tinued to  persecute;'  'used  to  do,  habitually  did.'  From  which  we 
may  infer  that  some  of  the  unrecorded  miracles  (ii.  23,  iv.  45)  were 
wrought  on  the  Sabbath :  unless  the  Evangelist  is  speaking  from  their 
point  of  view;  'because  (as  they  said)  He  habitually  did  these  things 
on  the  Sabbath.' 

17—47.    The  Discourse  on  the  Son  as  the  Source  of  Life. 

17.  answered  them]  This  was  how  He  met  their  constant  persecii- 
tion.  The  discourse  which  follows  (see  introductory  note  to  chap,  iii.) 
may  be  thus  analysed.  (S.  p.  106.)  It  has  two  main  divisions— I. 
The  prerogatives  of  the  Son  of  God  (17 — 30).  II.  The  unbelief  of  the 
Jeivs  ill — 47).  These  two  are  subdivided  as  follows:  I.  I.  Defence  of 
healing  on  the  Sabbath  based  on  the  relation  of  the  Son  to  the  Father 
(17,  18).  2.  Intimacy  of  the  Son  with  the  Father  further  enforced  (19, 
20).  3.  This  intimacy  proved  by  the  twofold  power  committed  to  tlie 
Son  {a)  of  communicating  spiritual  life  (21—27),  (/')  of  raising  the 
dead  (28,  29).  4.  The  Son's  qualification  for  these  high  powers  is  the 
perfect  harmony  of  His  Will  with  that  of  the  Father  (30).  II.  r.  The 
Son's  claims  rest  not  on  His  testimony  alone,  nor  on  that  of  John,  but 
on  that  of  the  Father  (31—35).  2.  The  Father's  testimony  is  evident 
(rt)  in  the  works  assigned  to\he  Son  (36),  {b)  in  the  revelation  which 
the  Jews  reject  (37^—40).  3.  Not  that  the  Son  needs  honour  from 
men,  who  are  too  worldly  to  receive  Him  (41 — 44).  4.  Their  appeal 
to  Moses  is  vain ;  his  writings  condemn  them. 


w.  i8,  19.]  S.   JOHN,   V.  127 

17 — 30.     Tin  Prerogatives  and  Powers  of  tJu  Son  of  God. 

and   I  work.      Therefore   the   Jews    sought   the    more   to  18 
kill  him,    because  he  not  only   had  broken  the   sabbath, 
but    said   also    that    God    was    his    Father,    making   him- 
self equal  with  God.     Then  answered  Jesus  and  said  unto  19 
thtm,    Verily,  verily,   I    say  unto   you.    The   Son   can  do 
nothing  of  himself,  but  what  he  seeth  the  Father  do :  for 

17 — 30.    The  Prerogatives  and  Powers  of  the  Son  of  God. 

17,  18.  Defence  of  healing  on  ike  Sabbath  based  on  the  relation  of 
the  Son  to  the  Father. 

My  Father  worketh  hitherto,  &c.]  Or,  My  Father  is  working 
even  until  now;  I  am  working  also.  From  the  Creation  up  to  this 
moment  God  has  been  ceaselessly  working  for  man's  salvation.  From 
such  activity  there  is  no  rest,  no  Sabbath :  for  mere  cessation  from 
activity  is  not  of  the  essence  of  the  vSabbath;  and  to  cease  to  do  good 
is  not  to  keep  the  Sabbath  but  to  sin.  Sabbaths  have  never  hindered 
the  Father's  work;  they  must  not  hinder  the  Son's.  Elsewhere  (Mark 
ii.  27)  Christ  says  that  the  Sabbath  is  a  blessing  not  a  burden;  it  was 
made  for  man,  not  man  for  it.  Here  He  takes  far  higher  ground  for 
Himself.  He  is  equal  to  the  Father,  and  does  what  the  Father  does. 
Mark  ii.  28  helps  to  connect  the  two  positions.  If  the  Sabbath  is 
subject  to  man,  much  more  to  the  Son  of  Man,  who  is  equal  to  the 
Father. 

18,  Thereforel  Better,  For  this  cause.  See  on  v.  16,  vi.  65, 
vii.  21,  22,  viii.  47,  ix.  23,  x.  17,  xii.  39,  xiii.  ir,  xv.  19,  xvi.  15. 

the  more]  Shewing  that  the  persecution  spoken  of  in  tj.  16  included 
attempts  to  compass  His  death.  Comp.  Mark  iii.  6.  This  'seeking  to 
kill '  is  the  blood-red  thread  which  runs  through  the  whole  of  this 
section  of  the  Gospel:  comp.  vii.  i,  19,  25,  viii.  37,  40,  59,  x.  31, 
xi.  53,  xii.  10. 

had  broken]  Literally,  was  loosing  or  relaxing ;  i.e.  making  less 
binding.     As  in  v.  15,  the  A.V.  puts  pluperfect  for  imperfect. 

making  himself  equal]  They  fully  understand  the  force  of  the  parallel 
statements,  'My  Father  is  working;  I  am  working  also.'  'Behold,' 
says  Augustine,  '  the  Jews  understand  what  the  Arians  fail  to  under- 
stand.' If  Arian  or  Unitarian  views  were  right,  would  not  Christ  at 
once  have  explained  that  what  they  imputed  to  Him  as  blasphemy  was 
not  in  His  mind  at  all?  But  instead  of  explaining  that  He  by  no 
means  claims  equality  with  the  Father,  He  goes  on  to  reafifirm  this 
equality  from  other  points  of  view:  see  especially  v.  23. 

19,  20.     Intimacy  of  the  Son  with  the  Father  further  enfotxed, 

19.  can  do  nothing  of  himself  ]  It  is  impossible  for  Him  to  act  with 
individual  self-assertion  independent  of  God,  because  He  is  the  Son: 
Their  Will  and  working  are  one.  The  Jews  accuse  Him  of  blasphemy ; 
and  blasphemy  implies  opposition  to  God:  but  He  and  the  Father  are 
most  intimately  united. 


128  S.   JOHN,   V.  [vv.  20—22. 

Avhat   things  soever  he  doeth,  these   also   doeth  the   Son 

20  Hkewise.     For  the   Father  loveth   the   Son,    and   sheweth 
him  all  things  that  himself  doeth  :  and  he  will  shew  him 

21  greater  works  than  these,  that  ye  may  marvel.     For  as  the 
Father  raiseth  up  the  dead,  and  quickeneth  than  ;  even  so 

22  the  Son  quickeneth  whom  he  will.     For  the  Father  judgeth 

but  ivhat  he  seeth,  &c.]    Better,  unless  He  seeth  the  Father  doing  it. 

20.  For  the  Father  loveth  the  Soii\  Moral  necessity  for  the  Son's 
doing  what  the  Father  does.  The  Father's  love  for  the  Son  compels 
Him  to  make  known  all  His  works  to  Him;  the  Son's  relation  to  the 
Father  compels  Him  to  do  what  the  Father  does.  The  Son  continues 
on  earth  what  He  had  seen  in  heaven  before  the  Incarnation. 

he  will  shetv  him,  &c.]  Or,  Greater  works  than  these  will  He  shew 
Him.  '  The  Father  will  give  the  Son  an  example  of  greater  works 
than  these  healings,  the  Son  will  do  the  like,  and  ye  unbelievers  will  be 
shamed  into  admiration.'  He  does  not  say  that  they  will  believe. 
'  Works '  is  a  favourite  term  with  S.  John  to  express  the  details  of 
Christ's  work  of  redemption.  Comp.  v.  36,  ix.  4,  x.  25,  32,  37, 
xiv.  II,  12,  XV.  24. 

21 — 29.  The  intimacy  of  the  Son  %uith  the  Father  proi'ed  by  the  two- 
fold power  committed  to  the  Son  (a)  of  communicating  spiritual  life, 
(b)  of  causing  the  bodily  resurrection  of  the  dead. 

21—27.  The  Father  imparts  to  the  Son  the  power  of  raising  the 
spiritually  dead.  It  is  very  important  to  notice  that  'raising  the  dead  ' 
in  this  section  is  figurative ;  raising  from  moral  and  spiritual  death: 
whereas  the  resurrection  {vv.2^,  29)  is  literal ;  the  rising  of  dead  bodies 
from  the  graves.  It  is  impossible  to  take  both  sections  in  one  and  the 
same  sense,  either  figurative  or  literal.  The  wording  of  v.  28  and  still 
more  of  v.  29  is  quite  conclusive  against  spiritual  resurrection  being 
meant  there :  what  in  that  case  could  '  the  resurrection  of  damnation ' 
mean?  Verses  24  and  25  are  equally  conclusive  against  a  bodily  resur- 
rection being  meant  here:  what  in  that  case  can  'an  hour  is  coming, 
and  now  is  '  mean? 

21.  raiseth  up  the  dead'\  This  is  one  of  the  '  greater  works  '  which  the 
Father  sheweth  the  Son,  and  which  the  .Son  imitates,  the  raising  up 
those  who  are  spiritually  dead.  Not  all  of  them  :  the  Son  imparts  life 
only  to  '  whom  He  will :'  and  He  wills  not  to  impart  it  to  those  who 
will  not  believe.  The  'whom  He  will'  would  be  almost  unintelligible 
if  actual  resurrection  from  the  grave  were  intended. 

22.  For  the  Father  judgeth  no  man]  Rather,  For  not  even  doth  the 
Father  (to  Whom  judgment  belongs)  judge  any  f/ian.  The  Son  there- 
fore has  both  powers,  to  make  alive  whom  He  will,  and  to  judge :  but 
the  second  is  only  the  corollary  of  first.  Those  whom  He  does  not  will 
to  make  alive  are  by  that  very  fact  judged,  separated  off  from  the  living, 
and  left  in  tlie  death  which  they  have  chosen.  He  does  not  make  them 
dead,  does  not  slay  them.     They  are  spiritually  dead  already,  and  will 


vv.  23—25.]  S.   JOHN,   V.  129 

no  man,  but  hath  committed  all  judgment  unto  the  Son  : 
that  all  men  should  honour  the  Son,  even  as  they  honour  23 
the  Father.     He  that  honoureth  not  the  Son  honoureth  not 
the  Father  which  hath  sent  him.     Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  24 
you.  He  that  heareth  my  word,  and  believeth  on  him  that 
sent  me,  hath    everlasting   life,   and   shall    not   come  into 
condemnation  ;  but  is  passed  from  death  unto  life.     Verily,  23 
verily,  I   say  unto  you.  The  hour  is  coming,  and  now  is, 
when  the  dead  shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of  God  :  and 


not  be  made  alive.     Here,  as  in  iii.  17,  18,  the  judgment  is  one  of  con- 
demnation; but  tliis  comes  from  the  context,  not  from  the  word. 

hatli  committed^  Or,  given ;  there  is  no  reason  for  varying  the  com- 
mon rendering. 

23.  honoureth  not  the  Father\  Because  he  refuses  to  honour  the 
Father's  representative. 

which  hath  seiit'\     Better,  which  sent.     See  on  xx.  21. 

24.  He  that  heareth']  We  see  from  this  that  'whom  He  will'  (v,  21) 
implies  no  arbitrary  selection.  It  is  each  individual  who  decides  for 
himself  whether  he  will  hear  and  believe. 

believeth  on  him  that  sent  me]  Omit  'on;'  there  is  no  preposition  in 
the  Greek. 

hath  everlasting  life]  Or,  hath  eternal  life :  see  on  iii.  16.  Note  the 
tense;  he  hath  it  already,  it  is  not  a  reward  to  be  bestowed  hereafter: 
see  on  iii.  36. 

shall  not  come  into  condemnation]  Better,  cometh  not  into  judg- 
ment. 

is  passed  from  death  into  life]  Or,  is  passed  ov&v  out  of  death  into  life 
(comp.  xiii.  i  ;  i  John  iii.  14).  This  is  evidently  equivalent  to  escaping 
judgment  and  attaining  eternal  life,  clearly  shewing  that  death  is  spiritual 
death,  and  the  resurrection  from  it  spiritual  also.  This  cannot  refer  to 
the  resurrection  of  the  body. 

25.  Repetition  of  v.  24  in  a  more  definite  form,  with  a  cheering 
addition :  v.  24  says  that  whoever  hears  and  believes  God  has  eternal 
life;  z'.  25  states  that  already  some  are  in  this  happy  case. 

77ie  hour  is  coming]  Better,  Tliere  cometli  an  hour:  comp.  iv. 
21,  23. 

and  noiv  is]  These  words  also  exclude  the  meaning  of  a  bodily  x&%\xi- 
rection;  the  hour  for  which  had  not  yet  arrived.  The  few  cases  in 
which  Christ  raised  the  dead  cannot  be  meant;  (i)  the  statement 
evidently  has  a  much  wider  range ;  (2)  the  widow's  son,  Jairus'  daughter, 
and  Lazarus  were  not  yet  dead,  so  that  even  of  them  'and  notv  zj'  would 
not  be  true;  (3)  they  died  again  after  their  return  from  death,  and  'they 
that  hear  shall  live'  clearly  refers  to  eternal  life,  as  a  comparison  with 
V.  24  shews.  If  a  spiritual  resurrection  be  understood,  '  and  now  is'  is 
perfectly  intelligible :  Christ's  ministry  was  already  winning  souls  from 
spiritual  death. 

S.  JOHN  Q 


130  S.   JOHN,    V.  [vv.  26-28. 

26  they  that  hear  shall  live.     For  as  the  Father  hath  life  in 
himself;  so  hath  he  given  to  the  Son  to  have  life  in  himself; 

27  and  hath  given  him  authority  to  execute  judgment  also, 

28  because  he  is  the  Son  of  man.     Marvel  not  at  this  :  for  the 


26.  so  hath  he  given  to  the  Soti\  Better,  sc  gave  He  also  to  the  Son. 
Comp.  '  the  living  Father  hath  sent  Me,  and  I  live  by  the  Father  '  (vi. 
57).  The  Father  is  the  absolutely  living  One,  the  Fount  of  all  Life. 
The  Messiah,  however,  imparts  life  to  all  who  believe;  which  He  could 
not  do  unless  He  had  in  Himself  a  fountain  of  life;  and  this  the 
Father  gave  Him  when  He  sent  Him  into  the  world.  The  Eternal 
Generation  of  the  Son  from  the  Father  is  not  here  in  question ;  it  is 
the  Father's  communication  of  Divine  attributes  to  the  Incarnate  Word 
that  is  meant. 

27.  Hath  given  him  authority  to  execute  judgment  als6\  Better,  gave 
Him  anthoi'ity  to  execute  Jiidgme?it,  when  He  sent  Him  into  the  world. 
'Also'  is  not  genuine.     See  on  i.  12,  and  comp.  x.  18. 

because  he  is  the  Son  of  ma)i\  Rather,  because  He  is  a  son  of  man ; 
i.e.  not  because  He  is  the  Messiah,  but  because  He  is  a  human  being. 
In  the  Greek  neither  '  son  '  nor  '  man  '  has  the  article.  Where  '  the 
Son  of  Man,'  i.e.  the  Messiah,  is  meant,  both  words  have  the  article: 
comp.  i.  51,  iii.  13,  14,  vi.  27,  53,  62,  viii.  28,  &c.  Because  the  Son 
emptied  Himself  of  all  His  glory  and  became  a  man,  therefore  the 
Father  endowed  Him  with  these  two  powers;  to  have  life  in  Himself, 
and  to  execute  judgment. 

Before  passing  on  to  the  last  section  of  this  half  of  the  discourse  we 
may  remark  that  "  the  relation  of  the  Son  to  the  Father  is  seldom 
alluded  to  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels.  But  a  single  verse  in  which  it  is, 
seems  to  contain  the  essence  of  the  Johannean  theology.  Matt.  xi.  27: 
'AH  things  are  delivered  unto  Me  of  My  Father;  and  no  man  knoweth 
the  Son  but  the  Father ;  neither  knoweth  any  man  the  Father,  save  the 
Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  will  reveal  Him.'  This  passage  is 
one  of  the  best  authenticated  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels.     It  is  found  in 

exact  parallehsm  both  in  S.  Matthew  and  S.  Luke And  yet  once 

grant  the  authenticity  of  this  passage,  and  there  is  nothing  in  the 
Johannean  Christology  that  it  does  not  cover."  S-  p.  109.  The  theory, 
therefore,  that  this  discourse  is  the  composition  of  the  Evangelist,  who 
puts  forward  his  own  theology  as  the  teaching  of  Christ,  has  no  basis. 
If  the  passage  in  S.  Matthew  and  S.  Luke  represents  the  teaching  of 
Christ,  what  reason  have  we  for  doul)ting  that  this  discourse  does  so? 
To  invent  the  substance  of  it  was  beyond  the  reach  even  of  S.  John ; 
how  far  the  precise  wording  is  his  we  cannot  tell.  This  section  of  it 
(21 — 27)  bears  very  strong  impress  of  his  style. 

28.  29.  The  intimacy  between  the  Father  and  the  Son  further  proved 
by  the  power  committed  to  the  Son  of  causing  the  bodily  resurrection  of 
the  dead. 

28.  Marvel  not]  Comp,  iii.  7.  Marvel  not  that  the  Son  can  grant 
spiritual  life  to  them  that  believe,  and  separate  from  them  those  who  will 


w.  29—31.]  S.   JOHN,   V.  131 

hour  is  coming,  in  the  which  all  that  are  in  the  graves  shall 
hear  his  voice,  and  shall  come  forth  ;  they  that  have  done  29 
good,  unto  the  resurrection  of  life  ;  and  they  that  have  done 
evil,  unto  the  resurrection  of  damnation.  I  can  of  mine  jo 
own  self  do  nothing :  as  I  hear,  I  judge  :  and  my  judgment 
is  just ;  because  I  seek  not  mine  own  will,  but  the  will  of 
the  Father  which  hath  sent  me. 

31—47.     The  unbelief  of  the  Jeivs. 
If  I    bear   witness   of  myself,    my  witness  is  not   true.  31 

not  believe.  There  cometh  an  hour  when  He  shall  cause  a  general  resur- 
rection of  men's  bodies,  and  a  final  separation  of  good  from  bad,  a  final 
judgment.  He  does  not  add  'and  now  is,'  which  is  in  favour  of  the 
resurrection  being  literal. 

all  that  are  in  the  graves']  Not  'whom  He  will;'  there  are  none 
whom  He  does  not  will  to  come  forth  from  their  sepulchres  (see  on 
xi.  7).  All,  whether  believers  or  not,  must  rise.  This  shews  that 
spiritual  resurrection  cannot  be  meant. 

29.  done  evil]    Or,  practised  worthless  things.     See  on  iii.  20. 
tinto   the  resurrection   of  damnation]    Better,    unto   the   resurrection 

of  judgment.  It  is  the  same  Greek  word  as  is  used  in  vv.  11,  27. 
These  words  are  the  strongest  proof  that  spiritual  resurrection  cannot 
be  meant.  Spiritual  resurrection  must  always  be  a  resurrection  of  life, 
a  passing  from  spiritual  death  to  spiritual  life.  A  passing  from  spiritual 
death  \.o  judgtnent  is  not  spiritual  resurrection.  This  passage,  and  Acts 
xxiv.  15,  are  the  only  direct  assertions  in  N.T.  of  a  bodily  resurrection 
of  the  wicked.  It  is  implied,  Matt.  x.  28;  Rev.  xx.  12,  13.  A 
satisfactory  translation  for  the  Greek  words  meaning  'judge'  and 
'judgment'  cannot  be  found:  they  combine  the  notions  of  'sepa- 
rating' and  'judging,'  and  from  the  context  often  acquire  the  further 
notion  of  '  condemning. '     See  on  iii.  17,  18. 

30.  The  Soil's  qualification  for  these  high  powers  is  the  perfect 
harmony  between  His  Will  and  that  of  the  Father. 

I  can  of  mine  own  self]  Change  to  the  first  person.  He  identifies 
Himself  with  the  Son.  It  is  because  He  is  the  Son  that  He  cannot 
act  independently:  it  is  impossible  for  Him  to  will  to  do  anything  but 
what  the  Father  wills. 

as  I  hear]  From  the  Father  :  Christ's  judgment  is  the  declaration 
of  that  which  the  Father  communicates  to  Him.  And  hence  Christ's 
judgment  must  be  just,  for  it  is  in  accordance  with  the  Divine  Will; 
and  this  is  the  strongest  possible  guarantee  of  its  justice.  Comp.  Matt. 
xxvi.  39. 

31 — 47.    The  unbelief  of  the  Jews. 

31 — 35.  These  claitns  rest  not  on  My  testimony  alone,  nor  on  that  of 
John,  but  on  that  of  the  Father. 

31.  my  witness  is  not  true]     Nothing  is  to  be  understood ;  the  words 

9—2 


132  S.   JOHN,    V.  [vv.  32—36. 

32  There   is   another    that    beareth    witness   of    me ;    and   I 
know   that    the    witness    which    he   witnesseth   of    me   is 

33  true.     Ye  sent  unto  John,  and  he  bare  witness  unto  the 

34  truth.     But  I  receive  not  testimony  from  man  :  but  these 

35  things  I  say,   that  ye  might  be   saved.      He  was  a  burn- 
ing and  a  shining  light :  and  ye  were  wilhng  for  a  season 

36  to  rejoice  in  his  light.     But  I  have  greater  witness  than 

are  to  be  taken  quite  literally ;  '  If  I  bear  any  witness  other  than  that 
which  My  Father  bears,  that  witness  of  Mine  is  not  true.'  In  viii. 
14  we  have  an  apparent  contradiction  to  this,  but  it  is  only  the  other 
side  of  the  same  truth:  'My  witness  is  true  because  it  is  really  My 
Father's.' 

32.  There  is  auother']  Not  the  Baptist,  as  seems  clear  from  v.  34 ; 
but  the  Father,  comp.  vii.  28,  viii.  26.  It  has  been  already  remarked 
how  much  there  is  in  this  Gospel  about  'witness,'  'bearing  witness,' 
and  the  like :  see  on  i.  7. 

33.  Ye  sent  unto  Jolin,  and  he  bare  -uitness']  Better,  Ye  have  sent 
unto  John,  and  he  hath  home  witness.  '  What  ye  have  heard  from 
him  is  true;  but  I  do  not  accept  it,  for  I  need  not  the  testimony  of 
man.  I  mention  it  for  your  sakes,  not  My  own.  If  ye  believe  John 
ye  will  believe  Me  and  be  saved.'  '  Ve '  and  '  I '  in  these  two  verses 
(33,  34)  are  in  emphatic  opposition. 

35.  He  was  a  bnrningand a  shining light'\  A  grievous  mistranslation, 
ignoring  the  Greek  article  twice  over,  and  also  the  meaning  of  the 
words  ;  and  thus  obscuring  the  marked  difference  between  the  Baptist  and 
the  Messiah  :  better,  >4f  waj- the  lamp  which  is  kindled  and  (so)  shineth. 
Christ  is  the  Light;  John  is  only  the  lamp  kindled  at  the  Light,  and 
shining  only  after  being  so  kindled,  having  no  light  but  what  is  derived. 
The  word  here,  and  Matt.  vi.  22,  translated  'light,'  is  translated 
'candle'  Matt.  v.  15;  Mark  iv.  ii;  Luke  viii.  16,  xi.  33,  36,  xv.  8; 
Rev.  xviii.  23,  xxii.  5.  'Lamp'  would  be  best  in  all  places.  No 
O.T.  prophecy  speaks  of  the  Baptist  under  this  figure.  David  is  so 
called  2  Sam.  xxi.  17  (see  margin),  and  Elijah  (Ecclus.  xlviii.  i). 
The  imperfects  in  this  verse  seem  to  imply  that  John's  career  is  closed; 
he  is  in  prison,  if  not  dead. 

were  willing  for  a  season'\  Like  children,  they  were  glad  to  disport 
themselves  in  the  blaze,  instead  of  seriously  considering  its  meaning. 
And  even  that  only  for  a  season :  their  pilgrimages  to  the  Ijanks  of 
the  Jordan  had  soon  ended ;  when  John  began  to  preach  repentance 
they  left  him,  sated  with  the  novelty  and  offended  at  his  doctrine. — 
For  another  charge  of  frivolity  and  fickleness  against  them  in  reference 
to  John  comp.  Matt.  xi.  16 — 19. 

36 — 40.  The  Father's  testimony  is  evident^  (a)  iti  the  works  assigned 
to  Me,  (b)  in  the  revelation  which  ye  do  not  receive. 

36.     /  have  greater  witness  than  that  of  yohn']     Better,  /  have  the 


vv.  37,  38-] S.  JOHN,  V. 133 

that  of  John :  for  the  works  which  the  Father  hath  given 
me  to  finish,  the  same  works  that  I  do,  bear  witness 
of  me,  that  the  Father  hath  sent  me.  And  the  Father  37 
himself,  which  hath  sent  me,  hath  borne  witness  of  me. 
Ye  have  neither  heard  his  voice  at  any  time,  nor  seen  his 
shape.     And   ye   have   not   his  word  abiding  in  you :  for  38 

■witness  which  is  greater  than  John ;  or,  the  witness  which  I  have 
is  greater  than  John,  viz.  the  works  which  as  the  Messiah  I  have 
been  commissioned  to  do.  Among  these  works  would  be  raising  the 
spiritually  dead  to  life,  judging  unbelievers,  as  well  as  miracles : 
certainly  not  miracles  only  ;  iv.  48,  x.  38. 

to  finish^  Literally,  in  order  that  I  may  accomplish;  comp.  xvii. 
4.  This  was  God's  purpose.  See  on  iv.  34,  47,  ix.  3.  S.  John  is  very 
fond  of  the  construction  'in  order  that,'  especially  of  the  Divine  purpose. 

37 — 40.  The  connexion  of  thought  in  the  next  few  verses  is  very 
difficult  to  catch,  and  cannot  be  affirmed  with  certainty.  This  is  often 
the  case  in  S.  John's  writings.  A  number  of  simple  sentences  follow 
one  another  with  an  even  flow  ;  but  it  is  by  no  means  easy  to  see  how 
each  leads  on  to  the  next.  Here  there  is  a  transition  from  the  indirect 
testimony  to  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus  given  by  the  works  which  He 
is  commissioned  to  do  {v.  36),  to  the  direct  testimony  to  the  same  given 
by  the  words  of  Scripture  (37 — 40).     The  Jews  were  rejecting  both. 

which  hath  sent  vie,  hath  borne  tvitness']  There  is  a  difference  of 
tense  in  the  Greek  which  should  be  retained :  the  Father  which  sent 
Me  (once  for  all  at  the  Incarnation)  He  hath  borne  witness  (for  a  long 
time  past,  and  is  still  doing  so)  of  Me. 

Ye  have  neither,  &c.]  These  words  are  a  reproach;  therefore  there 
can  be  no  allusion  (as  suggested  in  the  margin)  to  the  Baptism  or  the 
Transfiguration.  The  Transfiguration  had  not  yet  taken  place,  and 
very  few  if  any  of  Christ's  hearers  could  have  heard  the  voice  from 
heaven  at  the  Baptism.  Moreover,  if  that  particular  utterance  were 
meant,  '  voice '  in  the  Greek  would  have  had  the  article.  Nor  can 
there  be  any  reference  to  the  theophanies,  or  symbolical  visions  of 
God,  in  O.T.  It  could  be  no  matter  of  reproach  to  these  Jews  that 
they  had  never  beheld  a  theophany.  A  paraphrase  will  shew  the 
meaning;  'neither  with  the  ear  of  the  heart  have  ye  ever  heard  Him, 
nor  with  the  eye  of  the  heart  have  ye  ever  seen  Him,  in  the  revelation 
of  Himself  given  in  the  Scriptures;  and  so  ye  have  not  the  testimony 
of  His  word  present  as  an  abiding  power  within  you.'  There  should 
be  no  full  stop  at  'shape,'  only  a  comma  or  semi-colon.  Had  they 
studied  Scripture  rightly  they  would  have  had  a  less  narrow  view  of 
the  Sabbath  {v.  16),  and  would  have  recognised  the  Messiah. 

38.  And  ye  have  not  his  word'\  '  And  hence  it  is  that  ye  have  no 
inner  appropriation  of  the  word ' — seeing  that  ye  have  never  received 
it  either  by  hearing  or  vision.  'His  word'  is  not  a  fresh  testimony 
different  from  the  'voice'  and  'shape:'  all  refer  to  the  same  thing, — 
the  testimony  of  Scripture  to  the  Messiah. 


134  S.   JOHN,   V.  [vv.  39-41. 

39  whom  he  hath  sent,  him  ye  believe  not.     Search  the  Scrip- 
tures ;  for  in  them  ye  think  ye  have  eternal  life :  and  they 

40  are  they  which  testify  of  me.     And  ye  will  not  come  to  me, 

41  that  ye  might  have  life.     I  receive  not  honour  from  men. 

for  whom  he  hath  sent]  Better,  because  whom  He  sent.  This  is 
the  proof  of  the  previous  negation :  one  who  had  the  word  abiding 
in  his  heart  could  not  reject  Him  to  whom  that  word  bears  witness. 
Comp.  I  John  ii.  14,  24. 

39.  Search  the  Scriptures]  It  will  never  be  settled  beyond  dispute 
whether  the  verb  here  is  imperative  or  indicative.  As  far  as  the  Greek 
shews  it  may  be  either,  'search,'  or  '  ye  search,'  and  both  make  sense. 
The  question  is,  which  makes  the  best  sense,  and  this  the  context 
must  decide.  The  context  seems  to  be  strongly  in  favour  of  the 
indicative,  ye  search  the  Scriptures.  All  the  verbs  on  either  side  are 
in  the  indicative;  and  more  especially  the  one  with  which  it  is  so  closely 
connected,  '  and  ye  will  not  come.'  Ye  sea/rh  the  Scriptures,  atid 
(instead  of  their  leading  you  to  Me)  ye  are  not  willing  to  come  to  Me. 
The  tragic  tone  once  more:  see  on  i.  5.  The  reproach  lies  not  in  their 
searching,  but  in  their  searching  to  so  little  purpose.  Jewish  study  of 
the  Scriptures  was  too  often  learned  trifling  and  worse ;  obscuring  the 
text  by  frivolous  interpretations,  'making  it  of  none  effect'  by  unholy 
traditions. 

for  in  them  ye  think]  '  Ye'  is  emphatic;  because  ye  are  the  people 
who  think;  it  is  your  own  opinion.  Not  that  they  were  wrong  in 
thinking  that  eternal  life  was  to  be  found  in  the  Scriptures ;  their  error 
was  in  thinking  that  they,  who  rejected  the  Messiah,  had  found  it. 
Had  they  searched  aright  they  would  have  found  both  the  Messiah  and 
eternal  life. 

they  are  they]     See  on  x.  i. 

40.  ye  will  not  come  to  me]  Not  the  future  of  '  to  come, '  but  the 
present  of  'to  will :'  ye  are  not  willing  to  come  to  Me.  This  is  at  the 
root  of  their  failure  to  read  Scripture  aright,  their  hearts  are  estranged. 
They  have  no  will  to  find  the  truth,  and  without  that  no  intellectual 
searching  will  avail.  Note  that  here  again  man's  will  is  shewn  to  be 
free;  the  truth  is  not  forced  upon  him;  he  can  reject  it  if  he  likes. 
Comp.  iii.  19. 

that  ye  might  have  life]  'Ye  fancy  ye  find  life  in  your  searching  of 
the  Scriptures,  and  ye  refuse  to  come  to  Me  in  order  to  have  it  in 
reality.' 

41 — 44.  Not  that  I  seek  glory  from  men ;  had  I  done  so,  you  would 
hai'e  received  Me.  Your  worldliness  prevents  you  from  receiving  One 
whose  motives  are  not  worldly. 

41.  /  receive  not  honour]  It  is  nothing  to  Me ;  I  have  no  need  of  it, 
and  refuse  it :  comp.  v.  34.  Glory  would  jierhaps  be  better  than 
'honour'  both  here  and  in  v.  44,  and  than  'praise'  in  ix.  24  and  xii.  43; 
see  notes  there.     Christ  is  anticipating  an  objection,  and  at  the  same 


vv.  42—45.]  S.   JOHN,    V.  135 

But  I  know  you,  that  ye  have  not  the  love  of  God  in  you.  42 
I  am  come  in  my  Father's  name,  and  ye  receive  me  not :  43 
if  another  shall  come  in  his  own  name,  him  ye  will  receive. 
How  can  ye  believe,  which  receive  honour  one  of  another,  4* 
and  seek  not  the  honour  that  cometh  from  God  only  ?  Do  4S 
not  think  that  I  will  accuse  you  to  the  Father  :  there  is  one 


time  shewing  what  is  the  real  cause  of  their  unbelief.  'Glory  from  men 
is  not  what  I  seek ;  think  not  the  want  of  that  is  the  cause  of  My  com- 
plaint. The  desire  of  glory  from  men  is  what  blinds  your  eyes  to  the 
truth.' 

42.  Btit  I  know  yoti']  Once  more  Christ  appears  as  the  searcher  of 
hearts;  comp.  i.  47,  50,  ii.  24,  25,  iv.  17,  18,  48,  v.  14. 

in  you]  Or,  in  yourselves,  in  your  hearts.  '  1  hou  shalt  love  the 
Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart'  (Dent.  vii.  5)  was  written  on  their 
broad  phylacteries  (see  note  on  Matt,  xxiii.  5),  but  it  had  no  place  in 
their  hearts  and  no  influence  on  their  lives.  It  is  the  want  of  love,  the 
want  of  will  (v.  40)  that  makes  them  reject  and  persecute  the  Messiah. 

43.  and  ye  receive  me  not]  The  tragic  tone  as  in  vv.  39,  40,  'I  come 
with  the  highest  credentials,  as  My  Father's  representative  (comp.  viii. 
42),  and  ye  reject  Me.' 

cotne  in  his  own  name']  As  a  false  Messiah  or  as  Antichrist.  Sixty- 
four  pretended  Messiahs  have  been  counted.     Comp.  Matt.  xxiv.  24. 

44.  How  can  ye  believe]  The  emphasis  is  on  'ye.'  How  is  it  possible, 
for  you,  who  care  only  for  the  glory  that  man  bestows,  to  believe  on 
One  who  rejects  such  glory.  This  is  the  climax  of  Christ's  accusation. 
They  have  reduced  themselves  to  such  a  condition  that  they  cannot 
believe.  They  must  change  their  whole  view  and  manner  of  life  before 
they  can  do  so,  comp.  v.  47. 

from  God  only]  Rather,  from  tlie  only  God,  from  Him  who  alone 
is  God ;  whereas  by  receiving  glory  from  one  another  they  were  making 
gods  of  one  another;  so  that  it  is  they  who  really  'make  themselves 
equal  with  God'  {v.  18).  The  Greek  is  not  similar  to  Matt.  xvii.  8  or 
Luke  V.  21,  but  to  xvii.  3;  i  Tim.  vi.  16.  Comp.  Rom.  xvi.  27;  i  Tim. 
i.  17;  Jude  25.  Note  the  absence  of  the  article  before  the  first  'honour' 
and  its  presence  before  the  second :  they  receive  glory,  such  as  it  is, 
from  one  another,  and  are  indifferent  to  the  glory,  which  alone  deserves 
the  name. 

The  whole  verse  should  run  thus,  How  can  ye  believe,  seeing  that  ye 
receive  glory  one  of  another ;  and  the  glory  zvhich  cometh  frorn  the  only 
God  ye  seek  not, 

45 — 47.     Do  not  appeal  to  Moses  ;  his  writings  condemn  you. 

Thus  the  whole  basis  of  their  confidence  is  cut  away.  Moses  on 
whom  they  trust  as  a  defender  is  their  accuser. 

45.  Do  not  think]  As  you  might  be  disposed  to  do  after  hearing 
these  reproaches. 


136  S.   JOHN,   V.  [vv.  46,  47. 

46  that  accuseth  you,  even  Moses,  in  whom  ye  trust.     For  had 
ye   believed   Moses,  ye   would  have   believed  me :  for  he 

47  v/rote  of  me.     But  if  ye  believe  not  his  writings,  how  shall 
ye  believe  my  words  ? 

that  I  will  accuse  you]  If  this  refers  to  the  day  of  judgment  (and  the 
future  tense  seems  to  point  to  that),  there  are  two  reasons  why  Christ 
will  not  act  as  accuser  (i)  because  it  would  be  needless;  there  is  another 
accuser  ready ;  (2)  because  He  will  be  acting  as  Judge. 

there  is  one]  Your  accuser  exists  already;  he  is  there  with  his  charge. 
Note  the  change  from  future  to  present :  Christ  will  not  be,  because 
Moses  is,  tiieir  accuser. 

iti  whom  ye  trust]     Literally,  on  whom  ye  have  set  your  hope. 

46.  had  ye  believed  Moses,  ye  would  have  believed  >ne]  Better,  U ye 
believed  Moses,  ye  woiild  believe  Me:  the  verbs  are  imperfects,  not 
aorists.  See  on  viii.  19  (where  we  have  a  similar  mistranslation),  42, 
ix.  4I,  XV.  19,  xviii.  36.  Contrast  the  construction  in  iv.  10,  xi.  21,  32, 
xiv.  28.     This  proves  that  Moses  is  their  accuser. 

fo7-  he  wrote  of  me]  Christ  here  stamps  with  His  authority  the  au- 
thority of  the  Pentateuch.  He  accepts,  as  referring  to  Himself,  the 
Messianic  types  and  prophecies  which  it  contains.  Comp.  Luke  xxiv. 
27.  44- 

47.  if  ye  believe  not]  The  emphatic  words  are  'his'  and  'My.'  Most 
readers  erroneously  emphasize  'writings'  and  'words.'  The  comparison 
is  between  Moses  and  Christ.  It  was  a  simple  matter  of  fact  that  Moses 
had  written  and  Christ  had  not :  the  contrast  between  writings  and 
words  is  no  part  of  the  argument.  Comp.  Luke  xvi.  31 ;  'If  they  hear 
not  Moses  and  the  projihets,  neither  will  they  be  persuaded  though  one 
rose  from  the  dead.' 

myivords]  Or,  My  sayings.  It  is  not  the  plural  of  'word'  (\6yos) 
in  V.  38,  but  another  substantive  {prjfiaTa)  used  by  .S.  John  only  in  the 
plural.  Comp.  vi.  6.^,,  68,  viii.  47,  xii.  47,  xv.  7;  where  the  separate  say- 
ings are  meant;  whereas  in  vi.  60,  viii.  43,  51,  xii.  48,  xv,  3  it  is  rather 
the  teaching  as  a  whole  that  is  meant. 

Chap.  VI. 

We  see  more  and  more  as  we  go  on,  that  this  Gospel  makes  no  at- 
tempt to  be  a  complete  or  connected  whole.  There  are  large  gaps  in 
the  chronology.  The  Evangelist  gives  us  not  a  biography,  but  a  series 
of  typical  scenes,  very  carefully  selected,  and  painted  with  great  accu- 
racy and  minuteness,  but  not  closely  connected.  As  to  what  guided 
him  in  his  selection,  we  know  no  more  than  the  general  purpose  stated 
XX.  31,  and  it  is  sufficient  for  us.  Those  words  and  works  of  Jesus, 
which  seemed  most  calculated  to  convince  men  that  He  'is  ihe  Christ, 
the  Son  of  God,'  were  recortled  by  the  beloved  Apostle.  And  the  fact 
that  they  had  already  been  recorded  by  one  or  more  of  the  first  Evan- 
gelists did  not  deter  him  from  insisting  on  them  again ;  although  he 
naturally  more  often  chose  what  they  had  omitted.     In  this  chapter  we 


vv.  I,  2.]  S.   JOHN,   VI.  137 

Chap.  VI.     Christ  the  Support  of  Life. 
I — 15.     The  Sign  on  the  Land ;  Feeding  the  Five  Thousand. 

Alter  these  things  Jesus  went  over  the  sea  of  GaUlee,  6 
which    is   the   sea   of  Tiberias.       And    a   great   muhitude  ^ 

have  a  notable  instance  of  readiness  to  go  over  old  ground  in  order 
to  work  out  his  own  purpose.  The  miracle  of  feeding  the  Five 
Thousand  is  recorded  by  all  four  Evangelists,  the  only  miracle  that 
is  so.  Moreover,  it  is  outside  the  Judaean  ministry;  so  that  for  this 
reason  also  we  might  have  expected  S.  John  to  omit  it.  But  he 
needs  it  as  a  text  for  the  great  discourse  on  the  Bread  of  Life;  and 
this  though  spoken  in  Galilee  was  in  a  great  measure  addressed  to 
Jews  from  Jerusalem  ;  so  that  both  text  and  discourse  fall  naturally 
within  the  range  of  S.  John's  plan. 

As  in  Chap.  V.  Christ  is  set  forth  as  the  Source  of  Life,  so  in 
this  chapter  He  is  set  forth  as  the  Support  of  Lfe. 

Chap.  VI.    Christ  the  Support  of  Life. 

This  chapter,  like  the  last,  contains  a  discourse  arising  out  of  a 
miracle.  It  contains  moreover  an  element  wanting  in  the  previous 
chapter,  — the  results  of  the  discourse.  Thus  we  obtain  three  divisions; 
I.  The  Sign  on  the  Land,  the  Sign  on  the  Lake,  and  the  Sequel  of  the 
Signs  (i — 25).  2.  The  Discourse  on  the  Son  as  the  ^Support  of  Life 
(26 — 59).     3.  The  opposite  Results  [60 — 71). 

1 — 15.    The  Sign  on  the  Land;  Feeding  the  Five  Thousand. 

1.  After  these  things']  See  on  v.  i.  How  long  after  we  cannot  tell; 
but  if  the  feast  in  v.  i  is  rightly  conjectured  to  be  Purim,  this  would 
be  about  a  month  later  in  the  same  year,  which  is  probably  a.  D.  29. 
But  S.  John  is  not  careful  to  mark  tlie  precise  interval  between  the 
various  scenes  which  he  gives  us.  Comp.  the  indefmite  transitions  from 
the  First  Passover  to  Nicodemus,  ii.  23,  iii.  i ;  from  Nicodemus  to  the 
Baptist's  discourse,  iii.  22,  25;  from  that  to  the  scene  at  Sychar  iv.  i  — 
4 ;  &c.,  &c.  The  chronology  is  doubtless  correct,  but  it  is  not  clear : 
chronology  is  not  what  S.  John  cares  to  give  us.  The  historical  con- 
nexion with  what  precedes  is  not  the  same  in  the  four  accounts.  Here 
it  is  in  connexion  with  the  miracles  at  Bethesda  and  probably  after  the 
death  of  the  Baptist  (see  on  v.  25) :  in  S.  Matthew  it  is  in  connexion 
with  the  death  of  the  Baptist :  in  S.  Mark  and  S.  Luke  it  is  after  the 
death  of  the  Baptist,  but  in  connexion  with  the  return  of  the  Twelve. 
The  notes  on  Matt.  xiv.  13 — 21 ;  Mark  vi.  40 — 44,  and  Luke  ix.  10 — 17 
should  be  compared  tliroughout. 

went  over  the  sea  of  Galilee']  To  the  eastern  or  north-eastern  shore. 
The  scene  shifts  suddenly  from  Judaea  (v.  18)  to  Galilee;  but  we  are 
told  nothing  about  the  transit. 

which  is  the  sea  of  Tiberias]  (Here,  v.  23  and  xxi.  i  only).  Added  to 
describe  the  sea  more  exactly,  especially  for  the  sake  of  foreign  readers. 


138  S.    JOHN,    VI.  [vv.  3-5. 

followed  him,  because  they  saw  his  miracles  which  he  did 

3  on  them  that  were  diseased.     And  Jesus  went  up  into  a 

4  mountain,  and   there  he  sat  with  his  disciples.     And  the 

5  passover,  a  feast  of  the  Jews,  was  nigh.     When  Jesus  then 


Another  slight  indication  that  this  Gospel  was  written  outside  Palestine : 
inside  Palestine  such  minute  description  would  be  less  natural.  Perhaps 
we  areto  understand  that  i)\e  souihe7-n  half  of  the  lake  is  specially  intended; 
for  here  on  the  western  shore  Tiberias  was  situated.  The  name  Tiberias 
is  not  found  in  the  first  three  Gospels.  The  town  was  built  during  our 
Lord's  life  time  by  Herod  Antipas,  who  called  it  Tiberias  out  of  com- 
pliment to  the  reigning  Emperor;  one  of  many  instances  of  the  Herods 
paying  court  to  Rome.  Comp.  Bethsaida  Julias,  where  this  miracle 
took  place,  called  Julias  by  Herod  Philip  after  the  infamous  daughter  of 
Augustus.  The  new  town  would  naturally  be  much  better  known  and 
more  likely  Lo  be  mentioned  when  S.  John  wrote  than  when  the  earlier 
Evangelists  wrote. 

2.  a  great  iniiltitude\  All  the  greater  seeing  that  the  Baptist  was 
no  longer  a  counter-attraction,  and  that  the  Twelve  had  returned  from 
their  mission,  in  which  they  had  no  doubt  excited  attention.  This 
multitude  went  round  by  land  while  Christ  crossed  the  water.  All  the 
verbs  which  follow  are  imperfects  and  express  continued  and  habitual 
action ;  were  following  Him,  because  they  were  beholding  the  signs 
■which  he  was  doing,  &c.,  i.e.  after  He  landed  He  kept  on  working 
miracles  of  healing,  and  these  continually  attracted  fresh  crowds. 

3.  into  a  mountain^  Rather,  into  the  mountain,  or,  perhaps  the 
mountainous  part  of  the  district.  The  definite  article  indicates  fami- 
liarity with  the  locality.  Comp.  v.  15.  We  have  no  means  of  deter- 
mining the  precise  eminence. 

4.  And  the passover'X     V>^\,i&x,'^oif  the  Passor'er. 

a  feast  of  the  yews\  Rather,  the  feast  of  the  Jews.  Possibly  this 
near  approach  of  the  Passover  is  given  merely  as  a  date  to  mark  the 
time.  As  already  noticed  (see  on  ii.  13),  S.John  groups  liis  narrative 
round  the  Jewish  festivals.  ]?ut  the  statement  may  also  be  made  as  a 
further  explanation  of  the  multitude.  Just  before  the  Passover  large 
bands  of  pilgrims  on  their  way  to  Jerusalem  would  be  passing  along 
the  east  shore  of  the  lake.  But  we  find  that  the  multitude  in  this  case 
are  quite  ready  {v.  74)  to  cross  over  to  Capernaum,  as  if  they  had  no 
intention  of  going  to  Jerusalem;  so  that  this  interpretation  of  the  verse 
is  uncertain.  Still  more  doubtful  is  the  theory  that  this  verse  gives  a 
key  of  interpretation  to  the  discourse  which  follows,  the  eating  of 
Christ's  flesh  and  blood  being  the  antitype  of  the  Passover.  Of  this 
there  is  no  indication  whatever.  It  is  safest  to  regard  the  verse  as  a 
mere  note  to  time.  In  any  case  the  addition  of  'the  feast  of  the  Jews' 
again  indicates  that  the  author  is  writing  away  from  Palestine.  From 
vii.  I  it  would  seem  that  Jesus  did  not  go  up  to  Jerusalem  for  this 
Passover 


vv.  6-8.]  S.   JOHN,   VI.  139 

lift  up  his  eyes,  and  saw  a  great  company  come  unto  him, 
he  saith  unto  PhiHp,  Whence  shall  we  buy  bread,  that  these 
may  eat  ?     And  this  he  said  to  prove  him  :  for  he  himself  6 
knew   what   he   would   do.      Philip   answered    him,    Two  ^ 
hundred   pennyworth   of  bread  is  not  sufficient  for  them, 
that  every  one  of  them   may  take   a   litde.     One    of  his  s 

6.  When  Jesus  then,  &c.]  Better,  Jesus  therefore  having  lifted 
up  His  eyes  and  seen  that  a  great  multitude  cometh. 

he  saith  imto  Philip\  Why  Philip?  Because  he  was  nearest  to 
Him;  or  because  his  forward  spirit  (xiv.  8)  needed  to  be  convinced  of 
its  own  helplessness ;  or  because,  as  living  on  the  lake  (i.  44)  he  would 
know  the  neighbourhood.  Any  or  all  of  these  suggestions  may  be 
correct.  As  Judas  kept  the  bag  it  is  not  likely  that  Philip  commonly 
provided  food  for  the  party.  A  more  important  question  remains: 
"we  notice  that  the  impulse  to  the  performance  of  the  miracle  comes 
in  the  Synoptists  from  the  disciples;  in  S.  John,  solely  from  our  Lord 
Himself."  This  is  difference,  but  not  contradiction :  S.  John's  narra- 
tive does  not  preclude  the  possibility  of  the  disciples  having  sponta- 
neously applied  to  Christ  for  help  either  before  or  after  this  conversa- 
tion with  Philip.  "For  the  rest  the  superiority  in  distinctness  and  . 
precision  is  all  on  the  side  of  S.  John.  He  knows  to  whom  the  ques- 
tion was  put ;  he  knows  exactly  what  Philip  answered ;  and  again  the 

remark   of  Andrew,    Simon  Peter's   brother Some   memories   are 

essentially  pictorial;  and  the  Apostle's  appears  to  have  been  one  of 
these.  It  is  wonderful  with  what  precision  every  stroke  is  thrown  in. 
Most  minds  would  have  become  confused  in  reproducing  events  which 
had  occurred  so  long  ago ;  but  there  is  no  confusion  here.  The  whole 
scene  could  be  transferred  to  canvas  without  any  difficulty."  S.  pp. 
121 — 123. 

Whence  shall  we  buy\  Or,  whence  must  we  buy ;  the  deliberative 
subjunctive. 

6.  to  prove  him]  This  need  not  mean  more  than  to  try  whether  he 
could  suggest  any  way  out  of  the  difficulty ;  but  the  more  probable 
meaning  is  to  test  his  faith,  to  try  what  impression  Christ's  words  and 
works  have  made  upon  him. 

he  himself]  without  suggestions  from  others. 
would  do]    Or,  was  about  to  do. 

7.  T7V0  hundred  pennyworth]  Two  hundred  shillingsworth  would 
more  accurately  represent  the  original.  The  denarius  was  the  ordi- 
nary wage  for  a  day's  work  (Matt.  xx.  2  ;  comp.  Luke  x.  35) ;  in  weight 
of  silver  it  was  less  than  a  shilling ;  in  purchasing  power  it  was  more. 
Two  hundred  denarii  from  the  one  point  of  view  would  be  about  £"}, 
from  the  other,  nearly  double  that.  S.  Philip  does  not  solve  the  diffi- 
culty; he  merely  states  it  in  a  practical  way;  a  much  larger  amount 
than  they  can  command  would  still  be  insufficient.  See  notes  on  Mark 
viii.  4. 

8.  One  of  his  disciples]     Of  course  this  does  not  imply  that  Philip 


HO  S.   JOHN,    VI.  [w.  9— II. 

disciples,  Andrew,  Simon  Peter's  brother,  saith  unto  him, 

9  There  is  a  lad  here,  which  hath  five  barley  loaves,  and  two 

«o  small  fishes:  but  what  are   they  among  so   many?     And 

Jesus  said,  Make  the  men  sit  down.     Now  there  was  much 

grass  in  the  place.     So  the  men  sat  down,  hi  number  about 

II  five  thousand.     And  Jesus  took  the  loaves ;  and  when  he 

had  given  thanks,  he  distributed  to  the  disciples,  and  the 

disciples  to  them  that  were  set  down ;  and  likewise  of  the 


was  not  a  disciple;  the  meaning  ratlier  is,  that  a  disciple  had  been 
appealed  to  without  results,  and  now  a  disciple  makes  a  communication 
out  of  which  good  results  flow.  There  seems  to  have  been  some  con- 
nexion between  S.  Andrew  and  S.  Philip  (i.  44,  xii.  22).  In  the  lists  of 
the  Apostles  in  Mark  iii.  and  Acts  i.  S.  Philip's  name  immediately  follows 
Andrew's.  On  S.  Andrew  see  notes  on  i.  40,  41.  The  particulars 
about  Philiji  and  Andrew  here  are  not  found  in  the  Synoptists'  account. 

9.  a  lad'\  And  therefore  able  to  carry  very  little.  The  word  is  a 
diminutive  in  the  Greek,  a  little  lad;  it  might  also  mean  'servant,'  but 
this  is  less  likely. 

barley  loavrs]  The  ordinary  coarse  food  of  the  lower  orders;  Judg. 
vii.  13.  S.  John  alone  mentions  their  being  of  barley,  and  that  they 
belonged  to  the  lad,  who  was  probably  selling  them.  With  homely 
food  from  so  scanty  a  store  Christ  will  feed  them  all.  These  minute 
details  are  the  touclies  of  an  eyewitness. 

tiao  small  fishes\  Better,  two  fishes,  although  the  Greek  {opsaria) 
is  a  diminutive.  The  word  occurs  in  this  Gospel  only  {v.  11,  xxi.  9, 
10,  13),  and  literally  means  a  little  relish,  i.e.  anything  eaten  with 
bread  or  other  food :  and  as  salt  fish  was  most  commonly  used  for  this 
purpose,  the  word  came  gradually  to  mean  'fish'  in  particular.  Philip 
liad  enlarged  on  the  greatness  of  the  difficulty ;  Andrew  insists  rather 
on  the  smallness  of  the  resources  for  meeting  it. 

10.  muck  grass']  As  we  might  expect  early  in  April  [v.  4).  S. 
Mark  (vi.  39,  40)  mentions  how  they  reclined  in  parterres,  by  hun- 
dreds and  by  fifties,  on  the  green  grass.  This  arrangement  would 
make  it  easy  to  count  them. 

the  men  sat  down]  The  women  and  children  were  probably  apart 
by  themselves.  S.  Mattliew  (xiv.  21)  tells  us  that  the  5000  included 
the  men  only.  Among  those  going  up  to  the  Passover  there  would 
not  be  many  women  or  children. 

11.  7uhen  he  had  given  thanks]  The  tisual  grace  before  meat  said 
by  the  head  of  the  house  or  the  host.  '  He  that  enjoys  aught  without 
thanksgiving,  is  as  though  he  robbed  God.'  Talmud.  Put  it  seems 
clear  that  this  giving  of  thanks  or  blessing  of  the  food  (Luke  ix.  16) 
was  the  means  of  the  miracle,  because  (i)  all  four  narratives  notice  it; 
{2)  it  is  pointedly  mentioned  again  v.  23;  (3)  it  is  also  mentioned  in 
both  accounts  of  the  feeding  of  the  4000  (Matt.  xv.  36;  Mark  viii.  6). 

to   the  disciples,   and  the  disciples]    These   words  are   wanting  in 


vv.  12—14.]  S.   JOHN,   VI.  141 

fishes  as  much  as  they  would.     When  they  were  filled,  he  12 
said  unto  his  disciples,  Gather  up  the  fragments  that  remain, 
that   nothing   be   lost.     Therefiare  they  gathered  them  to- 13 
gether,  and  filled  twelve  baskets  with  the  firagments  of  the 
five   barley   loaves,  which   remained  over  and  above  unto 
them  that  had  eaten.     Then  those  men,  when  they  had  seen  14 
the   miracle   that   Jesus   did,  said,  This  is  of  a  truth  that 
prophet  that  should  come  into  the  world. 

authority ;  the  best  texts  run,  He  distributed  to  them  that  were  lying 
down.  It  is  futile  to  ask  whether  the  muhiplication  took  place  in 
Christ's  hands  only:  the  manner  of  the  miracle  eludes  us,  as  in  the 
turning  of  the  water  into  wine.  That  was  a  change  of  quality,  this  of 
quantity.     This  is  a  literal  fulfilment  of  Matt.  vi.  33. 

12.  Gather  up  the  frag»ients\  S.  John  alone  tells  of  this  command, 
though  the  others  tell  us  that  the  fragments  were  gathered  up.  It  has 
been  noticed  as  a  strong  mark  of  truth,  most  unlikely  to  have  been 
invented  by  the  writer  of  a  fiction.  We  do  not  find  the  owner  of  For- 
tunatus'  purse  careful  against  extravagance.  How  improbable,  from  a 
human  point  of  view,  that  one  who  could  multiply  food  at  will  should 
give  directions  about  saving  fragments ! 

13.  basket s\  All  four  accounts  have  the  same  word  for  basket, 
cophinus,  i.e.  the  wallet  which  every  Jew  carried  when  on  a  journey,  to 
keep  himself  independent  of  Gentile  food,  which  would  be  unclean. 
Comp.  Juvenal  III.  14.  Each  of  the  Twelve  gathered  into  his  own 
wallet,  and  filled  it  full.  Moreover  in  referring  to  the  miracle  the 
word  cophinus  is  used  (Matt.  xvi.  9).  In  the  feeding  of  the  4000 
(Matt.  XV.  37;  Mark  viii.  8),  and  in  referring  to  it  (Matt.  xvi.  10),  a 
different  word  for  basket,  spurts,  is  used.  Such  accuracy  is  evidence 
of  truth.  See  note  on  Mark  viii.  8.  S.  Mark  tells  us  that  fragments 
of  fish  were  gathered  also.  The  remnants  far  exceed  in  quantity  the 
original  store. 

The  expedients  to  evade  the  obvious  meaning  of  the  narrative  are 
worth  mentioning,  as  shewing  how  some  readers  are  willing  to  'violate 
all  the  canons  of  historical  evidence,'  rather  than  admit  the  possibility 
of  a  miracle:  (i)  that  food  had  been  brought  over  and  concealed  in 
the  boat;  (2)  that  some  among  the  multitude  were  abundantly  sup- 
plied with  food  and  were  induced  by  Christ's  example  to  share  their 
supply  with  others;  {3)  that  the  whole  is  an  allegorical  illustration  of 
Matt.  vi.  33.  How  could  either  (i)  or  (2)  excite  even  a  suspicion  that 
He  was  the  Messiah,  much  less  kindle  such  an  enthusiasm  as  is 
recorded  in  v.  15?  And  if  the  whole  is  an  illustration  of  Matt.  vi.  33, 
what  meaning  in  the  allegory  can  be  given  to  this  popular  enthusiasm  ? 
There  are  "rationalising  expedients  that  are  considerably  more  incre- 
dible than  miracles."     S.  p.  126. 

14.  Then  those  men]     Rather,  The  men  therefore. 

the  miracle  that  Jestis  did]  Better,  the  sign  that  He  did.  The 
name  Jesus  has  been  inserted  here,   as  elsewhere,   because  this  once 


U2  S.   JOHN,  VI.  [v.  15. 

IS  When  Jesus  therefore  perceived  that  they  would  come 
and  take  him  by  force,  to  make  him  a  king,  he  departed 
again  into  a  mountain  himself  alone. 


was  the  beginning  of  a  lesson  read  in  church.  The  same  thing  has 
been  done  in  our  own  Prayer  Book  in  the  Gospels  for  Quinquagesima 
and  the  3rd  Sunday  in  Lent :  in  the  Gospel  for  S.  John's  Day  the 
names  of  both  Jesus  and  Peter  have  been  inserted;  and  in  those  for 
the  5th  S.  in  Lent  and  2nd  S.  after  Easter  the  words  'Jesus  said'  have 
been  inserted.  In  all  cases  a  desire  for  clearness  has  caused  the  inser- 
tion.   Comp.  viii.  21. 

that  prophet  that  should  come\  Literally,  the  Prophet  that  cometh: 
the  Prophet  of  Deut.  xviii.  15  (see  on  i.  21).  But  perhaps  the  Greek 
participle  here  only  represents  the  Hebrew  participle,  which  is  properly 
present,  but  is  often  used  where  a  future  participle  would  be  used 
in  Latin  or  Greek.  S.  John  alone  tells  us  the  effect  of  the  miracle 
on  those  who  witnessed  it:  comp.  ii.  11,  23.  These  two  verses 
(14,  15)  supply  "a  decisive  proof  that  the  narrative  in  the  fourth 
Gospel  is  not  constructed  out  of  that  of  the  Synoplists,  and  we  might 
almost  add  a  decisive  proof  of  the  historical  character  of  the  Gospel 
itself...  The  Synoptists  have  nothing  of  this...  Yet  how  exactly  it 
corresponds  with  the  current  Messianic  expectations!  Our  Lord  had 
performed  a  miracle;  and  at  once  He  is  hailed  as  the  Messiah.  But 
it  is  as  the  Jewish,  not  the  Christian  Messiah.  The  multitude  would 
take  Him  by  force  and  make  Him  king.  At  last  they  have  found 
the  leader  who  will  lead  them  victoriously  against  the  Romans  and 
'restore  the  kingdom  to  Israel.'  And  just  because  He  refused  to  do 
this  we  are  told  a  few  verses  lower  down  that  many  of  His  disciples 
'went  back,  and  walked  no  more  with  Him,'  and  for  the  same  cause,  a 
year  later,  they  crucified  Him.  It  is  this  contrast  between  the  popular 
Messianic  belief  and  the  sublimated  form  of  it,  as  maintained  and 
represented  by  Christ,  that  is  the  clue  to  all  the  fluctuations  and  oscil- 
lations to  which  the  belief  in  Him  was  subject.     This  is  why  He  was 

confessed  one  day  and  denied  the  next It  is  almost  superfluous  to 

point  out  how  impossible  it  would  have  been  for  a  writer  wholly  ab 
extra  to  throw  himself  into  the  midst  of  these  hopes  and  feelings,  and 
to  reproduce  them,  not  as  if  they  were  something  new  that  he  had 
learned,  but  as  part  of  an  atmosphere  that  he  had  himself  once 
breathed.  There  is  no  stronger  proof  both  of  the  genuineness  and  of 
the  authenticity  of  the  fourth  Gospel  than  the  way  in  which  it  reflects 
the  current  Messianic  idea."     S.  pp.  123,  124. 

15.  take  him  by  force']  Carry  Him  up  to  Jerusalem  and  proclaim 
Him  king  at  the  Passover.  This  again  is  peculiar  to  S.  John.  In  his 
Epic  he  points  out  how  the  enmity  of  Clirist's  foes  increases;  and 
nothing  increased  it  so  much  as  popular  enthusiasm  for  Him :  comp. 
iii.  26,  iv.  1—3,  vii.  40,  41,  46,  viii.  30,  ix.  30—38,  x.  21,  42,  xi.  45, 
46,  xii.  9 — II. 

again\     Pie  had  come  down  to  feed  them. 


vv.  16-2 1.]  S.    JOHN,   VI.  143 

16 — 21.     The  Sign  on  the  Lake  ;   Walking  on  the  Water. 

And  when  even  was  now  come,  his  disciples  went  down  16 
unto  the  sea,  and  entered  into  a  ship,  and  went  over  the  sea  17 
towards  Capernaum.  And  it  was  now  dark,  and  Jesus  was 
not  come  to  them.  And  the  sea  arose  by  reason  of  a  great  is 
wind  that  blew.  So  when  they  had  rowed  about  five  and  19 
twenty  or  thirty  furlongs,  they  see  Jesus  walking  on  the  sea, 
and  drawing  nigh  unto  the  ship  :  and  they  were  afraid.  But  20 
he  saith  unto  them,  It  is  I ;   be  not  afraid.     Then  they  21 

into  a  moiinhnni  Better,  as  in  v.  3,  into  the  moitntain,  or  the  hill 
country. 

hifnself  alone]  S.  Matthew  and  S.  Mark  tell  us  that  the  solitude  He 
sought  was  for  prayer.  S.  Luke  (ix.  18)  mentions  both  the  solitary 
prayer  and  also  a  question  which  seems  to  refer  to  this  burst  of  enthu- 
siasm for  Christ;  'Whom  say  the  people  that  I  am?'  Thus  the  various 
accounts  supplement  one  another. 

16 — 21.    The  Sign  on  the  Lake;   Walking  on  the  Water. 

16.  when  even  was  now  come]  S.  Matthew  (xiv.  15,  23)  makes  two 
evenings;  this  was  in  accordance  with  Jewish  custom.  It  is  the 
second  evening  that  is  here  meant,  from  6  p.m.  to  dark. 

went  down]  From  Matt.  xiv.  22  and  Mark  vi.  45  we  learn  that 
Christ  'constrained'  His  disciples  to  embark:  this  points  either  to 
their  general  unwillingness  to  leave  Him,  or  to  their  having  shared  the 
wish  to  make  Him  a  king  by  force.  S.  Luke  omits  the  whole 
incident. 

17.  toward  Capernaum]  S.  Mark  says  'unto  Bethsaida'  which  was 
close  to  Capernaum.  See  notes  and  map  at  Matt.  iv.  13  and  Luke  v.  i. 
For  '  went  over  the  sea'  we  should  read  were  coming  over  the  sea,  i.e. 
were  on  their  way  home. 

was  not  come]     More  accurately,  was  not  yet  come. 

18.  the  sea  arose]  Literally,  was  beco7ning  thoroughly  agitated,  so 
that  their  Master's  following  them  in  another  boat  seemed  impossible. 
For  the  vivid  description  comp.  Jonah  i.  13. 

19.  five  and  twenty  or  thirty  furlongs]  This  pretty  closely  corre- 
sponds with  'in  the  midst  of  the  sea'  (Matt.  xiv.  24).  The  lake  is 
nearly  seven  miles  across  in  the  widest  part. 

walking  on  the  sea]  There  is  no  doubt  that  this  means  on  the  sur- 
face of  the  water,  although  an  attempt  has  been  made  to  shew  that  the 
Greek  may  mean  '  on  the  sea-shore.'  Even  if  it  can,  which  is  perhaps 
somewhat  doubtful,  the  context  shews  plainly  what  is  meant.  How 
could  they  have  been  afraid  at  seeing  Jesus  walking  on  the  shore? 
S.  Mark  tells  us  that  it  was  about  the  fourth  watch,  i.e.  between  3.0 
and  6.0  a.m.     S.  Matthew  alone  gives  S.  Peter's  walking  on  the  sea. 

20.  //  is  /]     Literally,  I  atn  (comp.  xviii.  5). 


144  S.    JOHN,    VI.  [v.  22. 

willingly  received  him  into  the  ship  :  and  immediately  the 
ship  was  at  the  land  whither  they  went. 

22 — 25.     llie  Sequel  of  the  two  Signs. 
82     The  day  following,  when  the  people  which  stood  on  the 

21.  they  willingly  received  him']  Rather,  ihey  were  willing  to 
receive  IJim.  The  mistranslation  seems  to  have  arisen  from  a  wish  to 
make  this  account  agree  with  that  of  S.  Matthew  and  S.  Mark,  who 
say  that  he  entered  the  boat.  It  is  probably  due  to  Beza,  who  for  the 
Vulgate's  volitertint  7-ecipere  substitutes  volente  animo  receperiint.  S. 
John  leaves  us  in  doubt  whether  He  entered  the  boat  or  not;  he  is  not 
correcting  the  other  two  accounts:  this  would  require  'but  before  He 
could  enter  it  the  boat  was  at  the  land.' 

iviinediatcly'l  We  are  probably  to  understand  that  this  was  miracu- 
lous; not  a  mere  favourable  breeze  which  brought  them  to  land  before 
they  had  recovered  from  their  surprise :  but  the  point  is  uncertain  and 
unimportant. 

whither  they  zvent]  Better,  whither  they  were  going,  or  intending 
to  go.  The  imperfect  tense  helps  to  bring  out  the  contrast  between 
the  difficulty  of  the  first  half  of  the  voyage,  when  they  were  alone,  and 
the  ease  of  the  last  half,  when  He  was  with  them.  The  word  for 
'  going'  implies  departure,  and  looks  back  to  the  place  left. 

The  Walking  on  the  Sea  cannot  be  used  as  evidence  that  the  writer 
held  Docetic  views  about  Christ,  i.e.  believed  that  His  Body  was  a 
mere  phantom.  A  Docetist  would  have  made  more  of  the  incident, 
and  would  hardly  have  omitted  the  cry  of  the  disciples  'It  is  a  spirit' 
(Matt.  xiv.  26;  conip.  Mark  vi.  49).  Docetism  is  absolutely  excluded 
from  this  Gospel  by  i.  14,  and  by  the  general  tone  of  it  throughout. 
Comp.  xix.  34,  35,  XX.  20,  27. 

22 — 25.    The  Sequel  of  the  two  Signs. 

22 — 24.  We  have  here  a  complicated  sentence  very  unusual  in 
S.  John  (but  comp.  xiii.  i — 4);  it  betrays  "a  certain  literary  awk- 
wardness, but  great  historical  accuracy The  structure  of  the  sen- 
tence is  no  argument  against  the  truth  of  the  statements  which  it  con- 
tains. On  the  contrary,  if  these  had  been  fictitious,  we  may  be  sure 
that  they  would  have  been  much  simpler.  Indeed  a  forger  would 
never  have  thought  of  relating  how  the  crowd  got  across  the  sea  at  all. 
We  see  the  natural  partiality  with  which  the  Evangelist  dwells  upon 
scenes  with  which  he  is  familiar.  He  had  been  a  fisherman  on  the  sea 
of  Galilee  himself.  He  knew  the  jjoats  of  Tiberias  from  those  of 
Capernaum  and  the  other  cities,  and  had  probably  friends  or  relations 
in  that  very  crowd."     S.  pp.  126,  127. 

22.  the  people']  An  instance  of  the  caprice  of  our  translators  in 
creating  differences.  The  same  Greek  word  is  translated  'multitude' 
in  V.  2,  'company'  in  v.  5,  and  'people'  here,  v.  24,  &c. ;  multitude 
would  be  best  throughout. 


vv.  23—26.]  S.   JOHN,   VI.  145 

other  side  of  the  sea  saw  that  there  was  none  other  boat 
there,  save  that  one  whereinto  his  disciples  were  entered, 
and  that  Jesus  went  not  with  his  disciples  into  the  boat, 
but  that  his  disciples  were  gone  away  alone ;  (howbeit  there  23 
came  other  boats  from  Tiberias  nigh  unto  the  place  where 
they  did  eat  bread,  after  that  the  Lord  had  given  thanks :) 
when   the  people  therefore  saw  that  Jesus  was  not  there,  24 
neither  his  disciples,  they  also  took  shipping,  and  came  to 
Capernaum,  seeking  for  Jesus.     And  when  they  had  found  25 
him  on  the  other  side  of  the  sea,  they  said  unto  him,  Rabbi, 
when  earnest  thou  hither? 

26 — 59.     The  Discourse  on  the  Son  as  the  Support  of  Life. 
Jesus   answered   them    and   said.    Verily,    verily,    I    say  26 

on  the  other  side  of  the  sea]  On  the  eastern  side  where  the  miracle 
took  place. 

save  that  one  whereinto  his  disciples  were  entered]  The  only  words  of 
this  sentence  that  are  of  certain  authority  are  save  one;  the  rest  is  pro- 
bably an  explanatory  note. 

were  gone  away]     Better,  went  away. 

23.  Howbeit  there  came]  This  awkward  parenthesis  explains  how 
there  came  to  be  boats  to  transport  the  people  to  the  western  shore 
after  they  had  given  over  seeking  for  Christ  on  the  eastern. 

after  that  t/ie  Lord  had  given  thanlis]  Unless  the  giving  thanks  was 
the  turning-point  of  the  miracle  it  is  difiicult  to  see  why  it  is  men- 
tioned again  here:  see  on  z/.  11. 

24.  they  also  tooli  shipping]  More  literally,  they  themselves  entered 
into  the  boats,  i.e.  the  boats  that  had  come  from  Tiberias,  driven 
in  very  possibly  by  the  gale  which  had  delayed  the  Apostles :  '  also ' 
is  not  genuine.  Of  course  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  alt  who 
had  been  miraculously  fed  crossed  over;  but  a  sufficient  number  of  them 
to  be  called  a  '  multitude. ' 

25.  071  the  other  side  of  the  sea]  This  now  means  the  western  shore; 
in  V.  22  it  meant  the  eastern.  From  v.  59  we  have  the  locality  fixed 
very  distinctly  as  the  synagogue  at  Capernaum. 

when  earnest  thou]  Including  how?  they  suspect  something  mi- 
raculous. Christ  does  not  gratify  their  curiosity  :  if  the  feeding  of  the 
5000,  which  they  had  witnessed,  taught  them  nothing,  what  good 
would  it  do  them  to  hear  of  the  crossing  of  the  sea?  '  Camest  Thou 
hither'  is  literally  '  hast  Thou  come  to  be  here:'  comp.  i.  15. 

26 — 59.     The  Discourse  on  the  Son  as  the  Support  of  Life. 

God's  revealed  word  and  created  world  are  unhappily  alike  in  this  ; 
that  the  most  beautiful  places  in  each  are  often  the  scene  and  subject 
of  strife.     This  marvellous  discourse  is  a  well-known  field  of  contro- 

S.  JOHN  10 


146  S.   JOHN,  VI.  [v.  26. 

veisy,  as  to  whether  it  does  or  does  not  refer  to  the  Eucharist.     That 
it  has  no  reference  whatever  to  the  Eucharist  seems  incredible,  when 
we  remember  ( i )  tlie  startling  words  here  used  about  eating  the  Flesh 
of  the  Son  of  Man  and  drinking  His  Blood;  (2)  that  just  a  year  from 
this  time  Christ  instituted  the  Eucharist  ;  (3)  that  the  primitive  Church 
is  something  like  unanimous  in  interpreting  this  discourse  as  referring 
to  the  Eucharist.     A  few  words  are  necessary  on  each  of  these  points. 
(1)     Probably  nowhere  in  any  literature,  not  even  among  the  luxuriant 
imagery  of  the  East,  can  we  find  an  instance  of  a  teacher  speaking  of 
the  reception  of  his  doctrine  under  so  astounding  a  metaphor  as  eating 
his  flesh  and  drinking  his  blood.     Something  more  than  this  must  at 
any  rate  be  meant  here.     The  metaphor  '  eating  a  man's  flesh '  else- 
where means  to  injure  or  destroy  him.      Ps.  xxvii.  2  (xiv.   4)  ;  James 
V.   3.     (2)     The  founding  of  new  religions,   especially  of  those  which 
have   had  any  great    hold  on   the  minds  of  men,   has  ever  been    the 
result  of  much    thought  and  deliberation.     Let    us  leave   out   of  the 
account  the   Divinity  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  place  Him  for  the  moment 
on   a   level  with  other  great  teachers.     Are  we   to  suppose  that  just 
a  year  before  the  Eucharist  was  instituted,   the  Founder   of  this,   the 
most   distinctive  element  of  Christian  worship,  had  no  thought  of  it 
in  His  mind?     Surely  for  long  beforehand  that  institution  was  in  His 
thoughts;  and  if  so,  'Except  ye  eat  the  Flesh  of  the  Son  of  Man  and 
drink  His  Blood,  ye  have  no  life  in  you'  cannot  but  have  some  reference 
to   'Take  eat,   this  is  My  Body,'  'Drink  ye  all  of  it,   for  this    is   My 
Blood.'     The  coincidence  is  too  exact  to  be  fortuitous,  even  if  it  were 
probable  that  a  year  before  it  was  instituted  the   Eucharist    was  still 
unknown  to    the  Founder  of  it.     That    the    audience   at    Capernaum 
could    not    thus    understand    Christ's    words  is  nothing  to  the   point : 
He  was  speaking  less  to  them  than  to  Christians  throughout  all  ages. 
How  often  did  He  utter  words  which  even  Apostles  could  not  under- 
stand at  the    time.     (3)     The  interpretations  of  the  primitive  Church 
are  not    infallible,    even    when  they  are  almost   unanimous:   but  they 
carry  great  weight.     And  in  a  case  of  this  kind,  where  spiritual  in- 
sight and  Apostolic  tradition  are  needed,  rather  than  scholarship  and 
critical   power,   patristic  authority  may  be   allowed  the   very  greatest 
weight. 

But  while  it  is  incredible  that  there  is  no  reference  to  the  Eucharist 
in  this  discourse,  it  is  equally  incredible  that  the  reference  is  solely  or 
primarily  to  the  Eucharist.  The  wording  of  the  larger  portion  of  the 
discourse  is  against  any  such  exclusive  interpretation ;  not  until  v.  5 1 
does  the  reference  to  the  Eucharist  become  clear  and  direct.  Rather 
the  discourse  refers  to  a//  the  various  channels  of  grace  by  means  of 
which  Christ  imparts  Himself  to  the  believing  soul :  and  who  will  dare 
to  limit  these  in  number  or  efficacy? 

To  quote  the  words  of  Dr  Westcott,  the  discourse  "cannot  refer 
]irimarily  to  the  Holy  Communion  ;  nor  again  can  it  be  simply  pro- 
phetic of  that  Sacrament.  The  teaching  has  a  full  and  consistent 
meaning  in  connexion  with  the  actual  circumstances,  and  it  treats 
essentially  of  spiritual  realities  with  which  no  external  act,  as  such, 
can  be  extensive.     The  well-known  words  of  Augustine,  cfcde  ct  mail' 


V.  27.]  S.   JOHN,   VI.  147 

unto  you,  Ye  seek  me,  not  because  ye  saw  the  miracles, 
but  because  ye   did   eat   of  tlie   loaves,    and   were    filled. 
Labour   not  for   the   meat   which  perisheth,    but   for  that  27 
meat  which  endureth  unto  everlasting  life,  wliich  the  Son 
of  man   shall   give   unto    you :    for    him    hath    God    the 


dticasti,  'believe  and  thou  hast  eaten,'  give  the  sum  of  the  thoughts  in 
a  hnninous  and  pregnant  sentence. 

"But,  on  the  other  hand,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  truth  which 
is  presented  in  its  absolute  form  in  these  discourses  is  presented  in  a 
specific  act  and  in  a  concrete  form  in  the  Holy  Communion;  and  yet 
further  that  the  Holy  Conmiunion  is  the  divinely  appointed  means 
whereby  men  may  realise  the  truth.  Nor  can  there  be  any  difficulty 
to  any  one  who  acknowledges  a  divine  fitness  in  the  ordinances  of  the 
Church,  an  eternal  correspondence  in  the  parts  of  the  one  counsel  of 
God,  in  believing  that  the  Lord,  while  speaking  intelligibly  to  those 
who  heard  Him  at  the  time,  gave  by  anticipation  a  commentary,  so 
to  speak,  on  the  Sacrament  which  He  afterwards  instituted."  Sj>eake)-'s 
Comnicntary,  II.  p.  113. 

The  discourse  may  be  thus  divided  ;  I.  26 — 34,  Distinction  between 
the  material  bread  and  the  Spiritual  Bread;  11.  35 — 50  (with  two 
digressions,  37 — 40;  43 — 46),  Identification  of  the  Spiritual  Bread 
with  Christ;  III.  51 — 58,  Further  definition  of  the  identification  as 
consisting  in  the  giving  of  His  Body  and  outpouring  of  His  Blood. 
S.  p.  128.  On  the  language  and  style  see  introductory  note  to 
chap.  III. 

26 — 34.     Distinction  betiveen  the  material  bread  and  the  Spiritual  Bread. 

26.  not  because  ye  saw  the  mij'acles']  Better,  not  because  ye  saw 
signs.  There  is  no  article  in  the  Greek;  and  the  strict  meaning  of 
'  signs '  should  be  retained.  They  had  seen  the  miracle,  but  it  had 
not  been  a  sign  to  them  ;  it  had  e,\cited  in  them  nothing  better  than 
wonder  and  greediness.  The  plural  does  not  necessarily  refer  to  more 
than  the  one  sign  of  the  Feeding ;  the  generic  plural. 

27.  Labotir  not  for,  &c.]  Better,  Work  not  for,  &c.  The  trans- 
lation in  the  margin  is  preferable,  to  keep  up  the  connexion  with 
verses  28,  29,  30.     The  people  keep  harping  on  the  word  '  work.' 

the  meat  which  perisheth]  Better  (to  avoid  all  ambiguity),  the  food 
that  perisheth:  'meat'  in  the  sense  of  'flesh-meat'  is  not  intended. 
Comp.  (iv.  13)  'whosoever  drinketh  of  this  water  shall  thirst  again.' 
The  discourse  with  the  Samaritan  woman  should  be  compared  through- 
out :  '  the  food  which  abides  '  here  corresponds  with  '  the  living  water  ' 
there;  '  the  food  that  perisheth'  with  the  water  of  the  weU.  'Perisheth  ' 
not  merely  in  its  sustaining  power,  but  in  itself:  it  is  digested  and 
dispersed  (Matt.  xv.  17;   i  Cor.  vi.  13). 

endureth  unto  eveiiasting  life]  Better,  abideth  unto  eternal  life: 
see  on  i.  33  and  iii.  16. 

10 — 2 


3' 


148  S.   JOHN,  VI.  [vv.  28— 32. 

aS  Father   sealed.     Then  said  they  unto  him,  What  shall  we 

zy  do,  that  we  might  work  the  works  of  God?  Jesus  answered 
and   said   unto    them,  This   is   the   work  of  God,  that  ye 

30  believe  on  him  whom  he  hath  sent.  They  said  therefore 
unto  him.  What  sign  shewest  thou  then,  that  we  may  see, 
and  believe  thee?  what  dost  thou  work  ?  Our  fathers  did 
eat  manna  in  the  desert;  as  it  is  written.  He  gave  them 

32  bread  from  heaven  to  eat.  Then  Jesus  said  unto  them, 
Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  Mo^es  gave  you  not   that 


for  him  hath  God  the  Father  scah'd'\  Better  (preserving  the  em- 
phasis of  the  Greek  order),  for  Him  the  Father  sealed,  even  God. 
'Sealed,'  i.e.  authenticated  (iii.  33),  as  the  true  giver  of  this  food 
(i)  by  direct  testimony  in  the  Scriptures,  {2)  by  the  same  in  the  voice 
from  Heaven  at  His  IJaptism,  (3)  by  indirect  testimony  in  His  miracles 
and  Messianic  work. 

28.  Thefi  said  they']     They  said  therefore. 

What  shall  we  do,  that  we  might  work]  Better,  what  must  we  do 
that  we  may  'work.  They  see  that  His  words  have  a  moral  meaning; 
they  are  to  do  works  pleasing  to  God.     But  how  to  set  about  this? 

29.  the  work  of  God]  1  hey  probably  were  thinking  of  works  of 
the  law,  tithes,  sacrifices,  &c.  Christ  tells  them  of  one  work,  one  moral 
act,  from  which  all  the  rest  derive  their  value, — belief  in  Him  whom 
God  has  sent. 

that  ye  believe]  Literally,  that  ye  may  believe.  S.  John's  favourite 
form  of  expression,  indicating  the  Divine  purpose.  Conip.  v.  50  and 
V.  36. 

30.  What  sign  shewest  thou  then]  '  Thou '  is  emphatic :  '  what 
dost  Thou  on  Thy  part?'  They  quite  understand  tliat  in  the  words 
'Him  whom  He  hath  sent'  Jesus  is  claiming  to  be  the  Messiah;  but 
they  want  a  proof.  Their  enthusiasm  had  cooled,  their  curiosity  had 
increased,  during  the  night.  After  all,  the  feeding  of  the  5000  was 
less  marvellous  than  the  manna,  and  Moses  was  not  the  Messiah.  Note 
that  whereas  He  uses  the  strong  form,  '  believe  on  Him,'  they  use  the 
weak  one,  'believe  Thee.'     See  last  note  on  i.  12. 

7uhat  dost  thou  ivork]  They  purposely  choose  the  vci"y  word  that  He 
had  used  in  v.  29.     The  emphasis  is  on  '  what.' 

31.  viaiiua]     More  exactly,  the  manna. 

He  gave  them  bread  from  heaven  to  eat]  A  rough  quotation  of  '  had 
rained  down  manna  upon  them  to  eat'  (Ps.  Ixxviii.  24).  They  artfully 
suppress  the  nominative  (wliich  in  the  Psalm  is  'God'),  and  leave 
'Moses'  to  be  understood.  Possibly  Neh.  ix.  15  is  in  their  thoughts; 
if  so,  there  is  the  same  artfulness.  On  'it  is  written'  see  on  ii.  17. 
'From  heaven'  is  literally  'out  of  heaven.' 

32.     Moses  gave  you  not]     Christ  shews  them  that  He  quite  undei- 
slands  their  insinuation:   they  are   comparing  Him  unfavourably  with 


vv.  33—35.]  S.   JOHN,   VI.  149 

bread  from  heaven ;    but  my  Father  giveth  you  the  true 
bread   from    heaven.     For  the  bread  of  God  is  he  which  33 
Cometh  down  from  heaven,  and  giveth  life  unto  the  world. 
Then   said   they  unto  him,   Lord,    evermore   give   us   this  34 
bread.     And  Jesus  said  unto  them,  I  am  the  bread  of  life :  35 

Moses.     He  denies  both  their  points;  (i)  that  Moses  gave  the  manna; 
(2)  that  the  manna  was  in  the  truest  sense  bread  from  heaven. 

giveth  you  the  true  bread,  &c.]  Literally,  giveth  joti  the  bread 
out  Of  heaven  {which  is)  the  true  h-ead;  'true'  in  the  sense  of  'real' 
and  'perfect'  (see  on  i.  9);  the  manna  was  but  the  type,  and  therefore 
imperfect.  Note  the  change  of  tense  from  '  gave '  to  '  giveth :'  God 
is  continually  giving  the  true  bread ;  it  is  not  a  thing  granted  at  one 
time  and  then  no  more,  like  the  manna. 

33.  the  bread  of  God  is  he  -which]  Better,  the  bread  of  God  is 
that  7vhich.  Christ  has  not  yet  identified  Himself  with  the  Bread; 
it  is  still  impersonal,  and  hence  the  present  participle  in  the  Greek. 
Contrast  v.  41,  There  is  a  clear  reference  to  this  passage  in  the 
Ignatian  Epistles,  Roi?ians  vii.  The  whole  chapter  is  impregnated 
with  the  Fourth  Gospel.     See  on  iv.  10. 

giveth  life  itnto  the  world]  Without  this  Bread  mankind  is  spiritu- 
ally dead;  and  this  is  the  point  of  the  argument  (the  introductory 'for' 
shews  that  the  verse  is  argum.entative):  we  have  proof  that  it  is  the 
Father  who  gives  the  really  heavenly  Bread,  for  it  is  His  Bread  that 
quickens  the  whole  human  race. 

34.  Then  said  they]     They  said  therefore. 

Lord,  evermore  give  us  this  bread]  'Lord'  is  too  strong,  and  makes 
the  request  too  much  like  the  prayer  of  a  humble  believer.  Our  trans- 
lators wisely  vary  the  rendering  of  Kyrie,  using  sometimes  '  Lord,'  and 
sometimes  '  Sir.'  Here,  as  in  the  conversation  with  the  Samaritan 
woman,  'Sir'  would  be  better.  Not  that  the  request  is  ironical;  it  is 
not  the  mocking  prayer  of  the  sceptic.  Rather  it  is  the  selfish  petition 
of  one  whose  beliefs  and  aspirations  are  low.  As  the  Samaritan 
woman  thought  that  the  living  water  would  at  any  rate  be  very  useful 
(iv.  15),  so  these  Jews  think  that  the  true  bread  is  at  least  worth 
having.  He  fed  them  yesterday,  and  they  are  hungry  again ;  He  talks 
to  them  of  food  that  endureth ;  it  will  be  well  to  be  evermore  supplied 
with  this  food,  which  is  perhaps  another  manna  with  greater  sustaining 
powers.     They  do  not  disbelieve  in  His  power,  but  in  His  mission. 

35 — 50.     Identification  of  the  Spiritual  Bread  with    Christ. 

35.  /  am  the  bread  of  life.  The  pronoun  is  very  emphatic:  comp. 
iv.  26.  As  in  v.  30,  He  passes  from  the  third  to  the  first  person. 
'Bread  of  life'  means  'bread  that  giveth  life.'  Comp.  'the  tree  of 
life'  (Gen.  ii.  9,  iii.  11,  24),  'the  water  of  life'  (Rev.  xxi.  6,  xxii.  i). 
In  the  remainder  of  the  verse  'He  that  cometh  to  Me'  =  'he  that  be- 
lieveth  on  Me,'  and  'shall  never  hunger'=  '  shall  never  thirst;'  i.e.  the 
believer  shall  experience  the  continual  satisfaction  of  his  highest  spiri- 


ISO 


S.   JOHN,   VI.  [vv.  36—39. 


he    that   cometh   to  me  shall  never  hunger;  and  he  that 

36  believeth  on  me  shall  never  thirst.     But  I  said  unto  you, 

37  That  ye  also  have  seen  me,  and  believe  not.     All  that  the 
Father  giveth  me  shall  come  to  me  ;  and  him  that  cometh 

38  to  me  I  will  in  no  wise  cast  out.     For  I  came  down  from 
heaven,  not  to  do  mine  own  will,  but  the  will  of  him  that 

39  sent  me.     And  this  is  the  Father's  will  which  hath  sent  me, 

tual  needs.  The  superiority  of  Christ  to  the  manna  consists  in  this, 
that  while  it  satisfied  only  bodily  needs  for  a  time,  He  satisfies  spiri- 
tual needs  for  ever. 

36.  /  said  unto  you]  When?  no  such  saying  is  recorded.  EwaUl 
thus  finds  some  slight  evidence  for  his  theory  that  a  whole  sheet  of 
this  Gospel  has  been  lost  between  chapters  v.  and  vi.  But  the  ref^er- 
ence  may  easily  be  to  one  of  the  countless  unrecorded  sayings  of  Christ, 
or  possibly  to  the  general  sense  of  v.  37—44-  I"  the  latter  case  'you' 
must  mean  the  Jewish  nation,  for  those  verses  were  addressed  to  Jews 
at  Jerusalem.  See  on  x.  26,  where  there  is  a  somewhat  similar  case. 
That  'I  said'  means  'I  would  have  you  to  know,'  and  has  no  refer- 
ence to  any  previous  utterance,  does  not  seem  very  probable. 

ye  also  have  seen  me]  '  Also'  belongs  to  '  have  seen,'  not  to  '  ye,'  as 
most  English  readers  would  suppose :  ye  have  even  seen  me  (not  merely 
heard  of  me),  and  (yet)  do  not  believe.  The  tragic  tone  again.  See  on 
i.  5,  10,  II. 

37—40.     Digression  on  the  blessedness  of  those  who  come  to  Christ 

as  believers. 

37.  All  that  the  Father  giveth... him  that  cometh]  There  is  a  signi- 
ficant change  of  gender  in  the  Greek  which  is  obscured  in  the  E:i;,dish 
version:  'all  that'  is  neuter,  all  that  wMcli;  what  is  given  is  treated 
as  impersonal,  mankind  en  masse;  what  comes,  with  free  will,  is  mas- 
culine. Men  are  given  to  Christ  without  their  wills  being  consulted ; 
but  each  individual  can,  if  he  likes,  refuse  to  come._  There  is  no  coer- 
cion.   Comp.  similar  changes  of  gender  in  i.  1 1,  xvii.  2. 

shall  come  to  7ne,  and  him  that  cometh... For  I  came  doivn]  The 
verb  'come'  here  represents  three  different  Greek  verbs,  but  there  is 
no  such  great  difTerence  between  them  as  to  make  it  worth  while  to 
change  so  familiar  a  text;  yet  it  would  be  more  literal  to  translate  all 
that  7he  Father  giveth  iMe,  to  Me  shall  come,  and  him  that  approachcth 
Me  I  will  in  no  wise  cast  out;  for  I  have  descended,  &c.  The  second 
'  Me'  is  emphatic,  the  first  and  third  are  not. 

38.  /  came  do-am]  Better,  I  am  come  doim  or  have  descended. 
Four  times  in  this  discourse  Christ  declares  that  He  is  come  down 
from  heaven;  verses  38,  50,  51,  58.  The  drift  of  these  three  verses 
(38—40)  is ;— How  could  I  cast  them  out,  seeing  that  I  am  come  to  do 
my  Father's  will,  and  He  wills  that  they  should  be  received? 

39.  tl'is  is  the  Father's  will,  &c.]  The  true  reading  is;  this  is  the 
will  of  Him  that  sent  Me. 


vv.  40— 42.]  S.   JOHN,   VI.  151 

that  of  all  which  he  hath  given  me  I  should  lose  nothing, 
but  should  raise  it  up  again  at  the  last  day.     And  this  is  40 
the  will  of  him  that  sent  me,  that  every  one  which  seeth 
the  Son,  and  beheveth  on  him,  may  have  everlasting  hfe : 
and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day. 

The  Jews  then  murmured  at  him,  because  he  said,  I  am  41 
the  bread  which  came  down  from  heaven.  And  they  said,  -12 
Is   not   this  Jesus,  the  son   of  Joseph,  whose   father   and 

that  of  all]     Literally,  in  order  that  of  all :  see  on  v.  29. 

all  which  he  hath  given  vie]  'AH'  is  neuter  as  in  v.  37,  and  is  placed 
first  for  emphasis.     In  the  Greek  it  is  a  noviinativus  pendens. 

raise  it  up  again  at  the  last  day\  This  gracious  utterance  is  repeated 
as  a  kind  of  refrain,  verses  40,  44,  54.  'Again'  may  be  omitted. 
This  is  'the  resurrection  of  life'  (v.  29),  'the  first  resurrection,'  the 
resurrection  of  the  just. 

the  last  day\  This  phrase  is  peculiar  to  S.  John,  and  occurs  seven 
times  in  this  Gospel.  Elsewhere  it  is  called  'the  Day  of  the  Lord,' 
'the  Great  Day,'  &c. 

40.  And  this  is  the  7vill  of  hifn  that  sent  me]  The  true  reading  is ; 
For  this  is  the  will  of  My  Father.  The  opening  words  of  verses  39  and 
40,  being  very  similar,  have  become  confused  in  inferior  MSS.  The 
best  MSS.  have  'Father'  in  this  verse,  where  'the  Son'  is  mentioned, 
not  in  V.  39,  where  He  is  not.  Moreover  this  verse  is  explanatory  of 
V.  40,  and  opens  with  '  for;'  it  shews  who  are  meant  by  'all  which  He 
hath  given  me,'  viz.  every  one  that  coiiternplateth  the  Son  and  believeth 
on  Him.  '  Seeth'  is  not  strong  enough  for  the  Greek  word  here  used : 
the  Jews  had  seen  Jesus;  they  had  not  contemplated  Him  so  as  to 
believe.  'Contemplate'  is  frequent  in  S.  John  and  the  Acts,  elsewhere 
not.  Comp.  xii.  45,  xiv.  19,  xvi.  10,  16,  19.  'Tliat'  again  =  /«  order 
that. 

I  will  raise  him  up]  The  Greek  construction  is  ambiguous ;  pos- 
sibly 'raise'  depends  upon  'that'  as  in  v.  39:  and  that  I  shotdd  raise 
him  tip.     'I'  is  here  very  emphatic;  '  by  My  power  as  Messiah.' 

41.  The  Jcivs  then  imu-mured  at  him]  Better,  The  Jeivs  therefore 
muttered  respecting  Him,  talked  in  an  under  tone  among  themselves 
about  Him :  it  does  not  necessarily  mean  that  they  found  fault,  though 
the  context  shews  that  they  did  (comp.  v.  6r,  vii.  12).  From  the  men- 
tion of  the  Jews  we  are  to  understand  that  there  were  some  of  the  hos- 
tile party  among  the  multitude,  perhaps  some  members  of  the  Sanhe- 
drin ;  but  not  that  the  whole  multitude  were  hostile,  though  carnally- 
minded  and  refusing  to  believe  without  a  further  sign.  Comp.  i.  19, 
ii.  18,  v.  10,  vii.  1 1,  &c. 

/  am  the  bread  which  came  down  from  heaven]  They  put  together 
the  statements  in  verses  33,  35,  38. 

42.  Is  not  this]  Or,  Is  not  this  fellow;  the  expression  is  con- 
temptuous. 


152  S.   JOHN,   VI.  [vv.  43—46 

mother  we  know?  how  is  it  then  t/iat  he   saith,  I  came 

43  down  from  heaven  ?  Jesus  therefore  answered  and  said  unto 

44  them,  Murmur  not  among  yourselves.  No  ma?i  can  come 
to  me,  except  the  Father  which  hath  sent  me  draw  him  : 

45  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day.  It  is  written  in  the 
prophets,  And  they  shall  be  all  taught  of  God.  Every 
man  therefore  that  hath  heard,  and  hath   learned  of  the 

46  Father,  cometh  unto  me.     Not  that  any  man  hath  seen  the 


whose  father  and  mother  ive  kno7v\  'We  l<now  all  about  His  parent- 
age; there  is  nothing  supernatural  or  mysterious  about  His  origin.' 
Nothing  can  be  inferred  from  this  as  to  Joseph's  being  alive  at  this 
time :  the  probability  is  that  he  was  not,  as  he  nowhere  appears  in  the 
Gospel  narrative;   but  this  cannot  be  proved. 

how  is  it  then,  &c.]  Better,  How  dotli  He  now  say,  I  am  come 
doivji. 

43 — 46.     Digression  on  the  difficulty  of  coming  to  Christ  as  a  believer. 

43.  Mttrmur  not]  Christ  does  not  answer  their  objection  or  explain. 
Even  among  the  first  Christians  the  fact  of  his  miraculous  conception 
seems  to  have  been  made  known  only  gradually,  so  foul  were  the 
calumnies  which  the  Jews  had  spread  respecting  His  Mother.  This 
certainly  was  not  the  place  to  proclaim  it.  He  directs  them  to  some- 
thing of  more  vital  importance  than  the  way  by  which  He  came  into 
the  world,  viz.  the  way  by  which  tliey  may  come  to  Him. 

44.  dra7a  him]  It  is  the  same  word  as  is  used  xii.  32 ;  'will  draw  all 
men  unto  Me.'  The  word  does  not  necessarily  imply  force,  still  less 
irresistible  force,  but  merely  attraction  of  some  kind,  some  inducement 
to  come.  Comp.  'with  loving-kindness  have  I  drawn  thee'  (Jer. 
xxxi.  3),  and  Virgil's  trahit  sua  qucmqite  vohtptas. 

45.  in  the  prophets]  The  direct  reference  is  to  Isa.  liv.  13,  but 
there  are  similar  passages  Jer.  xxxi.  33,  34;  Joel  iii.  16,  17.  The 
quotation  explains  what  is  meant  by  the  Father's  drawing  men,  viz., 
enlightening  them.  The  'therefore'  in  the  second  half  of  the  verse  is 
not  genuine:  'therefore'  is  very  common  in  the  narrative  portion  of 
this  Gospel,  very  rare  in  the  discourses.  On  'it  is  written'  see  on 
ii.  17.  Here,  as  in  xiii.  18  and  xix.  37,  the  quotation  agrees  with  the 
Hebrew  against  the  LXX.  This  is  evidence  that  the  writer  knew 
Hebrew  and  therefore  was  probably  a  Jew  of  Palestine. 

Every  tnan  there/ore  that  hath  h,ard,  &c.]  And  no  others :  only 
those  who  have  been  enlightened  by  the  Father  can  come  to  the 
Son. 

46.  Not  that  any  man  hath  see7i'\  To  be  enlightened  and  taught  by 
the  Father  it  is  not  necessary  to  see  Him.  "That  is  a  privilege 
reserved  for  a  later  stage  in  the  spiritual  life,  and  is  only  to  be  attained 
mediately  through  the  Son  (comp.  i.  iS)."     S.  p.  129. 


vv.  47-5I-]  S.   JOHN,    VI.  153 

Father,  save  he  which  is  of  God,  he  hath  seen  the  Father, 
Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  He  that  believeth  on  me  hath  47 
everlasting  life.     I  am  that  bread  of  life.     Your  fathers  did  f^ 
eat  manna  in  the  wilderness,  and  are  dead.     This  is  the  50 
bread  which  cometh  down  from  heaven,  that  a  man  may  eat 
thereof,  and  not  die.     I  am  the  living  bread  which  came  s' 
down  from  heaven :  if  any  man  eat  of  this  bread,  he  shall 
live  for  ever :  and  the  bread  that  I  will  give  is  my  flesh, 

he  which  is  of  God]  Or,  He  zuhich  is  from  God,  with  whom  He  was 
previous  to  the  Incarnation;  i.  i,  14,  viii.  42,  xvi.  27. 

47 — 50.     Christ  returns  from  answering  the  Jews  to  the  main  subject. 

47.  hath  everlasting  life]  //a/// eternal ///J?  (iii.  16).  Note  the  tense. 
Christ  solemnly  assures  them  (the  double  'Verily')  that  the  believer  is 
already  in  possession  of  eternal  life.     See  on  iii.  36  and  v.  24. 

48.  that  bread  of  life]  Better,  the  Bread  of  life.  Comp.  v.  32, 
i.  21,  25,  vi.  14,  where  the  same  exaggerated  translation  of  the  Greek 
article  occurs. 

49.  Christ  answers  them  out  of  their  own  mouths.  They  had  spoken 
of  the  manna  as  superior  to  the  multiplied  loaves  and  fishes  ;  but  the 
manna  did  not  preserve  men  from  death.  The  same  word  is  used  both 
in  V.  49  and  v.  50;  therefore  for  'are  dead  '  it  will  be  better  to  substi- 
tute died.  Moreover,  the  point  is,  not  that  they  are  dead  now,  but  that 
they  perished  then ;  the  manna  did  not  save  them.  They  ate  the  manna 

and  died. 

50.  that  a  man  may  eat]  S.  John's  favourite  form  of  expression 
again,  indicating  the  Divine  intention  :  comp.  v.  29,  vi.  34,  viii.  56, 
&c.  *  Of  this  purpose  is  the  Bread  which  cometh  down  from  heaven  ; 
in  order  that  a  man  may  eat  thereof  and  so  not  die.'   Comp.  i  John  v.  3. 

61 — 68.  Further  definition  of  the  identification  of  the  Spiritual  Bread 
with  Christ  as  consisting  in  the  giving  of  His  Body  and  the  out- 
pouring of  His  Blood. 

In  vv.  35 — 50  Christ  in  His  Person  is  the  Bread  of  Life:  here  He  is 
the  spiritual  food  of  believers  in  the  Redemptive  work  of  His  Death. 

51.  the  living  h-ead]  Not  merely  the  Bread  of  life  (v.  48),  the  life- 
giving  Bread,  but  the  living  Bread,  having  life  in  itself,  which  life  is 
imparted  to  those  who  partake  of  the  Bread. 

which  came  down]  At  the  Incarnation.  Now  that  the  Bread  is  iden- 
tified with  Christ,  we  have  the  past  tense  of  what  took  place  once  for 
all.  Previously  (verses  33,  50)  the  present  tense  is  used  of  what  is  con- 
tinually going  on.  In  one  sense  Christ  is  perpetually  coming  down 
from  heaven,  in  the  other  He  came  but  once:  He  is  ever  imparting 
Himself  to  man  ;  He  only  once  became  man. 

he  shall  live  for  ever]  Just  as  '  living  Bread  '  is  a  stronger  expression 
than  '  Bread  of  life,'  so '  live  for  ever '  is  stronger  than  '  not  die.' 

and  the  bread  that  I  will  give]     The  precise  wording  of  this  sentence 


154  S.   JOHN,   VI.  [vv.  52—54. 

52  which  I  will  give  for  the  life  of  the  world.  The  Jews  there- 
fore strove  amongst  themselves,  saying,  How  can  this  man 

53  give  us  Jiis  flesh  to  eat?  Then  Jesus  said  unto  them, 
Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  Except  ye  eat  the  flesh  of 
the  Son  of  man,  and  drink  his  blood,  ye  have  no  life  in  you. 

54  Whoso  eateth  my  flesh,  and  drinketh  my  blood,  hath  eternal 

is  somewhat  uncertain,  but  the  best  reading  seems  to  be :  a^td  the  Bread 
that  I  will  give  is  My  Flesh  for  the  life  of  the  world.  That  in  Christ's 
mind  these  words  looked  onwards  to  the  Eucharist,  and  that  in  thus 
speaking  to  believers  throughout  all  time  He  included  a  reference  to  the 
Eucharist  has  already  been  stated  to  be  highly  probable.  (See  above, 
Introduction  to  26 — 58).  But  that  the  reference  is  not  exclusively,  nor 
even  directly,  to  the  Eucharist  is  shewn  from  the  use  of  '  Flesh '  {sarx) 
and  not  '  Body '  {soma).  In  all  places  where  the  Eucharist  is  mentioned 
in  N.  T.  wf>  have  'Body,'  not  '  Flesh;'  Matt.  xxvi.  26;  Mark  xiv.  22; 
Luke  xxii.  19;  i  Cor.  xi.  241?.  Moreover  the  words  must  have  had 
some  meaning  for  those  who  heard  them  at  Capernaum.  Evidently  they 
have  a  wider  range  than  any  one  Sacrament.  Christ  promises  to  give 
His  Flesh  (by  His  bloody  death  soon  to  come)  for  the  benefit  of  the 
whole  world.  But  this  benefit  can  only  be  appropriated  by  the  faith  of 
each  individual;  and  so  that  which  when  ofiered  by  Christ  is  His  Flesh 
appears  under  the  figure  of  bread  when  partaken  of  by  the  believer. 
The  primary  reference,  therefore,  is  to  Christ's  propitiatory  death ;  the 
secondary  reference  is  to  all  those  means  by  wliich  the  death  of  Christ 
is  appropriated,  especially  the  Eucharist.  Not  that  Christ  is  here 
promising  that  ordinance,  but  uttering  deep  truths,  which  apply,  and 
which  lie  intended  to  apply,  to  that  ordinance,  now  that  it  is  in- 
stituted. 

52.  strove  among  themselves'\    Their  excitement  increases;  they  have 
got  beyond  muttering  among  themselves  {v.  41). 

give  us  his  flesh  to  eat]     'To  eat '  is  their  own  addition  ;  they  wish 
to  bring  out  in  full  the  strangeness  of  His  declaration. 

53.  Then  said  yest/s]     Better,  Therefore  said  yesus:  see  on  z*.  45. 
and  drink  his  blood]     Christ  not  only  accejits  what  they  have  added 

to  His  words,  but  still  further  startles  them  by  telling  them  that  they 
must  drink  His  Blood ;  an  amazing  statement  to  a  Jew,  who  was  for- 
bidden to  taste  even  the  blood  of  animals  (Gen.  ix.  4 ;  Lev.  xvii.  10 — 16). 
These  words  point  still  more  distinctly  to  His  propitiatory  death;  for 
'the  blood  is  the  life'  which  He  offered  up  for  the  sins  of  the  world. 
The  eating  and  drinking  are  not  faith,  but  the  appropriation  of  His 
death  ;  faith  leads  us  to  eat  and  drink  and  is  the  means  of  appropriation. 
Taken  separately,  the  Flesh  represents  sacrifice  and  sustenance,  the 
Blood  represents  atonement  and  life. 

no  life  in  yott]     Literally,   no  life  in  yourselves :  for  the  source  of 
life  is  absent.     The  next  four  verses  explain  more  fully  how  this  is. 

64.     The  gracious  positive  of  the  previous  minatory  negative.     From 
the    warning  as  to  the  disastrous  consequences  of  not  partaking   He 


vv.  55—58.]  S.   JOHN,   VI.  T55 

life ;  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day.     For  my  flesh  55 
is  meat  indeed,  and  my  blood  is  drink  indeed.     He  that  56 
eateth  my  flesh,  and  drinketh  my  blood,  dwelleth  in  me, 
and  I  in  him.     As  the  living  Father  hath  sent  me,  and  I  57 
live  by  the  Father :  so  he  that  eateth  me,  even  he  shall  live 
by  me.     This  is  that  bread  which  came  down  from  heaven  :  58 
not  as  your  fathers  did  eat  manna,  and  are  dead  :  he  that 
eateth  (?/'this  bread  shall  live  for  ever. 

passes  to  a  declaration  of  the  blessed  consequences  of  partaking, 
viz.  eternal  life,  and  that  at  once,  with  resurrection  among  the  just 
hereafter. 

55.  my  flesh  is  meat  indeed,  &c.]  According  to  the  best  reading; 
My  Flesh  is  true  food  and  My  Blood  is  true  drink;  i.e.  this  is  no  mis- 
leading metaphor,  but  an  actual  fact. 

56.  dwelleth  in  me,  and  I  in  him'\  Or,  abideth  in  Me  and  I  in 
him.  This  is  one  of  S.  John's  very  characteristic  phrases  to  express  the 
most  intimate  mutual  fellowship  and  union.  The  word  'abide'  is  also 
characteristic,  as  we  have  seen.  Comp.  xiv.  10,  20,  xv.  4,  5,  xvii.  i\; 
I  John  iii.  24,  iv.  16.  Christ  is  at  once  the  centre  and  circumference 
of  the  life  of  the  Christian ;  the  source  from  which  it  springs,  and  the 
ocean  into  which  it  flows ;  its  starting-point  and  its  goal. 

57.  Not  a  mere  repetition  of  the  previous  statement  but  an  enlarge- 
ment of  it.  The  result  of  this  close  union  is  perfect  life,  proceeding  as 
from  the  Father  to  the  Son,  so  in  like  manner  from  the  Son  to  all 
believers. 

the  living  Father]  The  absolutely  Living  One,  the  Fount  of  all  life, 
in  whom  is  no  element  of  death.  The  expression  occurs  nowhere  else. 
Comp.  Matt.  xvi.  16  j  2  Cor.  vi.  16;  Hebr.  vii.  25.  For  'hath  sent' 
read  sent. 

By  the  Father]  Better  because  of  the  Father,  i.e.  because  the  Father 
is  the  Living  One.  Similarly,  'by  Me '  should  be  because  of  Me, 
i.e.  because  he  thus  derives  life  from  Me. 

he  that  eateth  me]  Instead  of  the  Flesh  and  Blood  we  have  Christ 
Himself;  the  two  modes  of  partaking  are  merged  in  one,  the  more 
appropriate  of  the  two  being  retained. 

even  he]     Or,  he  also. 

58.  This  is  that  bread]  Better,  this  is  tte  Bread:  see  on  v.  48. 
The  verse  is  a  general  summing  up  of  the  whole,  returning  from  the 
imagery  of  Flesh  and  Blood  to  the  main  expression  of  the  discourse — 
the  Bread  that  came  down  from  heaven  and  its  superiority  to  all  earthly 
food. 

not  as  yo7ir  fathers  did  eat  manna,  and  are  dead]  Better,  not  as  the 
fathers  did  eat  and  died  (see  on  v.  49) :  '  your  '  and  '  manna '  are 
wanting  in  the  best  MSS.  It  is  not  in  that  way  that  the  Bread  comes 
down  from  heaven,  nor  is  it  such  food. 

eateth  of]  Omit  'of,'  as  in  vv.  54,  56;  'of  is  rightly  inserted  in 
vv.  26,  50,  51. 


156  S.   JOHN,   VI.  [vv.  59—62. 

59  These  fki/igs  said  he  in  the  synagogue,  as  he  taught  in 
Capernaum. 

60 — 71.     Opposite  Results  of  the  Discourse. 

60  Many   therefore   of  his   disciples,  wlien  they  had  heard 

61  t/iis,  said,  This  is  a  hard  saying;  who  can  hear  it?     When 
Jesus  knew  in  himself  that  his  disciples  murmured  at  it,  he 

62  said  unto  them,  Doth  this  offend  you  ?      JV/iat  and  if  ye 

59.  i>i  the  synagogue]  Or,  in  synagogue,  as  m'c  say  '  in  church  :' 
there  is  no  article  in  the  Greek.  Comp.  xviii.  20.  The  verse  is  a  mere 
historical  note,  stating  definitely  what  was  stated  vaguely  in  v.  11  as 
'the  other  side  of  the  sea.'  '  These  things  '  naturally  refers  to  the  whole 
discourse  from  v.  26  ;  we  have  no  sufficient  evidence  of  a  break  between 
V.  40  and  I/.  41.  On  the  other  hand  there  is  strong  evidence  that  from 
V.  26  to  V.  jrf  forms  one  connected  discourse  spoken  at  one  time  in  the 
synagogue  at  Capernaum.  The  site  of  Capernaum  is  not  undisputed 
(see  on  Matt.  iv.  13)  ;  but  assuming  Tell  Hum  to  be  correct,  the  ruins 
of  the  synagogue  there  are  probably  those  of  the  very  building  in 
which  these  words  were  uttered.  On  one  of  the  stones  a  pot  of 
manna  is  sculptured. 

60 — 71.    Opposite  Results  of  the  Discourse. 

60.  Many  therefore  of  his  disciples']  Including  many  more  than  the 
Apostles. 

This  is  a  hard  saying]  Or,  Hard  is  this  speech.  Not  hard  to  under- 
stand, but  hard  to  accept.  The  word  for  'hard  '  means  originally  'diy,' 
and  so  'rough;'  and  then  in  a  moral  sense,  'rough,  harsh,  offensive.' 
Nabal  the  churl  has  this  epithet,  i  Sam.  xxv.  3  ;  and  the  slothful  ser- 
vant in  the  parable  of  the  Talents  calls  his  master  a  'hard  man,'  Matt. 
xxv.  24.  Here  the  meaning  is  :  '  This  is  a  repulsive  speech  ;  who  can 
listen  to  it?'  It  was  the  notion  of  eating  flesh  and  drinking  blood  that 
specially  scandalized  them.     See  on  v.  47. 

61.  kneiv  in  himself]  Again  He  appears  as  the  reader  of  the  heart. 
Comp.  i.  42,  47,  ii.  24,  25,  iv.  18,  v.  14,  42,  vi.  26,  &c.  More 
literally  the  verse  runs:  No-di  Jesus  knoaving  in  Himself  that  His  dis- 
ciples are  muttering  about  it:  see  on  v.  41,  vii.  12.  They  talked  in 
a  low  tone  so  that  He  could  not  hear  :  but  He  knew  without  hearing. 

62.  IVhat  and  if,  &c.]  Literally,  If  therefore  ye  should  behold  the 
Son  of  man  ascending  "where  lie  7ms  btporel  The  sentence  breaks  off 
(aposiopesis)  leaving  something  to  be  understood  :  but  what  is  to  be 
understood  ?  The  answer  to  this  depends  on  the  meaning  assigned  to 
'behold  the  Son  of  man  ascending.'  The  most  literal  "and  obvious 
interpretation  is  of  an  actual  beholding  of  the  Ascension :  and  in  that 
case  we  supply;  'Would  ye  still  take  offence  then?'  Against  this 
interpretation  it  is  urged  (i)  That  S.  John  does  not  record  the  Ascen- 
sion.    But  it  is  assumed,  if  not  here  and  iii.  13,  yet  certainly  xx.  17  as  a 


vv.  63-65.]  S.   JOHN,   VI.  157 

shall  see  the  Son  of  man  ascend  up  where  he  was  before  ? 
It  is  the  spirit  that  quickeneth ;  the  flesh  profiteth  nothing  :  63 
the  words  that  I  speak  unto  you,  they  are  spirit,  and  they 
are  life.     But  there  are  some  of  you  that  believe  not.     For  64 
Jesus  knew  from  the  beginning  who  they  were  that  believed 
not,  and  who  should  betray  him.     And  he  said,  Therefore  65 

fact  ;  and  in  all  three  cases  it  is  in  the  words  of  our  Lord  that  the 
reference  occurs.  S.  John  throughout  assumes  that  the  main  events  of 
Christ's  life  and  the  fundamental  elementsof  Christianity  are  well  known 
to  his  readers.  (2)  That  none  but  the  Twelve  witnessed  the  Ascension, 
while  this  is  addressed  to  a  multitude  of  doubting  disciples.  But  some 
of  the  Twelve  were  present  :  and  Christ  speaks  hypothetically  ;  '  ?/  ye 
J'//(w/a' behold,' not  '■■wlieti  ye  ^/za// behold.'  {3)  That  in  this  case  we 
should  expect  'but'  instead  of  '  therefore.'  Possibly,  but  not  neces- 
sarily. The  alternative  interpretation  is  to  make  the  '  ascending '  refer 
to  the  whole  drama  which  led  to  Christ's  return  to  glory,  especially  the 
Passion  (comp.  vii.  33,  xiii.  3,  xiv.  12,  28,  xvi.  5,  28,  xvii.  11,  13): 
and  in  that  case  we  supply  ;  '  Will  not  the  sight  of  a  suffering  Messiah 
offend  you  still  more?' 

63.  that  quickenetlil  Literally,  that  maketh  alive  or  giveth  life. 
The  latter  would  perhaps  be  better  to  bring  out  the  connexion  with 
'  they  are  life'  at  the  end  of  the  verse. 

the  fleshy  Not,  'My  Flesh,'  which  would  contradict  v.  51.  The 
statement  is  a  general  one,  but  has  reference  to  Himself.  'My  Flesh' 
in  V.  51  means  'My  death'  to  be  spirit luilly  appropriated  by  every 
Christian,  and  best  appropriated  in  the  Eucfiarist.  'The  flesh'  here 
means  the  flesh  witliout  the  Spirit,  that  which  can  only  be  appropriated 
physically,  like  the  manna.  Even  Christ's  flesh  in  this  sense  '  profiteth 
nothing.'  (Comp.  iii.  6.)  Probably  there  is  a  general  reference  to 
their  carnal  ideas  about  the  Messiah :  it  is  "in  our  Lord's  refusal  to 
assume  the  outward  insignia  of  the  Messianic  dignity,  and  in  His  per- 
sistent spiritualisation  of  the  Messianic  idea"  that  we  must  seek  "the 
ultimate  cause"  of  the  defection  of  so  many  disciples.  S.  pp.  141, 
142. 

the  words']     Or,  the  sayings:  see  on  v.  47. 

that  I  speak]  The  true  reading  is;  that  I  have  spoken,  in  the  dis- 
course just  concluded. 

64.  some  of  you  that  believe  not]  There  were  some  of  those  who  followed 
Him  and  called  themselves  His  disciples,  who  still  did  not  believe  on 
Him.     The  better  order  is,  there  are  of  you  some. 

knew  from  the  beginning]  It  is  impossible  to  fix  the  exact  limits  of 
this;  the  meaning  of  'the  beginning'  must  depend  on  the  context  (see 
on  i.  i).  Here  the  most  natural  limit  is  'knew  from  the  beginning  of 
their  discipleship,'  when  they  first  became  His  followers.  Comp.  ii. 
24,  25. 

who  should  bdray  him]  Or,  ^vho  it  was  tliat  should  betray  Him. 
To  ask,  'Why  then  did  Jesus  choose  Judas  as  an  Apostle?'  is  to  ask  in 


158  S.   JOHN,   VI.  [vv.  66-69. 

said  I  unto  you,  tliat  no  man  can  come  unto  me,  except  it 
were  given  unto  him  of  my  Father. 

66  From  that  time  many  of  his  disciples   went   back,   and 

67  walked   no   more   with   him.     Then   said  Jesus   unto   the 

68  twelve.  Will  ye  also  go  away?     Then  Simon  Peter  answered 
him,  Lord,  to  whom  shall  we  go?  thou  hast  the  words  of 

fg  eternal  life.     And  we  believe  and  are  sure  that  thou   art 

a  special  instance  for  an  answer  to  the  insoluble  enigma  'Why  does 
Omniscience  allow  wicked  persons  to  be  born?  Why  does  Omnipo- 
tence allow  evil  to  exist?'  The  tares  once  sown  among  the  wheat,  both 
must  'grow  together  till  the  harvest,'  and  share  sunshine  and  rain 
alike. 

65.  Therefore]  Better,  For  this  cause  (xii.  18,  27):  see  on  v.  16, 
18,  vii.  12,  viii.  47. 

said  I  unto  you]     v.  44;  comp.  v.  37,  and  see  notes  on  both. 
were  given  unto  him  of  my  Father]    Have  toeen  given  unto  him  of 
tlie  Father. 

66.  Frotn  that  time]  This  may  be  the  meaning,  but  more  probably 
it  means  in  consequence  of  that.  Hereupon  has  somewhat  of  the  ambi- 
guity of  the  Greek,  combining  the  notions  of  time  and  result.  The 
Greek  phrase  occurs  here  and  xix.  12  only  in  N.T. 

67.  the  tzuehe]  The  first  mention  of  them;  S.  John  speaks  of 
them  familiarly  as  a  well-known  body,  assuming  that  his  readers  are 
well  acquainted  with  the  expression  (see  on  v.  62).  This  is  a  mark  of 
truth :  all  the  more  so  because  the  expression  does  not  occur  in  the 
earlier  chapters;  for  it  is  probable  that  down  to  the  end  of  chap.  iv.  at 
any  rate  'the  Twelve'  did  not  yet  exist. 

Pilate  and  Mary  Magdalene  are  introduced  in  the  same  abrupt  way 
(xviii.  29,  xix.  25). 

Will  ye  also  go  away  ?]  Better,  Surely  ye  also  do  not  wlsli  to  go 
away?  'Will'  is  too  weak;  it  is  not  the  future  tense,  but  a  separate 
verb,  'to  will.'  There  is  a  similar  error  vii.  17  and  viii.  44.  Christ 
knows  not  only  the  unbelief  of  the  many,  but  the  belief  and  loyalty  of 
the  few. 

68.  Then  Simon  Pete}-]  Omit 'Then.'  S.  Peter,  as  leader, />;7'///«j 
ititer  fares,  answers  here  as  elsewhere  in  the  name  of  the  Twelve 
(see  note  on  Mark  iii.  17),  and  answers  with  characteristic  impetuosity. 
The  firmness  of  Ilis  conviction  shews  the  appropriateness  of  the  name 
given  to  him  i.  42.  His  answer  contains  three  reasons  in  logical  order 
why  they  cannot  desert  their  Master:  (i)  there  is  no  one  else  to  whom 
they  can  go;  the  Baptist  is  dead.  Even  if  there  were  (2)  Jesus  has  all 
that  they  need;  He  has  'sayings  of  eternal  life.'  And  if  there  be 
other  teachers  who  have  them  also,  yet  (3)  there  is  but  one  Messiah, 
and  Jesus  is  He.     See  on  v.  47. 

69.  ive  beliez<e]  Rather,  7cv  have  believed  :  the  perfect  tense  im- 
plies that  the  faith  and  knowledge  which  they  possess  have  been  theirs 
for  some  time  past.     'Are  sure'  means  literally  ^ have  come  to  know.'' 


vv.  70,  71.]  S.  JOHN,   VI.  159 

that  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God.     Jesus  answered  7° 
them,  Have  not  I  chosen  you  twelve,  and  one  of  you  is  a 
devil  ?     He  spake  of  Judas  Iscariot  the  son  of  Simon  :  for  y 
he  it  was  that  should  betray  him,  being  one  of  the  twelve. 

thou  art  that  Christ,  &c.]  These  words  seem  to  have  been  imported 
hither  from  S.  Peter's  Confession,  Matt.  xvi.  i6.  The  true  reading 
here  is ;  Thou  art  the  Holy  One  of  God.  This  is  altogether  a  different 
occasion  from  Matt.  xvi.  16,  and  probably  previous  to  it.  The  Con- 
fessions are  worth  comparing.  I.  'Thou  art  the  Son  of  God'  (Matt, 
xiv.  33);  in  this  the  other  Apostles  joined.  1.  'Thou  art  the  Holy 
One  of  God'  (John  vi.  69).  3.  'Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the 
living  God'  (Matt.  xvi.  16).  They  increase  in  fulness,  as  we  might 
expect. 

70.  Havel  7tot  chosen  you  tzudve]  Or,  Did  not  I  clioose  you  the  Twelve 
(comp.  xiii.  i8)?  Here  probably  the  question  ends:  and  one  of  you  is  a 
devil  is  best  punctuated  without  an  interrogation ;  it  is  a  single  state- 
ment in  tragic  contrast  to  the  preceding  question.  It  would  be  closer 
to  the  Greek  to  omit  the  article  before  'devil'  and  make  it  a  kind  of 
adjective;  and  one  of  you  is  devil,  i.e.  devilish  in  nature:  but  this  is 
hardly  English.  The  words  contain  a  half-rebuke  to  S.  Peter  for  his 
impetuous  avowal  of  loyalty  in  the  name  of  them  all.  The  passage 
stands  alone  in  the  N.T.  (comp.  Matt.  xvi.  23),  but  its  very  singular- 
ity is  evidence  of  its  truth.  S.  John  is  not  likely  to  have  forgotten 
what  was  said,  or  in  translating  to  have  made  any  serious  change. 

71.  yudas  Iscariot,  the  son  of  Siiiion^  The  better  reading  is;  Judas, 
the  son  of  Simon  Iscariot.  If,  as  seems  probable,  the  name  Iscariot 
means  '  man  of  Kerioth,'  a  place  in  Judah,  it  would  be  natural  enough 
for  both  father  and  son  to  have  the  name.  Assuming  this  to  be  cor- 
rect, Judas  was  the  only  Apostle  who  was  not  a  Galilean. 

that  should  betray^  That  was  to  betray ;  not  the  same  phrase  as  in 
V.  64. 

being  one  of  the  twelve']  'Being'  is  of  doubtful  genuineness.  The 
tragic  contrast  is  stronger  without  the  participle :  for  he  was  to  betray 
Him,  one  of  the  Twelve. 

With  regard  to  the  difficulty  of  understanding  Christ's  words  in  this 
sixth  chapter,  Meyer's  concluding  remark  is  to  be  borne  in  mind. 
"The  difficulty  is  partly  exaggerated;  and  partly  the  fact  is  over- 
looked that  in  all  references  to  Plis  death  and  the  purpose  of  it  Jesus 
could  rely  upon  the  light  which  ihsfutm-e  would  throw  on  these  utter- 
ances: and  sowing,  as  He  generally  did,  for  the  future  in  the  bosom  of 
the  present.  He  was  compelled  to  utter  much  that  was  mysterious,  but 
which  would  supply  material  and  support  for  the  further  development 
and  purification  of  faith  and  knowledge.  The  wisdom  thus  displayed 
in  His  teaching  has  been  justified  by  History. " 

Chap.  VII. 

"Chapter  vii.,  like  chapter  vi.,  is  very  Important  for  the  estimate  of 
the  fourth  Gospel.     In  it  the  scene  of  the  Messianic  crisis  shifts  from 


l6o  S.   JOHN,    VII.  [vv.  1-3. 

Chap.  Vll.    Christ  the  Source  of  Truth  and  Light. 
I — 9,     The  controversy  with  His  brethren. 

7      After  these  things  Jesus  walked  in  Galilee  :  for  he  would 

not  walk  in  Jewry,  because  the  Jews  sought  to  kill  him. 

J  Now   the   Jews'   feast   of  tabernacles   was  at   hand.     His 

Galilee  to  Jerusalem;  and,  as  we  should  naturally  expect,  the  crisis 
itself  becomes  hotter.  The  divisions,  the  doubts,  the  liopes,  the  jea- 
lousies, and  the  casuistry  of  the  Jews  are  vividly  portrayed.  We  see 
the  mass  of  the  populace,  especially  those  who  had  come,  up  from 
Galilee,  swaying  to  and  fro,  hardly  knowing  which  way  to  turn,  in- 
clined to  believe,  but  held  back  by  the  more  sophisticated  citizens  of 
the  metropolis.  These  meanwhile  apply  the  fragments  of  Rabbinical 
learning  at  their  command  in  order  to  test  the  claims  of  the  new  pro- 
phet. In  the  background  looms  the  dark  shadow  of  the  hierarchy 
itself,  entrenched  behind  its  prejudices  and  refusing  to  hear  the  cause 
that  it  has  already  prejudged.  A  single  timid  voice  is  raised  against 
this  injustice,  but  is  at  once  fiercely  silenced."     S.  p.  144. 

As  in  chapters  v.  and  vi.  Christ  is  set  forth  as  the  Source  and  Support 
of  Life,  so  in  chapters  vii. .  viii.,  and  ix.  He  is  set  forth  as  the  Source 
of  Truth  and  Light. 

Chap.  VII.     Christ  the  Source  of  Truth  and  Light. 

Chapter  vii.  has  three  main  divisions:  1.  The  controversy  with  His 
brethren  (i — 9);  2.  His  teaching  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (10 — 39); 
3.  The  effect  of  His  teaching ;  division  both  in  the  multitude  and  in  the 
Sanhedrin  (40 — 52). 

1—9,    The  controversy  with  His  brethren. 

1,  After  these  thingsl  The  interval  is  again  vague  (see  introductory 
note  to  chap.  vi. ) ;  but  comparing  vi.  4  with  vii.  2  we  see  that  it  covers 
about  five  months,  the  interval  between  the  Passover  and  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles. 

7valkcd  in  Galilee^  To  this  ministry  in  Galilee,  of  which  S.  John 
tells  us  nothing,  most  of  the  incidents  narrated  Matt.  xiv.  34 — xviii.  35 
belong.     The  tenses  here  are  all  imperfects,  implying  continued  action. 

he  would  not  walk  in  Jcwry^  From  this  we  understand  that  He 
did  not  go  up  to  Jerusalem  for  the  Passover  mentioned  vi.  4.  'Jewry' 
is  found  here  in  all  the  English  versions  excepting  Wiclifs  ;  it  was 
common  in  the  earlier  translations.  But  in  the  A.V.  it  has  been 
retained  (probably  by  an  oversight)  only  here,  Luke  xxiii.  5,  and  Dan. 
V.  13:  elsewhere  Judsea  has  been  substituted.  In  Dan.  v.  13  the 
same  word  is  translated  both  'Jewry'  and  'Judah  !'  Comp.  the 
Prayer  Book  version  of  Ps.  Ixxvi.  i. 

2.  the  fews''  feast  of  tabernacles^  Again  an  indication  that  the 
Gospel  was  written  outside  Palestine:  see  on  vi.  i,  4.  An  author 
writing  in  Palestine  would  be  less  likely  to  specify  it  as   '  the  feast 


vv.  4,  5.]  S.    JOHN,   VII.  161 

brethren  therefore  said  unto  him,   Depart  hence,  and  go 
into  Judea,  that  thy  disciples  also  may  see  the  works  that 
thou  doest.     For  there  is  no  man  that  doeth  any  thing  in  4 
secret,   and  he  himself  seeketh  to  be  known   openly.     If 
thou   do   these   things,    shew   thyself  to   the  world.      For  s 


of  the  Jeivs.^  Tabernacles  was  the  most  joyous  of  the  Je\vish  festivals. 
It  had  two  aspects;  (i)  a  commemoration  of  their  dwelling  in  tents 
in  the  wilderness,  (2)  a  harvest-home.  It  was  therefore  a  thanks- 
giving (i)  for  a  permanent  abode,  (2)  for  the  crops  of  the  year.  It 
began  on  the  15th  of  the  7th  month,  Tisri  (about  our  September), 
and  lasted  seven  days,  during  which  all  who  were  not  exempted 
through  illness  or  weakness  were  obliged  to  live  in  booths,  which 
involved  much  both  of  the  discomfort  and  also  of  the  merriment  of 
a  picnic.  The  distinctions  between  rich  and  poor  were  to  a  large 
Sk;xtent  obliterated  in  the  general  encampment,  and  the  Feast  thus 
b(-came  a  great  levelling  institution.  On  the  eighth  day  the  booths 
were  broken  up  and  the  people  returned  home:  but  it  had  special 
sacrifices  of  its  own  and  was  often  counted  as  part  of  the  Teast  itself. 
The  Feast  is  mentioned  here,  partly  as  a  date,  partly  to  shew  what 
after  all  induced  Christ  to  go  up  to  Jerusalem. 

3.  His  brethreit]     See  on  ii.  12. 

Depart  hence'\  The  bluntness  of  this  suggestion,  given  almost  as 
a  command,  shews  that  they  presumed  upon  their  near  relationship. 
It  would  be  more  natural  in  the  mouths  of  men  older  than  Christ,  and 
therefore  is  in  favour  of  their  being  sons  of  Joseph  by  a  former  marriage 
rather  than  sons  of  Joseph  and  Mary  (comp.  Mark  iii.  21,  31).  They 
shared  the  ordinary  beliefs  of  the  Jews  about  the  Messiah,  and  there- 
fore did  not  believe  in  their  Brother.  But  His  miracles  perplexed 
them,  and  they  wished  the  point  brought  to  a  decisive  issue.  There 
is  no  treachery  in  their  suggestion;  its  object  is  not  to  put  Him  in  the 
power  of  His  enemies. 

thy  disciples  also^  His  brethren  seem  to  imply  that  they  themselves 
are  not  His  disciples  even  nominally. 

4.  the7-e  is  no  fnan  that  doethl     More  simply,  no  man  doeth. 

and  he  himself  seeketh]  i.  e.  no  one  does  anything  in  secret  and  is 
thereby  personally  seeking  to  act  with  openness.  To  conceal  His 
miracles  is  to  deny  His  Messiahship;  the  Messiah  must  accept  His 
position. 

to  be  kno7vn  openly]  Literally,  to  be  in  openness  ox  frankness.  The 
word  for  'frankness'  occurs  nine  times  in  this  Gospel  and  four  times 
in  the  First  Epistle ;  not  in  Matt,  or  Luke ;  only  once  in  Mark. 

If  thou  do  these  things]  Feeding  the  5000,  and  other  miracles.  If 
Thou  doest  such  miracles  at  all,  do  them  at  Jerusalem  at  the  Feast 
and  convince  the  whole  nation.  It  is  assuming  a  false  position  to 
do  such  things  and  hide  them  in  obscure  parts  of  Galilee :  it  is 
claiming  to  be  the  Messiah  and  being  afraid  to  shew  one's  credentials. 

S.  JOHN  J  J 


i63  S.   JOHN,   VII.  [vv.  6—8. 

6  neither  did  his  brethren  believe  in  him.     Then  Jesus  said 
unto  them,  My  time  is  not  yet  come :  but  your  time   is 

7  alway   ready.      The   world   cannot   hate   you ;  but   me   it 
hateth,  because  I  testify  of  it,  that  the  works  thereof  are 

8  evil.     Go  ye  up  unto  this  feast :  I  go  not  up  yet  unto  this 

They  knew  probably  that  He  had  not  gone  up  to  Jerusalem  for  the 
Passover. 

shew  thyself]  Better,  manifest  Thyself.  See  on  i.  31,  xxi.  i,  and 
comp.  ix.  3,  xvii.  6. 

'  5.  For  neither  did  his  brethren  believe  in  hifn]  Or,  For  not  even 
did  His  brethi-en  (as  one  would  expect)  bdieve  on  Him.  It  is  mar- 
vellous that  in  the  face  of  this  verse  any  one  should  have  maintained 
that  three  of  His  brethren  (James,  Simon,  and  Judas)  were  Apostles. 
This  verse  is  also  fatal  to  the  common  theory,  that  these  'brethren' 
are  really  our  Lord's  cousins,  the  sons  of  Alphasus.  Certainly  one 
of  the  sons  of  Alphaeus  (James)  was  an  Apostle;  probably  a  second 
was  (Matthew,  if  Levi  and  Matthew  are  the  same  person,  as  is  almost 
universally  admitted);  possibly  a  third  was  (Judas,  if  'Judas  of  James' 
means  'Judas,  brother  of  James,'  as  is  commonly  supposed).  By  this 
time  the  company  of  the  Twelve  was  complete  (vi.  67,  70,  71);  so 
that  we  cannot  suppose  that  some  of  the  Twelve  have  still  to  be  con- 
verted. If  then  one,  two,  or  three  sons  of  Alphseus  were  Apostles, 
how  could  it  be  true  that  the  sons  of  Alphseus  'did  not  believe  on 
Him?'  'His  brethren'  cannot  be  the  sons  of  Alphaus.  They  seem 
to  have  been  converted  by  the  Resurrection.  Immediately  after  the 
Ascension  we  find  them  with  the  Apostles  and  the  holy  women  (Acts 
i.  14;  comp.  I  Cor.  ix.  5,   Gal.  i.  19). 

6.  Then  Jesus  said]     Better,  Jestis  therefore  saith. 

My  time  is  not  yet  come]  i.  e.  My  time  for  manifesting  Myself  to  the 
world ;  with  special  reference  to  the  Passion.  It  is  inadequate  to 
interpret  it  of  the  time  for  going  up  to  the  Feast.  Moreover,  what 
sense  would  there  be  in  '  Your  time  for  going  up  to  the  Feast  is  always 
ready?'  Whereas  'You  can  always  manifest  yourselves'  makes  ex- 
cellent sense.     See  last  note  on  ii.  4. 

7.  The  world]  Unbelievers;  the  common  meaning  in  S.  John. 
In  V.  4  'the  world'  means  all  mankind.     See  on  i.  10. 

cannot  hate  you]  Because  you  and  it  are  of  one  mind;  because  you 
are  part  of  it:  it  cannot  hate  itself;  see  on  xv.  19.  Hence  it  is  that 
they  can  always  manifest  themselves :  they  can  always  count  upon 
favourable  surroundings  and  a  sympathetic  audience. 

me  it  hateth]     Comp.  iii.  -zo,  vii.  34,  36,  viii.  21,  xii.  39. 

8.  Go  ye  up  unto  this  feast]  'Ye'  is  emphatic;  'this'  is  wanting 
in  authority;  we  should  read,  go  ye  up  unto  the  feast. 

I  go  not  up  yet]  '  Yet,'  though  very  ancient,  is  possibly  no  part 
of  the  original  text :  it  may  have  been  inserted  to  avoid  the  charge  of 
the  heathen  critic  Porphyry,  that  Jesus  here  shews  fickleness  or  deceit, 
and  therefore  cannot  be  Divine.     But  the  sense  is  the  same,  whether 


w.  9-II.]  S.   JOHN,  VII.  163 

feast ;  for  my  time  is  not  yet  full  come.     When  he  had  said  9 
these  words  unto  them,  he  abode  still  in  Galilee. 

10 — 39.     The  Discourse  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles. 

But  when  his  brethren  were  gone  up,  then  went  he  also  10 
up  unto  the  feast,  not  openly,   but  as  it  were  in  secret. 
Then  the  Jews  sought  him  at  the  feast,  and  said,  Where  is  u 

'  yet '  is  inserted  or  not.  He  means  '  I  am  not  going  now ;  not  going 
publicly  in  the  general  caravan  of  pilgrims;  not  going  M'ith  you,  who 
do  not  believe  on  Me.'  He  does  not  say  '  I  shall  not  go.'  The  next 
two  verses  shew  exactly  what  is  meant  by  the  negative. 

9.  hi  abode  still  in  Galilee]  This  in  conjunction  with  v.  i  shews 
that  S.  John  is  quite  aware  that  Galilee  is  the  main  scene  of  Christ's 
ministry,  as  the  Synoptists  represent.  The  gaps  in  his  narrative  leave 
ample  room  for  the  Galilean  ministry. 

This  opening  scene  (i — 9)  "is  described  by  M.  Renan  as  a  'gem 
of  history '  (un  petit  tresor  historique).  He  argues  justly  that  an 
apologist,  writing  merely  ad  probandtim,  would  not  have  given  so 
much  prominence  to  the  unbelief  which  Jesus  met  with  in  His  own 
family.  He  insists,  too,  on  the  individualising  traits  which  the  whole 
section  bears.  The  brethren  of  Jesus  are  not  '  types '  but  living  men  ; 
their  ill-natured  and  jealous  irony  is  only  too  human."  S.  pp.  144, 
145- 

10 — 39.    The  Discourse  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles. 

Of  this  section  w.  10 — 15  form  a  sort  of  introduction. 

"An  equal  degree  of  authenticity  belongs  to  the  verses  which  follow, 
10 — 15.  The  whispered  enquiries  and  debatings  among  the  people, 
the  secret  journey,  the  sudden  appearance  in  the  temple  in  the  midst 
of  the  Feast,  and  in  particular  the  question  that  alludes  to  the  Rab- 
binical schools  and  the  custom  of  professed  teachers  to  frequent  them, 
compose  a  varied,  clear,  and  graphic  picture  that  has  every  circum- 
stance of  probability  in  its  favour."     S.  pp.  145,  146. 

10.  unto  the  feast]  These  words  have  become  transposed;  they  be- 
long to  the  first  clause,  not  to  the  second ;  Now  when  His  brethren  2vere 
gone  up  to  the  feast,  then  He  also  went  up.  This  being  so,  it  becomes 
possible,  if  not  probable,  that  Christ's  declaration  '  I  go  not  up  to  this 
Feast'  is  true,  even  when  made  to  mean  '  I  shall  not  go  up  at  all.'  All 
that  is  certain  is  that  Christ  appeared  when  the  Feast  was  half  over  [v. 
14). 

not  openly]  Not  in  the  general  caravan,  but  either  by  a  different 
route  (e.g.  through  Samaria,  as  in  iv.  4,  instead  of  down  the  eastern 
bank  of  Jordan),  or  several  days  later.  One  suspects  that  traces  of 
Docetism  are  difficult  to  find  in  this  Gospel  when  it  is  maintained  that 
this  verse  contains  such. 

11.  the  yews]  The  hostile  party,  as  usual:  comp.  t*.  i.  Both  here 
and  in  v.  6   'then'  should  rather  be  therefore:  comp.  vi.  53,  67,  68. 

II — 2 


i64  S.   JOHN,   VII.  [vv.  12— 16. 

12  he  ?     And  there  was  much  murmuring  among  the  people 
concerning  him  :  for  some  said,  He  is  a  good  man :  others 

13  said,  Nay ;  but  he  deceiveth  the  people.     Howbeit  no  man 
spake  openly  of  him  for  fear  of  the  Jews. 

14  Now  about  the  midst  of  the  feast  Jesus  went  up  into  the 

15  temple,  and  taught.     And  the  Jews  marvelled,  saying.  How 

16  knoweth   this  man  letters,    having   never  learned  ?     Jesus 

The  force  of  the  '  therefore '  here  is  '  because  they  did  not  find  Him  in 
the  caravan  of  pilgrims  from  Galilee.' 

sought. ..and  said'\  Both  verbs  are  imperfects  of  continued  action. 
They  do  not  mention  His  name, — perhaps  in  contempt;  'Where  is  that 
man?'     Comp.  ix.  28. 

12.  nmr??iu)'ing\  Talking  in  an  under  tone,  not  necessarily  com- 
plaining: see  onvi.  41,  61.  Here  some  are  for,  and  some  against  Him. 
'  Among  the  people '  should  rather  be  amoitg  the  multitudes  ;  the  word 
is  plural,  p.iid  this  is  the  only  place  in  the  Gospel  where  the  plural  is 
used :  the  singular  [He  leadeth  the  multitude  astray)  is  common. 

13.  no  man]  Quite  literally ;  no  man  dared  speak  openly  either  for 
or  against  Him,  they  were  so  afraid  of  the  hierarchy.  Experience  had 
taught  them  that  it  was  dangerous  to  take  any  line  which  the  rulers  had 
not  formally  sanctioned;  and  though  the  rulers  were  known  to  be 
against  Christ,  yet  they  had  not  committed  themselves  beyond  recall, 
and  might  turn  against  either  side.  'A  true  indication  of  an  utterly 
Jesuitical  domination  of  the  people.'     Meyer. 

for  fear  of  the  Je70s\  Literally,  fo7-  the  fear  of  the  yezus,  i.e.  on 
account  of  the  prevalent  fear  of  the  hierarchy  and  official  representatives 
of  the  nation. 

14.  aboiit  ike  midst  of  the  feast]  Literally,  But  now,  tvhen  the  feast 
7vas  at  the  middle,  or  was  half  way  past ;  i.e.  about  the  fourth  day.  But 
the  expression  is  a  vague  one,  so  that  we  cannot  be  certain  which 
day. 

went  up  into  the  temple]  Whether  He  had  been  in  Jerusalem  or  not 
since  the  beginning  of  the  Feast,  is  uncertain :  see  on  v.  10.  This  is  per- 
haps the  first  occasion  of  His  publicly  teaching  in  the  Temple;  when 
He  cleansed  it  (ii.  13 — 17)  He  delivered  no  discourse. 

15.  And  the  'Je'Ms  marvelled]  According  to  the  best  MSS. ,  The  Je-ws 
therefore  marvelled.  'Therefore'  should  also  be  inserted  in  v.  16; 
yestis  therefore  answered  thefu.  S.  John's  extreme  fondness  for  this 
particle  in  narrative  is  worth  keeping  in  view. 

How  knoweth  this  man  letters]  Or,  this  fellow,  as  in  vi.  42.  Their 
question  is  so  eminently  characteristic,  that  it  is  very  unlikely  that  a 
Greek  writer  of  the  second  century  would  have  been  able  to  invent  it 
for  them;  he  would  probably  have  made  Ihem  too  cautious  to  commit 
themselves  to  any  expression  of  astonishment  about  Him.  The  sub- 
stance of  His  doctrine  excites  no  emotion  in  them,  but  they  are 
astounded  that  He  should  possess  learning  without  having  got  it  accord- 
ing to  ordinaiy  routine.     He  had  never  attended  the  schools  of  the 


vv.  17—19.]  S.   JOHN,   VII.  165 

answered  them,  and  said,  My  doctrine  is  not  mine,  but  his 
that  sent  me.     If  any  man  will  do  his  will,  he  shall  know  17 
of  the  doctrine,  whether  it  be  of  God,  or  whether  I  speak 
of  myself.     He  that  speaketh  of  himself  seeketh  his  own  is 
glory :  but  he  that  seeketh  his  glory  that  sent  him,  the  same 
is  true,  and  no  unrighteousness  is  in  him.     Did  not  Moses  19 

Rabbis,  and  yet  His  interpretations  of  Scriptui-e  shewed  a  large  amount 
of  biblical  and  other  knowledge.  That  does  excite  them.  In  Acts  xxvi. 
24,  '  much  learning  doth  make  thee  mad,'  the  word  there  translated 
'  learning '  is  the  same  as  the  one  here  translated  '  letters.' 

16 — 36.  The  remark  made  on  the  Jews'  question  in  z*.  15  applies 
also  to  their  questions  and  comments  throughout  this  dialogue.  They 
are  too  exactly  in  keeping  with  what  we  know  of  the  Jews  in  our  Lord's 
day  to  be  the  invention  of  a  Greek  more  than  a  century  later.  They 
"are  all  exactly  what  we  should  expect  from  the  popular  mode  of  inter- 
preting and  applying  the  Messianic  prophecies."     S.  p.  146. 

16.  My  doctrine  is  not  mifte\  '  The  teaching  which  I  give  does  not 
originate  with  Me ;  that  is  the  reason  why  I  have  no  need  to  learn  in 
the  schools.     He  Who  sent  Me  communicates  it  to  Me.' 

17.  If  any  man  will  do  his  will}  As  in  vi.  67  and  viii.  44,  '  will '  is 
too  weak  ;  it  is  not  the  simple  future,  but  the  verb  '  to  will :'  If  any  man 
willeth  to  do  His  will.  The  mere  mechanical  performance  of  God's 
will  is  not  enough;  there  must  be  an  inchnation  towards  Him,  a  wish 
to  make  our  conduct  agree  with  His  will ;  and  without  this  agreement 
Divine  doctrine  cannot  be  recognised  as  such.  There  must  be  a  moral 
harmony  between  the  teaching  and  the  taught,  and  this  harmony  is  in 
the  first  instance  God's  gift  (vi.  44,  45),  which  each  can  accept  or  refuse 
at  will.      Comp.  xiv.  11. 

he  shall  know'\  Literally,  He  shall  come  to  know,  recognise.  See  on 
V.  26  and  viii.  55. 

whether  it  be  of  God,  &c.]  Literally,  whether  it  proceeds  from  God  (as 
its  Fount),  or  I  speak  from  Myself.     Comp.  v.  30,  xv.  4. 

18.  Proof  almost  in  the  form  of  a  syllogism  that  He  does  not  speak 
of  Himself.  It  applies  to  Christ  alone.  Human  teachers  who  seek 
God's  glory  are  not  thereby  secured  from  erroneous  teaching.  These 
verses  (16 — 18)  remind  us,  and  might  remind  some  of  His  hearers  of  an 
earlier  discourse  delivered  in  Jerusalem  some  seven  months  before : 
comp.  V.  19,  30,  37,  44.  ,  .        ,r    r         ,_ 

the  same  is  true]  and  therefore  does  not  speak  of  himself,  for  who- 
ever speaks  what  comes  from  himself  is  not  true. 

no  unrighteousness  is  in  hitti\  Or,  unrighteousness  Is  not  in  him. 
S.  John  does  not  say  'falsehood  '  as  we  might  expect,  but  uses  a  wider 
word  which  points  out  the  moral  root  of  the  falsehood.  Comp.  viii.  46. 
Throughout  S.  John's  writings  the  connexion  between  truth  and 
righteousness,  falsehood  and  unrighteousness  is  often  brought  before 
us.  Hence  his  peculiar  phrases  '  to  do  the  truth  '  (i  John  i.  6),  '  to  do  a 
lie'  (Rev.  xxi.  27,  xxii.  15). 


i66  S.  JOHN,  VII.  [vv.  20—22. 

give  you  the  law,  and  yet  none  of  you  keepeth  the  law? 

20  Why  go  ye  about  to  kill  me?     The  people  answered  and 
said,  Thou  hast  a  devil :   who  goeth  about  to  kill  thee  ? 

21  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  them,  I  have  done  one  work, 

22  and   ye   all   marvel.     Moses  therefore  gave  unto  you  cir- 
cumcision, not  because  it  is  of  Moses,  but  of  the  fathers; 

There  is  no  need  to  suppora  that  anything  is  omitted  between  18 
and  19,  though  the  transition  is  abrupt.  Christ  has  answered  them 
and  now  takes  the  offensive.  He  exposes  the  real  meaning  of  their 
cavillings;  they  seek  His  life. 

19.  Did  not  Moses  give  you  the  law?]  Here  the  question  should 
probably  end:  and  notie  of  you  doeth  the  law  should  be  a  simple  state- 
ment in  contrast  to  the  question  preceding.  The  argument  is  similar  to 
V.  45;  Moses  in  whom  they  trust  condemns  them.  Moreover  it  is  an 
argiimentiw.  ad  hominem  :  '  ye  are  all  breakers  of  the  law,  and  yet 
would  put  Me  to  death  as  a  breaker  of  it.' 

20.  Thou  hast  a  devil]  The  multitude  who  have  come  up  from  the 
provinces  know  nothing  of  the  designs  of  the  hierarchy,  although 
dwellers  in  Jerusalem  {v.  25)  are  better  informed.  These  provincials 
think  He  must  be  possessed  to  have  such  an  idea.  Comp.  x.  20,  and 
also  Matt.  xi.  18,  where  the  same  is  quoted  as  said  of  the  Baptist.  In 
both  cases  extraordinary  conduct  is  supposed  to  be  evidence  of  in- 
sanity, and  the  insanity  is  attributed  to  demoniacal  possession.  In  viii. 
48  the  same  remark  is  made,  but  in  a  much  more  hostile  spirit  (see  note 
there);  and  there  Christ  answers  the  charge.  Here,  where  it  is  the  mere 
ignorant  rejoinder  of  a  perplexed  multitude,  He  takes  no  notice  of  the 
interruption. 

21.  I  have  done]    Better,  I  did.     Comp.  v.  23. 

one  work']  The  healing  of  the  impotent  man  at  Bethesda :  it  excited 
the  astonishment  of  all  as  being  wrought  on  the  .Sabbath.  Christ  re- 
minds them  that  on  that  occasion  all,  and  not  the  rulers  only,  were 
offended. 

Most  modern  editors  add  to  this  verse  the  words  translated  'there- 
fore' in  V.  22  [it  is  not  S.  John's  favourite  particle  (see  on  v.  15),  but  a 
preposition  with  a  pronoun  =for  this  cause,  on  account  of  this] ;  '  and 
ye  all  marvel  on  account  of  this.'  But  this  is  cumbrous,  and  unlike 
S.  John,  who  begins  sentences  with  this  phrase  (v.  16,  18,  viii.  47,  x.  17, 
xii.  39;  mistranslated  'therefore'  in  all  cases)  rather  than  ends  them 
with  it.     The  old  arrangement  is  best. 

22.  Moses  therefore  gave]  Better,  For  this  cause  (xii.  18,  27)  Moses 
hath  given.     Comp.  viii.  47. 

of  Moses... of  the  fathers]  'Originating  with  Moses... originating 
with  the  fathers.'  Circumcision  originated  with  the  Patriarchs,  and 
was  a  more  ancient  institution  than  the  Sabbath.  When,  therefore, 
the  two  ordinances  clashed,  the  younger  had  to  give  place ;  it  was 
more  fit  that  tlie  Sabbath  should  be  broken,  than  that  circumcision 
should    be   administered    on    the   wrong    day.     If  then   the   Sabbath 


vv.  23-27.]  S.   JOHN,   VII.  167 

and  ye  on  the  sabbath  day  circumcise  a  man.     If  a  man  23 
on  the  sabbath  day  receive  circumcision,  that  the  law  of 
Moses  should  not  be  broken ;  are  ye  angry  at  me,  because 
I  have  made  a  man  every  whit  whole  on  the  sabbath  day  ? 
Judge  not  according  to  the  appearance,  but  judge  righteous  24 
judgment.     Then  said  some  of  them  of  Jerusalem,  Is  not  23 
this   he,   whom   they  seek   to   kill  ?     But  lo,  he  speaketh  26 
boldly,  and  they  say  nothing  unto  him.      Do   the   rulers 
know   indeed  that  this  is  the  very  Christ  ?     Howbeit  we  27 
know  this  man  whence  he  is  :  but  when  Christ  cometh,  no 

could  give  way  to  a  mere  ceremonial  observance,  hovir  much  more 
might  it  give  way  to  a  work  of  mercy?  The  law  of  charity  is  older 
and  higher  than  any  ceremonial  law. 

on  the  sabbatk'l     Rather,  on  a  Sabbath;  so  also  in  v.  2^. 

23.  that  the  law  of  Moses  should  not  be  broken']  i.e.  the  law  about 
circumcision  on  the  eighth  day  (Lev.  xii.  3),  which  was  a  re-enactment 
of  the  patriarchal  law  (Gen.  xvii.  12).  Some  adopt  the  inferior  ren- 
dering in  the  margin;  'without  breaking  the  law  of  Moses,'  or  'vnth- 
out  the  law  of  Moses  being  broken ;'  in  which  case  '  the  law  of  Moses ' 
means  the  law  about  the  Sabbath. 

are  ye  angry]  The  word  occurs  nowhere  else  in  N.T.  It  signifies 
bitter  and  violent  resentment. 

because  I  have  made]     Better,  because  I  made.     Comp.  v.  2\. 

24.  according  to  the  appearance]  'According  to  the  appearance' 
Christ's  act  was  a  breach  of  the  Sabbath.  This  is  almost  certainly  the 
meaning,  although  the  word  translated  'appearance'  may  mean  'face,' 
and  is  rightly  translated  'face'  in  xi.  44  (see  note  there).  Thereis  no 
reference  here  to  Christ's  having  '  no  form  nor  comeliness,'  as  if  He 
meant  'Judge  not  by  My  mean  appearance.' 

25.  Then  said  some]  Or,  Some  therefore  said  (see  on  vi.  53,  vii. 
II,  15),  i.e.  in  consequence  of  Christ's  vindication  of  Himself.  These 
inhabitants  of  the  capital  know  better  than  the  provincials,  who  speak 
in  V.  20,  what  the  intentions  of  the  hierarchy  really  are. 

26.  boldly]  Or,  with  frankfiess,  or  openness;  the  same  word  as  in 
V.  4,  where  (as  in  xvi.  29)  it  has  a  preposition;  here  and  v.  13  it  is  the 
simple  dative. 

Do  the  rulers  know]  The  word  here  translated  'know'  is  not  the  one 
translated  'know'  in  vv.  28,  29.  The  latter  is  the  most  general  word 
for  'know:'  this  means  rather  to  'acquire  knowledge.'  Have  the 
rulers  come  to  know  (or  recognised)}  See  on  i.  10.  In  the  next  verse 
we  have  both  words.     Comp.  viii.  55. 

that  this  is  the  very  Christ]  'Very'  is  wanting  in  authonity:  that 
this  man  is  the  Christ  is  the  right  reading.  This  suggestion,  however, 
is  only  a  momentary  thought.  They  at  once  raise  a  dilj&culty  which 
for  them  demolishes  the  suggestion. 

27.  when  Christ  cometh]   Better,  when  the  Christ  cometh:  see  on  i.  20. 


i68  S.   JOHN,   VII.  [w.  28,  29. 

28  man  knoweth  whence  he  is.  Then  cried  Jesus  in  the 
temple  as  he  taught,  saying.  Ye  both  know  me,  and  ye 
know  whence  I  am  :  and  I  am  not  come  of  myself,  but  he 

39  that  sent  me  is  true,  whom  ye  know  not.     But  I  know  him : 

no  man  knoweth  whence  he  is\  Literally,  no  man  comes  to  know  (see 
on  w.  16  and  viii.  55)  whence  He  is.  '  Whence'  does  not  refer  to  the 
Messiah's  birthplace,  which  was  known  {vv.  41,  42);  nor  to  His  remote 
descent,  for  He  was  to  be  the  Son  of  David  {ibid.);  but  to  His  parent- 
age (vi.  42),  immediate  and  actual.  This  text  is  the  strongest,  if  not 
the  only  evidence  that  we  have  of  the  belief  that  the  immediate  parents 
of  the  Messiah  would  be  unknown  :  but  the  precision  and  vivacity  of 
this  passage  carries  conviction  with  it,  and  shews  how  famihar  the 
ideas  current  among  the  Jews  at  that  time  were  to  S.  John.  It  never 
occurs  to  him  to  explain.  The  belief  might  easily  grow  out  of  Isa. 
liii.  8,  'Who  shall  declare  His  generation?'  Justin  Martyr  tells  us 
of  a  Lindred  belief,  that  the  Messiahship  of  the  Messiah  would  be 
unknown,  even  to  Himself,  until  He  was  anointed  by  Elijah.  ( Trypho, 
pp.  226,  336.) 

28.  Then  cried  Jesus\  Better,  Jesus  therefore  cried  aloud.  The 
word  translated  'cried'  signifies  a  loud  expression  of  strong  emotion. 
He  is  moved  by  their  gross  misconception  of  Him,  a  fact  which  the 
weakening  of  'therefore'  into  'then'  obscures.  Comp.  z*.  37,  i-  15, 
xii.  44. 

in  the  temple']  S.  John  well  remembers  that  moving  cry  in  the 
Temple ;  the  scene  is  still  before  him  and  he  puts  it  before  us,  although 
neither  '  in  the  Temple'  nor  '  as  He  taught'  is  needed  for  the  narrative 
(see  V.  14). 

Ye  both  know  me,  &c.]  Various  constructions  have  been  put  upon 
this:  (i)  that  it  is  a  question;  (2)  that  it  is  ironical;  (3)  a  mixture  of 
the  two;  (4)  a  reproach,  i.e.  that  they  knew  His  Divine  nature  and 
maliciously  concealed  it.  None  of  these  are  satisfactory.  The  words 
are  best  understood  quite  simply  and  literally.  Christ  admits  the 
truth  of  what  they  say :  they  have  an  outward  knowledge  of  Him  and 
His  origin  (vi.  42) ;  but  He  has  an  inner  and  higher  origin,  of  which 
they  know  nothing.  So  that  even  their  self-made  test,  for  the  sake  of 
which  they  are  willing  to  resist  the  evidence  both  of  Scripture  and  of 
His  works,  is  complied  with;  for  they  know  not  His  real  immediate 
origin. 

atid  I  am  not  come  0/ myself]  '  Of  Myself  is  emphatic ;  and  (yet)  of 
Myself  I  am  not  come.  Comp.  viii.  42.  The  'and'  introduces  a  con- 
trast, as  so  often  in  S.  John :  '  ye  know  My  person,  and  ye  know  My 
parentage;  and  yet  of  the  chief  thing  of  all.  My  Divine  mission,  ye 
know  nothing.     See  on  v.  30. 

but  he  that  sent  me  is  true]  The  word  for  'true'  here  is  the  same  as 
occurs  i.  9  in  'the  true  Light'  (see  note  there):  the  meaning,  there- 
fore, is  not  'truthful'  but  'real,  perfect;'  He  that  sendtth  Me  is  a  real 
sender.  One  who  in  the  highest  and  most  perfect  sense  can  give  a  mis- 


w.  30—32.]  S.   JOHN,   VII.  169 

for   I   am   from   him,  and   he   hath  sent  me.     Then  they  30 
sought   to   take   him :    but   no   man   laid    hands   on   him, 
because  his  hour  was  not  yet  come.      And  many  of  the  31 
people  believed  on  him,  and  said,  When  Christ  cometh,  will 
he  do  moe  miracles  than  these  which  this  man  hath  done  ? 
The  Pharisees  heard  that  the  people  murmured  such  things  32 
concerning  him;   and  the  Pharisees  and  the  chief  priests 


sion.  But  perhaps  here  and  in  Rev.  iii.  7  and  xix.  1 1  the  distinction 
between  the  two  words  for  'true'  is  not  very  marked.  Such  refine- 
ments (the  words  being  alike  except  in  termination)  have  a  tendency  to 
become  obscured. 

29.  /  know  hii)i\  '  I '  in  emphatic  contrast  to  the  preceding  '  ye,' 
which  is  also  emphatic.  'I  know  Him,  for  I  came  forth  from  Him, 
and  it  is  He,  and  no  other,  that  sent  Me.'  '  Sent'  is  aorist,  not  perfect. 
Comp.  the  very  remarkable  passage  Matt.  xi.  27. 

30.  Then  they  sought]  Better,  Therefore  they  kept  seeking  (im- 
perfect of  continued  action)  in  consequence  of  His  publicly  claiming 
Divine  origin  and  mission.  'They'  means  the  rulers,  the  Sanhedrin; 
not  the  people,  who  are  mentioned  in  the  next  verse. 

but  no  ma7i  laid  hands\  Rather,  and  no  fiian  laid  hands,  'and' 
introducing  a  contrast  as  in  v.  28.  See  on  xxi.  3.  That  '  and'  in 
S.  John  often  =  'and  yet,'  as  here,  is  most  true;  that  'and'  ever^'but' 
is  true  neither  of  S.  John  nor  of  any  other  Greek  writer. 

because  his  hour\  The  hour  appointed  by  God  for  His  Passion  (xiii. 
1 ),  this  meaning  being  clearly  marked  by  the  context  (see  on  v.  6  and 
ii.  4).  The  immediate  cause  of  their  not  seizing  Him  was  that  they 
were  as  yet  afraid  to  do  so ;  but  S.  John  passes  through  proximate 
causes  to  the  prime  cause  of  all,  the  Will  of  God.  When  the  hour 
was  come  God  no  longer  allowed  their  fear,  which  still  existed  (Matt, 
xxvi.  5),  to  deter  them. 

31.  A7id  many  of  the  people]  Our  version  is  somewhat  perverse ; 
in  V.  30  'and'  is  arbitrarily  turned  into  'but;'  here  'but'  is  turned 
into  'and.'  But  (on  the  other  hand,  i.e.  in  contrast  to  the  rulers)  of 
the  multitude  many  believed  on  Him  (as  the  Messiah)  and  kept  sasring 
(in  answer  to  objectors),  When  the  Christ  (see  on  v.  27  and  i.  20) 
covieth,  -will  He  do  more  signs  than  this  man  did?  They  express  not 
their  own  doubts  but  those  of  objectors  in  saying  '  when  the  Christ 
cometh:'  they  believe  that  He  has  come.  Some  of  them  perhaps  had 
witnessed  the  numerous  Galilean  miracles ;  they  have  at  any  rate 
heard  of  them. 

32.  heard  that  the  people  murmured  such  things]  Better,  heard  the 
multitude  muttering  these  things  (see  on  z^.  12):  it  was  not  reported 
to  them,  they  heard  it  themselves,  and  they  went  and  reported  it  in  the 
Sanhedrin,  which  gives  an  order  for  His  apprehension.  Note  that  in 
this  the  reckless  hierarchy,  who  were  mainly  Sadducees,  combine  with 
the  Pharisees  (comp.  v.  45,  xi.  47,  57,  xviii.  3>. 


lyo  S.   JOHN,   VII.  [vv.  33-35. 

33  sent  officers  to  take  him.  Then  said  Jesus  unto  them,  Yet 
a  little  while  am  I  with  you,  and  then  I  go  unto  him  that 

34  sent  me.     Ye  shall  seek  me,  and  shall  not  find  me:  and 

35  where  I  am,  thither  ye  cannot  come.  Then  said  the  Jews 
among  themselves,  Whither  will  he  go,  that  we  shall  not 
find  him?  will  he  go  unto  the  dispersed  among  the  Gentiles, 

33.  Then  said  yesus\  Better,  as  in  v.  30  and  often,  Therefore  said 
yesus,  i.e.  in  consequence  of  their  sending  to  arrest  Him  :  probably  He 
recognised  the  officers  waiting  for  an  opportunity  to  take  Him.  Ac- 
cording to  the  best  MSS.,  'Unto  them'  should  be  omitted:  Christ's 
words  are  addressed  to  the  officers  and  those  who  sent  them. 

It  is  very  difficult  to  decide  on  the  precise  meaning  of  Christ's  words. 
Perhaps  the  simplest  interpretation  is  the  best.  '  I  must  remain  on 
earth  a  little  while  longer,  and  during  this  time  ye  cannot  kill  Me : 
then  ye  will  succeed,  and  I  shall  go  to  My  Father.  Thither  ye  will 
wish  to  come,  but  ye  cannot ;  for  ye  know  Him  not  [v.  28),  and  such 
as  ye  cannot  enter  there.'  This  is  the  first  formal  attempt  upon  His 
life.  It  reminds  Him  that  His  death  is  not  far  off,  and  that  it  will 
place  a  tremendous  barrier  between  Him  and  those  who  compass  it. 
It  is  the  beginning  of  the  end ;  an  end  that  will  bring  a  short-lived 
loss  and  eternal  triumph  to  Him,  a  short-lived  triumph  and  eternal 
loss  to  them. 

unto  him  that  sent  me]  One  suspects  that  here  S.  John  is  translat- 
ing Christ's  words  into  plainer  language  than  He  actually  used.  Had 
He  said  thus  clearly  'unto  Him  that  sent  Me,'  a  phrase  which  they 
elsewhere  undei-stand  at  once  of  God  (see  on  v.  30),  they  could  scarcely 
have  asked  the  questions  which  follow  in  v.  35.  Unless  we  are  to 
suppose  that  they  here  pretend  not  to  understand;  which  is  unlikely, 
as  they  speak  not  to  Him  but  '  among  themselves.' 

34.  Ye  shall  seek  me]  From  xiii.  33  it  seems  almost  certain  that 
these  words  are  not  to  be  understood  of  seeking  His  life:  rather  of 
seeking  for  help  at  His  hands.  Comp.  viii.  21.  It  is  best,  however, 
not  to  limit  their  application  to  any  particular  occasion,  such  as  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  the  great  hour  of  Jewish  need. 

where  I  am,  thither  ye  cannot  come]  '  Thither'  is  not  in  the  Greek 
and  is  perhaps  better  omitted,  so  as  to  bring  out  the  emphatic  oppo- 
sition between  '  I '  and  '  ye. ' 

35.  Then  said  the  Jews]  The  Je^vs  therefore  said,  i.e.  in  con- 
sequence of  what  Christ  had  said,  shewing  that  it  is  to  the  official 
representatives  of  the  nation  that  His  words  are  addressed. 

Whither  will  he  go,  &c.  ]  Better,  Where  does  this  fellow  intend  to 
go,  seeing  that  ive  shall  not  find  Him?  Does  He  intend  to  go  unto 
the  dispersion  among  the  Gentiles,  &c. 

the  dispersed]  Or,  the  dispersion,  meaning  those  Jews  who  were 
dispersed  among  the  heathen  outside  Palestine;  the  abstract  for  the 
concrete,  like  '  ihe  circumcision '  for  the  Jews  generally.  The  word 
for    'dispersion'   (diaspora),  occurs  James  i.    i   and    i    Pet.   i.    i    (see 


vv.  36,  37-]  S.   JOHN,  VII.  171 

and   teach  the  Gentiles  ?      What  manner  of  saying  is  this  36 
that  he  said,  Ye  shall  seek  me,  and  shall  not  find  me :  and 
where  I  am,  thither  ye  cannot  come  ? 

In  the  last  day,  that  great  day  of  the  feast,  Jesus  stood  37 
and  cried,  saying,  If  any  7nan  thirst,  let  him  come  unto  me, 

notes  there),  and  nowhere  else  in  N.T.  There  were  three  chief 
colonies  of  these  '  dispersed '  or  '  scattered '  Jews,  in  Babylonia,  Egypt, 
and  Syria,  whence  they  spread  over  the  whole  world.  '  Moses  of  old 
time  hath  in  every  city  them  that  preach  him,'  Acts  xv.  21.  These 
opponents  of  Christ,  therefore,  suggest  that  He  means  to  go  to  the 
Jews  scattered  among  the  Gentiles  in  order  to  reach  the  Gentiles  and 
teach  them — the  very  mode  of  proceeding  afterwards  adopted  by  the 
Apostles.  But  here  it  is  spoken  in  sarcasm.  Christ's  utter  disregard 
of  Jewish  exclusiveness  and  apparent  non-observance  of  the  ceremonial 
law  gave  a  handle  to  the  sneer ;  which  would  be  pointless  if  the  word 
translated  'Gentiles'  (margin  'Greeks')  were  rendered  'Hellenists,' 
i.  e.  Grecised  Jews.  Hellenes,  or  '  Greeks,'  in  N.  T.  always  means 
Gentiles  or  heathen.     See  on  xii.  20. 

36.  What  majtner  of  saying  is  this']  Or,  What  is  this  saying? 
'this'  being  contemptuous,  like  'this  precious  saying.'  They  know 
that  their  scornful  suggestion  is  not  true. 

37.  In  the  last  day,  that  great  day]  Now  on  the  last  day,  the 
great  day.  This  was  probably  not  the  seventh  day,  but  the  eighth 
day,  which  according  to  Lev.  xxiii.  36,  39;  Num.  xxix.  35;  Neh. 
viii.  18,  was  reckoned  along  with  the  seven  days  of  the  feast  proper. 
To  speak  of  the  seventh  day  as  'the  great  day  of  the  feast'  would  not 
be  very  appropriate;  whereas  the  eighth  day  on  which  the  people 
returned  home  was,  like  the  first  day,  kept  as  a  Sabbath  (Lev.  xxiii. 
39),  and  had  special  sacrifices  (Num.  xxix.  36 — 38).  In  keeping  with 
the  solemnity  of  the  day  Christ  solemnly  takes  up  His  position  and 
cries  aloud  with  deep  emotion  (see  on  v.  28). 

stood]    Or,  was  standing. 

If  any  man  thirst]  The  conjectural  reference  to  the  custom  of 
pouring  water  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  is  probably  correct.  On 
all  seven  days  water  was  brought  from  the  pool  of  Siloam  and  poured 
into  a  silver  basin  on  the  western  side  of  the  altar  of  burnt  offering, 
a  ceremony  not  mentioned  in  O.T.  Apparently  this  was  not  done 
on  the  eighth  day.  Accordingly  Christ  comes  forward  and  fills  the 
gap,  directing  them  to  a  better  water  than  that  of  Siloam.  The  fact 
that  the  water  was  poured  and  not  drunk,  does  not  seem  to  be  a 
reason  for  denying  the  reference,  especially  when  we  remember  how 
frequently  Christ  took  an  external  fact  as  a  text  (comp.  iv.  10,  v.  17, 
19,  vi.  26,  27,  (viii.  12?)  ix.  39,  xiii.  8,  10,  12—17;  Mark  x.  15,  16,  23, 
24,  &c.).  The  pouring  of  the  water  would  be  suggestive  enough.  In 
such  cases  there  is  no  need  for  the  analogy  to  be  complete,  and  in  the 
present  case  it  would  add  point  to  the  reference  that  it  was  not  com- 
plete.    Mere  pouring  of  water  could  not  quench  even  bodily  thirst; 


172  S.   JOHN,    VII.  [vv.  38— 40. 

38  and  drink.     He  that  believeth  on  me,  as  the  scripture  hath 

39  said,  out  of  his  belly  shall  flow  rivers  of  living  water.  (But 
this  spake  he  of  the  Spirit,  which  they  that  believe  on  him 
should  receive:  for  the  Holy  Ghost  was  not  yet  given; 
because  that  Jesus  was  not  yet  glorified.) 

40 — 52.     Opposite  Results  of  the  Discourse. 

40  Many  of  the  people  therefore,  when  they  heard  this  saying, 

Christ  could  satisfy  spiritual  thirst.     *  Therefore  with  joy  shall  ye  draw 
water  out  of  the  wells  of  salvation.'     Isa.  xii.  3. 

38.  as  the  scripture  hath  said'\  This  phrase  undoubtedly  refers  to 
the  words  that  follow :  but  inasmuch  as  no  such  text  is  found  in 
Scripture,  some  have  tried  to  force  the  phrase  into  connexion  with 
what  precedes,  as  if  the  meaning  were  'He  that  believeth  on  me  in 
the  way  that  Scripture  prescribes.'  Although  the  exact  words  are  not 
found  in  Scripture  there  are  various  texts  of  similar  import  :  Isa.  xliv. 
3,  Iviii.  11;  Zech.  xiii.  i,  xiv.  8,  &c.  But  none  of  them  contain  the 
very  remarkable  expression  '  out  of  his  belly.' 

rivers  of  living  watery  In  the  Greek  '  rivers  '  stands  first  with  strong 
emphasis ;  rivers  out  of  his  belly  shall  flow,  (rivers)  of  livifig  water, 
in  marked  contrast  to  the  ewer  of  water  poured  each  day  during  the 
Feast.  '  He  that  believeth  on  me '  is  of  course  a  stage  far  in  advance 
of  'if  any  one  thirst.'  A  man  may  thirst  for  spiritual  satisfaction,  and 
yet  not  end  in  believing  on  Christ.  But  the  believer  cannot  end  in 
satisfying  his  own  thirst;  he  at  once  becomes  a  fount  whence  others 
may  derive  refreshment.  Whether  he  wills  to  be  a  teacher  or  no,  the 
true  Christian  cannot  fail  to  impart  the  spirit  of  Christianity  to  others. 

39.  this  spake  he  of  the  Spirii\  S.  John's  interpretation  is  to  be 
accepted,  whatever  may  be  our  theory  of  inspiration,  (i)  because  no 
better  interpreter  of  Christ's  words  ever  lived,  even  among  the  Apostles ; 
(2)  because  it  is  the  result  of  his  own  inmost  experience.  The  principle 
of  Christian  activity  has  ever  been  the  Spirit.  He  moves  the  waters, 
and  they  overflowed  at  Pentecost.  Till  then  'the  Spirit  was  not  yet;' 
the  dispensation  of  the  Spirit  had  not  come. 

the  Holy  Ghost  7vas  not  yet  given]  Both  'the  Holy'  and  'given' 
are  of  doubtful  authority  :  'given  '  is  omitted  by  nearly  all  MSS.  except 
the  Vatican;  it  gives  the  right  sense.  Like  'Holy  Spirit'  in  i.  33, 
'Spirit '  has  no  article  and  means  a  power  of  the  Spirit. 

because  that  J esus  was  not  yet  glorified]  Comp.  xvi.  7;  Ps.  Ixviii.  18. 
The  Spirit,  "though  given  in  His  fulness  to  Christ  Himself  (iii.  34), 
and  operating  through  Him  in  His  people  (vi.  63),  was  not,  until 
after  Christ's  return  to  glory,  to  be  given  to  the  faithful  as  the  Para- 
clete and  representative  of  Christ  for  the  carrying  on  of  His  work." 
Meyer. 

40—52.     Opposite  Results  of  the  Discourse. 

40.  Many  of  the  people,  &c.]     According  to  the  best  authorities ; 


w.  41—45.]  S.   JOHN,  VII  173 

said,  Of  a  truth  this  is  the  Prophet.  Others  said,  This  is  the  41 
Christ.  But  some  said,  Shall  Christ  come  out  of  Galilee  ? 
Hath  not  the  scripture  said,  That  Christ  cometh  of  the  seed  42 
of  David,  and  out  of  the  town  of  Bethlehem,  where  David 
was  ?  So  there  was  a  division  among  the  people  because  43 
of  him.  And  some  of  them  would  have  taken  him  ;  but  no  44 
man  laid  hands  on  him. 

Then  came  the  officers  to  the  chief  priests  and  Pharisees;  45 


Of  the  multitude,  therefore,  some,  when  they  heard  these  words, 
were  saying,  or,  began  to  say. 

Of  a  t7-uth  this  is  the  Frophef]  The  Prophet  of  Deut.  xviii.  15, 
whom  some  identified  with  the  Messiah,  others  supposed  would  be  the 
fore-runner  of  the  Messiah.  Here  he  is  plainly  distinguished  from  the 
Messiah.      See  on  i.  21  and  vi.  14. 

41.  Others  said. ..some  saidi  Both  verbs,  as  in  v.  40,  are  imperfects 
of  repeated  action ;  kept  saying,  used  to  say. 

Shall  Christ  come  out  of  Galilee']  We  have  here  an  instance  how 
little  attention  our  translators  paid  to  the  Greek  article:  in  the  same 
verse  they  translate  the  article  in  one  place  and  ignore  it  in  another. 
In  the  next  verse  they  ignore  it  again.  In  all  three  places  it  should 
be  'the  Christ'  (see  on  i.  20).  Why,  doth  the  Christ  come  out  of 
Galilee?  It  is  quite  inadmissible  to  infer,  because  S.  John  does  not 
correct  this  mistake  of  supposing  that  Jesus  came  from  Galilee,  that  he 
is  either  ignorant  of  the  truth  or  indifferent  to  it.  He  knew  that  his 
readers  would  be  well  aware  of  the  facts.  On  the  other  hand,  could 
a  Greek  of  the  second  century  invent  these  discussions  of  the  Jewish 
multitude  ? 

42.  of  the  seed  of  David]     Ps.  cxxxii.  11;  Jer.  xxiii.  5;  Isa.  xi.  i,  10. 
out  of  the  town   of  Bethlehem]     Literally,    from  Bethlehem,    the 

village  7vhere  David  was.     Mic.  v.  2 ;  i  Sam  xvi. 

43.  a  division]  Schis7na,  whence  our  word  '  schism.'  It  means  a 
serious  and  possibly  violent  division:  ix.  16,  x.  19;  i  Cor.  i.  10, 
xii.  25 ;  comp.  Acts  xiv.  4,  xxiii.  7.  In  N.  T.  it  is  never  used  in  the 
modern  sense  of  a  separation  j^(7/«  the  Church,  but  of  parties  in  the 
Church.  In  the  Synoptists  it  is  used  only  in  its  original  sense  of 
physical  severing;  'a  worse  rent  is  made;'  Matt.  ix.  16;  Mark  ii.  21. 

among  the  people]    In  the  multitude. 

44.  some  of  them]  Some  of  the  multitude,  provoked  by  the  con- 
troversy, would  on  their  own  responsibility  have  carried  Him  before  the 
Sanhedrin.  These  'some'  are  not  the  officers  mentioned  in  the  next 
verse. 

45.  Then  came  the  officers]  Better,  Therefore  came  the  officers, 
i.e.  because  neither  they  nor  any  of  the  multitude  had  ventured  to 
arrest  Him.  Under  the  control  of  God's  providence  {v.  30),  they  had 
been  unable  to  find  any  good  opportunity  for  taking  Him,  and  had 
been  over-awed  by  the  majesty  of  His  words  {v.  46). 


174 


S.   JOHN,   VII.  [vv.  46— 51. 

and  they  said  unto  them,  Why  have  ye  not  brought  him  ? 

46  The   officers   answered.    Never  man  spake  like  this  man. 

47  Then  answered  them  the  Pharisees,  Are  ye  also  deceived  ? 

48  Have  any  of  the  rulers  or  of  the  Pharisees  believed  on  him? 

49  But  this  people  who  knoweth  not  the  law  are  cursed, 
so  Nicodemus  saith  unto  them,  (he  that  came  to  Jesus  by 
51  night,  being  one  of  them,)  Doth  our  law  judge  any  man, 

to  the  chief  priests  and  Pharisees']  See  on  v.  32.  It  would  seem  as 
if  the  Sanhedrin  had  continued  sitting,  waiting  for  the  return  of  its 
officers;  an  extraordinary  proceeding  on  so  great  a  day  (see  on  v.  37), 
shewing  the  intensity  of  their  hostility.  Their  question  is  quite  in 
harmony  with  this. 

they  said]  The  pronoun  used  (ekeinoi)  indicates  that  they  are 
regarded  as  alien  or  hostile  to  the  narrator. 

Why  hai  e  ye  not  brought]     Why  did  ye  not  bring  ? 

46.  Never  man  spake  like  this  matt]  The  reading  is  doubtful ;  some 
of  the  best  MSS.  have  Never  man  so  spake.  Possibly  Christ  said  a 
good  deal  more  than  is  recorded  by  S.  John. 

47.  the  Pharisees]  That  portion  of  the  Sanhedrin  which  was  most 
jealous  of  orthodoxy,  regarded  both  by  themselves  and  others  as  models 
of  correct  belief:  see  next  verse.     For  'then'  read  therefore. 

Are  ye  also  deceived]  Strong  emphasis  on  '  ye;'  Surely  ye  also  have 
not  been  led  astray,  ye,  the  officers  of  the  Sanhedrin !     Comp.  v.  12. 

48.  What  right  have  you  to  judge  for  yourselves,  contrary  to  the 
declared  opinion  of  the  Sanhedrin  and  of  the  orthodox  party?  What 
right  have  you  to  wear  our  livery  and  dispute  our  resolutions? 

49.  this  people]  Very  contemptuous;  this  multitude  of  yours 
(comp.  35,  36),  whose  ignorant  fancies  you  prefer  to  our  deliberate 
decisions. 

who  knoweth  not  the  law]  The  form  of  negative  used  miplies  cen- 
sure ;  knoweth  not  when  it  ought  to  know.  They  ought  to  know  that 
a  sabbath-breaker  cannot  be  the  Messiah. 

are  cursed]  A  mere  outburst  of  theological  fury.  A  formal  excom- 
munication of  the  whole  multitude  by  the  Sanhedrin  (comp.  ix.  22) 
would  be  impossible.  How  could  such  a  sentence  be  executed  on  the 
right  individuals?  It  was  reserved  for  a  Christian  hierarchy  to  invent 
the  interdict.     Excommunication  eti  masse  was  unknown  to  the  Jews. 

50.  he  that  came  to  Jesus  by  night]  The  better  reading  seems  to  be, 
he  that  came  to  Him  before.  See  on  iii.  i,  2.  His  'being  one  of 
them'  contradicts  what  is  implied  in  v.  48,  that  no  member  of  the 
Sanhedrin  believed  on  Him. 

61.  Doth  our  laTu]  'Law'  is  emphatic.  '  You  condemn  the  mul- 
titude for  not  knowing  the  law ;  but  are  we  not  forgetting  the  law  in 
condemning  a  man  unheard?'  These  learned  theologians  and  lawyers 
were  forgetting  such  plain  and  simple  texts  as  Deut.  i.  16,  17,  xvii.  8, 
xix.  15;  involving  the  most  elementary  principles  of  justice. 


V.  52.]  S.   JOHN,  VII.  175 

before  it   hear  him,  and   know    what   he   doeth  ?      They  sa 
answered   and   said   unto   him.   Art   thou  also  of  GaUlee? 
Search,  and  look  :  for  out  of  Galilee  ariseth  no  prophet. 

any  man,  before  it  hear  him']  Literally,  the  man  (prosecuted)  ex- 
cept it  first  liear  from  himself. 

52.  Art  thou  also  of  Galilee?']  '  Surely  thou  dost  not  sympathize 
with  Him  as  being  a  fellow-countryman?'  They  share  the  popular 
belief  that  Jesus  was  by  birth  a  Galilean  (v.  41). 

out  of  Galilee  ariseth  no  prophet]  Either  their  temper  makes  them 
forgetful,  or  in  the  heat  of  controversy  they  prefer  a  sweeping  state- 
ment to  a  qualified  one.  Jonah  of  Gath-hepher  (2  Kings  xiv.  25)  was 
certainly  of  Galilee ;  Nahum  of  Elkosh  may  have  been,  but  the  situa- 
tion of  Elkosh  is  uncertain;  Hosca  was  of  the  northern  kingdom,  but 
whether  of  Galilee  or  not  is  unknown ;  Abelmeholah,  whence  Elisha 
came,  was  in  the  north  part  of  the  Jordan  valley,  possibly  in  Galilee. 
Anyhow,  their  statement  is  only  a  slight  and  very  natural  exaggera- 
tion (comp.  iv.  V.  29).  Judging  from  the  past,  Galilee  was  not  very 
likely  to  produce  a  Prophet,  much  less  the  Messiah. 


Of  the  various  questions  which  arise  respecting  the  paragraph  that 
follows  (vii.  53 — viii.  11)  one  at  least  may  be  answered  with  something 
like  certainty, — that  it  is  no  part  of  the  Gospel  of  S.  John,  (i)  In  both 
tone  and  style  it  is  very  unlike  his  writings.  His  favourite  words  and 
expressions  are  wanting ;  others  that  he  rarely  or  never  uses  are  found. 
(2)  It  breaks  the  course  of  the  narrative,  which  runs  smoothly  enough 
if  this  paragraph  be  omitted;  and  hence  a  few  of  the  MSS.  whicli 
contain  it  place  it  at  the  end  of  the  Gospel.  (3)  All  the  very  serious 
amount  of  external  evidence  which  tells  against  the  passage  being  part 
of  the  Gospel  narrative  at  all  of  course  tells  against  its  being  by  S.  John, 
and  in  this  respect  is  not  counterbalanced  by  other  considerations. 
So  that  the  internal  and  external  evidence  when  put  together  is  over- 
whelmingly against  the  paragraph  being  part  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 

With  regard  to  the  question  whether  the  section  is  a  genuine  portion 
of  the  Gospel  history,  the  internal  evidence  is  wholly  in  favour  of  its 
being  so,  while  the  balance  of  external  testimony  is  decidedly  on  the 
same  side,  (i)  The  style  is  similar  to  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  espe- 
cially to  S.  Luke;  and  four  inferior  MSS.  insert  the  passage  at  the  end 
of  Luke  xxi.,  the  place  in  the  history  into  which  it  fits  best.  (2)  It 
bears  the  impress  of  truth  and  is  fully  in  harmony  with  Christ's  conduct 
on  other  occasions ;  yet  it  is  quite  original  and  cannot  be  a  divergent 
account  of  any  other  incident  in  the  Gospels.  (3)  It  is  easy  to  see 
how  prudential  reasons  may  in  some  cases  have  caused  its  omission 
(the  fear  of  giving,  as  S.  Augustine  says,  peccandi  impunitatem  mulier- 
ibus) ;  difficult  to  see  what,  excepting  its  truth,  can  have  caused  its 
insertion.  (4)  Though  it  is  found  in  no  Greek  MS.  earlier  than  the 
sixth  century,  nor  in  the  earliest  versions,  nor  is  quoted  as  by  S.  John 
until  late  in  the  fourth  century,  yet  Jerome  says  that  in  his  time  it  was 


176  S.   JOHN,   Vir.   VIIT.  [w.  53 ;  1,2. 

^g      And  every  man  went  unto  his  own  house.     Jesus  went 

2  unto  the  mount  of  OUves.     And  early  in  the  morning  he 

came  again  into  the  temple,  and  all  the  people  came  unto 

contained  '  in  many  Greek  and  Latin  MSS.'  {Adv.  Pelag.  11.  17),  and 
these  must  have  been  as  good  as,  or  better  than,  the  best  MSS.  which 
we  now  possess. 

The  question  as  to  who  is  the  author,  cannot  be  answered.  There  is 
not  sufficient  material  for  a  satisfactory  conjecture,  and  mere  guesswork 
is  worthless.  The  extraordinary  number  of  various  readings  {80  in 
183  words)  points  to  more  than  one  source. 

One  more  question  remains.  How  is  it  that  nearly  all  the  MSS. 
that  do  contain  it  (several  uncials,  including  the  Cambridge  MS.,  and 
more  than  300  cursives)  agree  in  inserting  it  here?  This  cannot  be 
answered  with  certainty.  Similaiity  of  matter  may  have  caused  it  to 
have  been  placed  in  the  margin  in  one  copy,  and  thence  it  may  have 
passed,  as  other  things  have  done,  into  the  text  of  the  Cambridge 
and  other  MSS.  In  chap.  vii.  we  have  an  unsuccessful  attempt  to 
ruin  Jesus:  this  paragraph  contains  the  history  of  another  attempt, 
equally  unsuccessful.  Or,  the  incident  may  have  been  inserted  in  the 
margin  in  illustration  of  viii.  15,  and  hence  have  got  into  the  text. 


53.  That  this  verse,  as  well  as  viii.  i,  2,  is  omitted  in  most  MSS. 
shews  that  prudential  reasons  cannot  explain  the  omission  of  the  para- 
graph in  more  than  a  limited  number  of  cases.  Some  MSS.  omit  only 
viii.  3 — II. 

every  man  went  unto  his  own  house\  To  what  meeting  this  refers 
we  cannot  tell :  of  course  not  to  the  meeting  of  the  Sanhedrin  just 
recorded  by  S.  John.  It  is  unfortunate  that  the  verse  should  have  been 
left  as  the  end  of  this  chapter  instead  of  beginning  the  next. 

Chap.  VIII. 

1.  the  mount  of  Olives]  S.  John  nowhere  mentions  the  Mount  of 
Olives  (comp.  xviii.  i),  and  when  he  mentions  a  new  place  he  com- 
monly adds  an  explanation:  i.  44,  iv.  5,  v.  2,  vi.  i,  xix.  13,  17.  The 
phrase  for  'went  unto'  is  not  found  in  S.  John.  Both  occur  in  all 
three  Synoptists. 

2.  And  early  in  the  morning,  &c.]  Comp.  Luke  xxi.  37,  38;  'and 
in  the  day  time  He  was  teaching  in  the  temple,  and  at  night  He  went 
out  and  abode  in  the  mount  that  is  called  the  mount  of  Olives.  And 
all  the  people  came  early  in  the  morning  to  Him  in  the  temple  for  to 
hear  Him.  The  phrase  for  'all  the  people'  used  by  S.  Luke  is  the 
phrase  which  occurs  here :  S.  John  never  uses  it.  S.  John  uses  the 
word  for  'people'  only  twice;  it  occurs  more  than  thirty  times  in 
S.  Luke,  and  more  than  twenty  times  in  the  Acts.  The  word  for 
'came  early'  is  a  verb  derived  from  the  word  for  'early'  which  occurs 
here:  S.  John  uses  neither. 


vv.  3—6.]  S.   JOHN,    VIII.  177 

him  ;  and  he  sat  down,  and  taught  them.  And  the  scribes  3 
and  Pharisees  brought  unto  him  a  woman  taken  in  adultery; 
and  when  they  had  set  her  in  the  midst,  they  say  unto  him,  4 
Master,  this  woman  was  taken  in  adultery,  in  the  very  act. 
Now  Moses  in  the  law  commanded  us,  that  such  should  be  5 
stoned :  but  what  sayest  thou  ?  This  they  said,  tempting  6 
him,   that   they   might   have  to   accuse   him.      But  Jesus 

sat  dowii]  To  teach  with  authority.  Comp.  Matt.  v.  i,  xxiii.  3; 
Mark  ix.  35, 

3.  the  scribes  and  Pharisees']  This  phrase  is  used  thrice  by  S.  Luke, 
once  each  by  S.  Matthew  and  S.  Mark.  S.  John  nowhere  mentions 
the  scribes:  he  speaks  of  the  hierarchy  as  'the  chief  priests'  or  'rulers' 
with  or  without  'the  Pharisees,'  or  else  simply  as  'the  Jews.'  Here 
we  are  probably  not  to  understand  an  official  deputation  from  the 
Sanhedrin:  there  is  nothing  to  shew  that  the  woman  had  been  taken 
before  the  Sanhedrin  before  being  brought  to  Christ. 

brought  tmto  him\  Literally,  bring  unto  Him.  The  bringing  her 
was  a  wanton  outrage  both  on  her  and  on  all  generous  and  modest 
spectators.  She  might  have  been  detained  while  the  case  was  referred 
to  Christ.  The  statement  'in  the  very  act'  is  another  piece  of  brutal 
indelicacy;  and  the  Greek  verb,  hath  been  taken,  adds  to  this. 

5.  Moses  in  the  law]  Of  the  two  texts  given  in  the  margin  of  our 
Bible,  Lev.  xx.  10  and  Deut.  xxii.  22,  probably  neither  is  correct.  It 
is  often  assumed  that  'put  to  death'  in  Jewish  Law  means  stoning: 
such  however  is  not  Jewish  tradition.  The  Rabbis  taught  that  it  meant 
strangulation;  i.e.  the  criminal  was  smothered  in  mud  and  then  a  cord 
was  twisted  round  his  neck.  But  for  the  case  of  a  betrothed  woman 
sinning  in  the  city,  stoning  is  specified  as  the  punishment  (Deut.  xxii. 
23,  24),  and  this  is  probably  what  is  indicated  here.  Such  cases  would 
be  rare,  and  therefore  all  the  better  suited  for  a  casuistical  question. 

but -what  sayest  thou?]  Better,  What  therefore  j-£7jw/  Thou?  This  is 
the  only  place  in  the  whole  paragraph  where  S.John's  favourite  particle 
'therefore'  occurs;  and  that  not  in  the  narrative,  where  S.  John  makes 
such  frequent  use  of  it,  but  in  the  dialogue,  where  he  very  rarely 
employs  it.  Scarcely  anywhere  in  this  Gospel  can  a  dozen  verses  of 
narrative  be  found  without  a  'therefore;'  but  see  ii.  i — 17,  and  contrast 
iv.  I — 26,  XX.  I — 9. 

6.  tempting  him]  The  Greek  word  for  '  tempting'  is  frequent  in  the 
Synoptists  of  trying  to  place  Christ  in  a  difficulty;  never  so  used  in 
S.  John,  who,  however,  uses  it  once  of  Christ  'proving'  Philip 
(vi.  6). 

that_  they  might  have  to  accuse  him]  This  clause  must  be  borne  in 
mind  in  determining  what  the  difficulty  was  in  which  they  wished  to 
place  Him.  It  seems  to  exclude  the  supposition  that  they  hoped  to 
undermine  His  popularity,  in  case  He  should  decide  for  the  extreme 
rigour  of  the  law;  the  people  having  become  accustomed  to  a  lax 
morality  (Matt.  xii.  39;  Mark  viii.  38).  Probably  the  case  is  somewhat 
S.  JOHN  j2 


178  S.   JOHN,    VIII.  [v.  7. 

stooped  down,  and  with  his  finger  wrote  on  the  ground,  as 

7  though  he  heard  them  not.     So  when  they  continued  asking 

him,  he  hft  up  hhnseif,  and   said  unto  them.  He  that  is 

without  sin  among  you,  let  him  first  cast  a  stone  at  her. 

parallel  to  the  question  about  tribute,  and  they  hoped  to  bring  Him  into 
collision  either  with  the  Law  and  Sanhednn  or  with  the  Roman  Govern- 
ment. If  He  said  she  was  not  to  be  stoned,  He  contradicted  Jewish 
Law;  if  He  said  she  was  to  be  stoned,  He  ran  counter  to  Roman  Law, 
for  the  Romans  had  deprived  the  Jews  of  the  right  to  inflict  capital 
punishment  (xviii.  31).  The  Sanhedrin  might  of  course  pronounce 
sentence  of  death  (Matt.  xxvi.  66;  Mark  xiv.  64;  comp.  John  xix.  7), 
but  it  rested  with  the  Roman  governor  whether  he  would  allow  the 
sentence  to  be  carried  out  or  not  (xix.  16):  see  on  xviii.  31  and 
xix.  6. 

stooped  dowft,  and  with  his  finger  wrote  on  the  ground']  It  is  said  that 
this  gesture  was  a  recognised  sign  of  unwillingness  to  attend  to  what  was 
being  said;  a  call  for  a  change  of  subject.  McClellan  quotes  Plut.  Ii. 
532:  'Without  uttering  a  syllable,  by  merely  raising  the  eyebrows,  or 
stooping  down,  ox  fixing  the  eyes  npoti  the  ground,  you  may  baffle  un- 
reasonable importunities.'  'Wrote'  should  perhaps  be  ' kept  writing^ 
(comp.  vii.  40,  41),  or  'began  to  write,  made  as  though  He  would  write' 
(comp.  Luke  i.  59).  Either  rendering  would  agree  with  this  interpreta- 
tion, which  our  translators  have  insisted  on  as  certain  by  inserting  the 
gloss  (not  found  in  any  earlier  English  Version),  'as  though  He  heard 
them  not.'  But  it  is  just  possible  that  by  writing  on  the  stone  pave- 
ment of  the  Temple  He  wished  to  remind  them  of  the  '  tables  of  stone, 
written  with  the  finger  of  God'  (Ex.  xxxi.  18;  Deut.  ix.  10).  They 
were  hoping  that  He  would  explain  away  the  seventh  commandment, 
in  order  that  they  themselves  might  break  the  sixth. 

7.  they  continued  asking]  They  will  not  take  the  hint,  whatever 
His  gesture  meant. 

without  sin]  The  Greek  word  occurs  nowhere  else  in  N.T.,  but  it  is 
quite  classical:  it  may  mean  either  'free  from  the  possibility  of  sin, 
impeccable ;^  or  'free  from  actual  sin,  sinless:'  if  the  latter,  it  may  mean 
either  'free  from  sin  in  general,  ^/7//^j^;'  or  'free  from  a  particular  sin, 
not  guilty.^  The  context  shews  that  the  last  is  the  meaning  here,  'free 
from  the  sin  of  impurity:'  comp.  '««  no  more,'  v.  11,  and  'sinner,' 
Luke  vii.  37,  39.  The  practical  maxim  involved  in  Christ's  words  is 
that  of  Matt.  vii.  i — 5 ;  Rom.  xiv.  4.  As  to  its  application  to  them 
comp.  Matt.  xii.  39;  Mark  viii.  38.  He  is  contending  not  against 
punishment  being  inflicted  by  human  law,  but  against  men  taking  the 
law  into  their  own  hands. 

a  stone]  Rather,  the  stotte,  according  to  the  Received  Text  and  some 
MSS.;  i.e.  the  stone  required  for  executing  the  sentence.  Others  take 
it  of  theyfrj/  stone,  which  the  witnesses  were  to  throw  (Deut.  xvii.  7). 
But  Christ  does  not  say  'let  him  cast  \\i^  first  stone,'  but  'let  him  bcfirsi 
of  you  to  cast  the  stone.' 


w.  8— II.]  S.   JOHN,   VIII.  179 

And   again  he  stooped  down,  and  wrote  on  the  ground,  s 
And   they   which   heard  it,  being  convicted  by  their  own  9 
conscience,  went  out  one  by  one,  beginning  at  the  eldest, 
even  unto  the  last :  and  Jesus  was  left  alone,  and  the  woman 
standing  in  the  midst.     When  Jesus  had  lift  up  himself,  10 
and  saw  none  but  the  woman,  he  said  unto  her,  Woman, 
where  are  those  thine  accusers  ?  hath  no  man  condemned 
thee  ?     She  said,  No  man.  Lord.     And  Jesus  said  unto  her,  n 
Neither  do  I  condemn  thee  :  go,  and  sin  no  more. 

8.  again  he  stooped  dowit\  He  again  declines  to  have  the  office  of 
judge  thrust  upon  Him.  The  Reader  of  men's  hearts  knew  how  His 
challenge  must  work  :  no  one  would  respond  to  it. 

a7td  wrote  on  the  ground^  A  Venetian  MS.  ascribed  to  the  tenth 
centuiy  has  the  remarkable  reading  'wrote  on  the  ground  the  sins  of 
each  one  of  them.'  The  same  strange  idea  appears  in  Jerome,  shewing 
how  soon  men  began  to  speculate  as  to  what  He  wrote.  Others  sup- 
pose that  He  wrote  His  answer  in  v.  7.  As  has  been  shewn  {v.  6),  it 
is  not  certain  that  He  wrote  anything. 

9.  being  convicted  by  their  own  conscience']  These  words  are  probably 
a  gloss  added  by  some  copyist,  like  'as  though  He  heard  them  not,' 
added  by  our  translators  (v.  6). 

beginning  at  the  eldest]  Literally,  beginning  at  the  elders:  but  it 
means  the  elders  in  years,  not  the  Elders ;  so  that  our  translators  have 
done  well  to  avoid  a  literal  rendering  which  would  have  been  mislead- 
ing. Meyer  suggests  that  the  oldest  would  be  shrewd  enough  to  slip 
away  at  once  without  compromising  themselves  further ;  certainly  they 
would  have  the  largest  experience  of  life  and  its  temptations. 

was  left  alone]  Not  that  there  were  no  witnesses,  but  that  they  had 
withdrawn  to  a  distance.  The  graphic  precision  of  this  verse  indicates 
the  account  of  an  eyewitness. 

standing  in  the  midst]  Literally,  being  in  the  midst,  where  the 
brutality  of  her  accusers  had  placed  her  {v.  3). 

10.  none  but  the  wo/nan]  The  word  for  'but'  or  'except'  occurs 
nowhere  in  S.  John's  writings  excepting  Rev.  ii.  25;  frequently  in 
S.  Luke,  five  times  in  S.  Matthew,  five  times  in  S.  Paul's  Epistles, 
once  in  S.  Mark,  and  nowhere  else. 

hath  no  ;«a«  condemned  thee?]  Literally,  Did  no  man  condemn  thee? 
But  here  the  English  perfect  may  idiomatically  represent  the  Greek 
aorist :  see  on  v.  29.  The  word  for  'condemn'  is  a  compound  not  found 
anywhere  in  S.  John's  WTitings,  but  occurring  nine  times  in  the  Synop- 
tists._  S.  John  uses  the  simple  verb,  which  means  'judge,'  but  often 
acquires  the  notion  of  judging  unfavourably  from  the  context  (see  on 
iii.  17  and  v.  29). 

11.  No  man.  Lord]  We  must  bear  in  mind  that  'Lord'  may  be  too 
strong  a  translation  of  the  Greek  word,  which  need  not  mean  more  than 
'Sir'  (see  on  vi.  34).  But  as  we  have  no  such  ambiguous  word  in 
English,  'Lord'  is  best. 

12  —  2 


i8o  S.   JOHN,   VIII.  [v.  12. 

VIII.  12 — IX.  41.     Christ  the  Source  of  Truth  and  Light 

{continued). 

Then  spake  Jesus  again  unto  them,  saying,  I  am  the 
light  of  the  world  :  he  that  foUoweth  me  shall  not  walk  in 

Neither  do  I  condemn  thee\  He  maintains  in  tenderness  towards  her 
the  attitude  which  He  had  assumed  in  sternness  towards  her  accusers: 
He  declines  the  office  of  judge.  He  came  not  to  condemn,  but  to  seek 
and  to  save.  And  yet  He  did  condemn,  as  S.  Augustine  remarks,  not 
the  woman,  but  the  sin.  With  regard  to  the  woman,  though  He  does 
not  condemn,  yet  He  does  not  pardon  :  He  does  not  say  'thy  sins  have 
been  forgiven  thee'  (Matt.  ix.  ■2;  Luke  vii.  48),  or  even  'go  in  peace' 
(Luke  vii.  50,  viii.  48).  "We  must  not  apply  in  all  cases  a  sentence, 
which  requires  His  Divine  knowledge  to  make  it  a  just  one"  (Alford). 
He  knew  whether  she  was  penitent  or  not. 

go,  and  sin  no  more']  Or,  go  and  continue  no  longer  in  sin.  The 
contrast  befween  the  mere  negative  declaration  and  the  very  positive 
exhortation  is  striking.     See  on  v.  14. 

VIII.  12— IX.  41.    Christ  the  Source  of  Truth  and  Light 

(continued). 

In  viii.  12 — 46  the  word  'true'  occurs  six  times,  the  word  'truth' 
seven  times. 

12.  Then  spake  Jesus  again  unto  them]  The  paragraph  vii.  53 
— viii.  1 1  being  omitted,  these  words  must  be  connected  with  vii.  52. 
The  officers  have  made  their  report  to  the  Sanhedrin,  leaving  Jesus 
unmolested.  After  an  interval  He  continues  His  discourse :  again, 
therefore,  Jesus  spake  unto  them,  i.e.  because  the  attempt  to  interfere 
with  Him  had  failed.  How  long  the  interval  was  we  do  not  know, 
but  probably  the  evening  of  the  same  day. 

I  am  the  light  0/  the  world]  Once  more  we  have  a  possible  reference 
to  the  ceremonies  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  somewhat  less  probable 
than  the  other  (see  on  vii.  37),  but  not  improbable.  Large  candelabra 
were  lighted  in  the  Court  of  the  Women  on  the  evening  of  the  first 
day  of  the  Feast,  and  these  flung  their  light  over  the  whole  city. 
Authorities  differ  as  to  whether  this  illumination  was  repeated,  but 
all  are  agreed  that  it  did  not  take  place  on  the  last  evening.  Here, 
therefore,  there  was  once  more  a  gap,  which  Christ  Himself  may 
have  designed  to  fill;  and  while  the  multitude  were  missing  the 
festal  light  of  the  great  lamps,  He  declares,  'I  am  the  Light  of  the 
world.'  In  the  case  of  the  water  we  know  that  it  was  poured  on  each 
of  the  seven  days,  and  that  Christ  spoke  the  probable  reference  to 
it  on  the  last  day  of  the  Feast.  But  in  this  case  the  illumination 
took  place  possibly  on  the  first  night  only,  and  Christ  certainly  did 
not  utter  this  possible  reference  to  it  until  the  last  day  of  the  Feast, 
or  perhaps  not  until  the  Feast  was  all  over.  But  the  fact  that  the 
words  were  spoken  in  the  Court  of  the  Womon  (see  on  v.  20)  makes 
the  reference  not  improbable. 


vv.  13—15.]  S.   JOHN,   VIII.  181 

darkness,  but  shall  have  the  light  of  life.     The  Pharisees  13 
therefore  said  unto  him,  Thou  bearest  record  of  thyself; 
thy  record  is  not  true.     Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  them,  14 
Though  I  bear  record  of  myself,  yet  my  record  is  true  :  for 
I  know  whence  I  came,  and  whither  I  go ;  but  ye  cannot 
tell  whence  I  come,  and  whither  I  go.     Ye  judge  after  the  15 

he  that  followeth  me]  This  expression  also  is  in  favour  of  the  refer- 
ence. The  illumination  in  the  Court  of  the  Women  commemorated  the 
pillar  of  fire  which  led  the  Israelites  through  the  wilderness,  as  the 
pouring  of  the  water  of  Siloam  commemorated  the  water  flowing 
from  the  Rock.  '  The  Lord  went  before  them  by  day  in  a  pillar  of 
a  cloud  to  lead  them  the  way ;  and  by  night  in  a  pillar  of  fire,  to  give 
them  light''  (Exod.  xiii.  21).  So  Christ  here  declares  that  those  who 
follow  Him  shall  in  no  wise  walk  in  darkness.  The  negative  is  very 
strong.  This  use  of  'darkness'  for  moral  evil  is  peculiar  to  S.  John: 
see  on  i.  5,  where  (as  here)  we  have  light  and  life  (jj.  4)  closely  con- 
nected, while  darkness  is  opposed  to  both. 

shall  have  the  light  of  life]  Not  merely  with  him  but  in  him,  so 
that  he  also  becomes  a  source  of  light.  See  on  vii.  38,  and  comp. 
'Ye  are  the  light  of  the  world,'  Matt.  v.  14. 

13.  Thou  bearest  record]  Our  translators  have  again  been  some- 
what capricious.  The  words  which  in  verses  13  and  14  they  render 
'record'  and  'bear  record, '  they  render  in  verses  17  and  18  'witness' 
and  'bear  witness.'  The  latter  rendering  is  to  be  preferred.  The 
Pharisees  attempt  to  cancel  the  effect  of  Christ's  impressive  declaration 
by  urging  against  Him  a  formal  objection,  the  validity  of  which  He 
had  been  heard  to  admit  (v.  31):  Thou  bearest  witness  of  Thyself; 
Thy  witness  is  not  true. 

14.  Though  I  bear  record]  Better,  even  if  /  bear  witness.  God 
can  testify  respecting  Himself,  and  there  are  truths  to  which  He  alone 
can  testify.  Yet  He  condescends  to  conform  to  the  standard  of  human 
testimony,  and  adds  to  His  witness  the  words  and  works  of  His 
incarnate  Son ;  who  in  like  manner  can  bear  witness  of  Himself,  being 
supported  by  the  witness  of  the  Father  (v.  16). 

and  whither  I  go]  i.e.  by  Death  and  Ascension. 

but  ye  cannot  tell]  Better,  Bict  ye  know  not.  They  knew  neither 
of  these  points  respecting  themselves ;  how  should  they  know  it  re- 
specting Him?  Man  knows  not  either  the  origin  or  the  issue  of  his 
life.     '  Ye '  is  emphatic. 

whence  I  came,  and  whither  I  go]  For  '  and  '  read  or  with  the  best 
MSS.  Note  the  change  from  'came,'  which  refers  to  the  Incarnation. 
His  having  once  come  from  the  Father,  to  '  come,'  which  refers  to 
His  perpetual  presence  with  mankind.  Note  also  the  balanced  pa- 
rallelism of  the  verse  and  comp.  w.  35,  38,  vii.  6. 

15.  Ye  judge  after  the  flesh]  According  to  His  outward  form,  the 
form  of  a  servant:  comp.  vii.  24.  From  the  context  'judge'  here 
acquires  an   adverse   sense,   and   virtually   means    '  condemn  :'   comp. 


i82  S.   JOHN,   VIII.  [vv.  16—19. 

16  flesh ;  I  judge  no  fnan.  And  yet  if  I  judge,  my  judgment 
is  true  :  for  I  am  not  alone,  but  I  and  the  Father  that  sent 

17  me.     It  is  also  written  in  your  law,  that  the  testimony  of 

18  two  men  is  true.     I  am  one  that  bear  witness  of  myself, 

19  and  the  Father  that  sent  me  beareth  witness  of  me.  Then 
said  they  unto  him,  Where  is  thy  Father?  Jesus  answered. 
Ye  neither  know  me,  nor  my  Father  :  if  ye  had  known  me, 

iii.  17,  18,  vii.  51.  Judging  Him  to  be  a  mere  man  they  had  con- 
demned His  testimony  respecting  Himself  as  invalid.  '  Ye '  and  '  I ' 
are  in  emphatic  opposition. 

I  judge  fto  man]  Neither  'after  the  flesh,'  nor  'as  ye  do,'  nor 
anything  else  is  to  be  supplied.  No  such  addition  can  be  made  ir. 
V.  16,  and  therefore  cannot  be  made  here.  The  words  are  best  taken 
quite  simply  and  literally.  '  My  mission  is  not  to  condemn,  but  to 
save  and  to  bless.'     Comp.  xii.  47. 

16.  And  yet  if  I  judge]  Or,  But  even  if  I  jtidge,  like  'even  if  I 
bear  vi'itness'  (f.  14).  'I  judge  no  man;  not  because  I  have  no 
authority,  but  because  judging  is  not  what  I  canie  to  do.  Even  if 
I  do  in  exceptional  cases  judge,  My  judgment  is  a  genuine  and  autho- 
ritative one  (see  on  i.  9),  not  the  mock  sentence  of  an  impostor.  It 
is  the  sentence  not  of  a  mere  man,  nor  even  of  one  with  a  Divine 
commission  yet  acting  independently ;  but  of  One  sent  by  God  acting 
in  union  with  His  Sender.'     Comp.  v.  30. 

17.  //  is  also  -written  in  your  laiu]  Literally,  But  in  the  law  also, 
your  law,  it  is  written.  '  Your '  is  very  emphatic ;  '  the  Law  about 
which  you  profess  to  be  so  jealous.'  Comp.  'Thou  art  called  a  Jew, 
and  restest  on  the  Law'  (Rom.  ii.  17). 

t/ie  testimony  of  tivo  men  is  true]  Better,  the  witness  of  tivo,  &c. 
Not  so  much  a  quotation  as  a  reference  to  Deut.  xix.  15,  xvii.  6. 
Note  that  the  Law  speaks  of  'two  or  three  witnesses:''  here  we  have 
'  two  ;«^«.'  The  change  is  not  accidental,  but  introduces  an  argument 
a  fortiori :  if  the  testimony  of  two  men  is  true,  how  much  more  the 
testimony  of  two  Divine  Witnesses.  Comp.  '  If  we  receive  the  witness 
of  men,  the  witness  of  God  is  greater;  for  this  is  the  witness  of  God 
which  He  hath  testified  of  His  Son'  (i  John  v.  9). 

18.  /  am  one  that  bear  witness  of  }?iyself]  Or,  It  is  I  who  bear 
witness  of  Myself  (in  My  words  and  works),  and  there  beareth  witness 
of  Me  the  Father,  who  sent  Me  (in  Scripture  and  the  voice  from 
Heaven). 

19.  Then  said  they]     They  said  therefore. 

IVhere  is  thy  Father!]  They  do  not  ask  'who'  but  'where;'  they 
know  well  enough  by  this  time  the  meaning  of  Christ's  frequent 
reference  to  'Him  that  sent  me  :'  v.  ■23,  24,  30,  37,  38,  vi.  38,  39,  40, 
44,  vii.  16,  18,  28,  33.  They  ask,  therefore,  in  mockery,  what  Philip 
(xiv.  8)  asks  with  earnest  longing,  ^ Shew  us  the  Father:  we  see  one 
of  Thy  two  witnesses;  shew  us  the  other.' 

if  ye  had  known  me,  &€.]     Better,  /f  ye  knew  Me,  ye  would  know, 


vv.  20—22.]  S.   JOHN,   VIII.  183 

ye  should  have  known  my  Father  also.     These  words  spake  20 
Jesus  in  the  treasury,  as  he  taught  in  the  temple  :  and  no 
ma7i  laid  hands  on  him  ;  for  his  hour  was  not  yet  come. 

Then  said  Jesus  again  unto  them,  I  go  my  way,  and  ye  21 
shall  seek  me,  and  shall  die  in  your  sins  :  whither  I  go,  ye 
cannot  come.     Then  said  the  Jews,  Will  he  kill  himself.?  22 

&c.  (There  is  a  similar  error  v.  46).  It  is  in  the  Son  that  the 
Father  reveals  Himself.  Comp.  xiv.  9,  xvi.  3 ;  and  for  the  construction 
comp.  V.  42. 

20.  in  the  treasnry\  At  the  treasury  is  an  admissible  and  in  one 
respect  safer  translation.  It  is  not  certain  that  there  was  a  separate 
building  called  the  treasury ;  and  if  there  was,  it  is  not  probable  that 
Christ  would  be  able  to  address  the  multitude  there.  But  the  thirteen 
brazen  chests,  into  which  people  put  their  offerings  for  the  temple 
and  other  charitable  objects,  stood  in  the  Court  of  the  Women  (see 
on  Mark  xii.  41),  and  these  chests  seem  to  have  been  called  'the 
treasury.'  The  point  seems  to  be  that  in  so  public  and  frequented 
a  place  as  this  did  He  say  all  this,  and  yet  no  man  laid  hands  on  Him 
(see  on  vii.  30).  Moreover  the  Hall  Gazith,  where  the  Sanhedrin 
met,  was  close  to  the  Court  of  the  Women ;  so  that  He  was  teaching 
close  to  His  enemies'  head  quarters. 

21.  Then  said  Jesus  again  ttnto  theml  The  name  'Jesus'  should 
be  omitted  both  here  and  in  the  preceding  verse  (see  on  vi.  14),  and 
'then'  should  be  therefore  (see  on  vi.  45,  53,  68,  vii.  15,  30,  33, 
35,  45).  He  said,  therefore,  again  to  them.  The  'therefore'  does  not 
compel  us  to  place  what  follows  on  the  same  day  with  what  precedes ; 
'  therefore  '  merely  signifies  that,  as  no  one  laid  hands  on  Him,  He 
was  able  to  address  them  again.  '  Again '  shews  that  there  is  some 
interval,  but  whether  of  minutes,  hours,  or  days,  we  have  no  means  of 
determining.  There  is  no  distinct  mark  of  time  between  vii.  37  (the 
close  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles)  and  x.  22  (the  Feast  of  the  Dedi- 
cation), an  interval  of  two  months.     See  introductory  note  to  chap.  vi. 

/  go  my  way]  There  is  no  '  my  way '  in  the  Greek ;  the  word  is  the 
same  as  for  'I  go'  in  v.  14  and  vii.  33;  but  to  avoid  abruptness  we  may 
render,  /go  away.  Possibly  in  all  three  passages  there  is  a  side  refer- 
ence to  the  Jews  who  were  now  leaving  Jerusalem  in  great  numbers,  the 
Feast  of  Tabernacles  being  over. 

shall  seek  me]  See  on  vii.  33,  34.  Here  Christ  is  more  explicit;  He 
does  not  say  'shall  not  find  Me,'  but  'shall  die  in  your  sin.'  So  far 
from  finding  Him  and  being  delivered  by  Him,  they  will  perish  most 
miserably.  Tnyoiirsiti  shall  ye  die.  '  Sin'  is  emphatic,  and  is  singular, 
not  plural,  meaning  'state  of  sin.' 

22.  Will  he  kill  himself?]  They  see  that  He  speaks  of  a  voluntary 
departure,  and  perhaps  they  suspect  that  He  alludes  to  His  death.  So 
with  sarcasm  still  more  bitter  than  the  sneer  in  vii.  35  they  exclaim 
'Surely  He  does  not  mean  to  commit  suicide?  We  certainly  shall  not 
be  able  to  follow  Him  if  He  takes  refuge  in  that !' 


i84  S.   JOHN,    VIII.  [vv.  23—25. 

■Ai  l^ecause  he  saith,  Whither  I  go,  ye  cannot  come.  And  he 
said  unto  them,  Ye  are  from  beneath  ;  I  am  from  above : 

24  ye  are  of  this  world  ;  I  am  not  of  this  world.  I  said  there- 
fore unto  you,   that  ye  shall  die  in  your  sins  :  for  if  ye 

25  believe  not  that  I  am  he,  ye  shall  die  in  your  sins.  Then 
said  they  unto  him.  Who  art  thou  ?  And  Jesus  saith  unto 
them,  Even  the  same  that  I  said  unto  you  from  the  begin- 

23.  Ye  are  from  heneat/i]  At  first  sight  it  might  seem  as  if  this 
meant  'ye  are  from  hell.'  Christ  uses  strong  language  later  on  {v.  44), 
and  this  interpretation  would  make  good  sense  with  what  precedes. 
'Ye  suggest  that  I  am  going  to  hell  by  self-destruction:  it  is  ye  who 
come  from  thence.'  But  what  follows  forbids  this.  The  two  halves  of 
the  verse  are  manifestly  equivalent,  and  'ye  are  from  beneath '=  'ye  are 
of  this  world.'  The  pronouns  throughout  are  emphatically  opposed. 
The  whole  verse  is  a  good  instance  of  'the  spirit  of  parallelism,  the  in- 
forming po'ver  of  Hebrew  poetry,'  which  runs  more  or  less  through  the 
whole  Gospel.     Comp.  xiv.  27. 

24.  ye  shall  die  in  your  sii;s~\  Here  'die'  is  emphatic,  not  'sin  '  as 
in  V.  21.  Moreover  the  plural  is  here  correct;  it  is  no  longer  the  state 
of  sin  generally,  but  the  separate  sins  of  each  that  are  spoken  of. 
Before  it  was  'in  your  sin  shall  ye  die;'  here  it  is  'ye  shall  die  in  your 
sins.' 

for  if  ye  believe  nol]  This  is  the  only  way  in  which  they  can  be  de- 
livered— faith  in  Him.     Comp.  i.  12,  iii.  15 — 18,  vi.  40. 

(Aat  I  aju  he\  Better,  that  I  am.  It  not  merely  means  'that  I  am 
the  Messiah,'  but  is  the  great  name,  which  every  Jew  at  once  under- 
stood, I  AM.  Comp.  vv.  28,  58,  xiii.  19,  xviii.  5;  Ex.  iii.  14;  Deut. 
xxxii.  39;  Isa.  xliii.  10. 

26.      Then  said  the)']     They  said  XyiereioxQ. 

Who  art  thou .?]  It  is  incredible  that  the  Jews  can  have  failed  to 
understand.  Christ  had  just  declared  that  He  was  from  above,  and  not 
of  this  world.  Even  if  the  words  'I  am '  were  ambiguous  in  themselves, 
in  this  context  they  are  plain  enough.  As  in  v.  19,  they  pretend  not  to 
understand,  and  contemptuously  ask.  Thou,  who  art  Thou?  The  pro- 
noun is  scornfully  emphatic.  Comp.  Acts  xix.  15.  Possibly  both  in 
V.  19  and  here  they  wish  to  draw  from  Him  something  more  definite, 
more  capal)le  of  being  stated  in  a  formal  charge  against  Him. 

Even  the  same  that  I  said  unto  you  from  the  beginning]  This  is  a 
passage  of  well-known  difficulty,  and  the  meaning  will  probably  always 
remain  uncertain,  (i)  It  is  doubtful  whether  it  is  a  question  or  not. 
(2)  Of  the  six  or  seven  Greek  words  all  excepting  the  word  meaning  'unto 
you'  can  have  more  than  one  meaning.  (3)  There  is  a  doubt  whether 
we  have  six  or  seven  Greek  words.  To  discuss  all  the  possible  render- 
ings would  go  beyond  the  scope  of  this  volume.  What  I  from  the 
beginning  am  also  speaking  to  you  of  is  perhaps  as  likely  as  any  transla- 
tion to  be  right.  And  it  matters  little  whether  it  be  made  interrogative 
or  not.     Either,  '  Do  you  ask  that  of  which  I  have  been  speaking  to  you 


vv.  26—29.]  S.   JOHN,   VIII.  185 

ning,     I  have  many  thmgs  to  say  and  to  judge  of  you  :  26 
but  he  that  sent  me  is  true ;  and  I  speak  to  the  world  those 
things  which  I  have  heard  of  him.     They  understood  not  27 
that  he  spake  to  them  of  the  Father.     Then  said  Jesus  unto  28 
them,  When  ye  have  Hft  up  the  Son  of  man,  then  shall  ye 
know  that  I  am  he,  and  that  I  do  nothing  of  myself;  but 
as  my  Father  hath  taught  me,  I  speak  these  things.     And  29 

from  the  first?',  in  which  case  it  is  not  unlike  Christ's  reply  to  Phil!]) 
(xiv.  9);  or,  'I  am  that  of  which  I  have  been  speaking  to  you  all 
along. ' 

26.  Here  again  we  have  a  series  of  simple  sentences,  the  precise 
meaning  of  which  and  their  connexion  with  one  another  cannot  be  de- 
termined with  certainty.  See  on  vii.  33.  The  following  seems  to  be 
the  drift  of  the  verse:  'I  have  very  much  to  speak  concerning  you,  very 
much  to  blame.  But  I  keep  to  My  immediate  task  of  speaking  to  the 
world  those  truths  which  before  the  world  was  I  heard  from  God  that 
cannot  lie.  Who  sent  Me:'  i.e.  Christ  will  not  desist  from  teaching 
Divine  truth  in  order  to  blame  the  Jews.  It  is  as  the  Truth  and  the 
Light  that  He  appears  in  these  discourses. 

ivhich  I  have  hea7-d  of  Jiinil  Better,  what  I  heard  from  Him,  these 
things  I  speak  unto  the  world,  i.e.  precisely  these  and  nothing  else. 
Comp.  V.  39. 

27.  They  understood  not  that  he  spake]  Better,  they  perceived  not 
that  He  was  speaking.  This  statement  of  the  Evangelist  has  seemed 
to  some  so  unaccountable  after  v.  18,  that  they  have  attempted  to  make 
his  words  mean  something  else.  But  the  meaning  of  the  words  is  quite 
unambiguous,  and  is  not  incredible.  We  have  seen  that  there  is  an 
interval,  possibly  of  days,  between  v.  20  and  v.  21.  The  audience  may 
have  changed  very  considerably ;  but  if  not,  experience  shews  that  the 
ignorance  and  stupidity  of  unbelief  are  sometimes  almost  unbounded. 
Still  we  may  admit  that  the  dulness  exhibited  here  is  extraordinary; 
and  it  is  precisely  because  it  is  so  extraordinary  that  St  John  records 
it. 

28.  Then  said  yesus  unto  theni\  Better,  as  so  often  (see  on  z/.  21), 
Therefore  said  Jesus,  i.  e.  in  consequence  of  their  gross  want  of  percep- 
tion.    '  Unto  them '  is  of  doubtful  authority. 

When  ye  have  lifted  up\  On  the  Cross:  comp.  iii.  14  and  xii.  32. 
The  Crucifixion  was  the  act  of  the  Jews,  as  Peter  tells  them  in  Solomon's 
Porch  (Acts  iii.  13 — 15). 

then  shall  ye  kjiow]  Better,  then  shall  ye  perceive.  It  is  the  same 
verb  as  is  used  in  v.  27,  and  evidently  refers  back  to  that  (comp.  v.  43). 
Had  they  known  the  Messiah  they  would  have  known  His  Father  also 
(xiv.  9).  But  when  by  crucifying  Him  they  have  brought  about  His 
glory,  then  and  not  till  then  will  their  eyes  be  opened.  Then  will  facts 
force  upon  them  what  no  words  could  teach  them.      Comp.  xii.  32. 

that  I  am  he]     See  on  v.  24. 

dut  as  my  Father  hath  taught  me]    Better,  dut  that  as  My  Father 


i86  S.  JOHN,   VIII.  [vv.  30,  31. 


he  that  sent  me  is  with  me  :  the  Father  hath  not  left  me 

30  alone ;  for  I  do  always  those  thmgs  that  please  him.     As 
he  spake  these  words,  many  believed  on  him. 

31  Then  said  Jesus  to  those  Jews  which  believed  on  him, 

taught  Me,  i.e.  before  the  Incarnation ;  aorist,  not  perfect,  like  'heard' 
in  V.  -26.  The  construction  depending  on  'then  shall  ye  understand' 
continues  to  the  end  of  this  verse,  and  possibly  down  to  'is  with  Me  ' 

29.  the  Father  hath  ttot  left  me  alone^  Here  again  we  have  an 
aorist,  not  a  perfect;  'He  left  Ale  not  alone''  ('the  Father'  being  omitted 
in  the  best  MSS.).  It  will  depend  on  the  interpretation  whether  the 
aorist  or  perfect  is  to  be  used  in  English.  If  it  refers  to  God  sending  the 
Messiah  into  the  world,  then  we  must  keep  the  aorist;  He  left.  But  if 
it  refers  to  Christ's  experience  in  each  particular  case,  the  perfect  may 
be  substituted  :  He  hath  left.  In  some  cases  it  is  the  idiom  in  English 
to  use  the  perfect  where  the  aorist  is  used  in  Greek,  and  then  to  translate 
the  Greek  aorist  by  the  English  aorist  would  be  misleading.  See  on 
xvi.  32. 

for  T  do  always']  Or,  because  the  things  which  are  pleasing  to  Him 
I  always  do.  'I'  and  'always'  are  emphatic;  and  'always'  literally 
means  'on  every  occasion,'  which  is  somewhat  in  favour  of  the  second 
interpretation  in  the  preceding  note.  '  He  hath  never  left  me  alone, 
because  in  every  case  I  do  what  pleaseth  Him.'  The  emphasis  on  'I' 
is  perhaps  in  mournful  contrast  to  the  Jews.  In  any  case  it  is  a  distinct 
claim  to  Divinity.  What  blasphemous  effrontery  would  such  a  declara- 
tion be  in  the  mouth  of  any  but  the  Incarnate  Deity.  The  theory  that 
Jesus  was  the  noblest  and  holiest  of  teachers,  but  nothing  more,  shatters 
against  such  words  as  these.  What  saint  or  prophet  ever  dared  to  say, 
'The  things  which  are  pleasing  to  God  I  in  every  instance  do?'  Comp. 
V.  46.  And  if  it  be  said,  that  perhaps  Jesus  never  uttered  these  words, 
then  it  may  also  be  said  that  perhaps  He  never  uttered  any  of  the  words 
attributed  to  Him.  We  have  the  same  authority  for  what  is  accepted 
as  His  as  for  what  is  rejected  as  not  His.  History  becomes  impossible 
if  we  are  to  admit  evidence  that  we  like,  and  refuse  evidence  that  we 
dislike. 

30.  many  believed  on  him]  Nothing  exasperated  His  opponents  so 
much  as  His  success;  and  therefore  in  leading  us  on  to  the  final  cata- 
strophe, the  Evangelist  carefully  notes  the  instances  in  which  He  won, 
though  often  only  for  a  time,  adherents  and  believers.  See  on  vi.  15. 
Among  these  'many'  were  some  of  the  hierarchy  {v.  51).  Their  faith, 
poor  as  it  proves,  is  better  than  that  of  the  many  in  ii.  23 ;  belief  that 
results  from  teaching  is  higher  than  that  which  results  from  miracles. 
Jesus  recognises  both  its  worth  and  its  weakness,  and  applies  a  test, 
which  might  have  raised  it  to  something  higher,  but  under  which  it 
breaks  down. 

31.  Then  said  Resits  to  those  yews  which  believed  on  him"]  Better, 
yesus  said,  therefore,  to  the  ye^vs  7vho  had  believed  Him.  There  is  a 
change  in  the  expression  respecting  their  belief.     In  v.  30  S.  John 


vv.  32—34.]  S.   JOHN,   VIII.  187 

If  ye  continue  in  my  word,  the?i  are  ye  my  disciples  indeed ; 
and  ye  shall  know  the  truth,  and  the  truth  shall  make  you  32 
free.     They   answered   him,  We  be  Abraham's  seed,  and  33 
were  never  in  bondage  to  any  ma7i :  how  sayest  thou,  Ye 
shall  be  made  free  ?     Jesus  answered  them,  Verily,  verily,  34 
I  say  unto  you,  Whosoever  committeth  sin  is  the  servant  of 

uses  the  strong  phrase  'believed  on  Him;'  here  he  uses  the  much 
weaker  'believed  Him'  (see  on  i.  12),  as  if  to  prepare  us  for  the  col- 
lapse of  their  faith. 

If  ye  continue,  &c.]  Or,  If  ye  abide  in  My  zvord  (see  on  i.  33),  ye 
are  triUy  My  disciples.  Both  'ye'  and  'My'  are  emphatic:  'you  on 
your  part'— 'the  word  that  is  Mine.'  "The  new  converts,  vv^ho  come 
forward  with  a  profession  of  faith,  receive  a  word  of  encouragement  as 
well  as  of  warning.  They  were  not  to  mistake  a  momentary  impulse 
for  a  deliberate  conviction."  S.  p.  155.  '  If  ye  abide  in  My  word,  so 
that  it  becomes  the  permanent  condition  of  your  life,  then  are  ye  My 
disciples  in  truth,  and  not  merely  in  appearance  after  being  carried 
away  for  the  moment.' 

32.  the  truth]  Both  Divine  doctrine  (xvii.  17)  and  Christ  Himself 
(xiv.  6)  'whose  service  is  perfect  freedom.'     See  on  xviii.  37. 

shall  make  you  free]  Free  from  the  moral  slavery  of  sin.  Comp. 
the  Stoics'  dictum — '  The  wise  man  alone  is  free.' 

33.  They  anstvered  him]  Or,  unto  Him,  according  to  the  best 
MSS.  'They'  must  mean  'the  Jews  who  had  believed  Him'  {v.  31)  : 
it  is  quite  arbitrary  to  suppose  any  one  else.  The  severe  words  which 
follow  (v.  44)  are  addressed  to  them,  for  turning  back,  after  their  mo- 
mentary belief,  as  well  as  to  those  who  had  never  believed  at  all. 

Abraham's  seed]  Comp.  'kings  of  peoples  shall  be  of  her'  (Sarah), 
and  'thy  seed  shall  possess  the  gate  of  his  enemies'  (Gen.  xvii.  16, 
xxii.  17).  On  texts  like  these  they  build  the  proud  belief  that  Jews 
have  never  yet  been  ?«  bondage  to  any  7nan.  But  passion  once  more 
blinds  them  to  historical  facts  (see  on  vii.  52).  The  bondage  in  Egypt, 
the  oppressions  in  the  times  of  the  Judges,  the  captivity  in  Babylon, 
and  the  Roman  yoke,  are  all  forgotten.  Some,  who  think  such  forget- 
fulness  incredible,  interpret  'we  have  never  been  lawfully  in  bondage.' 
'  The  Truth '  would  not  free  them  from  enforced  slavery.  It  might  free 
them  from  voluntary  slavery,  by  teaching  them  that  it  was  unlawful 
for  them  to  be  slaves.  '  But  we  know  that  already.'  This,  however, 
is  somewhat  subtle,  and  the  more  literal  interpretation  is  not  incredible. 
The  power  which  the  human  mind  possesses  of  keeping  inconvenient 
facts  out  of  sight  is  very  considerable.  In  either  case  we  have  another 
instance  of  gross  inability  to  perceive  the  spiritual  meaning  of  Christ's 
words.     Comp.  iii.  4,  iv.  15,  vi.  34. 

34.  Whosoever  coi7imitteth  sin  is  the  servant  of  siti]  Better,  Every- 
oae  who  continues  to  commit  sin  is  the  bond-servant  of  sin.  '  Com- 
mitteth sin'  is  too  weak  for  the  Greek:  Christ  does  not  say  that  a 
single  act  of  sin  enslaves.     'To  commit  (poiein)  sin'  is  the  opposite  of 


i88  S.   JOHN,   VIII.  [xv.  35—38. 

35  sin.     And  the  servant  abideth  not  in  the  house  for  ever : 

36  but  the  son  abideth  ever.     If  the  Son  therefore  shall  make 

37  you   free,  ye   shall   be  free  indeed.     I  know  that  ye  are 
Abraham's  seed  ;  but  ye  seek  to  kill  me,  because  my  word 

38  hath  no  place  in  you.     I  speak  that  which  I  have  seen  with 

'to  do  the  Truth'  (iii.  21).  Again,  'servant,'  though  often  a  good 
translation  where  nothing  degrading  is  implied,  is  not  strong  enough, 
where,  as  here,  the  degradation  is  the  main  point.  Moreover,  the 
connexion  with  z'.  33  must  be  kept  up.  Tlie  words  for  'bondage'  and 
'servant'  are  cognate;  therefore  either  'bondage'  and  'bond-servant,' 
or  'slavery'  and  'slave,'  must  be  our  renderings. 

Some  have  thought  that  we  have  here  an  echo  of  Rom.  vi.  16,  which 
of  course  S.  John  may  have  seen.  But  why  may  not  both  passages  be 
original?  The  idea  that  vice  is  slavery  is  common  in  all  literature: 
frequent  in  the  classics.  2  Pet.  ii.  19  is  probably  an  echo  either  of  this 
passage  or  of  Rom.  vi.  16.     Comp.  Matt.  vi.  24. 

35.  And  the  servant,  &c.]  The  transition  is  somewhat  abnipt,  the 
mention  of  'bond-servant'  suggesting  a  fresh  thought.  Now  the  bond- 
servant (not  the  bond-servant  of  sin,  but  any  slave)  abideth  not  in  the 
house  for  ever:  the  son  (not  the  Son  of  God,  but  any  son)  abideth  for 
ever.  "  The  thought  is  throughout  profound  and  instructive ;  and  to  a 
Jew,  always  ready  to  picture  to  himself  the  theocracy  or  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  under  the  form  of  a  household,  it  would  be  easily  intelligible." 
S.  p.  157. 

36.  If  the  Son  therefore,  &c.]  As  before,  any  son  is  meant.  '  If  the 
son  ema-ncipates  you,  your  freedom  is  secured;  for  he  is  always  on  the 
spot  to  see  that  his  emancipation  is  carried  out.'  The  statement  is 
general,  but  of  course  with  special  reference  to  the  Son  of  God.  If 
they  will  abide  in  His  word  {v.  31),  He  will  abide  in  them  (vi.  56), 
and  will  take  care  that  the  bondage  from  which  His  word  has  freed 
them  is  not  thrust  upon  them  again. 

shall  be  free  indeed"]  Not  the  same  word  as  is  translated  'indeed'  in 
t;.  31.  'Indeed'  or  'in  reality'  may  do  here;  'in  truth'  or 'truly'  in 
V.  31.     Both  words  are  opposed  to  mere  appearance. 

37.  Christ's  words  seem  gradually  to  take  a  wider  range.  They 
are  no  longer  addressed  merely  to  those  who  for  a  moment  had  believed 
on  Him,  but  to  His  opponents  generally,  whose  ranks  these  short- 
lived believers  had  joined. 

Abraham^s  seed]  He  admits  their  claim  in  their  own  narrow  sense. 
They  are  the  natural  descendants  of  Abraham :  his  children  in  any 
higher  sense  they  are  not  {v.  39).  Comp.  'neither,  because  they  are 
the  seed  of  Abraham,  are  they  all  children'  (Rom.  ix.  8). 

hath  no  place  in  you]  Rather,  maketh  no  advance  in  you.  His 
word  had  found  place  in  them  for  a  very  short  time;  but  it  made  no 
progress  in  their  hearts:  it  did  not  abide  in  them  and  they  did  not 
abide  in  it  (?'.  31).     They  had  stifled  it  and  cast  it  out. 

38.  /  speak,   &c.]     The  text  here  is  a  little  uncertain,  but  the  fol- 


w.  39— 4I-]  S.   JOHN,   VIII.  189 

my  Father :  and  ye  do  that  which  ye  have  seen  with  your 
father.     They  answered  and  said  unto  him,  Abraham  is  our  39 
father.      Jesus   saith   unto   them,    If   ye   were   Abraham's 
children,  ye  would  do  the  works  of  Abraham.     But  now  4c 
ye  seek  to  kill  me,  a  man  that  hath  told  you  the  truth, 
which  I  have  heard  of  God :  this  did  not  Abraham.     Ye  4' 
do  the  deeds  of  your  father.     Then  said  they  to  him,  We 

lowing  seems  to  have  most  authority;  /  speak  the  tMngs  wMch  / 
have  seen  with  {Afy)  Father:  ye  also,  therefore,  do  the  things  which 
ye  heard  from  {your)  father.  '  I  speak  those  truths  of  which  I  have 
had  direct  Icnowledge  from  all  eternity  with  the  Father ;  you,  there- 
fore, following  My  relation  to  the  Father,  commit  those  sins  which 
your  father  suggested  to  you.'  Christ  does  not  say  who  their  father  is; 
but  he  means  that  morally  they  are  the  children  of  the  devil.  _  The 
'therefore'  (rare  in  discourses)  is  severely  ironical.  The  connexion  of 
V.  38  with  V.  37  is  not  quite  obvious.  Perhaps  it  is  this: — My  words 
make  no  progress  in  you,  because  they  are  so  different  in  origin  and 
nature  from  your  acts,  especially  your  attempt  to  kill  Me.  It  is  pos- 
sible to  take  the  latter  half  of  the  verse  as  an  imperative ;  and  do  ye 
therefore  the  things  which  ye  heard  from  the  Father. 

39.  Abraham  is  our  father^  They  see  that  He  means  some  other 
father  than  Abraham ;  possibly  they  suspect  His  full  meaning,  soon  to 
be  expressed  {v.  44). 

If  ye  were  Abraham's  children]  The  true  reading  seems  to  be,  if  ye 
are  Abraham's  childreji,  which  has  been  altered  to  ' if  ye  zvere'  so  as 
to  run  more  smoothly  with  the  second  clause.  But  the  reading  of  the 
second  verb  is  also  doubtful,  and  perhaps  we  should  read,  do  (imper.) 
the  works  of  Abraham. 

40.  *  On  the  contrary,  5'e  seek  to  commit  murder,  and  a  murder  of 
the  most  heinous  kind.  Ye  would  kill  One  who  hath  spoken  unto 
you  the  truth,  truth  which  He  learnt  from  God.' 

a  tna}i  that  hath  told  you]  This  pointed  insertion  of 'man'  possibly 
looks  forward  to  v.  44,  where  they  are  called  the  children  of  the  great 
7nan-slayer,  lusting  like  him  for  blood.  The  Lord  nowhere  else  uses 
this  term  of  Himself. 

this  did  not  Abraham]  A  litotes  or  understatement  of  the  truth. 
Abraham's  life  was  utterly  unlike  the  whole  tenour  of  theirs.  What 
could  there  be  in  common  between  'the  Friend  of  God'  (Jas.  ii.  23)  and 
the  enemies  of  God's  Son? 

41.  Ye  do  the  deeds  of  your  father]  Better,  Ye  are  doing  the  works 
of  your  father.  The  word  here  rendered  'deeds'  is  the  same  as  that 
rendered  'works'  in  v.  39.  'Ye'  is  emphatic,  in  contrast  to  Abraham. 
This  shews  them  plainly  that  spiritual  parentage  is  what  He  means.  In 
V.  39  they  still  cling  to  Abraham,  although  He  has  evidently  assigned 
them  some  other  father.  Here  they  drop  literal  parentage  and  adopt 
His  figurative  language.  'You  are  speaking  of  spiritual  parentage. 
Well,  our  spiritual  Father  is  God.' 


19°  S.   JOHN,   VIII.  [vv.  42, 43. 

be  not  born  of  fornication  ;  we  have  one  Father,  eve7i  God. 

42  Jesus  said  unto  them,  If  God  were  your  Father,  ye  would 
love    me :    for   I    proceeded  forth   and   came   from    God ; 

43  neither  came  I  of  myself,  but  he  sent  me.     Why  do  ye  not 
understand   my  speech?  even  because  ye  cannot  hear  my 

We  be  not  born  offornication\  The  meaning  of  this  is  very  much  dis- 
puted. The  following  are  the  chief  explanations :  (i)  Thou  hast  denied 
that  we  are  the  children  of  Abraham,  then  we  must  be  the  children  of 
some  one  sinning  with  Sarah:  which  is  false.'  But  this  would  be 
adultery,  not  fornication.  (2)  'We  are  the  children  of  Sarah,  not  of 
Hagar.'  But  this  was  lawful  concubinage,  not  fornication.  (3)  'We 
are  not  a  mongrel  race,  like  the  Samaritans;  we  are  pure  Jews.'  This 
is  far-fetched,  and  does  not  suit  the  context.  (4)  'We  were  not  born  of 
fornication,  as  Thou  art.'  But  His  miraculous  birth  was  not  yet  com- 
monly known,  and  this  foul  Jewish  lie,  perpetuated  from  the  second 
century  onwards  (Origen,  c.  Celsum  i.  xxxii.),  was  not  yet  in  exis- 
tence. (5)  'We  were  not  born  of  spiritual  fornication;  our  sonship  has 
not  been  polluted  with  idolatry.  If  thou  art  speaking  of  spiritual 
parentage,  'we  have  one  Father,  even  God.'  This  last  seems  the  best. 
Idolatry  is  so  constantly  spoken  of  as  whoredom  and  fornication  through- 
out the  whole  of  the  O.  T.,  that  in  a  discussion  about  spintual  father- 
hood this  image  would  be  perfectly  natural  in  the  mouth  of  a  Jew. 
Exod.  xxxiv.  15,  16;  Lev.  xvii.  7;  Judg.  ii.  17;  2  Kgs.  ix.  22;  Ps. 
Ixxiii.  27;  Isa.  i.  21;  Jer.  iii.  i,  9;  Ezek.  xvi.  15;  &c.  &c.  See  esp. 
Hos.  11.  4.  There  is  a  proud  emphasis  on  'we;'— 'w^  are  not  idolaters, 
like  Thy  friends  the  Gentiles'  (comp.  vii.  35). 

we  have  one  Father]  Or,  one  Father  we  have,  with  emphasis  on  the 
'one,'  in  contrast  to  the  many  gods  of  the  heathen. 

42.  Moral  proof  that  God  is  not  their  father;  if  they  were  God's 
children  they  would  love  His  Son.  Comp.  xv.  23,  and  'every  one  that 
loveth  Him  that  begat  loveth  Him  also  that  is  begotten  of  Him' 
( I  John  V.  i).  For  the  construction  comp.  v.  19,  v.  46,  ix.  41,  xv.  19, 
xiii.  36 :  in  all  these  cases  we  have  imperfects,  not  aorists.  Contrast 
iv.  10,  xi.  21,  32,  xiv.  28. 

I  proceeded  forth  atid  came  from  God]  Rather,  /  came  out  (see  on 
xvi.  28)  from  God  and  am  here  from  God  among  you.  Surely  then 
God's  true  children  would  recognise  and  love  Me. 

neither  came  I  of  myself]  Rather,  For  not  even  of  Myself  have  I 
come.  The  'for'  must  on  no  account  be  omitted;  it  introduces  a  proof 
that  He  is  come  from  God.  '  For  (not  only  have  I  not  come  from  any 
other  than  God)  I  have  not  even  come  of  My  own  self-determination.' 

43.  my  speech... my  word]  'Speech'  is  the  outward  expression,  the 
language  used;  'thy  speech  bewrayeth  thee'  (Malt.  xxvi.  73;  comp. 
Mark  xiv.  70).  Besides  these  two  passages  the  word  for  'speech'  is 
used  only  iv.  42,  where  it  is  rendered  'saying,'  and  here.  'Word'  is  the 
meaning  of  the  expression,  the  teaching  conveyed  in  the  language  used. 
They  perpetually  misunderstand    His  language,  because   they  cannot 


V.  44-]  S.   JOHN,   VIII.  191 

word.     Ye  are  of  yotir  father  the  devil,  and  the  lusts  of  44 
your   father   ye   will   do.      He   was  a  murderer   from   the 
beginning,  and  abode  not  in  the  truth,  because  there  is  no 


appreciate  His  meaning.  They  are  'from  beneath'  {v.  23),  and  He  is 
speaking  of  'things  above'  (Col.  iii.  i);  they  are  'of  this  world,'  and 
He  is  telling  of  'heavenly  things'  (iii.  12);  they  are  'natural,'  and  He  is 
teaching  'spiritual  things'  (i  Cor.  ii.  14;  see  note  there).  They  'caM- 
not  hear ; '  it  is  a  moral  impossibility :  they  have  their  whole  character 
to  change  before  they  can  understand  spiritual  truths. 

44.  Ye  are  of  your  father  the  devil\  At  last  Christ  says  plainly,  what 
He  has  implied  in  w.  38  and  41.  'Ye'  is  emphatic;  'ye,  who  boast 
that  ye  have  Abraham  and  God  as  your  Father,  ye  are  morally  the 
Devil's  children.'  Comp.  i  John  iii.  8,  10,  which  is  perhaps  an  echo  of 
Christ's  words. 

This  passage  seems  to  be  conclusive  as  to  the  real  personal  existence 
of  the  devil.  It  can  scarcely  be  an  economy,  a  concession  to  ordinary 
modes  of  thought  and  language.  Would  Christ  have  resorted  to  a 
popular  delusion  in  a  denunciation  of  such  solemn  and  awful  severity? 
Comp.  'the  children  of  the  wicked  one'  (Matt.  xiii.  38);  'ye  make  him 
twofold  more  the  child  of  hell  than  yourselves'  (Matt,  xxiii.  15).  With 
this  denunciation  generally  compare  those  contained  in  Matt.  xi.  20 — 24, 
xxiii.  13 — 36.  "It  is  likely  that  dialogues  of  this  sort  would  be  of  not 
infrequent  occurrence,  especially  just  at  this  time  when  the  conflict  is 
reaching  its  climax.  It  is  likely  too  that  they  would  be  of  the  nature  of 
dialogues  broken  by  impatient  interruptions  on  the  part  of  the  Jews, 
and  not  always  a  continuous  strain  of  denunciation  as  in  Matt,  xxiii." 
S.  p.  159. 

A  monstrous  but  grammatically  possible  translation  of  these  words  is 
adopted  by  some  who  attribute  a  Gnostic  origin  to  this  Gospel; — 'ye  are 
descended  from  the  father  of  the  devil.'  This  Gnostic  demonology, 
according  to  which  the  father  of  the  devil  is  the  God  of  the  Jews,  is 
utterly  unscriptural,  and  does  not  suit  the  context  here. 

and  the  lusts  of  your  father  ye  will  do\  Rather,  ye  will  to  do.  See 
on  vi.  67,  vii.  17  ;  and  comp.  v.  40.  'Ye  love  to  gratify  the  lusts  which 
characterize  him,  especially  the  lust  for  blood.  Being  his  children,  ye 
are  like  him  in  nature.' 

He  was  a  murderer  from  the  beginning]  The  word  for  'murderer' 
etymologically  means  'man-slayer,'  and  seems  to  connect  this  passage 
with  V.  40  (see  note  there).  The  devil  was  a  murderer  by  causing  the 
Fall,  and  thus  bringing  death  into  the  world.  Comp.  'God  created 
man  to  be  immortal,  and  made  him  to  be  an  image  of  His  own  eternity. 
Nevertheless,  through  envy  of  the  devil  came  death  into  the  world,  and 
they  that  do  hold  of  his  side  shall  find  it  (Wisd.  ii.  23,  24) :  and  'Cain 
was  of  that  wicked  one  and  slew  his  brother:'  and  'whosoever  hateth 
his  brother  is  a  murderer'  (i  John  iii.  12,  15). 

and  abode  not  in  the  truth]  Rather,  and  standeth  not  in  the  truth. 
The  verb  is  not  S.  John's  favourite  word   'abide'  (see  on  i.  33),  but 


192  S.   JOHN,   VIII.  [vv.  45-48. 

truth  in  him.     When  he  speaketh  a  he,  he  speaketh  of  his 

45  own  :  for  he  is  a  Uar,  and  the  father  of  it.     And  because  I 

46  teU  yoii  the  truth,  ye  beheve  me  not.     Which  of  you  con- 
vinceth  me  of  sin  ?     And  if  I  say  the  truth,  why  do  ye  not 

47  beheve  me?     He  that  is  of  God  heareth  God's  words:  ye 

48  therefore  hear  the7n  not,  because  ye  are  not  of  God.     Then 

(according  to  the  common  reading)  the  same  that  is  used  in  i.  35,  iii.  ■29, 
vii.  37,  &c.  Though  perfect  in  form  it  is  present  in  meaning:  therefore 
not  'hath  stood,'  still  less  'stood'  or  'abode,'  but  standeth.  The  true 
reading,  however,  is  probably  not  hest^ken,  but  esteken,  the  imperfect  of 
stekein  (i.  26;  Rom.  xiv.  4),  a  stronger  form  of  the  verb;  stood  firm. 
Truth  is  a  region  from  which  the  devil  has  long  since  departed. 

he  speaketh  of  his  ow?i]  Literally,  he  speaketh  out  of  his  own ;  out  of 
his  own  resources,  out  of  his  own  nature :  the  outcome  is  what  might  be 
expected  from  him. 

for  he  is  a  liar,  and  the  father  ofit'\  Better,  toecause  he  is  a  liar  and 
the  fat  he-  thereof,  i.e.  father  of  the  liar,  rather  than  father  of  the  lie 
(understood  in  liar).  Here  again  a  monstrous  misinterpretation  is  gram- 
matically possible ; —  'for  he  is  a  liar,  and  his  father  also.'  It  is  not  strange 
that  Gnostics  of  the  second  and  third  centuries  should  have  tried  to  wring 
a  sanction  for  their  fantastic  systems  out  of  the  writings  of  S.  John.  It  is 
strange  that  any  modern  critics  should  have  thought  demonology  so 
extravagant  compatible  with  the  theology  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 

45.  Atid  because  I  tell  you,  &c.]  Better,  But  because  I  speak  the 
truth,  ye  do  not  believe  7)ie.  'Ye  will  listen  to  the  devil  [v.  38) ;  ye  will 
believe  a  lie:  but  the  Messiah  speaking  the  truth  ye  will  not  believe.' 
The  tragic  tone  once  more:  comp.  i.  5,  10,  11,  ii.  24,  iii.  10,  19,  &c. 

46.  Which  ofyoticoiivincethme  ofsin?}  Or,  convicteth  Me  of  sin  (see 
on  iii.  20).  Many  rebuked  Christ  and  laid  sin  to  His  charge:  none  brought 
sin  home  to  His  conscience.  There  is  the  majesty  of  Divinity  in  the  chal- 
lenge. What  mortal  man  would  dare  to  make  it?  See  on  v.  29,  and 
comp.  xiv.  30,  and  xv.  10;  i  John  iii.  5;  i  Pet.  i.  19,  ii.  22.  Note 
the  implied  connexion  between  sin  generally  and  falsehood,  as  between 
righteousness  and  truth,  vii.  18. 

And  if  I  say  the  tnith^  Better,  If  I  say  truth.  No  MSS.  have  the 
article,  and  the  best  MSS.  omit  the  conjunction.  '  If  I  am  free  from 
sin  (and  none  of  you  can  convict  Me  of  sin),  I  am  free  from  falsehood 
and  speak  the  truth.  Why  then  do  ye  on  your  part  refuse  to  believe 
Me?'     'Ye' is  emphatic. 

47.  Christ  answers  His  own  question  and  at  the  same  time  gives  a 
final  disproof  of  their  claim  to  call  God  their  father  {v.  41). 

heareth  God^s  words']  Christ  here  assumes,  wliat  He  elsewhere 
maintains  explicitly,  that  He  speaks  the  words  of  God  [v.  26,  iii.  34, 
vii.  16,  xvii.  8). 

ye  therefore  hear  them  not]  Better,  for  this  cause  (xii.  18,  27)  ye  hear 
not.  It  is  not  S.  John's  favourite  particle  'therefore,'  but,  as  in 
V.  16,  i8,  vi.  65,  vii.   22  (see  notes  there),  a  preposition  and  pronoun 


V.  49-1  S.   JOHN,   VIII.  193 

answered  the  Jews,  and  sai3  unto  him.  Say  we  not  well 
that  thou  art  a  Samaritan,  and  hast  a  devil?     Jesus  an- 49 
swered,  I  have  not  a  devil ;  but  I  honour  my  Father,  and 

with  which  he  not  unfrequently  begins  a  sentence  to  prepare  the 
way  for  a  '  because '  afterwards.  These  characteristics  of  his  language 
should  be  preserved  in  English,  and  kept  distinct,  so  far  as  is  possible. 
In  the  First  Epistle  he  uses  the  very  same  test  as  Christ  here  applies 
to  the  Jews;  'We  are  of  God:  he  that  knoweth  God  heareth  us;  he 
that  is  not  of  God  heareth  not  us.  Hereby  know  we  the  spirit  of  truth 
and  the  spirit  of  error'  (iv.  6). 

48.  Then  answeird  the  Jews\  The  best  MSS.  omit  the  particle, 
which  if  it  were  genuine  should  be  rendered  '  therefore,' not  'then:' 
The  Jews  answered.  This  denial  of  their  national  prerogative  of  being 
sons  of  God  seems  to  them  malicious  frenzy.  He  must  be  an  enemy  of 
the  peculiar  people  and  be  possessed. 

Say  we  not  weir\  i.e.  rightly:  comp.  iv.  17,  xiii.  13,  xviii.  23.  'We' 
is  emphatic ;  '  we  at  any  rate  are  right.' 

that  thou  art  a  Samaritan^  "  Nowhere  else  do  we  find  the  designa- 
tion 'a  Samaritan;'  yet  it  might  naturally — we  might  say  inevitably — 
be  given  to  one  who  seemed  to  attack  the  exclusive  privileges  of  the 
Jewish  people."  S.  pp.  159,  160.  It  is  therefore  a  striking  touch  of 
reality,  and  another  instance  of  the  Evangelist's  complete  familiarity 
with  the  ideas  and  expressions  current  in  Palestine  at  this  time. 
Possibly  this  term  of  reproach  contains  a  sneer  at  His  visit  to  Samaria 
in  chap,  iv.,  and  at  His  having  chosen  the  unusual  route  through 
Samaria,  as  Pie  probably  did  (see  on  vii.  10),  in  coming  up  to  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles.  The  parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan  was  probably  not 
yet  spoken. 

and  hast  a  devil'\  It  is  unfortunate  that  we  have  not  two  words  in  our 
Bible  to  distinguish  diabolos,  '  the  Devil '  {v.  44,  xiii.  2 ;  Matt.  iv.  i  ; 
Luke  viii.  12  ;  &c.,  &c. ),  from  daimonion  or  daimon,  '  a  devil,'  or  '  un- 
clean spirit.'  'Fiend,'  which  Wiclif  sometimes  employs  (Matt.  xii. 
24,  28;  Mark  i.  34,  39,  &c.),  might  have  been  used,  had  Tyndale 
and  Cranmer  adopted  it :  demon  would  have  been  better  still.  But 
here  Tyndale,  Cranmer,  and  the  Geneva  Version  make  the  confusion 
complete  by  rendering  'and  hast  the  devil,'  a  mistake  which  they 
make  also  in  vii.  20  and  x.  20.  The  charge  here  is  more  bitter  than 
either  vii.  20  or  x.  20,  where  it  simply  means  that  His  conduct  is 
so  extraordinary  that  He  must  be  demented.  We  have  instances  more 
similar  to  this  in  the  Synoptists;  Matt.  ix.  34,  xii.  24;  Mark  iii.  22; 
Luke  xi.  15. 

49.  /  have  not  a  devil\  He  does  not  notice  the  charge  of  being  a 
Samaritan.  For  Him  it  contained  nothing  offensive,  for  He  knew  that 
Samaritans  might  equal  or  excel  Jews  (iv.  39 — 42  ;  Luke  x.  33,  xvii.  16) 
in  faith,  benevolence,  and  gratitude.  There  is  an  emphasis  on  '  I,'  but 
the  meaning  of  the  emphasis  is  not  '  /  have  not  a  demon,  but  ye  have. ' 
Rather  it  means  '/  have  not  a  demon,  but  honour  My  Father;  while 
you  on  the  contrary  dishonour  My  Father  through  Me.' 


S.  JOHN 


^3 


194  >  S.   JOHN,   VIII.  [w.  50—53. 

so  ye  do  dishonour  me.     And   I   seek  not  mine  own  glory  : 

sx  there  is  one  that  seeketh  and  judgeth.     Verily,  verily,  I  say 

unto  you,  If  a  man  keep  my  saying,  he  shall  never  see 

52  death.  Then  said  the  Jews  unto  him,  Now  we  know  that 
thou  hast  a  devil.  Abraham  is  dead,  and  the  prophets ; 
and  thou  sayest.  If  a  man  keep  my  saying,  he  shall  never 

53  taste  of  death.     Art  thou  greater  than  our  father  Abraham, 

50.  And  I  seek  not  mine  own  olory\  '&&i\.tr,'BvAIseeknotMyglory. 
♦  It  is  not  because  I  seek  glory  for  Myself  that  I  speak  of  your  dis- 
honouring Me :  My  Father  seeks  that  for  Me  and  pronounces  judgment 
on  you.'     Comp.  z/.  54  and  V.  41. 

51.  If  a  man  keep  my  saying]  Better,  if  a  inan  keep  My  word. 
This  is  important,  to  shew  the  connexion  with  verses  31  and  43  and  also 
with  V.  24.  In  all  these  the  same  Greek  word  is  used,  logos.  The 
phrase  '  keep  My  word '  is  one  of  frequent  occurrence  in  this  Gospel : 
verses  52,  55,  xiv.  23,  xv.  20,  xvii.  6:  as  also  the  kindred  phrase  '  keep 
My  commandments:'  xiv.  15,  21,  xv.  10:  comp.  i  John  ii.  3,  4,  5,  iii. 
•22,  24,  V.  2,  3.  'Keeping'  means  not  merely  keeping  in  heart,  but 
obeying  and  fulfilling.  This  is  the  way  in  which  they  may  escape  the 
judgment  just  spoken  of.  So  that  there  is  no  need  to  suppose  that 
while  verses  49,  50  are  addressed  to  His  opponents,  z/.  51  is  addressed 
after  a  pause  to  a  more  friendly  section,  a  change  of  which  there  is  no 
hint. 

shall  never  see  deatJt]  Literally,  shall  certainly  not  behold  death  for 
ever.  But  'for  ever'  belongs,  like  the  negative,  to  the  verb,  not  to 
'  death.'  It  does  not  mean  '  he  shall  see  death,  but  the  death  shall  not 
be  eternal:'  rather  'he  shall  certainly  never  see  death,'  i.e.  he  already 
has  eternal  life  (v.  24)  and  shall  never  lose  it.  This  is  evident  from 
iv.  14,  which  cannot  mean  'shall  thirst,  but  the  thirst  shall  not  be 
eternal,'  and  from  xiii.  8,  which  cannot  mean  '  shalt  wash  my  feet,  but 
the  washing  shall  not  be  eternal.'  In  all  three  cases  the  meaning  is  the 
same,  'shall  certainly  never.'    Comp.  x.  28,  xi.  26. 

52.  Noiv  we  know  that  thou  hast  a  devil]  '  It  was  somewhat  of 
a  conjecture  before,  but  now  we  recognise  clear  evidence  of  it.' 

Abraham  is  dead]  Abrahafu  died.  Again  they  shew  a  gross  want 
of  perception  and  '  do  not  understand  His  speech  '  {v.  43).  They  can- 
not discern  a  spiritual  truth,  but  understand  Him  to  be  speaking 
of  physical  death.      '  My  saying '  should  be  '  My  word  '  as  in  w.  51. 

he  shall  never  taste  of  death]  In  their  excitement  they  exaggerate 
His  language.  The  metaphor  '  taste  of  death '  is  not  taken  from  a 
death-cup,  but  from  the  general  idea  of  bitterness.  It  is  frequent  in  the 
classics. 

53.  Art  thou  greater]  Exactly  parallel  to  iv.  12.  'Thou'  is  emphatic: 
'Surely  Thou  art  not  greater  than  our  father  Abraham,  who  died?— 
And  the  prophets  died.  An  anacoluthon,  like  their  exaggeration,  very 
natural.  Strictly  the  sentence  should  run,  '  and  than  the  prophets,  who 
died?' 


w.  54—57-]  S.  JOHN,  VIII.  195 

which  is  dead  ?  and  the  prophets  are  dead :  whom  makest 
thou  thyself?     Jesus  answered,   If  I   honour  myself,    my  54 
honour  is  nothing  :  it  is  my  Father  that  honoureth  me ;  of 
whom  ye  say,  that  he  is  your  God  :  yet  ye  have  not  known  55 
him ;  but  I  know  him  :  and  if  I  should  say,  I  know  him 
not,  I  shall  be  a  liar  like  unto  you  :  but  I  know  him,  and 
keep  his  saying.     Your  father  Abraham  rejoiced  to  see  my  56 
day :  and  he  saw  //,  and  was  glad.     Then  said  the  Jews  57 

54 — 56.  Christ  first  answers  the  insinuation  that  He  is  vain-glorious, 
implied  in  the  question  'whom  makest  Thou  Thyself?'  Then  He  shews 
that  He  really  is  greater  than  Abraham. 

54.  If  I  honotcr  myself  \  Better,  If  I  shall  have  glorified  Myself, 
My  glory  is  nothing.  It  is  not  the  same  word  as  is  rendered  '  honour ' 
in  V.  49,  therefore  another  English  word  is  desirable.  There  is  My 
Father  who  glorifieth  Me — in  miracles  and  the  Messianic  work  generally. 
Comp.  V.  50. 

55.  Yet  ye  have  not  known  hi>n  ;  but  I  know  him'\  Once  more  we 
have  two  different  Greek  words  for  '  know '  in  close  proximity,  and  the 
difference  is  obliterated  in  our  version  (comp.  vii.  15,  17,  -26,  27,  xiii.  7, 
xiv.  7,  and  see  on  vii.  26).  Here  the  meaning  is,  And  ye  have  not 
recognised  Him ;  btit  I  knoiv  Him,  the  latter  clause  referring  to  His 
immediate  essential  knowledge  of  the  Father. 

a  liar  like  untoyoul  Or,  Like  unto  you,  a  liar.  Referring  back  to 
V.  44. 

keep  his  saying]  Or,  keep  His  word,  as  in  verses  51,  52.  Christ's 
whole  life  was  a  continual  practice  of  obedience:  Heb.  v.  8;  Rom.  v. 
19;  Phil.  ii.  8. 

56.  rejoiced  to  see  my  day]  Literally,  exulted  that  he  inight  see  My 
day,  the  object  of  his  joy  being  represented  as  the  goal  to  which  his 
heart  is  directed.  This  is  a  remarkable  instance  of  S.  John's  prefer- 
ence for  the  construction  expressing  a  purpose,  where  other  construc- 
tions would  seem  more  natural.  Comp.  iv.  34,  47,  vi.  29,  50,  ix.  2,  3, 
22,  xi.  50,  xvi.  7.  Abraham  exulted  in  anticipation  of  the  coming 
of  the  Messiah  through  implicit  belief  in  the  Divine  promises. 

and  he  saw  it,  and  was  glad]  A  very  important  passage  with  regard 
to  the  intermediate  state,  shewing  that  the  soul  does  not,  as  some  main- 
tain, remain  unconscious  between  death  and  the  Day  of  Judgment. 
The  Old  Testament  saints  in  Paradise  were  allowed  to  know  that  the 
Messiah  had  come.  How  this  was  revealed  to  them  we  are  not  told ;  but 
here  is  a  plain  statement  of  the  fact.  The  word  for  '  was  glad  '  expresses 
a  calmer,  less  emotional  joy  than  the  word  for  '  rejoiced,'  and  therefore 
both  are  appropriate :  '  exulted  '  while  still  on  earth ;  '  was  glad  '  in 
Hades.  Thus  the  'Communion  of  Saints'  is  assured,  not  merely  in 
parables  (Luke  xvi.  27,  28),  but  in  the  plainer  words  of  Scripture. 
Comp.  Heb.  xii.  i. 

57.  Then  said  the  Jews]     Better,  Therefore  said  the  Jews. 

13—2 


196  S.    JOHN,   VIII.  [vv.  58,  59. 

unto  him,  Thou  art  not  yet  fifty  years  old,  and  hast  thou 

58  seen  Abraham  ?     Jesus  said  unto  them.  Verily,  verily,  I  say 

59  unto  you.  Before  Abraham  was,  I  am.  Then  took  they  up 
stones  to  cast  at  him  :  but  Jesus  hid  himself,  and  went  out 
of  the  temple,  going  through  the  midst  of  them,  and  so 
passed  by. 

Thou  art  not  yet  fifty  years  old]  The  reading,  '  forty  years,'  which 
Chrysostom  and  a  few  authorities  give,  is  no  doubt  incorrect.  It  has 
arisen  from  a  wisli  to  make  the  number  less  wide  of  the  marlc  ;  for  our 
Lord  was  probably  not  yet  thirty-five,  although  Irenaeus  preserves 
a  tradition  that  He  taught  at  a  much  later  age.  He  says  (11.  xxii.  5), 
a  qiiadrigesinio  atitem  et  quinqiiagesitno  anno  declinat  jam  in  aetatem 
seniorein,  qtiam  habens  Dominus  noster  docebat,  sicut  evaiigelinm  et 
oinnes  seniores  testatittir  qtii  in  Asia  apud  Joannem  disctpuhtm  Domini 
conveuerunt.  By  '  evangelium  '  he  probably  means  this  passage.  But 
'  fifty  year^ '  is  a  round  number,  the  Jewish  traditional  age  of  full  man- 
hood (Num.  iv.  3,  39,  viii.  24,  25).  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that 
Jesus  was  nearly  fifty,  or  looked  nearly  fifty.  In  comparing  His  age 
with  the  2000  years  since  Abraham  the  Jews  would  not  care  to  be  pre- 
cise so  long  as  they  were  within  the  mark. 

58.  Before  Abraham  was,  I  am]  Here  our  translators  have  lament- 
ably gone  back  from  earlier  translations.  Cranmer  has,  '  Ere  Abraham 
%vas  born,  I  am;'  and  the  Rhemish,  'Before  that  Abraham  was  made,  I 
am,'  following  the  Vulgate,  Antequam  Abraham  fieret,  Ego  sum.  See 
notes  on  'was'  in  i.  i,  6.  'I  am'  denotes  absolute  existence,  and  in 
this  passage  clearly  involves  the  pre-existence  and  Divinity  of  Christ,  as 
the  Jews  see.     Comp.  vv.  24,  28;  Rev.  i.  4,  8;  and  see  on  v.  24. 

69.  Then  took  they  up  stones]  Or,  Therefore /(^tJ/t  they  up  stones,  i.e. 
in  consequence  of  His  last  words.  They  see  clearly  what  He  means. 
He  has  taken  to  Himself  the  Divine  Name  and  they  prepare  to  stone 
Him  for  blasphemy.  Material  lying  there  for  completing  and  re- 
pairing the  Temple  would  supply  them  with  missiles.  Comp.  x.  31,  33. 
but  yesus  hid  himself]  Probably  we  are  not  to  understand  a 
miraculous  withdrawal  as  in  Luke  iv.  30,  where  the  '  passing  through 
the  midst  of  them'  seems  to  be  miraculous.  Here  we  need  not  sup- 
pose more  than  that  He  drew  back  into  the  crowd  away  from  those 
who  had  taken  up  stones.  The  Providence  which  ordered  that  as  yet  the 
fears  of  the  hierarchy  should  prevail  over  their  hostility  (vii.  30,  viii.  20), 
ruled  that  the  less  hostile  in  this  multitude  should  screen  Him  from  the 
fury  of  the  more  fanatical.  It  is  quite  arbitrary  to  invert  the  clauses 
and  render,  'Jesus  went  out  of  the  Temple  and  hid  Himself 

going  through  the  tnidst  of  them,  and  so  passed  by]  These  words  are 
apparently  an  insertion,  and  probably  an  adaptation  of  Luke  iv. 
30.  No  English  Version  previous  to  the  one  of  161 1  contains  the 
passage. 

As  a  comment  on  the  whole  discourse  see  i  Pet.  ii.  22,  23,  remem- 
bering that  S.  Peter  was  very  possibly  present  on  the  occasion. 


vv.  I,  2.]  S.   JOHN,   IX.  197 

Chap.  IX.     Christ  the  Source  of  Truth  and  Light  illustrated 

by  a  Sign. 

I — 5.     The  Prelude  to  the  Sign. 

And  duS  Jesus  passed  by,  he  saw  a  man  which  was  blind  9 
from  his  birth.  And  his  disciples  asked  him,  saying,  2 
Master,  who  did  sin,  this  ma?i,  or  his  parents,  that  he  was 

"The  whole  of  the  Jews'  reasoning  is  strictly  what  we  should  expect 
from  them.  These  constant  appeals  to  their  descent  from  Abraham, 
these  repeated  imputations  of  diabolic  possession,  this  narrow  intelli- 
gence bounded  by  the  letter,  this  jealousy  of  anything  that  seemed  in 
the  slightest  degree  to  trench  on  their  own  rigid  monotheism  — all  these, 
down  to  the  touch  in  ver.  57,  in  which  the  age  they  fix  upon  in  round 
numbers  is  that  assigned  to  completed  manhood,  give  local  truth  and 
accuracy  to  the  picture  ;  which  in  any  case,  we  may  say  confidently, 
must  have  been  drawn  by  a  Palestinian  Jew,  and  was  in  all  probability 
drawn  by  a  Jew  who  had  been  himself  an  early  disciple  of  Christ."  S. 
p.  160. 

Chap.  IX.    Christ  the  Source  of  Truth  and  Light 

ILLUSTRATED    BY   A    SiGN. 

Light  is  given  to  the  eyes  of  the  man  born  blind  and  the  Truth  is  re- 
vealed to  his  soul. 

1 — 5.    The  Prelude  to  the  Sign. 

1.  And  as  yesus  passed  by]  Or,  And  as  He  was  passing  by.  This 
was  possibly  on  His  way  from  the  Temple  (viii.  59),  or  it  may  refer  to 
a  later  occasion  near  the  Feast  of  the  Dedication  (x.  22).  We  know 
that  this  man  begged  for  his  living  {v.  8),  and  that  beggars  frequented 
the  gates  of  the  Temple  (Acts  iii.  2),  as  they  frequent  the  entrances  of 
foreign  churches  now. 

blind  from  his  birth]  The  man  would  be  repeatedly  stating  this  fact 
to  passers  by.  The  Greek  for  '  from  his  birth '  occurs  nowhere  else  in 
N.  T.  Justin  Martyr  uses  the  phrase  twice-  of  those  whom  Christ 
healed ;  Trypho  LXIX.  ;  Apol.  I.  xxii.  No  source  is  so  probable  as 
this  verse,  for  nowhere  else  is  there  an  account  of  Christ's  healing 
a  congenital  disease.     See  on  i.  23  and  iii.  3. 

2.  Masiej-]     Better,  Rabtoi:  see  on  iv.  31. 

who  did  sin,  this  man,  or  his  parejits,  that  he  was  born  blind?] 
Literally,  that  he  should  be  born  blind  (see  note  on  viii.  56).  This 
question  has  given  rise  to  much  discussion.  It  implies  a  belief  that  some 
one  must  have  sinned,  or  there  would  have  been  no  such  suffering:  who 
then  was  it  that  sinned?  Possibly  the  question  means  no  more  than 
this ;  the  persons  most  closely  connected  with  the  suffering  being 
specially  mentioned,  without  much  thought  as  to  possibilities  or  pro- 
babilities.     But   this  is   not  quite  satisfactory.      The   disciples    name 


198  S.  JOHN,   IX.  [vv.  3,  4. 

3  born  blind?    Jesus  answered,  Neither  hath  this  man  sinned, 
nor  his  parents  :  but  that  the  works  of  God  should  be  made 

4  manifest  in  him.     I  must  work  the  works  of  him  that  sent 


two  very  definite  alternatives;  v^e  must  not  assume  that  one  of  them 
was  meaningless.  That  the  sins  of  the  fathers  are  visited  on  the 
children  is  the  teaching  of  the  Second  Commandment  and  of  every 
one's  experience.  But  how  could  a  man  be  bom  blind  for  his  own  sin? 
Four  answers  have  been  suggested,  (i)  The  predestinarian  notion 
that  the  man  was  punished  for  sins  which  God  knew  he  would  commit 
in  the  course  of  his  life.  This  is  utterly  unscriptural  and  scarcely  fits 
the  context. 

(2)  The  doctrine  of  the  transmigration  of  souls,  which  was  held  by 
some  Jews :  he  might  have  sinned  in  another  body.  But  it  is  doubtful 
whether  this  philosophic  tenet  would  be  familiar  to  the  disciples. 

(3)  The  doctrine  of  the  pre-existence  of  the  soul,  which  appears 
Wisdom  v'ii.  20:  the  man's  soul  sinned  before  it  was  united  to  the 
body.     This  again  can  hardly  have  been  familiar  to  illiterate  men. 

(4)  The  current  Jewish  interpretation  of  Gen.  xxv.  22,  Ps.  li.  5, 
and  similar  passages ;  that  it  was  possible  for  a  babe  yet  unborn  to  have 
emotions  (comp.  Luke  i.  41 — 44)  and  that  these  might  be  and  often 
were  sinful.  On  the  whole,  this  seems  to  be  the  simplest  and  most 
natural  interpretation,  and  7).  34  seems  to  confirm  it. 

3.  Christ  shews  that  there  is  a  third  alternative,  which  their  ques- 
tion assumes  that  there  is  not.  Moreover  He  by  implication  warns 
them  against  assuming  a  connexion  between  suffering  and  sin  in  in- 
dividuals (see  on  v.  14).  Neither  did  this  matt  sin  (not  'hath  sinned  '), 
nor  his  parents.  The  answer,  like  the  question,  points  to  a  definite  act 
of  sin. 

but  that']  i.e.  he  was  born  blind  in  order  that.  This  elliptical  use  of 
'  but  (in  order)  that '  is  common  in  S.  John,  and  illustrates  his  fondness 
for  the  construction  expressing  a  purpose :  see  on  i.  8  and  viii.  56. 

the  wo!-ks  of  Goc{\  All  those  in  which  He  manifests  Himself,  not 
miracles  only.  Comp.  xi.  4.  There  is  an  undoubted  reference  to  this 
passage  (i — 3)  in  the  Clementine  Homilies  (xix.  22),  the  dale  of  which 
is  about  A.D.  150.     Comp.  x.  9,  27. 

4.  I  must  work,  &c.]  The  reading  here  is  somewhat  doubtful,  as  to 
whether  'I'  or  'we,'  'Me'  or  'us'  is  right  in  each  case.  The  best 
authorities  give,  We  must  ivork  the  works  of  Him  that  sent  Me.,  and  this, 
the  more  difficult  reading,  is  probably  correct.  Some  copyists  altered 
'we'  into  'I'  to  make  it  agree  with  'Me,'  others  altered  'Me'  into  'us' 
to  make  it  agree  with  'we.' 

'  We  must  work :'  Christ  identifies  Himself  with  His  disciples  in  the 
work  of  converting  the  world.  '  Him  that  sent  Mei'  Christ  does  not 
identify  His  mission  with  that  of  the  disciples.  They  were  both  sent, 
but  not  in  the  same  sense.  So  also  He  says  'My  Father'  and  'your 
Father,'  'My  God'  and  'your  God;'  but  not  'our  Father,'  or  'our 
God'  (xx.  17). 


vv.  5—7.]  S.   JOHN,   TX.  199 

me,  while  it  is  day :  the  night  cometh,  when  no  ina7i  can 
work.     As  long  as  I  am  in  the  world,  I  am  the  light  of  5 
the  world. 

6 — 12.     The  Sign. 

When  he   had    thus    spoken,    he   spat  on   the   ground,  6 
and  made  clay  of  the  spittle,   and   he  anointed  the  eyes 
of  the  blind  man  with  the  clay,  and  said  unto  him.  Go,  7 
wash  in  the  pool  of  Siloam,  (which  is  by  interpretation, 

7vhile  it  is  day]  Or,  so  long  as  it  is  day,  i.  e.  so  long  as  we  have 
life.  Day  and  night  here  mean,  as  so  often  in  literature  of  all  kinds, 
life  and  death.  Other  explanations,  e.  g.  opportune  and  inopportune 
moments,  the  presence  of  Christ  in  the  world  and  His  withdrawal  from 
it, — are  less  simple  and  less  suitable  to  the  context.  If  all  that  is  re- 
corded from  vii.  37  takes  place  on  one  day,  these  words  would  probably 
be  spoken  in  the  evening,  when  the  failing  light  would  add  force  to  the 
warning,  night  cometh  (no  article),  when  no  one  can  work.  '  No 
one;'  not  even  Christ  Himself  as  man  upon  earth:  comp.  xi.  7  —  10; 
Ps.  civ.  23. 

5.  As  long  as  I  am  in  the  world'\  Better,  Whensoever  /  am  in  the 
world ;  it  is  not  the  same  construction  as  '  so  long  as  it  is  day. '  The 
Light  shines  at  various  times  and  in  various  degrees,  whether  the  world 
chooses  to  be  illuminated  or  not.  Comp.  i.  5,  viii.  12.  Here  there  is 
special  reference  to  His  giving  light  both  to  the  man's  eyes  and  to  his 
soul.  The  Pharisees  prove  the  truth  of  the  saying  that  '  the  darkness 
comprehended  it  not.' 

lam  the  light  of  the  world^  Or,  I  am  light  to  the  world:  no  article. 
Contrast  viii.  12. 

6—12.     The  Sign. 

6.  anointed  the  eyes  of  the  blind  man  with  the  clay]  '  Of  the 
blind  man  '  should  probably  be  omitted,  '  of  it '  inserted,  and  the  ren- 
dering in  the  margin  adopted  :  spread  the  clay  of  it  (clay  made  with 
the  spittle)  upon  his  eyes.  Regard  for  Christ's  truthfulness  compels  us 
to  regard  the  clay  as  the  means  of  healing  ;  not  that  He  could  not  heal 
without  it,  but  that  He  willed  this  to  be  the  channel  of  His  power.  Else- 
where He  uses  spittle;  to  heal  a  blind  man  (Mark  viii.  23);  to  heal  a 
deaf  and  dumb  man  (Mark  vii.  33).  Spittle  was  believed  to  be  a 
remedy  for  diseased  eyes  (comp.  Vespasian's  reputed  miracle,  Tac. 
Hist.  IV.  8r,  and  other  instances);  clay  also,  though  less  commonly. 
So  that  Christ  selects  an  ordinary  remedy  and  gives  it  success  in  a  case 
confessedly  beyond  its  supposed  powers  (p.  32).  This  helps  us  to  con- 
clude why  He  willed  to  use  means,  instead  of  healing  without  even  a 
word ;  viz.  to  help  the  faith  of  the  sufferer.  It  is  easier  to  believe,  when 
means  can  be  perceived ;  it  is  still  easier,  when  the  means  seem  to  be 
appropriate. 

7.  wash  in  the  pool]     Literally,  wash  into  the  pool,  i.  e.  '  wash  off 


ioo  S.  JOHN,    IX.  [vv.  8— II. 

Sent.)  He  went  his  way  therefore,  and  washed,  and  came 
seeing. 

8  The   neighbours   therefore,   and  they  which  before  had 
seen  him  that  he  was  bhnd,  said,  Is  not  this  he  that  sat  and 

9  begged  ?     Some  said.  This  is  he  :  others  said,  He  is  hke 

10  him  :  but  he  said,  I  am  he.     Therefore  said  they  unto  him, 

11  How  were  thine  eyes  opened?     He  answered  and  said,  A 
man  thai  is  called  Jesus  made   clay,   and  anointed  mine 

the  clay  into  the  pool,'  or,  'go  to  the  pool  and  wash.'  The  washing 
was  probably  part  of  the  means  of  healing  (comp.  Naaman)  and  was  a 
strong  test  of  the  man's  faith. 

Siloam]  Satisfactorily  identified  with  Birkei  Sikvdn  in  the  lower 
Tyropoean  valley,  S.  E.  of  the  hill  of  Zion.  This  is  probably  the  Siloah 
of  Neh.  iii.  15  and  the  Shiloah  of  Isa.  viii.  6.  'The  tower  in  Siloam  ' 
(Luke  xiii  4)  was  very  possibly  a  building  connected  with  the  water; 
perhaps  part  of  an  aqueduct. 

which  is  by  interpretation]  Literally,  -which  is  interpreted. 
Sefit]  This  is  an  admissible  interpretation  ;  but  the  original  meaning 
is  r:ii\\er  Sending,  i.e.  outlet  of  waters,  'the  waters  of  Shiloah  that  go 
softly '  (Isa.  viii.  6).  S.  John  sees  in  the  word  '  noiiicn  et  omen  '  of  the 
man's  cure.  Perhaps  he  sees  also  that  this  water  from  the  rock  is  an 
image  of  Him  who  was  sent  from  the  Father. 

and  came  seeing]  '  Came,'  not  back  to  Christ,  who  had  probably 
gone  away  meanwhile  {v.  12),  but  to  his  own  home,  as  would  appear 
from  what  follows.  Has  any  poet  ever  attempted  to  describe  this  man's 
emotions  on  first  seeing  the  world  in  which  he  had  lived  so  long  ? 

''The  scene  in  which  the  man  returns  seeing  and  is  questioned  by  his 
neighbours,  is  vividly  described.  So  too  is  the  M'hole  of  that  which 
follows,  when  the  Pharisees  come  upon  the  stage.  We  may  accept  it 
with  little  short  of  absolute  credence.  If  the  opponents  of  miracles 
could  produce  a  single  Jewish  document,  in  which  any  event,  known  not 
to  have  happened,  was  described  with  so  much  minuteness  and 
verisimilitude,  then  it  would  be  easier  to  agree  with  them."  S.  pp. 
162,  163. 

8.  had  seen  hi  in  that  he  was  blind]  The  true  reading  is,  saw  him 
that  he  was  a  beg-gar,  or  perhaps,  because  he  was  a  beggar,  i.  e.  he  was 
often  seen  in  public  places. 

he  that  sat  and  begged]  Or,  he  that  sitteih  and  beggeth ;  present  parti- 
ciples with  the  article  to  express  his  general  habit. 

9.  Some  said]  Or,  Others  said,  making  three  groups  of  speakers 
in  all. 

He  is  like  him]  The  better  reading  is.  No,  but  he  is  like  him.  The 
opening  of  his  eyes  would  greatly  change  his  look  and  manner :  this 
added  to  the  extreme  improbability  of  a  cure  made  them  doubt  his 
identity. 

11.     A  man  that  is  called  yesus]     This  looks  as  if  he   iiad  heard 


vv.  T2— 14.]  S.    JOHN,    IX.  201 

eyes,  and  said  unto  me,  Go  to  the  pool  of  Siloam,  and 
wash :    and    I    went   and   washed,    and    I    received    sight. 
Then  said  they  unto  him,  Where  is  he?     He  said,  I  know  12 
not. 

13 — 41.     Opposite  Results  of  the  Sign. 

They  brought  to  the  Pharisees  him  that  aforetime  was  13 
bhnd.     And  it  was  the  sabbath  day  when  Jesus  made  the  m 

little  of  the  fame  of  Jesus.  But  the  better  reading  gives,  'The  man  that 
is  called  Jesus,'  which  points  the  other  way. 

tnade  clay'\  He  does  not  say  how,  for  this  he  had  not  seen.  The  rest 
he  tells  in  order.     Omit  the  words  '  the  pool  of.' 

I  received  sight]  The  Greek  may  mean  either  'I  looked  up,'  as  in 
Mark  vi.  41,  vii.  34,  xvi.  4,  &c. ;  or  '  I  recovered  sight,'  as  Matt.  xi.  5; 
Mark  x.  51,  52,  &c.  '  I  looked  up '  does  not  suit  vv.  15  and  18,  where 
the  word  occurs  again  :  and  though  '  I  recovered  sight '  is  not  strictly 
accurate  of  a  man  bo7-n  blind,  yet  it  is  admissible,  as  sight  is  natural  to 
man. 

Note  the  gradual  development  of  faith  in  the  man's  soul,  and  compare 
it  with  that  of  the  Samaritan  woman  (see  on  iv.  19)  and  of  Martha  (see 
on  xi.  21).  Here  he  merely  knows  Jesus'  name  and  the  miracle;  in 
V.  17  he  thinks  Him  '  a  Prophet;'  in  v.  33  He  is  '  of  God ;'  in  v.  39  He 
is  'the  Son  of  God.'  What  writer  of  fiction  in  the  second  century  could 
have  executed  such  a  study  in  psychology  ? 

12.  Where  is  kef]  That  strange  {ekeinos)  Rabbi  who  perplexes  us 
so  much. 

/  knoiv  not]  This  shews  that  he  did  not  return  to  Jesus  after  he  was 
healed  {v.  7).     '  He  said'  should  be,  He  saith. 

13 — 41.     Opposite  Results  of  the  Sign. 

13.  They  brought,  &c.]  Better,  they  bring  him  to  the  Pharisees,  him 
that  ottce  was  blind.  These  friends  and  neighbours  are  perhaps  well- 
meaning  people,  not  intending  to  make  mischief.  But  they  are  uncom- 
fortable because  work  has  been  done  on  the  Sabbath,  and  they  think  it 
best  to  refer  the  matter  to  the  Pharisees,  the  great  authorities  in  matters 
of  legal  observance  and  orthodoxy  (comp.  vii.  47,  48).  This  is  not 
a  meeting  of  the  Sanhedrin.  S.  John's  formula  for  the  Sanhedrin  is 
•the  chief  priests  and  (the)  Pharisees'  (vii.  45,  xi.  47,  57,  xviii.  3),  or 
'  the  Pharisees  and  the  chief  priests  '  (vii.  32). 

14.  it  was  the  sabbath]  We  cannot  be  sure  whether  this  is  the  last 
day  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (vii.  37)  or  the  next  Sabbath.  There 
were  seven  miracles  of  mercy  wrought  on  the  Sabbath  :  i.  Withered 
hand  (Matt.  xii.  9);  2.  Demoniac  at  Capernaum  (Mark  i.  21);  3.  Si- 
mon's wife's  mother  (Mark  i.  29);  4.  Woman  bowed  down  eighteen 
years  (lAike  xiii.  14) ;  5.  Dropsical  man  (Luke  xiv.  i);  6.  Paralytic  at 
Bethesda  (John  v.  10) ;  7.   Man  born  blind. 


202  S.   JOHN,    IX.  [vv.  15—19. 

IS  clay,  and  opened  his  eyes.  Then  again  the  Pharisees  also 
asked  him  how  he  had  received  his  sight.  He  said  unto 
them,  He  put  clay  upon  mine  eyes,  and  I  washed,  and  do 

i6  see.  Therefore  said  some  of  the  Pharisees,  This  man  is 
not  of  God,  because  he  keepeth  not  the  sabbath  day. 
Others  said.  How  can  a  man  that  is  a  sinner  do  such  mira- 

i7cles?  And  there  was  a  division  among  them.  They  say 
unto  the  blind  man  again.  What  sayest  thou  of  him,  that 
he  hath  opened  thine  eyes?     He  said.  He  is  a  prophet. 

is  But  the  Jews  did  not  believe  concerning  him,  that  he  had 
been   bUnd,  and   received  his  sight,  until  they  called  the 

19  parents  of  him  that  had  received  his  sight.     And  they  asked 

15.  Then  agahi\  Better,  Again,  therefore.  The  man  is  becoming 
impatient  of  this  cross-questioning  :  he  answers  much  more  briefly  than 
at  first  (z/.  ii). 

16.  This  man  is  not  of  God]  Comp.  '  He  casteth  out  devils  through 
the  prince  of  the  devils'  (Matt.  ix.  34);  like  this,  an  argument  of  the 
Pharisees.  The  fact  of  a  miracle  is  not  denied :  but  it  cannot  have  been 
done  with  God's  help;  therefore  it  was  done  with  the  devil's  help. 

How  can  a  man  that  is  a  sinner,  &c.]  The  less  bigoted,  men  like 
Nicodemus  and  Joseph  of  Arimathea,  shew  that  the  argument  cuts  both 
ways.  They  also  start  from  the  '  sign,'  but  arrive  at  an  opposite  con- 
clusion. Comp.  Nicodemus' question,  vii.  51.  Perhaps  Christ's  teach- 
ing about  the  Sabbath  (v.  17 — 23)  has  had  some  effect. 

there  was  a  division]     See  on  vii.  43. 

17.  There  being  a  division  among  them  they  appeal  to  the  man  him- 
self, each  side  wishing  to  gain  him.  'They  '  includes  both  sides,  the 
whole  body  of  Pharisees  present.  Their  question  is  not  twofold,  but 
single;  not,  '  What  sayest  thou  of  Him?  that  He  hath  opened  thine 
eyes?'  but  What  sayest  thon  of  Him,  because  He  opened  thine  eyes? 
'  Thou  '  is  emphatic  ;  '//?(?«  shouldest  know  something  of  Him.'  They 
do  not  raise  the  question  of  fact;  the  miracle  as  yet  is  not  in  dispute. 
His  answer  shews  that  only  one  question  is  asked,  and  that  it  is  not  the 
question  of  fact. 

He  is  a  prophet]  i.e.  one  sent  by  God  to  declare  His  will;  a  man 
with  a  special  and  Divine  mission;  not  necessarily  predicting  the  future. 
Comp.  iv.  19,  iii.  2. 

18.  But  the  Jen's  did  not  beliciie]  Better,  the  Je^vs,  therefore,  did 
7tot  believe.  The  man  having  pronounced  for  the  moderates,  the  bigoted 
and  hostile  party  begin  to  question  ihe  fact  of  the  miracle.  Note  that 
here  and  in  v.  22  S.  John  no  longer  speaks  of  the  Pharisees,  some  of 
whom  were  not  unfriendly  to  Christ,  liut  'the  Jews,'  His  enemies,  the 
official  representatives  of  the  nation  that  rejected  the  Messiah  (see  on 
i.  19). 

19.  Three  questions  in  legal  form.  Is  this  your  son?  Was  he  born 
blind?     How  docs  he  now  see? 


22 


w.  20—24.]  S.   JOHN,    IX.  203 

them,  saying.  Is  this  your  son,  who  ye  say  was  born  bhnd? 
how  then  doth  he  now  see?  His  parents  answered  them 
and  said.  We  know  that  this  is  our  son,  and  that  he  was 
born  bhnd  :  but  by  what  means  he  now  seeth,  we  know 
not ;  or  who  hath  opened  his  eyes,  we  know  not :  he  is  of 
age ;  ask  him  :  he  shall  speak  for  himself.  These  words 
spake  his  parents,  because  they  feared  the  Jews  :  for  the 
Jews  had  agreed  already,  that  if  any  man  did  confess  that 
he  was  Christ,  he  should  be  put  out  of  the  synagogue. 
Therefore  said  his  parents.  He  is  of  age ;  ask  him.     Then  ^4 

who  ye  sayil  Emphasis  on  'ye,'  implying  'we  do  not  believe  it;' 
literally,  of  whom  ye  say  that  he  was  born  blind. 

21.  by  what  means]  Better,  how,  as  in  vv.  10,  15,  19,  ■26.  In  their 
timidity  they  keep  close  to  the  precise  questions  asked. 

who  hath  opetted]  Better,  who  opened.  This  is  the  dangerous  point, 
and  they  become  more  eager  and  passionate.  Hitherto  there  has  been 
nothing  emphatic  in  their  reply ;  but  now  there  is  a  marked  stress  on  all 
the  pronouns,  the  parents  contrasting  their  ignorance  with  their  son's 
responsibility.  'Who  opened  his  eyes,  we  know  not:  ask  himself ;  he 
himself  IS  of  full  age;  he  himself  vf'iW  speak  concerning  himself.'  See  on 
V.  23. 

22.  had  agreed]  It  does  not  appear  when ;  but  we  are  probably  to 
understand  an  informal  agreement  among  themselves  rather  than  a 
decree  of  the  Sanhedrin.  A  formal  decree  would  be  easily  obtained 
afterwards.  The  word  for  'agreed'  is  used  of  the  agreement  with  Judas 
(Luke  xxii.  5,  where  it  is  translated  'covenanted'),  and  of  the  agreement 
of  the  Jews  to  kill  S.  Paul  (Acts  xxiii.  20),  and  nowhere  else.  'As- 
sented' in  Acts  xxiv.  9  is  a  different  compound  of  the  same  verb. 

that  if  any  man]  Literally,  in  order  that  if  any  man:  what  they 
agreed  upon  is  represented  as  the  purpose  of  their  agreement.  See  on 
vv.  2,  3,  and  viii.  56, 

put  out  of  the  synagogue]  i.e.  excommunicated.  The  Jews  had  three 
kinds  of  anathema,  (i)  Excommunication  for  thirty  days,  during  which 
the  excommunicated  might  not  come  within  four  cubits  of  any  one. 
(2)  Absolute  exclusion  from  all  intercourse  and  worship  for  an  indefinite 
period.  (3)  Absolute  exclusion  for  ever;  an  irrevocable  sentence.  This 
third  form  was  very  rarely  if  ever  used.  It  is  doubtful  whether  the  second 
was  in  use  at  this  time  for  Jews ;  but  it  would  be  the  ban  under  which 
all  Samaritans  were  placed.  This  passage  and  'separate'  in  Luke  vi. 
22  probably  refer  to  the  first  and  mildest  kind  of  anathema.  The 
principle  of  all  anathema  was  found  in  the  Divine  sentence  on  Meroz 
(Judg.  V.  23) :  Comp.  Ezra  x.  8.  The  word  for  'out  of  the  synagogue' 
is  peculiar  to  S.  John,  occurring  xii.  42,  xvi.  2,  and  nowhere  else. 

23.  Therefore]  Better,  For  this  cause  (xii.  18,  27):  comp.  i.  31, 
v.  16,  18,  vi.  65,  viii.  47. 

He  is  of  age;  ask  him]    Or,  He  is  oflvSl  age;  ask  him  himself.     This 


204  S.   JOHN,    IX.  [vv.  25— 28. 

again  called  they  the  man  that  was  blind,  and  said  unto 
him,  Give  God  the  praise  :    we  know  that  this  man  is  a 

25  sinner.     He   answered  and  said,  Whether  he  be  a  sinner 
or  110,  I  know  not:  one  t/n'ng  I  know,  that,  whereas  I  was 

26  blind,  now  I  see.     Then  said  they  to  him  again,  What  did 

27  he  to  thee?  how  opened  he  thine  eyes?  He  answered  them, 
I  have  told  you  already,  and  ye  did  not  hear:  wherefore 

28  would  you  hear  it  again?  will  ye  also  be  his  disciples?  Then 

is  the  right  order  of  the  clauses  here,  and  they  have  been  altered  in  the 
Received  Text  of  z/.  21  to  match  this  verse. 

24.  Then  again  called  they']  Literally,  They  called,  therefore,  a 
second  time.  They  had  cross-questioned  the  parents  apart  from  the 
son,  and  now  try  to  browbeat  the  son,  before  he  finds  out  tliathis  parents 
have  not  discredited  his  story. 

Give  God  the  praise^  Better,  Give  glory  to  God  (comp.  v.  4 1  and 
viii.  54);  it  is  the  same  word  for  'glory'  as  in  i.  14,  ii.  11,  vii.  18,  viii. 
50.  Even  thus  the  meaning  remains  obscure :  but  'Give  God  the  praise' 
is  absolutely  misleading.  The  meaning  is  not  'Give  God  the  praise  for 
the  cure ; '  they  were  trying  to  deny  that  there  had  been  any  cure :  but, 
'Give  gloiy  to  God  by  speaking  the  truth.''  The  words  are  an  adjuration 
to  confess.  Comp.  Josh.  vii.  19;  i  Sam.  vi.  5;  Ezra  x.  11;  i  Esdr. 
ix.  8;  2  Cor.  xi.  31.  Wiclif,  with  the  Genevan  and  Rhemish  Versions, 
is  right  here.     Tyndale  and  Cranmer  have  misled  our  translators. 

we  know  that,  &c.  ]  '  We '  with  emphasis ;  '  we,  the  people  in  authority, 
who  have  the  right  to  pronounce  decisively.  So  it  is  useless  for  you  to 
maintain  that  He  is  a  Prophet. ' 

25.  He  answered']  Better,  Therefore  he  anrtvered.  He  will  not 
commit  himself,  but  keeps  to  the  incontrovertible  facts  of  the  case. 

whereas  I  was  blind]  Literally,  being  a  blind  man,  but  the  Greek 
participle  may  be  either  present  or  imperfect;  either  'being  by  nature  a 
blind  man'  or  'being  formerly  blind.'  In  iii.  13  and  xix.  38  we  have 
the  same  participle,  and  a  similar  doubt  as  to  wlicther  it  is  present  or 
imperfect :  so  also  in  v.  8. 

26.  Being  baffled,  they  return  to  the  details  of  the  fact,  either 
to  try  once  more  to  shake  the  evidence,  or  for  want  of  something  better 
to  say. 

27.  I  have  told  you]     Rather,  /told  jw^ 

and  ye  did  not  hear]  Or  possibly,  atid  did  ye  not  hear?  This  avoids 
taking  'hear'  in  two  different  senses;  (i)  'pay  attention,'  (2)  'hear.' 
The  man  loses  all  patience,  and  will  not  go  through  it  again. 

wherefore  would  ye  heai-]     Or,  wherefore  do  yc  xoislt  to  hear. 

will  ye  also,  &c.  ]  Or,  Surely  ye  also  do  not  wish  to  become  His  dis- 
ciples. The  form  of  the  question  is  similar  to  that  in  vi.  67  and  vii.  52 
(comp.  iv.  29,  vii.  35).  Moreover,  it  is  not  the  future  tense,  but  the  verb 
'to  will'  or  'wish'  (comp.  v.  40,  vi.  67,  vii.  17,  viii.  44).  Lastly,  the 
difference  between  'be'  and  'become*  is  easily  preserved  here,  and  is 
worth   preserving  (comp.  viii.  58).     The  meaning  of  'also'  has  been 


vv.  29—31.]  S.   JOHN,    IX.  205 

they  reviled  him,  and  said.  Thou  art  his  disciple;  but  we 
are  Moses'  disciples.    We  know  that  God  spake  unto  Moses :  29 
as  for  this  fellow,  we  know  not  from  whence  he  is.     The  3° 
man  answered  and  said  unto  them,  Why  herein  is  a  mar- 
vellous thing,  that  ye  know  not  from  whence  he  is,  and  yel 
he  hath  opened  mine  eyes.    Now  we  know  that  God  heareth  31 
not  sinners:  but  if  any  man  be  a  worshipper  of  God,  and 

misunderstood.  It  can  scarcely  mean  'as  well  as  I :'  the  man  has  not 
advanced  so  far  in  faith  as  to  count  himself  a  disciple  of  Jesus ;  and  if 
he  had,  he  would  not  avow  the  fact  to  the  Jews.  'Also 'means  'as  well 
as  His  well-known  disciples.'  That  Christ  had  a  band  of  followers  was 
notorious. 

28.  Then  they  reviled  hit)i\  Omit  'then.'  The  word  for  'revile' 
occurs  nowhere  else  in  the  Gospels.  Comp.  i  Pet.  ii.  23.  Argument 
fails,  so  they  resort  to  abuse. 

Thou  art  his  disciplel  Better,  Thoti  art  that  man's  disciple.  They 
use  a  pronoun  which  expresses  that  they  have  nothing  to  do  with  Him. 
Comp.  V.  12  and  vii.  11. 

The  pronouns  are  emphatic  in  both  v.  28  and  v.  29:  ^Thou  art  His 
disciple ;  but  we  are  Moses'  disciples.  We  know  that  God  hath  spoken 
to  Moses ;  but  as  for  this  fellow,  &c. ' 

29.  that  God  spake]  Literally,  that  GodhaXh.  spoken,  i.  e.  that  Moses 
received  a  revelation  which  still  remains.  This  is  a  frequent  meaning 
of  the  perfect  tense — to  express  the  permanent  result  of  a  past  action. 
Thus  the  frequent  formula  'it  is  written'  is  strictly  'it  has  been  written,' 
or  'it  stands  wi-itten:'  i.e.  it  once  was  written,  and  the  writing  still 
remains.  But  this  is  perhaps  one  of  those  cases  where  the  Greek 
perfect  is  best  represented  by  the  English  aorist  (see  on  viii.  29,  10 
for  the  converse). 

we  know  not  from  whence  he  is\  We  know  not  what  commission  He 
has  received,  nor  who  has  sent  Him.  Comp.  viii.  14  and  contrast  vii. 
27.  Once  more  He  is  compared  with  Moses,  as  in  the  synagogue  at 
Capernaum  (vi.  31,  32). 

30.  a  marvellous  thing]  Some  of  the  best  MSS.  read  'the  marvel- 
lous thing.'  '  Yoti,  the  very  people  who  ought  to  know  such  things 
(iii.  10),  know  not  whether  He  is  from  God  or  not,  and  yet  He  opened 
my  eyes.'  'You'  is  emphatic,  and  perhaps  is  a  taunting  rejoinder  to 
their  ^we  know  that  this  man  is  a  sinner'  {v.  24)  and  Hve  know  that 
God  hath  spoken  to  Moses'  {v.  29).  The  man  gains  courage  at  their 
evident  discomfiture. 

31.  God  heareth  not  sinners]  i.e.  wilful,  impenitent  sinners.  Of 
course  it  cannot  mean  'God  heareth  no  one  who  hath  sinned,'  which 
would  imply  that  God  never  answers  the  prayers  of  men.  But  the  man's 
dictum,  reasonably  understood,  is  the  plain  teaching  of  the  O.  T., 
whence  he  no  doubt  derived  it.  'The  Lord  is  far  from  the  wicked;  but 
He  heareth  the  prayer  of  the  righteous'  (Prov.  xv.  29).  Comp.  Ps.  Ixvi. 
iS,  19;  Job.  xxvii.  8,  95  Isa.  i.  11  — 15. 


2o6  S.  JOHN,   IX.  [vv.  32—36. 

32  doeth  his  will,  him  he  heareth.     Since  the  world  began  was 
it  not  heard  that  any  maji  opened  the  eyes  of  one  that  was 

33  born  blind.     If  this  man  were  not  of  God,  he  could  do 

34  nothing.     They  answered  and  said  unto  him,  Thou  wast 
altogether  born  in  sins,  and  dost  thou  teach  us?  And  they 

35  cast  him  out.     Jesus  heard  that  they  had  cast  him  out;  and 
when    he   had  found    him,  he   said  unto  him.  Dost  thou 

36  beheve  on  the  Son  of  God.?  He  answered  and  said.  Who  is 

a  ivorshipper  of  God^  Or,  God-fearing,  religious.  The  word  occurs 
nowhere  else  in  N.T.  The  man  supposes  that  miracles  must  be  answers 
to  prayer.  Only  good  men  can  gain  such  answers  to  prayer.  Only  a 
very  good  man  could  gain  such  an  unprecedented  answer  as  this. 

32.  Since  the  world  began'\  There  is  no  healing  of  the  blind  in 
O.  T. 

33.  of  God\     Or,  from  God:  comp.  i.  6. 

he  could  do  nothing]  The  context  limits  the  meaning — nothing  at  all 
like  this,  no  miracle. 

34.  Thou  zvast  altogether  born  in  sins\  '  In  sins  (first  for  emphasis) 
every  part  of  thy  nature  (comp.  xiii.  10)  has  been  steeped  from  thy 
birth;  thou  wast  born  a  reprobate.'  They  hold  the  same  belief  as  the 
disciples,  that  sin  before  birth  is  possible,  and  maliciously  exclude  not 
only  the  alternative  stated  by  Christ  {v.  3)  but  even  the  one  stated  by 
the  disciples  (v.  2),  that  his  parents  might  have  sinned.  Their  passion 
blinds  them  to  their  inconsistency.  They  had  been  contending  that  no 
miracle  had  been  wrought;  now  they  throw  his  calamity  in  his  face  as 
proof  of  his  sin. 

Dost  thou  teach  us  ?]  *  Dost  thou,  the  born  reprobate,  teach  us,  the 
authorized  teachers?' 

they  cast  him  out]  Or,  they  put  him  fortli :  see  on  x.  4.  This  pro- 
bably does  not  mean  excommunication,  (i)  The  expression  is  too 
vague,  (i)  There  could  not  well  have  been  time  to  get  a  sentence  of 
excommunication  passed.  (3)  The  man  had  not  incurred  the  threat- 
ened penalty;  he  had  not  'confessed  that  He  was  Christ'  {v.  22).  Pro- 
voked by  his  impracticability  and  sturdy  adherence  to  his  own  view  they 
ignominiously  dismiss  him — turn  him  out  of  doors,  if  (as  the  'out'  seems 
to  imply)  they  were  meeting  within  walls. 

35.  Dost  thou  believe]  There  is  a  stress  on  'thou.'  'Dost  thou, 
though  others  deny  and  blaspheme,  believe?' 

On  the  Son  of  God]  Again  there  is  much  doubt  about  the  reading. 
The  balance  of  MSS.  authority  (including  both  the  Sinaitic  and  the 
Vatican  MSS.)  is  in  favour  of  'the  Son  of  man,'  which  moreover  is  the 
expression  that  our  Lord  commonly  uses  respecting  Himself  in  all  four 
Gospels  (see  on  i.  51).  But  the  reading  'The  Son  of  God'  is  very 
strongly  supported,  and  is  at  least  as  old  as  the  second  century  ;  for  Ter- 
tuUian,  who  in  his  work  Against  Praxcas  quotes  largely  from  this 
Gospel,  in  chap.  xxii.  quotes  this  question  thus,  Tu  credis  in  Filium 


vv.  37, 38.]  S.   JOHN,   IX.  207 

he,   Lord,  that  I  might  beHeve  on  him?    And  Jesus  said  37 
unto  him,  Thou   hast   both    seen   him,  and  it   is  he  that 
talketh  with  thee.     And  he  said,  Lord,  I  believe.     And  he  38 
worshipped  him. 

Dei  ?  In  x.  36  and  xi.  4  there  is  no  doubt  about  the  reading,  and  there 
Christ  calls  himself  '  the  Son  of  God.'  Moreover,  this  appellation  seems 
to  suit  the  context  better,  for  the  man  had  been  contending  that 
Jesus  came  'from  God'  {v.  33),  and  the  term  'Son  of  man'  would 
scarcely  have  been  intelligible  to  him.  Lastly,  a  copyist,  knowing  that 
the  '  Son  of  man  '  was  Christ's  usual  mode  of  designating  Himself, 
would  be  very  likely  16  alter  '  the  Son  of  God  '  into  '  the  Son  of  man. ' 
Neither  title,  however,  is  very  frequent  in  St  John's  Gospel.  For  all 
these  reasons,  therefore,  it  is  allowable  to  retain  the  common  reading. 
But  in  any  case  we  once  more  have  evidence  of  the  antiquity  of  this 
Gospel.  If  both  these  readings  were  established  by  the  end  of  the 
second  century,  the  original  text  must  have  been  in  existence  long  before. 
Corruptions  take  time  to  spring  up  and  spread.     See  on  i.  13,  t8. 

36.  Who  is  he,  Lord}  We  should  perhaps  insert  'and'  or  'then' 
with  some  of  the  best  MSS.,  and  Who  is  He'i  or.  Who  is  He  then? 
This  '  and '  or  '  then '  has  the  effect  of  intensifying  the  question.  Comp. 
^  a7id  who  is  my  neighbour  ?'  (Luke  x.  29) ;  'Who  then  can  be  saved?' 
(xviii.  26);  'Who  is  he  then  thatmaketh  me  glad?'  (2  Cor.  ii.  2).  'Lord' 
should  perhaps  be  'Sir'  as  in  iv.  11,  15,  19,  49;  v.  7  (seeonvi.  34):  not 
until  V.  38  does  he  reach  the  point  at  which  he  would  call  Jesus  '  Lord.' 
But  it  is  the  same  Greek  word  in  both  cases,  though  the  amount  of 
reverence  with  which  he  uses  it  increases,  as  in  the  parallel  case  of  the 
woman  at  the  well. 

that  I  might  believe'\  Literally,  m  order  that  Iva&y  believe.  S.  John's 
favourite  construction  again,  as  in  w.  2,  3,  22. 

37.  Thou  hast  both  seal  himl  Better,  Thou  hast  even  seen  Him,  and 
He  that  speaketh  with  thee  is  He.  The  latter  half  of  the  sentence  is 
similar  to  the  declaration  in  iv.  26.  "This  spontaneous  revelation  to 
the  outcast  from  the  synagogueyfwo'j-  its  only  pa7-allel  in  the  similar  reve- 
lation to  the  outcast  firom  the  nation."  Westcott.  Not  even  Apostles 
are  told  so  speedily. 

38.  Lord,  I  believel  Or,  I  believe.  Lord :  the  order  is  worth  keep- 
ing. Comp.  the  centurion's  confession  (Matt,  xxvii.  54).  There  is  no 
need  to  suppose  that  in  either  case  the  man  making  the  confession  knew 
anything  like  the  full  meaning  of  belief  in  the  Son  of  God :  even  Apo- 
stles were  slow  at  learning  that.  The  blind  man  had  had  his  own  unin- 
formed idea  of  the  Messiah,  and  he  believed  that  the  realisation  of  that 
idea  stood  before  him.  His  faith  was  necessarily  imperfect,  a  poor 
'  two  mites ;'  but  it  was  '  all  that  he  had,'  and  he  gave  it  readily,  while 
the  learned  Rabbis  of  their  abundance  gave  nothing.  It  is  quite  gratui- 
tous to  suppose  that  a  special  revelation  was  granted  to  him.  There  is 
no  hint  of  this  in  the  narrative,  nor  can  one  see  why  so  great  an  excep- 
tion to  God's  usual  dealings  with  man  should  have  been  made. 

he  -worshipped  hini\    This  shews  that  his  idea  of  the  Son  of  God  in- 


2o8  S.  JOHN,   IX.  [vv.  39—41. 

39  And  Jesus  said,  For  judgment  I  am  come  into  this  world, 
tiiat  they  which  see  not  might  see;   and  that  they  which 

40  see   might    be   made  bUnd.     And   some   of  the   Pharisees 
which  were  with  him  heard  these  words,  and  said  unto  him, 

41  Are  we  bhnd  also?  Jesus  said  unto  them,  If  ye  were  blind, 

eludes  attributes  of  Divinity.  The  word  for  'worship  '  occurs  elsewhere 
in  this  Gospel  only  in  iv.  20 — 24  and  xii.  20,  always  of  the  worship  of 
God. 

39 — 41.  "The  concluding  verses  contain  a  saying  which  is  thoroughly 
in  the  manner  of  the  Synoptists  (cf.  Matt.  xv.  14;  xxiii.  16,  17,  24,  26). 
It  also  supplies  a  warranty  for  ascribing  a  typical  significance  to  miracles. 

That  the  Synoptists  do  not  relate  this  miracle  does  not  affect  its  his- 
torical character,  as  the  whole  of  these  events  in   Judaea  are   equally 

omitted  by  them The  vague  and  shifting  outlines  of  the  Synoptic 

narrative  allow  ample  room  for  all  the  insertions  that  are  made  in  them 
with  so  much  precision  by  S.  John."     S.  pp.  165,  166. 

39.  Andjesiissaid]  There  is  no  need  to  make  a  break  in  the  narra- 
tive and  refer  these  words  to  a  subsequent  occasion.  This  is  not  natural. 
Rather  it  is  the  sight  of  the  man  prostrate  at  His  feet,  endowed  now 
with  sight  both  in  body  and  soul,  that  moves  Christ  to  say  what  follows. 
His  words  are  addressed  to  the  bystanders  generally,  among  whom  are 
some  of  the  Pharisees. 

For  judgment  I  a?n  come]  Better,  For  jtuigmenl  I  czxas.  The  pre- 
cise form  of  word  for  'judgment'  occurs  nowhere  else  in  this  Gospel. 
It  signifies  not  the  ad  of  judging  (v,  22,  24,  27,  30)  but  its  result,  a 
'sentence'  or  'decision'  (Matt.  vii.  2,  Mark  xii.  40,  Rom.  ii.  1,  3,  &c.), 
Christ  came  not  to  judge,  but  to  save  (iii.  17,  viii.  15);  but  judgment 
was  the  inevitable  result  of  His  coming,  for  those  who  rejected  Hun 
passed  sentence  on  themselves  (iii.  19).  See  on  i.  9  and  xviii.  37.  The 
pronoun  is  emphatic. 

they  tvhich  see  not]  They  who  are  conscious  of  their  own  blindness, 
who  know  their  deficiencies;  like  'they  that  are  sick'  and  'sinners' 
in  Matt.  ix.  12,  13,  and  'babes'  in  Matt.  xi.  25.  This  man  was  aware 
of  his  spiritual  blindness  when  he  asked,  '  Who  is  He  then,  that  I  may 
believe  on  Him  !' 

might  see]  Better,  may  see,  may  really  see,  may  pass  from  the  dark- 
ness of  which  they  are  conscious,  to  light  and  truth. 

they  which  see]  They  who  fancy  they  see,  who  pride  themselves  on 
their  superior  insight  and  knowledge,  and  wish  to  dictate  to  others;  like 
•they  that  be  whole,'  and  'righteous'  in  Matt.  ix.  12,  13,  and  'the  wise 
and  prudent '  in  Matt.  xi.  25.  These  Pharisees  shewed  this  proud  self- 
confidence  when  they  declared,  '  we  know  that  this  man  is  a  sinner,'  and 
asked  '  Dost  thou  teach  usT  . 

might  be  made  blind]    Or,  may  become  blind,  really  blind  (Isa.  vi. 
10),  may  pass  from  their  fancied  light  into  real  darkness. 
40.     And  some  of]     Better,  Those  of. 
Are  we  blind  also?]    Or,   Surely  we  also  are  not  toUnd  7    See  on 


V.  41.]  S.   JOHN,   IX.  209 

ye  should  have  no  sin:  but  now  ye  say,  We  see;  therefore 
your  sin  remaineth. 

V.  ■27.  Of  course  they  understand  Him  to  be  speaking  figuratively. 
It  is  strange  that  any  should  have  understood  their  question  as  referring 
to  bodily  sight.  They  mean  that  they,  the  most  enlightened  among  the 
most  enlightened  nation,  must  be  among  'those  who  see.' 

41.  If  ye  we7-e  blifid]  Christ  returns  to  His  own  meaning  of  '  blind ' 
or  '  they  which  see  not '  in  v.  39.  '  If  ye  were  conscious  of  your  own 
spiritual  darkness,  if  ye  yearned  and  strove  to  reach  the  light,  j^  would 
7iot  have  sin  (see  on  xv.  22) ;  for  either  ye  would  find  the  light,  or,  if  ye 
failed,  the  failure  would  not  lie  at  your  door.'  For  the  construction 
comp.  V.  46;  viii.  19,  42;  xv.  19;  xviii.  36. 

therefore  your  sin  remaineth^  Better,  yonr  sin  abideth  (see  on  i.  33): 
'  therefore  '  is  an  insertion,  and  must  be  omitted.  '  Ye  profess  to  see  : 
your  sin  in  this  false  profession  and  in  your  consequent  rejection  of  Me 
abideth.'  It  was  a  hopeless  case.  They  rejected  11  im  because  they  did  not 
know  the  truth  about  Him  ;  and  they  would  never  learn  the  truth  because 
they  were  fully  persuaded  that  they  were  in  possession  of  it.  Those 
who  confess  their  ignorance  and  contend  against  it,  (i)  cease  to  be  re- 
sponsible for  it,  (2)  have  a  good  prospect  of  being  freed  from  it.  Those 
who  deny  their  ignorance  and  contend  against  instniction,  (i)  remain 
responsible  for  their  ignorance,  (2)  have  no  prospect  of  ever  being  freed 
from  it.     Comp.  iii.  36. 

Chap.  X.    Christ  is  Love. 

In  chapters  v.  and  vi.  two  miracles,  the  healing  of  the  paralytic  and 
the  feeding  of  the  five  thousand,  formed  the  introduction  to  two  discourses 
in  which  Christ  is  set  forth  as  the  Sotirce  and  the  Support  of  Life.  In 
chapters  vii.  and  viii.  we  have  a  discourse  in  which  He  is  set  forth  as 
the  Source  of  Truth  and  Light,  and  this  is  illustrated  (ix.)  by  His 
giving  physical  and  spiritual  sight  to  the  man  born  blind.  In  chap.  x. 
we  again  have  a  discourse  in  which  Christ  is  set  forth  as  Love,  under 
the  figure  of  the  Good  Shepherd  giving  His  life  for  the  sheep,  and  this 
is  illustrated  (xi.)  by  the  raismg  of  Lazarus,  a  work  of  Love  which  costs 
Him  His  life.  As  already  stated,  the  prevailing  idea  throughout  this 
section  (v. — xi.)  is  truth  and  love  provoking  contradiction  and  enmity. 
The  more  clearly  the  Messiah  manifests  Himself,  and  the  more  often  He 
convinces  some  of  His  hearers  of  His  Messiahship  (vii.  40,  41,  46,  50, 
viii.  30,  ix.  30 — 38,  X.  21,  42,  xi.  45),  the  more  intense  becomes  the 
hostility  of  '  the  Jews  '  and  the  more  determined  their  intention  to  kill 
Him. 

1 — 18.  "The  form  of  the  discourse  in  the  first  half  of  chap.  x.  is 
remarkable.  It  resembles  the  Synoptic  parables,  but  not  exactly.  The 
parable  is  a  short  narrative,  which  is  kept  wholly  separate  from  the 
ideal  facts  which  it  signifies.  But  this  discourse  is  not  a  narrative ;  and 
the  figure  and  its  application  run  side  by  side,  and  are  interwoven  with 
one  another  all  through.     It  is  an  extended  metaphor  rather  than  a 

S.JOHN  14 


iio  S.  JOHN,   X.  [v.  I. 

Chap.  X.     Christ  is  Love. 
I — lo.     The  Allegory  of  the  Door  of  the  Fold. 
10      Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  He  that  entereth  not  by  the 

parable.  If  we  are  to  give  it  an  accurate  name  we  should  be  obliged  to 
fall  back  upon  the  wider  term  '  allegory.' 

This,  and  the  parallel  passage  in  chap.  xv. ,  are  the  only  instances  of 
allegory  in  the  Gospels.  They  take  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  the  place 
which  parables  hold  with  the  Synoptists.  The  Synoptists  have  no 
allegories  distinct  from  parables.  The  fourth  Evangelist  has  no 
parables  as  a  special  form  of  allegory.  What  are  we  to  infer  from  this? 
The  parables  certainly  are  original  and  genuine.  Does  it  follow  that 
the  allegories  are  not? 

(i)  We  notice,  first,  that  along  with  the  change  oi  form  there  is  a 
certain    change   of   subject.     The   parables   generally   turn    round    the 

ground  conception  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.    They do  not  enlarge 

on  the    lelation  which  its  King   bears   to  the  separate  members 

Though  the  royal  dignity  of  the  Son  is  incidentally  put  forward,  there 
is  nothing  which  expresses  so  closely  and  directly  the  personal  relation  of 
the  Messiah  to  the  community  of  believers,  collectively  and  individually, 
as  these  two  'allegories'  from  S.  John.  Their  form  seems  in  an 
especial  manner  suited  to  their  subject  matter,  which  is  a  fixed,  per- 
manent and  simple  relation,  not  a  history  of  successive  states.  The 
form  of  the  allegories  is  at  least  appropriate. 

(2)  We  notice  next  that  even  with  the  Synoptists  the  use  of  the 
parable  is  not  rigid.  All  do  not  conform  precisely  to  the  .same  type. 
There  are  some,  like  the  Pharisee  and  Publican,  the  Good  Samari- 
tan, &c. ,  which  give  direct  patterns  for  action,  and  are  not  therefore 
parables  in  the  same  sense  in  which  the  Barren  Fig-tree,  the  Prodigal 
Son,  &c.  are  parables If,  then,  the  parable  admits  so  much  devia- 
tion on  the  one  side,  may  it  not  also  on  the  other? 

(3)  Lastly,  we  have  to  notice  the  parallels  to  this  particular  figure 
of  the  Good  Shepherd  that  are  found  in  the  Synoptists.  These  are 
indeed  abundant.     The  parable  of  the  Lost    Sheep  (Luke  xv.   4—7  ; 

Matt,  xviii.  12,  13) '  I  am  not  sent  but  unto  the  lost  sheep  of  the 

house  of  Israel'  (Matt.  xv.  24) 'But  when  He  saw  the  multitudes. 

He  was  moved  with  compassion  on  them,  because  they  fainted,  and 
were  scattered  abroad,  as  sheep  having  no  Shepherd  '  (Matt.  ix.  36), 
which  when  taken  with  Matt.  xi.  28,  29  ('  Come  unto  Me  all  ye  that 
labour,'  &c.),  gives  almost  an  exact  parallel  to  the  Johannean  allegory." 
S.  pp.  167 — 169. 

1 — 10.  The  Allegory  of  the  Door  of  the  Fold. 

1.  Verilf,  verily]  This  double  afTumation,  peculiar  to  this  Gospel 
(see  on  i.  51),  never  occurs  at  the  beginning  of  a  discourse,  but  either 
in  continuation,  to  introduce  some  deep  truth,  or  in  reply.  This 
verse  is   no  exception.      There   is  no   break   between  the   chapters, 


vv.  2,  3.]  S.   JOHN,   X. 


211 


door  into  the  sheepfold,  but  climbeth  up  some  other  way,  the 
same  is  a  thief  and  a  robber.     But  he  that  entereth  in  by  2 
the  door  is  the  shepherd  of  the  sheep.     To  him  the  porter  3 

which  should  perhaps  have  been  divided  at  ix.  34  or  38  rather  than 
here.  The  scene  continues  uninterrupted  from  ix.  35  to  x.  21,  where  we 
have  a  reference  to  the  healing  of  the  blind  man.  Moreover  x.  6  seems 
to  point  back  to  ix.  41 ;  their  not  understanding  the  allegory  was 
evidence  of  self-complacent  blindness.  This  chapter,  therefore,  although 
it  contains  a  fresh  subject,  is  connected  with  the  incidents  in  chap,  ix., 
and  grows  out  of  them.  The  connexion  seems  to  be  that  the  Pharisees 
by  their  conduct  to  the  man  had  proved  themselves  bad  shepherds;  but 
he  has  found  the  Good  Shepherd :  they  had  cast  him  out  of  doors  ;  but 
he  has  found  the  Door :  they  had  put  him  forth  to  drive  him  away ; 
the  Good  Shepherd  puts  His  sheep  forth  to  lead  them.  We  are  not 
told  where  these  words  are  spoken  ;  so  that  it  is  impossible  to  say 
whether  it  is  probable  that  a  sheepfold  with  the  shepherds  and 
their  flocks  was  in  sight.  There  is  nothing  improbable  in  the  supposi- 
tion. 

He  that  entereth  not  by  the  door'\  The  Oriental  sheepfolds  are  com- 
monly walled  or  palisaded,  with  one  door  or  gate.  Into  one  of  these 
enclosures  several  shepherds  drive  their  flocks,  leaving  them  in  charge 
of  an  under-shepherd  or  porter,  who  fastens  the  door  securely  inside, 
and  remains  with  the  sheep  all  night.  In  the  morning  the  shepherds 
come  to  the  door,  the  porter  opens  to  them,  and  each  calls  away  his  own 
sheep. 

some  other  way]  Literally,  from  another  quarter :  the  word  occurs 
here  only  in  N.T. 

the  same]  Better,  he ;  literally,  that  one.  It  is  a  pronoun  of  which 
S.  John  is  very  fond  in  order  to  recall  with  emphasis  some  person  or 
thing  previously  mentioned.  Comp.  i.  18,  33,  v.  ii.  39,  ix.  37,  xii.  48, 
xiv.  21,  16,  XV.  26.  In  i.  33  ('the  same  said  unto  me'),  v.  11,  and  xii. 
48  it  is  inaccurately  translated,  as  here,  '  the  same.' 

a  thief  and  robber]  Everywhere  in  this  Gospel  (8,  10,  xii.  6,  xviii. 
40),  as  also  2  Cor.  xi.  26,  these  words  are  given  correctly  as  renderings 
of  the  Greek  equivalents  ;  but  everywhere  else  in  N.T.  (Matt.  xxi.  13, 
xxvi.  55,  xxvii.  38,  &c.,  &c.)  the  word  here  translated  '  robber  '  is  less 
well  translated  '  thief '  The  '  robber  '  is  a  brigand,  a  more  formidable 
criminal  than  the  'thief;'  the  one  uses  violence,  the  other  cunning. 

2.  is  the  shepherd  of  the  sheep]  Better,  is  a  shepherd  of  the  sheep. 
There  is  more  than  one  flock  in  the  fold,  and  therefore  more  than  one 
shepherd  to  visit  the  fold.  The  Good  Shepherd  has  not  yet  appeared 
in  the  allegory.  The  allegory  indeed  is  two-fold;  in  the  first  part 
(i — 5),  which  is  repeated  (7—9),  Christ  is  the  Door  of  the  fold  ;  in  the 
second  part  (11 — 18)  He  is  the  Shepherd;  v.  10 forming  a  link  between 
the  two  parts. 

3.  To  him  the  porter  openeth]  The  'porter'  is  the  door-keeper  or 
gate-keeper,  who  fastens  and  opens  the  one  door  into  the  fold.  In  the 
allegory  the  fold  is  the  Church,  the  Door  is  Christ,  the  sheep  are  the 

14 — 2 


212 


S.   JOHN,   X.  [vv.  4—6. 


openeth;  and  the  sheep  hear  his  voice:  and  he  calleth  his 

4  own  sheep  by  name,  and  leadeth  them  out.     And  when  he 
putteth  forth  his  own  sheep,  he  goeth  before  them,  and  the 

5  sheep  follow  him:  for  they  know  his  voice.     And  a  stranger 
will  they  not  follow,  but  will  flee  from  him :  for  they  know 

6  not  the  voice  of  strangers.     This  parable  spake  Jesus  unto 

elect,  the  shepherds  are  God's  ministers.  What  does  the  porter  repre- 
sent? Possibly  nothing  definite.  Much  harm  is  sometimes  done  by 
trying  to  make  every  detail  of  an  allegory  or  parable  significant.  There 
must  be  back  ground  in  every  picture.  But  if  it  be  insisted  that  the 
porter  here  is  too  prominent  to  be  meaningless,  it  is  perhaps  best  to 
understand  the  Holy  Spirit  as  signified  under  this  figure ;  He  who 
grants  opportunities  of  coming,  or  of  bringing  others,  through  Christ 
into  the  Kingdom  of  God.  Comp.  i  Cor.  xvi.  g;  2  Cor.  ii.  12;  Col. 
iv.  3;  Acts  xiv.  27;  Rev.  iii.  8:  but  in  all  these  passages  'door'  does 
not  mean  Christ,  but  opporttmity.     See  on  i  Cor.  xvi.  9. 

the  sheep  hear  his  voice]  All  the  sheep,  whether  belonging  to  His 
flock  or  not,  know  from  His  coming  that  they  are  about  to  be  led  out. 
I/is  own  sheep  (first  for  emphasis)  he  calleth  by  name  (Excd.  xxxiii.  12, 
17;  Isa.  xliii.  i),  and  leadeth  them  otd  to  pasture.  Even  in  this  country 
shepherds  and  shepherds'  dogs  know  each  individual  sheep ;  in  the  East 
the  intimacy  between  shepherd  and  sheep  is  still  closer.  The  naming 
of  sheep  is  a  veiy  ancient  practice :  see  Theocritus  v.  102. 

4.  when  he  putteth  forth  his  otvn  sheep]  Better,  w//«j //f  hatli  put 
forth  all  his  own.  Most  of  the  best  MSS.  have  ' all '  for  ' sheep : '  '  there 
shall  not  an  hoof  be  left  behind'  (Exod.  x.  26).  The  word  for  'put 
forth'  is  remarkable;  it  is  the  same  as  is  used  in  ix.  34,  35  of  the 
Pharisees  'casting  out'  the  man  born  blind.  This  is  perhaps  not  acci- 
dental: the  false  shepherds  put  forth  sheep  to  rid  themselves  of  trouble; 
the  true  shepherds  put  forth  sheep  to  feed  them.  But  even  the  true 
shepherds  must  sometimes  use  a  certain  amount  of  violence  to  their 
sheep  to  'compel  them  to  come'  (Luke  xiv.  23)  to  the  pastures.  But 
note  that  there  are  no  'goats'  in  the  allegory:  all  the  flock  are  faithful. 
It  is  the  ideal  Church  composed  entirely  of  the  elect.  The  object  of  the 
allegory  being  to  set  forth  the  relations  of  Christ  to  His  sheep,  the 
possibility  of  bad  sheep  is  not  taken  into  account.  That  side  of  the 
picture  is  treated  in  the  parables  of  the  Lost  Sheep,  and  of  the  Sheep 
and  the  Goats. 

5.  And  a  stranger  will  they  not  follow]  Better, But  a  stranger  they  will 
assuredly  not  follow.  The  form  of  negative  is  very  strong,  as  in  iv.  14, 
48,  vi.  35,  37,  viii.  12,  51,  52:  see  on  viii.  51.  By  'a  stranger'  is 
meant  quite  literally  anyone  whom  they  do  not  know,  not  necessarily  a 
thief  or  robber. 

6.  This  parable]  Better,  This  allegory.  The  word  which  the 
Synoptists  use  for  'parable'  [paralwle)  is  never  used  by  S.  John;  and 
the  word  here  used  by  S.  John  (paroimia)  is  never  used  by  the  Synop- 
tists.    This  should  be  brought  out  in  translation;   both  are  rendered 


vv.  7,  8.]  S.   JOHN,   X.  213 

them :  but  they  understood  not  what  things  they  were  which 
he  spake  unto  them. 

Then  said  Jesus  unto  them  again,  Verily,  verily,  I  say  ^ 
unto  you,  I  am  the  door  of  the  sheep.  All  that  ever  came  8 
before  me  are  thieves  and  robbers:  but  the  sheep  did  not 

by  our  translators  sometimes  'parable'  and  sometimes  'proverb.'  Paroi- 
mia  occurs  again  xvi.  25,  29  and  2  Pet.  ii.  22,  and  nowhere  else  in  N.T. 
Everywhere  but  here  it  is  translated  'proverb.'  Paroimia  means  some- 
thing beside  the  ivay;  hence,  according  to  some,  a  trite  ^way  side 
saying;'  according  to  others,  a  figurative  ^out-of-the-way  S3.ymg.'  On 
parabola  see  on  Mark  iv.  2. 

understood  not  ]     Did  not  recognise  the  meaning. 

7.  Then  said  Jesus  unto  them  again']  Better,  Therefore  said  Jesus 
again.  They  did  not  understand ;  therefore  He  went  through  the  allegory 
again  more  explicitly,  interpreting  the  main  features.  'Unto  them'  is 
of  doubtful  authority. 

Verily,  verily]  This  is  the  important  point,  to  recognise  that  the  one 
door  of  the  fold,  through  which  the  sheep  and  the  shepherds  enter,  is 
Christ,  /(with  great  emphasis)  am  the  Door.  Comp.  'I  am  the  Way' 
(xiv.  6). 

the  door  of  the  sheep]  Better,  'the  Door  to  the  sheep'  {vv.  i,  2),  and 
also  'the  Jioox  for  the  sheep'  {v.  9).  Sheep  and  shepherds  alike  have 
one  and  the  same  door.  The  elect  enter  the  Church  through  Christ ;  the 
ministers  who  would  visit  the  flocks  must  receive  their  commission 
from  Christ.  Note  that  Christ  does  not  say,  'the  Door  of  the  foid,'  but 
'the  Door  of  the  sheep.'  The  fold  has  no  meaning  apart  from  the 
sheep. 

8.  A/l  that  ever  came  before  me  are  thieves  and  robbers]  These  words 
are  difficult,  and  some  copyists  seem  to  have  tried  to  avoid  the  difficulty 
by  omitting  either  'all'  or  'before  Me.'  But  the  balance  of  authority 
leaves  no  doubt  that  both  are  genuine.  Some  commentators  would 
translate  '  instead  of  Me '  for  'before  Me.'  But  this  meaning  of  the  Greek 
preposition  is  not  common,  and  perhaps  occurs  nowhere  in  N.T.  More- 
over 'instead  of  Me'  ought  to  include  the  idea  of  'for  My  advantage;' 
and  that  is  impossible  here.  We  must  retain  the  natural  and  ordinary 
meaning  of  'before  Me:'  and  as  'before  Me  in  dignity'  would  be 
obviously  inappropriate,  'before  Me  in  time'  must  be  the  meaning.  But 
who  are  'all  that  came  before  Me?'  The  patriarchs,  prophets,  Moses, 
the  Baptist  camiot  be  meant,  either  collectively  or  singly.  'Salvation  is 
of  the  Jews'  (iv.  22) ;  'they  are  they  which  testify  of  Me'  (v.  39);  'if  ye 
believed  Moses,  ye  would  believe  Me'  (v.  46);  'John  bare  witness  unto 
the  truth'  (v.  33):  texts  like  this  are  quite  conclusive  against  any  such 
Gnostic  interpretation.  Nor  can  false  Messiahs  be  meant :  it  is  doubtful 
whether  any  had  arisen  at  this  time.  Rather  it  refers  to  the  '  ravening 
wolves  in  sheep's  clothing'  who  had  been,  and  still  were,  the  ruin  of  the 
nation,  who  'devoured  widow's  houses,'  who  were  'full  of  ravening  and 
vnckedness,'  who  had  'taken  away  the  key  of  knowledge,'  and  were  in 


214  S.   JOHN,   X.  [vv.  9,  lo. 

9  hear  them.  I  am  the  door:  by  me  if  any  man  enter  in,  he 
shall  be  saved,  and  shall  go  in  and  out,  and  find  pasture. 

lo  The  thief  cometh  not,  but  for  to  steal,  and  to  kill,  and 
to  destroy:  I  am  come  that  they  might  have  life,  and  that 
they  might  have  it  mo7-e  abundantly. 

very  truth  'thieves  and  robbers'  (Matt.  vii.  15,  xxiii.  14;  Luke  xi.  39, 
52).  Some  of  them  were  now  present,  thirsting  to  add  bloodshed  to 
robbery,  and  this  denunciation  of  them  is  no  stronger  than  several 
passages  in  the  Synoptists:  e.g.  Matt,  xxiii.  33;  Luke  xi.  50,  £i.  The 
tense  also  is  in  favour  of  this  interpretation;  not  were,  but  'are  thieves 
and  robbers.' 

but  the  sheep  did  not  hear  them'\  For  they  spoke  with  no  authority 
(Matt.  vii.  29);  there  was  no  living  voice  in  their  teaching.  They  had 
their  hearers,  but  these  were  not  'the  sheep,'  but  blind  adherents,  led 
by  the  blind. 

9.  by  uie]  Placed  first  for  emphasis;  'through  Me  and  in  no  other 
way.'  The  main  point  is  iterated  again  and  again,  each  time  with  great 
simplicity,  and  yet  most  emphatically.  "The  simplicity,  the  directness, 
the  particularity,  the  emphasis  of  S.  John's  style  give  his  writings  a 
marvellous  power,  which  is  not  perhaps  felt  at  first.  Yet  his  words 
seem  to  hang  about  the  reader  till  he  is  forced  to  remember  them.  Each 
great  truth  sounds  like  the  burden  of  a  strain,  ever  falling  upon  the  ear 
with  a  calm  persistency  which  secures  attention."  Westcott,  Introduc- 
tion to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels,  p.  250. 

he  shall  be  saved]  These  words  and  'shall  find  pasture'  seem  to  shew 
that  this  verse  does  not  refer  to  the  shepherds  only,  but  to  the  sheep 
also.  Although  'find  pasture'  may  refer  to  the  shepherd's  work  for  the 
flock,  yet  one  is  inclined  to  think  that  if  the  words  do  not  refer  to  both, 
they  refer  to  the  sheep  only. 

'  With  the  verse  as  a  whole  should  be  compared  'the  strait  gate  and 
narrow  way  which  leadeth  unto  life'  (Matt.  vii.  14).  In  the  Clementine 
Homilies  (ill.  Hi.)  we  have  'He,  being  a  true  prophet,  said,  I  am  the 
gate  of  life;  he  that  entereth  in  through  Me  entereth  into  life.'  See  on 
ix.  3. 

10.  and  to  kill]     To  slaughter  as  if  for  sacrifice. 

I  am  come]  Better,  I  came.  'I'  is  emphatic,  in  marked  contrast  to 
the  thief.  This  is  the  point  of  transition  from  the  first  part  of  the 
allegory  to  the  second.  The  figme  of  the  Door,  as  the  one  entrance  to 
salvation,  is  dropped ;  and  that  of  the  Good  Shepherd,  as  opposed  to 
the  thief,  is  taken  up;  but  this  intermediate  clause  will  apply  to  either 
figure,  inclining  towards  the  second  one.  In  order  lo  make  the  strong- 
est possible  antithesis  to  the  thief,  Christ  introduces,  not  a  shepherd,  but 
Himself,  the  Chief  Shepherd.  The  thief  takes  life;  the  shepherds /;;?- 
tect  life ;  the  Good  Shepherd  ^^ives  it. 

that  they  might  have]  Rather,  in  both  clauses,  that  they  may 
have. 

have  it  more  abundantly]     Omit  'more;'  it  is  not  in  the  Greek,  and 


vv.  II,  12.]  S.   JOHN,   X.  215 

II — 18.     The  Allegory  of  the  Good  Shepherd. 

I  am  the  good  shepherd:  the  good  shepherd  giveth  his  hfe  " 
for  the  sheep.    But  he  that  is  a  hirehng,  and  not  the  shepherd,  12 
whose  own  the  sheep  are   not,  seeth  the  wolf  coming,  and 
leaveth  the  sheep,  and  fleeth:  and  the  wolf  catcheth  them,  and 

somewhat  spoils  the  sense.     More  abundantly  than  what  ?     Translate, 
thai  they  may  have  abundance. 

11—18.    The  Allegory  of  the  Good  Shepherd. 

11.  lam  the  Good  Shepherd'\  The  word  translated  'good'  cannot 
be  adequately  translated:  it  means  'beautiful,  noble,  good,'  as  opposed 
to  'foul,  mean,  wicked.'  It  sums  up  the  chief  attributes  of  ideal  perfec- 
tion. Christ  is  the  Perfect  Shepherd,  as  opposed  to  His  own  imperfect 
ministers ;  He  is  the  true  Shepherd,  as  opposed  to  the  false  shepherds, 
who  are  hirelings  or  hypocrites;  He  is  the  Good  Shepherd,  who  gives 
His  life  for  the  sheep,  as  opposed  to  the  wicked  thief  who  takes  their 
lives  to  preserve  his  own.  Thus  in  Christ  is  realised  the  ideal  Shepherd 
of  O.T.  Ps-  xxiii.;  Isa.  xl.  11;  Jer.  xxiii. ;  Ezek.  xxxiv.,  xxxvii.  24; 
Zech.  xi.  7.  Perhaps  no  image  has  penetrated  more  deeply  into  the 
mind  of  Christendom  :  Christian  prayers  and  hymns.  Christian  painting 
and  statuary,  and  Christian  literature  are  full  of  it,  and  have  been  from 
the  earliest  ages.  And  side  by  side  with  it  is  commonly  found  the  other 
beautiful  image  of  this  Gospel,  the  Vine;  the  Good  Shepherd  and  the 
True  Vine  are  figures  of  which  Christians  have  never  wearied. 

giveth  his  life]  Better,  layetti  down  His  life.  The  phrase  is  a 
remarkable  one  and  peculiar  to  S.  John,  whereas  'to  give  His  life' 
occurs  in  the  Synoptists  (Matt.  xx.  20;  Mark  x.  45).  'To  /ay  down' 
perhaps  includes  the  notion  of  'to /(7j  down,'  a  common  meaning  of  the 
words  in  classical  Greek ;  if  so,  it  is  exactly  equivalent  to  the  Synoptic 
phrase  'to  give  as  a  ransom.''  It  occurs  again,  w.  15,  17,  xiii.  37,  38, 
XV.  13;  I  John  iii.  16.  In  this  country  the  statement  'the  good  shep- 
herd lays  down  his  life  for  his  sheep'  seems  extravagant  when  taken 
apart  from  the  application  to  Christ.  It  is  otherwise  in  the  East,  where 
dangers  froni  wild  beasts  and  armed  bands  of  robbers  are  serious  and 
constant.  Comp.  Gen.  xiii.  5,  xiv.  12,  xxxi.  39,  40,  xxxii.  7,  8,  xxxvii. 
33;  Job  i.  17;   I  Sam.  xvii.  34,  35. 

12.  an  hireling]  The  word  occurs  nowhere  else  in  N.  T.  excepting 
of  the  'hired  servants' of  Zebedee  (Mark  i.  20).  The  Good  Shepherd 
was  introduced  in  contrast  to  the  thief.  Now  we  have  another  contrast 
to  the  Good  Shepherd  given,  the  hired  shepherd,  a  mercenary,  who 
tends  a  flock  not  his  own  for  his  own  interests.  The  application  is 
obvious;  viz.,  to  those  ministers  who  care  chiefly  for  the  emoluments 
and  advantages  of  their  position,  and  retire  when  the  position  becomes 
irksome  or  dangerous. 

and  not  the  shepherd]     Better,  and  not  a  shepherd,  as  in  v.  2 
the  ivolf]     Any  power  opposed  to  Christ.     See  on  v.  28. 


2i6  S.   JOHN,  X.  [vv.  13—16. 

13  scattereth  the  sheep.     The  hireUng  fleeth,  because  he  is  a 

14  hirehng,  and  careth  not  for  the  sheep.     I  am  the  good  shep- 
is  herd,  and  know  my  sheep,  and  am  known  of  mine.     As  the 

Father  knoweth  vi\t,even  so  know  I  the  Father:  and  I  lay  down 

16  my  Ufe  for  the  sheep.     And  other  sheep  I  have,  which  are 

not  of  this  fold :  them  also  I  must  bring,  and  they  shall  hear 

my  voice ;  and  there  shall  be  one  fold,  and  one  shepherd. 

and  scattereth  the  sheep]  The  best  authorities  omit  'the  sheep;'  but 
the  words  might  easily  be  omitted  as  apparently  awkward  and  super- 
fluous after  the  preceding  'them.'  But  in  any  case  the  meaning  is 
'snatcheth  certain  sheep  and  scattereth  the  flock.' 

13.  7'he  hireling  fleeth]  These  words  are  of  still  more  doubtful 
authority.  Omitting  both  the  doubtful  portions  the  sentence  will  run 
(The  hireling)  leaveth  the  sheep  and  fleeth  ;  and  the  luolf  snatcheth  them 
and  scattereth  {them);  because  he  is  an  hireling  and  careth  ttot,  &c. 

14 — 18.  Further  description  of  the  True  Shepherd,  (i)  His  inti- 
mate knowledge  of  His  sheep;  (2)  His  readiness  to  die  for  them.  This 
latter  point  recurs  repeatedly  as  a  sort  of  refrain,  like  'I  will  raise  him 
up  at  the  last  day,'  in  chap.  vi. 

14.  and  know  my  sheep,  and  am  known  of  mine]  Better,  and  I  know 
Mine,  and  Mine  know  Me. 

15.  As  the  Father  knoweth  me,  even  so,  &c.]  This  rendering  entirely 
obscures  the  true  meaning.  There  should  be  no  full  stop  at  the  end  of 
V.  14,  and  the  sentence  should  run ;  I  know  Mine,  and  Mine  know  Me, 
even  as  tlie  Father  knoweth  Me  and  I  know  the  Father.  So  intimate 
is  the  relation  between  the  Good  Shejiherd  and  His  sheep  that  it  may 
be  compared  to  the  relation  between  the  Father  and  the  Son.  The 
same  thought  runs  through  the  discourses  in  the  latter  half  of  the 
Gospel:  xiv.  20,  xv.  10,  xvii.  8,  10,  18,  ^i. 

16.  other  sheep  I  have]  Not  the  Jews  in  heathen  lands,  but  Gentiles, 
for  even  among  them  He  had  sheep.  The  Jews  had  asked  in  derision, 
'Will  He  go  and  teach  the  Gentiles?'  (vii.  35).  He  declares  here  that 
among  the  despised  heathen  He  has  sheep.  He  was  going  to  lay  down 
His  life,  'not  for  that  nation  only'  (xi.  52),  but  that  He  might  'draw  all 
men  unto  Him'  (.\ii.  32).  Of  that  most  heathen  of  heathen  cities, 
Corinth,  He  declared  to  S.  Paul  in  a  vision,  '  I  have  much  people  in 
this  city'  (Acts  xviii.  10). 

not  of  this  fold]  Emphasis  on  'fold,'  not  on  'this;'  the  Gentiles 
were  in  no  fold  at  all,  but  'scattered  abroad'  (xi.  52). 

them  also  I  must  bring]  Better,  them  also  I  must  lead.  No  need 
for  them  to  be  removed;  Christ  can  lead  them  in  their  own  lands. 
'Neither  in  this  mountain,  nor  yet  at  Jerusalem'  (iv.  21)  is  the  ap- 
pointed place.  Note  the  'must;'  it  is  the  Messiah's  bounden  duty, 
decreed  for  Him  by  the  Father:  comp.  iii.  14,  ix.  4,  xii.  34,  xx.  9. 

there  shall  be  onefold,  and  one  shepherd]  Rather,  they  shall  become 
onefioc\i,  one  shepherd.  The  distinction  between  'be'  and  'become'  is 
worth  preserving  (see  on  ix.   27,  39),  and  that  between  'flock'  and 


vv.  17,  18.]  S.   JOHN,   X.  217 

Therefore  doth  my  Father  love  me,  because  I  lay  down  my  17 
life,  that  I  might  take  it  again.     No  man  taketh  it  from  me,  18 

'fold'  still  more  so.  'There  shall  become  one  fold'  would  imply  that 
at  present  there  are  more  than  one :  but  nothing  is  said  of  any  other 
fold.  In  both  these  instances  our  translators  have  rejected  their  better 
predecessors:  Tyndale  and  Coverdale  have  'flock,'  not  'fold;'  the 
Geneva  Version  has  'be  made,'  not  'be.'  One  point  in  the  Greek  can- 
not be  preserved  in  English.  The  words  for  'flock'  and  'shepherd'  are 
cognate  and  very  similar,  poimn^  and  poiinen:  '  one  herd,  one  herdsman ' 
would  be  the  nearest  approach  we  could  make,  and  to  change  'flock' 
for  'herd'  would  be  more  loss  than  gain.  The  change  from  'flock'  to 
'fold'  has  been  all  loss,  leading  to  calamitous  misunderstanding. 

"The  universalism  of  v.  i6,  which  is  so  often  quoted  against  the 
Gospel,  seems  rather  to  be  exactly  of  the  kind  of  which  we  have  abun- 
dant evidence  in  the  Synoptists:  e.g.  in  Matt.  viii.  11,  xiii.  24 — 30, 
xxviii.  19;  Luke  xiii.  29.  A  certain  precedence  is  assigned  to  Israel, 
but  the  inclusion  of  the  Gentiles  is  distinctly  contemplated."  And  if 
S.  Matthew  could  appreciate  this  side  of  his  Master's  teaching,  how 
much  more  S.  John,  who  had  lived  to  see  the  success  of  missions  to  the 
heathen  and  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  "On  the  other  hand,  the 
nature  of  S.  John's  universalism  must  not  be  mistaken.  It  implies  a 
privileged  position  on  the  part  of  the  Jews."  S.  pp.  172,  173.  More- 
over, even  O.  T.  prophets  seem  to  have  had  a  presentiment  that  other 
nations  would  share  in  the  blessings  of  the  Messiah.  Mic.  iv.  1 ;  Isa. 
hi.  15. 

17.  Therefore^  Better,  (9«//^wa<rrw^«/,  or,  For  tMscause  (xii.  18,  27). 
See  on  vii.  22  and  viii.  47,  and  comp.  v.  16,  18,  vi.  65.  The  Father's 
love  for  the  incarnate  Son  is  intensified  by  the  self-sacrifice  of  the  Son. 

that  I  might  take  it  agaiit]  Literally,  in  order  that  I  may  take  it 
again.  This  clause  is  closely  connected  with  the  preceding  one  :  'that' 
depends  upon  'because.'  Only  because  Christ  was  to  take  His  human 
life  again  was  His  death  such  as  the  Father  could  have  approved.  Had 
the  Son  returned  to  heaven  at  the  Crucifixion  leaving  His  humanity  on 
the  Cross,  the  salvation  of  mankind  would  not  have  been  won,  the 
sentence  of  death  would  not  have  been  reversed,  we  should  be  'yet  in 
our  sins'  (i  Cor.  xv.  17).  Morever,  in  that  case  He  would  have  ceased 
to  be  the  Good  Shepherd :  He  would  have  become  like  the  hireling, 
casting  aside  his  duty  before  it  was  completed.  The  office  of  the  True 
Shepherd  is  not  finished  until  all  mankind  become  His  flock ;  and  this 
work  continues  from  the  Resurrection  to  the  Day  of  Judgment. 

18.  No  man  taketh  it  from  me]  Better,  No  one  taketh  it  from  Me; 
not  even  God.  See  on  v.  28.  Two  points  are  insisted  on;  (i)  that  the 
Death  is  entirely  voluntary;  (2)  that  both  Death  and  Resurrection  are 
in  accordance  with  a  commission  received  from  the  Father.  Comp. 
'Father,  into  Thy  hands  I  commend  My  spirit'  (Luke  xxiii.  46).  The 
precise  words  used  by  the  two  Apostles  of  Christ's  death  bring  this  out 
very  clearly;  'yielded  up  (literally  'let  go')  the  ghost'  (Matt,  xxvii.  50) ; 
'gave  up  the  ghost'  (John  xix.  30;  see  note  there).     The  word  used  by 


2i8  S.   JOHN,   X.  [vv.  19—21. 

but  I  lay  it  down  of  myself.  I  have  power  to  lay  it  down, 
and  I  have  power  to  take  it  again.  This  commandment 
have  I  received  of  my  Father. 

19 — 21.     Opposite  Results  of  the  Teaching. 

19  There  was  a  division  therefore  again  among  the  Jews  for 

20  these  sayings.     And  many  of  them  said.  He  hath  a  devil, 

21  and  is  mad ;  why  hear  ye  him?  Others  said,  These  are  not 
the  words  of  him  that  hath  a  devil.  Can  a  devil  open  the 
eyes  of  the  blind  ? 

S.  Mark  and  S.  Luke  ('breathed  His  last,'  or  'expired')  is  less  strong. 
Here  there  is  an  emphasis  on  the  pronoun;  'but  /lay  it  down  of  My- 
self.' 

I  have  power]  i.e.  right,  authority,  liberty:  same  word  as  in  i.  12, 
V.  27,  xvi',  2,  xix.  10.  This  authority  is  the  commandment  of  the 
Fatlier:  and  hence  this  passage  in  no  way  contradicts  the  usual  N.T. 
doctrine  that  Christ  was  raised  to  life  again  by  the  Father.  Acts  ii. 
-24. 

This  commandment  have  I  received]  Better,  This  commandment 
received  I,  viz.,  at  the  Incarnation:  the  commandment  to  die  and  rise 
again.     Comp.  iv.  34,  v.  30,  vi.  38. 

19 — 21.     Opposite  Results  of  the  Teaching. 

19.  again]  As  about  the  man  born  blind  (ix.  6)  among  the  Phari- 
sees, and  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (vii.  43),  among  the  multitude. 
'Therefore'  should  be  omitted  here  as  wanting  authority;  and  'there 
arose'  would  be  more  accurate  than  'there  was'  (see  on  i.  6);  (here 
arose  a  division  again.     See  on  vii.  43. 

among  the  yctus]  Some  even  among  the  hostile  party  are  impressed, 
and  doubt  the  correctness  of  their  position:  comp.  xi.  45. 

20.  //e  hath  a  devil]     See  last  note  on  viii.  48,  and  comp.  vii.  10. 

21.  0/  him  that  hath  a  devil]  Better,  of  one  possessed  witli  a 
demon:  the  expression  differs  from  that  in  v.  20. 

Can  a  devil]  Or,  Surely  a  demon  cannot.  See  on  ix.  40.  It  was 
too  great  and  too  beneficent  a  miracle  for  a  demon.  But  here  they  stop 
short:  they  state  what  He  cannot  be;  they  do  not  see,  or  will  not  ad- 
mit, what  He  must  be. 

22 — 38.     The  Discourse  at  the  Feast  of  the  Dedication. 

Again  we  seem  to  have  a  gap  in  the  narrative.  Between  vv.  21 — 22 
(but  see  below)  there  is  an  interval  of  about  two  months;  for  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles  would  be  about  the  middle  of  October,  and  that  of  the 
Dedication  towards  the  end  of  December.  In  this  interval  some  would 
place  Luke  x.  i — xiii.  11.  If  this  be  correct,  we  may  connect  the  send- 
ing out  of  the  Seventy  both  with  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  and  also  with 
John  x.  16.     Seventy  was  the  traditional  number  of  tlie  nations  of  the 


v\'.  22,  23.]  S.   JOHN,   X.  219 

22 — 38.     The  Discourse  at  the  Feast  of  the  Dedication. 

And  it  was  at  Jerusalem  the  feast  of  the  dedication,  and  22 
it  was  winter.     And  Jesus  walked  in  the  temple  in  Solo-  23 

earth ;  and  for  the  nations  70  bullocks  were  offered  at  the  Feast  of 
Tabernacles — 13  on  the  first  day,  12  on  the  second,  11  on  the  third,  and 
so  on.  The  Seventy  were  sent  out  to  gather  in  the  nations ;  for  they 
were  not  forbidden,  as  the  Twelve  were,  to  go  into  the  way  of  the  Gen- 
tiles or  to  enter  any  city  of  the  Samaritans  (Matt.  x.  5).  The  Twelve 
were  primarily  for  the  twelve  tribes;  the  Seventy  for  the  Gentiles.  The 
words  'other  sheep  I  have  which  are  not  of  this  fold;  them  also  I  must 
lead,'  must  have  been  spoken  just  before  the  mission  of  the  Seventy. 

Dr  Westcott,  on  the  strength  of  a  strongly  attested  reading  in  v.  22, 
Then  there  took  place  the  Feast  of  the  Dedication,  would  connect  chap, 
ix.  and  x.  i — 21  with  this  later  feast  rather  than  with  the  Feast  of 
Tabernacles.  In  this  case  the  interval  of  two  months  must  be  placed 
between  chaps,  viii.  and  ix. 

22.  And  it  ivas  at  Jerusalem  the  feast  of  the  dedication']  More 
literally,  Now  there  took  place  at  Jerusalem  the  Feast  of  the  Dedication. 
This  feast  might  be  celebrated  anywhere,  and  the  pointed  insertion  of 
'at  Jerusalem'  seems  to  suggest  that  in  the  interval  between  z/.  21  and  v. 
22  Christ  had  been  away  from  the  city.  It  was  kept  in  honour  of  the 
purification  and  restoration  of  the  Temple  (b.  c.  164)  after  its  desecra- 
tion by  Antiochus  Epiphanes;  i  Mace.  i.  20 — 60,  iv.  36 — 59  (note  esp. 
vv.  36  and  59);  2  Mace.  x.  i — 8.  Another  name  for  it  was  'the 
Lights,'  or  'Feast  of  Lights,'  from  the  illuminations  with  which  it  was 
celebrated.     Christian  dedication  festivals  are  its  lineal  descendants. 

"The  feast  was  of  comparatively  recent  institution.. ..It  is  not  a  feast 
the  name  of  which  would  be  likely  to  occur  to  any  but  a  Jew ;  still  less 
the  accurate  note  of  place  in  v.  23  ('in  the  temple  in  Solomon's  porch'). 
Both  these  verses  proclaim  the  eye-witness.  So  does  the  admirable 
question  in  the  verse  following.  Attracted  by  His  teachings  and  His 
miracles,  but  repelled  by  His  persistent  refusal  to  assume  the  Messianic 
character  as  they  understood  it,  the  Jews  ask  Jesus  directly,  'How  long, 
&c.'  It  is  such  a  question  as  at  this  period  of  the  ministry  was  inevit- 
able, and  the  language  in  which  it  is  expressed  exactly  represents  the 
real  difficulties  and  hesitation  that  the  Jews  would  feel."     S.  pp.  174, 

175- 
and  it  was  winter']     Omit  'and,'  which  is  wanting  in  authority,  and 

join  'it  was  wintei"'  to  the  next  verse.     The  words  explain  why  Jesus 
was  walking  under  cover. 

23.  in  Solomon^ s  porch]  This  was  a  cloister  or  colonnade  in  the 
Temple-Courts,  apparently  on  the  east  side.  Tradition  said  that  it  was 
a  part  of  the  original  building  which  had  survived  the  various  destruc- 
tions and  rebuildings.  No  such  cloister  is  mentioned  in  the  account  of 
Solomon's  Temple,  and  perhaps  the  name  was  derived  from  the  wall 
against  which  it  was  built.  It  is  mentioned  again  Acts  iii.  1 1  (where 
see  note)  and  v.  12.     Foundations  still  remaining  probably  belong  to  it. 


220  S.   JOHN,   X.  [w.  24—26. 

24  mon's   porch.     Then   came   the   Jews   round   about    him, 
and  said  unto  him,  How  long  dost  thou  make  us  to  doubt? 

25  If  thou   be   the   Christ,    tell  us   plainly.     Jesus   answered 
them,  I  told  you,  and  ye  believe  not:   the  works  that  I  do 

26  in  my  Father's  name,  they  bear  witness  of  me.     But  ye 
believe   not,   because   ye   are  not  of  my  sheep,  as  I   said 

24.  Then  came  the  JeT.vs  round  about,  &c.]  Better,  The  Jews  there- 
fore compassed  Him  about  (Luke  xxi.  20;  Hebr.  xi.  30;  Rev.  xx.  9) 
and  kept  saying  to  Him.  They  encircled  Him  in  an  urgent  and  ob- 
trusive manner,  indicating  that  they  were  determined  to  have  an 
answer. 

How  long  dost  thou  make  tis  to  doubt?\  The  margin  is  better  with  hold 
us  in  suspense.  The  literal  meaning  is  How  Ions;  dost  Thou  excite  our 
mittd?  If  Thou  art  the  Christ  tell  us  with  openness  (see  on  vii.  4). 
They  put  a  point-blank  question,  as  the  Sanhedrin  do  at  the  Passion 
(Luke  xxii.  67).  Their  motives  for  urging  this  v/ere  no  doubt  mixed, 
and  the  same  motive  was  not  predominant  in  each  case  Some  were 
hovering  between  faith  and  hostility  and  (forgetting  viii.  13)  fancied 
that  an  explicit  declaration  from  Him  might  help  them.  Others  asked 
mainly  out  of  curiosity:  He  had  interested  them  greatly,  and  they 
wanted  His  own  account  of  Himself.  The  worst  wished  for  a  plain 
statement  which  might  form  material  for  an  accusation:  they  wanted 
Him  to  commit  Himself. 

25.  /  told  you-,  and  ye  beliei'ed  not]  The  best  authorities  have,  and 
ye  believe  7tot:  their  unbelief  still  continues.  To  some  few,  the  woman 
at  the  well,  the  man  born  blind,  and  the  Apostles,  Jesus  had  explicitly 
declared  Himself  to  be  the  Messiah ;  to  all  He  had  implicitly  declared 
Himself  by  His  works  and  teaching. 

the  works']  in  the  widest  sense,  not  miracles  alone;  His  Messianic 
work  generally.  See  on  v.  36.  The  pronouns  are  emphatically  op- 
posed; 'the  works  which  /do. ..M^^.... But  ye  believe  not, 

26.  as  I  said  unto  you]  These  words  are  omitted  by  some  of  the 
best  authorities,  including  the  Vatican  and  Sinaitic  MSS.  But  they 
may  possibly  have  been  left  out  to  avoid  a  difficulty.  If  they  are 
genuine  they  are  best  joined,  as  in  our  version,  with  what  precedes. 
Nowhere  in  the  Gospels  does  Christ  make  such  a  quotation  from  a 
previous  discourse  as  we  should  have  if  we  read,  'As  I  said  unto  you. 
My  sheep  hear  My  voice,  &c.'  The  arrangement  'Ye  are  not  of  My 
sheep,  as  I  said  unto  you,'  is  better,  and  the  reference  is  to  the  general 
sense  of  the  allegory  of  the  sheep-fold,  especially  vi<.  14,  15.  He  and 
His  sheep  have  most  intimate  knowledge  of  one  another;  therefore 
these  Jews  asking  who  He  is  prove  that  they  are  not  His  sheep.  Comp. 
vi.  36,  where  there  seems  to  be  a  similar  reference  to  the  general  mean- 
ing of  a  previous  discourse.  It  is  strange  that  an  objection  should  have 
been  made  to  His  referring  to  the  allegory  after  a  lapse  of  two  montlis. 
There  is  nothing  improbable  in  His  doing  so,  especially  if  He  had  been 
absent  from  the  city  in  the  interval  (see  on  v.  22).     Might  not  a  speaker 


w.  27—31.]  S.   JOHN,   X.  221 

unto  you.     My  sheep  hear  my  voice,    and  I   know  them,  27 
and  they  follow  me:  and  I  give  unto  them  eternal  life;  and  28 
they  shall  never  perish,  neither  shall  any  jfian  pluck  them 
out  of  my  hand.     My  Father,  which  gave  them  me,  is  greater  29 
than   all;   and   no   man   is  able  to  pluck  them  out  of  my 
Father's  hand.     I  and  my  Father  are  one.     Then  the  Jews  3° 

at  the  present  time  refer  to  a  speech  made  two  months  before,  especially 
if  he  had  not  spoken  in  public  since  then? 

27.  28.  Note  the  simple  but  veiy  impressive  coupling  of  the  clauses 
by  a  simple  '  and  '  throughout  and  comp.  vv.  3  and  12  :  note  also  the 
climax. 

28.  I  give  unto  theni\  Not  'willgwQ.''  Here  as  in  iii.  15,  v.  24  and 
often,  the  gift  of  eternal  life  is  regarded  as  already  possessed  by  the 
faithful.  It  is  not  a  promise,  the  fulfilment  of  which  depends  upon 
man's  conduct,  but  a  gift,  the  retention  of  which  depends  upon  our- 
selves. 

they  shall  never  perish']  This  is  parallel  to  viii.  51  (see  note  there)  ; 
shall  certainly  not  perish  for  ever,  being  the  literal  meaning,  But  the 
negative  belongs  to  the  verb,  not  to  'for  ever;'  and  the  meaning  is,  not 
'  they  may  die,  but  shall  not  die  for  ever,''  but  '  they  shall  never  die  for 
all  eternity.'     Comp.  xi.  26. 

neither  shall  any  man  pluck  them]  Better,  and  no  one  shall  snatch 
them.  '  No  one  '  rather  than  'no  man  '  (as  in  z>.  18),  for  the  powers  of 
darkness  are  excluded  as  well  as  human  seducers.  '  Snatch '  rather  than 
'pluck,'  for  in  the  Greek  it  is  the  same  word  as  is  used  of  the  wolf  in 
V.  12,  and  this  should  be  preserved  in  translation. 

This  passage  in  no  way  asserts  the  indefectibiiity  of  the  elect,  and 
gives  no  countenance  to  ultra-predestinarian  views.  Christ's  sheep  cannot 
be  taken  from  Him  against  their  will ;  but  their  will  is  free,  and  they 
may  choose  to  leave  the  flock. 

out  of  my  hand]  "  His  hand  protects,  bears,  cherishes,  leads  them." 
Meyer. 

29.  which  gave  them]  Better,  which  hath  given  them.  Comp.  xvii. 
6,  24.  This  enforces  the  previous  assertion.  '  To  snatch  them  out  of 
My  hand,  he  must  snatch  them  out  of  My  Father's  hand  ;  and  My  Father 
is  greater  than  all:'  even  than  the  Son  (xiv.  28).  But  the  reading  is 
not  certain.  The  most  probable  text  gives,  that  which  the  Father 
hath  given  Me  is  greater  than  all.  The  unity  of  the  Church  is  strength 
invincible. 

out  of  my  Father's  hand]  The  better  reading  is,  otit  oftTae  Father's 
hand.  '  Out  of  His  hand '  would  have  sufficed  ;  but  '  Father '  is  repeated 
for  emphasis. 

30.  /  and  my  Father  are  one]  '  One  '  is  neuter  in  the  Greek ;  not 
one  Person,  but  one  Substance.  There  is  no  'My'  in  the  Greek;  /and 
the  Father  are  one.  Christ  has  just  implied  tliat  His  hand  and  the 
Father's  hand  are  one,  which  implies  that  He  and  the  Father  are  one  ; 
and  this  He  now  asserts.     They  are  one  in  power,  in  will,  and  in 


222  S.   JOHN,   X.  [vv.  32—35. 

32  took  up  stones  again  to  stone  him.  Jesus  answered  them, 
Many  good  works  have  I  shewed  you  from  my  Father;  for 

33  which  of  those  works  do  ye  stone  me?  The  Jews  answered 
him,  saying,  For  a  good  work  we  stone  thee  not;  but  for 
blasphemy;   and  because  that  thou,  being  a  man,  makest 

34  thyself  God.     Jesus   answered   them,    Is  it  not  ^vritten  in 

35  your  law,  I  said,  Ye  are  gods?     If  he  called  them  gods, 

action:  this  at  the  very  least  the  words  must  mean;  the  Arian  interpre- 
tation of  mere  moral  agreement  is  inadequate.  Whether  or  no  Unity 
of  Essence  is  actually  stated  here,  it  is  certainly  implied,  as  the  Jews  see. 
They  would  stone  Him  for  making  Himself  God,  which  they  would  not 
have  done  had  He  not  asserted  or  implied  that  He  and  the  Father  were 
one  in  Substance,  not  merely  in  will.  And  Christ  docs  not  correct 
them,  as  assuredly  He  would  have  done,  had  their  animosity  arisen  out 
of  a  gross  misapprehension  of  His  words.     Comp.  Rev.  xx.  6,  xxii.  3. 

31.  Then  the  yews]  Better,  Tlierefore  ihe  yews :  their  picking  up 
stones  was  a  direct  consequence  of  His  words.  But  '  therefore '  should 
perhaps  be  omitted.  They  prepare  to  act  on  Lev.  xxiv.  16  (Comp. 
I  Kin.  xxi.  10).  'Again'  refers  us  back  to  viii.  59.  The  word  for 
'  took  up  'is  not  the  same  in  each  case;  the  word  used  here  is  stronger, 
implying  more  effort;  'lifted  up,  bore.'  But  'again'  shews  that  it 
refers  to  raising  up  from  the  ground  rather  than  carrying  from  a  distance. 

32.  Alany  good  works\  It  is  the  same  word  as  is  used  v.  14  of  the 
6'<'(?d?  Shepherd :  many  beautiful,  noble,  excellent  works.  Comp.  'He 
hath  done  all  things  %velV  (Mark  vii.  37)  and  'God  saw  that  it  w^sgood' 
(Gen.  i.  8,  10,  12,  &c.).  These  excellent  works  proceed  from  the 
Father  and  are  manifested  by  the  Son. 

/or  whicli  of  t}iose\  Literally,  for  what  kind  of  work  among  these ; 
i.  e.  '  what  is  the  character  of  the  work  for  which  ye  are  in  the  act  of 
stoning  me  ?'  It  was  precisely  the  character  of  the  works  which  shewed 
that  they  were  Divine,  as  some  of  them  were  disposed  to  think  (t'.  21, 
vii.  26).  Comp.  Matt.  xxii.  36,  where  the  literal  meaning  is,  'what/'z«</ 
of  a  commandment  is  great  in  the  law?'  and  i  Cor.  xv.  35,  'with  what 
^/«</ of  body  do  they  come?'     See  on  xii.  33,  xviii.  32,  xxi.  19. 

33.  For  a  good  work]  The  preposition  is  changed  in  the  Greek ; 
concerning  a  good  work.   '  That  is  not  the  subject-matter  of  our  charge?' 

and  because]  '  And'  is  explanatory,  shewing  wherein  the  blasphemy 
consisted  :  it  does  not  introduce  a  separate  charge. 

34^38.  Christ  answers  the  formal  charge  of  blasphemy  by  a  fomial 
argument  on  the  other  side. 

34.  in  your  laid]  '  Law '  is  here  used  in  its  widest  sense  for  the 
whole  of  the  Old  Testament;  so  also  in  xii.  34  and  xv.  25 ;  in  all  three 
places  the  passage  referred  to  is  in  the  Psalms.  Comp.  vii.  19,  i  Cor. 
xiv.  21.  The  force  of  the  pronoun  is,  'for  which  you  profess  to  have 
such  a  regard  :'  comp.  viii.  17.  On  the  Greek  for  'is  it  written'  see  on 
ii.  17. 

I  said.   Ye  are  gods]    The  argument  is  both  h  fortiori  and  adkominetn. 


vv.  36,  37.]         _^    S.   JOHN,  X. 223 

unto   whom    the   word   of  God   came,    and    the   scripture 
cannot  be  broken;  say  ye  of  hh?i,  whom  the  Father  hath  36 
sanctified,  and   sent   into   the   world,    Thou    blasphemest; 
because  I  said,  I  am  the  Son  of  God  ?  If  I  do  not  the  works  37 

In  the  Scriptures  (Ps.  Ixxxii.  6)  even  unjust  rulers  are  called  '  gods  '  on 
the  principle  of  the  theocracy,  that  rulers  are  the  delegates  and  repre- 
sentatives of  God  (comp.  Ex.  xxii.  28).  If  this  is  admissible  without 
blasphemy,  how  much  more  may  He  call  Himself 'Son  of  God.' 

35.  If  he  called  them  gods\  More  probably,  If  it  called  them  gods, 
viz.  the  Law.  'Them'  is  left  unexplained;  a  Jewish  audience  would  at 
once  know  who  were  meant.  But  how  incredible  that  any  but  a  Jew 
should  think  of  such  an  argument,  or  put  it  in  this  brief  way  !  These 
last  eight  verses  alone  are  sufficient  to  discredit  the  theory  that  this 
Gospel  is  the  work  of  Greek  Gnostic  in  the  second  century. 

the  word  of  Godi  Practically  the  same  as  'the  Scripture;'  i.e.  the 
word  of  God  in  these  passages  of  Scripture.  The  Word  in  the  theolo- 
gical sense  for  the  Son  is  not  meant  ;  this  term  appears  nowhere  in  the 
narrative  part  of  S.  John's  Gospel.  But  of  course  it  was  through  the 
Word,  not  yet  incarnate,  that  God  revealed  His  will  to  His  people. 

cannot  be  brokett]  Literally,  'cannot  be  undone  '  or  '  unloosed.'  The 
same  word  is  rendered  'unloose'  (i.  27),  'destroy '  (ii.  19),  'break'  (v.  18 
and  vii.  ■23),  'loose'  (xi.  44).  i.  27  and  xi.  44  are  literal,  of  actual  un- 
binding ;  the  others  are  figurative,  of  dissolution  or  unbinding  as  a  form 
of  destruction.  Here  either  metaphor,  dissolution  or  unbinding,  would 
be  appropriate;  either,  'cannot  be  explained  away,  made  to  mean 
nothing;'  or,  'cannot  be  deprived  of  its  binding  authority.'  The  latter 
seems  better.  The  clause  depends  upon  'if,'  and  is  not  parenthetical ; 
'if  the  Scripture  cannot  be  broken.'  As  in  ii.  12,  xvii.  12,  xx.  9,  'the 
Scripture  '  (singular)  probably  means  a  definite  passage.  Comp.  vii.  38, 
42,  xiii.  18,  xvii.  12,  xix.  24,  28,  36,  37.  Scripture  as  a  whole  is  called 
'  the  Scriptures '  (plural) ;  v.  39. 

36.  Say  ye"]  'Ye 'with  great  emphasis,  '  Do  _j'£,  in  opposition  to 
the  Scripture,  say  ?' 

of  him,  whom  the  Father  hath  sanctified^  Omit  'hath;'  both  verbs 
are  aorists.  This  also  is  emphatic,  in  opposition  to  'them  unto  whom 
the  word  of  God  came.'  Men  on  whom  God's  word  has  conferred  a 
fragment  of  delegated  authority  may  be  called  'gods'  (Elohim)  without 
scruple  ;  He,  Whom  the  Father  Himself  sanctified  and  sent,  may  not  be 
called  Son  of  God  (no  article  before  'Son')  without  blasphemy!  By 
'sanctified  '  is  meant  something  analogous  to  the  consecration  of  Jere- 
miah before  his  birth  for  the  work  of  a  Prophet  (Jer.  i.  5).  When  the 
Son  was  sent  into  the  world  He  was  consecrated  for  the  work  of  the 
Messiah,  and  endowed  with  the  fulness  of  grace  and  truth  (see  on  i.  14), 
the  fulness  of  power  (iii.  35),  the  fulness  of  life  (v.  26).  In  virtue  of  this 
Divine  sanctification  He  becomes  'the  Holy  One  of  God'  (vi.  69  ;  Luke 
iv.  34).  See  on  xvii.  17,  19,  the  only  other  passages  in  S.  John's 
writings  where  the  word  occurs. 


224 


S.   JOHN,   X.  [w.  38,  39. 


38  of  my  Father,  believe  me  not.  But  if  I  do,  though  ye 
beheve  not  me,  beUeve  the  works :  that  ye  may  know,  and 
behave,  that  the  Father  is  in  me,  and  I  in  him. 

39 — 42.     Opposite  Results  of  the  Discourse. 

39  Therefore  they  sought  again  to  take  him  :   but  he  escaped 

37,  38.  Having  met  their  technical  charge  in  a  technical  manner  He 
now  proceeds  to  justify  the  assertion  of  His  unity  with  the  Father  by  an 
appeal  to  His  works. 

37.  believe  me  not]  A  literal  command.  If  His  works  are  not  those 
which  His  Father  works,  they  ought  not  (not  merely  have  no  need)  to 
believe  what  He  says.  Comp.  v.  24,  46;  vi.  30;  viii.  31,  45.  His 
works  are  His  Father's  (ix.  3,  xiv.  10). 

38.  bdieve  the  works]  '  Blessed  are  they  that  have  not  seen  and  yet 
have  believed'  (xx.  29);  but  it  is  better  to  have  the  faith  that  comes 
with  sight  than  none  at  all. 

that  ye  may  kno7v,  and  believe]  The  better  reading  probably  is,  that 
ye  may  come  to  know  and  continually  know ;  '  attain  to  knowledge 
and  advance  in  knowledge  in  contrast  to  your  state  of  suspense'  (z/.  24). 
In  the  Greek  it  is  the  aorist  and  present  of  the  same  verb  '  to  come  to 
know,  perceive,  recognise  :'  the  aorist  denotes  the  single  act,  the  pre- 
sent the  permanent  growth.  The  apparent  awkwardness  of  havmg  the 
same  verb  twice  in  the  same  clause  has  probably  caused  a  large  number 
of  authorities  to  substitute  another  verb  in  the  second  case.  But  the 
change  of  tense  is  full  of  meaning,  especially  in  reference  to  the  Jews. 
Many  of  them  attained  to  a  momentary  conviction  that  He  was  the 
Messiah  (ii.  23,  vi.  14,  15,  vii.  41,  viii.  30,  x.  42,  xi.  45) ;  very  few  of 
them  went  beyond  a  transitory  conviction  (ii.  24,  vi.  66,  viii.  31). 

the  Father  is  in  vie,  and  I  in  him]  For  'in  Him'  read  with  the 
best  authorities  in  tlie  Father.  An  instance  of  the  solemnity  and 
emphasis  derived  from  repetition,  so  frequent  in  this  Gospel. 

39—42.    Opposite  Results  of  the  Discourse. 

39.  Therefore  they  sought  again]  '  Therefore'  is  of  rather  doubtful 
authenticity;  some  important  witnesses  omit  'again'  also.  ^' Again' 
refers  us  back  to  vii.  30,  32,  44,  and  shews  that  'to  take  Him'  means, 
not,  take  Him  and  stone  Him  (v.  31),  but,  arrest  Ilim  for  the  San- 
hedrim 

he  escaped]  Literally,  went  forth.  There  being  notlung  in  the 
text  to  shew  that  His  departure  was  miraculous,  it  is  safest  (as  in  viii. 
59,  where  the  same  word  is  used  for  '  went  forth ')  to  suppose  that 
there  was  no  miracle.  He  withdrew  through  the  less  hostile  among 
those  who  encircled  Him,  while  the  others  were  making  up  their  minds 
how  to  apprehend  Him.  The  majesty  of  innocence  suffices  to  protect 
Him,  His  hour  not  having  come. 


vv.  40-42.]  S.   JOHN,  X.  225 

out  of  their  hand,  and  went  away  again  beyond  Jordan  into  40 
the  place  where  John  at  first  baptized;  and  there  he  abode. 
And  many  resorted  unto  him,  and  said,  John  did  no  miracle :  41 
but  all  thifigs  that  John  spake  of  this  man  were  true.     And  42 
many  believed  on  him  there. 

40 — 42.  "The  chapter  ends  with  a  note  of  place  which  is  evidently 
and  certainly  historical.  No  forger  would  ever  have  thought  of  the 
periphrasis  'where  John  at  first  baptized'... 'John  did  no  miracle: 
but  all  things  that  John  spake  of  this  man  were  true.'  It  would  be 
impossible  to  find  a  stronger  incidental  proof  that  the  author  of  the 
Gospel  had  been  originally  a  disciple  of  the  Baptist,  or  at  least  his 
contemporary,  and  also  that  he  is  writing  of  things  that  he  had  heard 
and  seen.  A  Gnostic,  writing  in  Asia  Minor,  even  though  he  had 
come  into  relation  with  disciples  of  John,  would  not  have  introduced 
the  Baptist  in  this  way.  In  circles  that  had  been  affected  by  the  Bap- 
tist's teaching,  and  were  hesitating  whether  they  should  attach  them- 
selves to  Jesus,  this  is  precisely  the  sort  of  comment  that  would  be 
heard."     S.  p.  179. 

40.  again  beyond  j^orc/an]  Referring  back  to  i.  28.  The  hostility 
of  the  hierarchy  being  invincible  and  becoming  more  and  more  dan- 
gerous Jesus  retires  into  Peraea  for  quiet  and  safety  before  His  Passion. 
This  interval  was  between  three  and  four  months,  from  the  latter  part 
of  December  to  the  middle  of  April.  But  some  portion  of  this  time 
was  spent  at  Ephraim  (xi.  54)  after  going  to  Bethany  in  Judaea  to 
raise  Lazarus.  Nothing  is  told  us  as  to  how  much  time  was  given  to 
Bethany  or  Bethabara  in  Peraea,  how  much  to  Ephraim. 

atfirst\    John  afterwards  baptized  at  Aenon  near  Salim  (iii.  23). 
baptized^  was  baptizing. 

41.  many  resorted  unto  hint]  There  is  no  reason  why  the  usual 
translation  'came'  should  be  changed  to  'resorted.'  The  testimony  of 
the  Baptist,  and  perhaps  the  miraculous  voice  at  Christ's  Baptism, 
were  still  remembered  there.  Since  then  there  had  been  the  mission 
of  the  Seventy  and  Christ's  own  work  in  Galilee. 

and  said]     Or,  kept  saying  or  used  to  say:  it  was  a  common  remark. 

yoAn  did  no  miracle]  Or  sign.  This  is  indirect  evidence  of  the 
genuineness  of  the  miracles  recorded  of  Christ.  It  is  urged  that  if 
Jesus  had  wrought  no  miracles,  they  would  very  possibly  have  been 
attributed  to  Him  after  His  death.  Let  us  grant  this;  and  at  the 
same  time  it  must  be  granted  that  the  same  holds  good  to  a  very  great 
extent  of  the  Baptist.  The  enthusiasm  which  he  awakened,  as  a  Pro- 
phet appearing  after  a  weary  interval  of  four  centuries,  was  immense. 
Miracles  would  have  been  eagerly  believed  of  him,  the  second  Elijah, 
and  would  be  likely  enough  to  be  attributed  to  him.  But  more  than 
half  a  century  after  his  death  we  have  one  of  his  own  disciples  quite 
incidentally  telling  us  that  'John  did  no  miracle';  and  there  is  no 
rival  tradition  to  the  contrary.  All  traditions  concur  in  attributing 
miracles  to  Jesus. 

42.  many  believed  on  him  there]     'There'  is  emphatic.     '  There,* 

s.  JOHN  15 


226  S.  JOHN,   XI. 


Chap.  XI.    Christ  is  Love  illustrated  by  a  Sign. 

in  contrast  to  Jerusalem  which  had  rejected  Him,  '  many  believed  on 
Him'.  Note  the  full  expression  '  believed  on'  (see  on  i.  12)  as  distmct 
from  merely  believing  His  statements  {vv.  37,  38). 

Chap.  XI.    Christ  is  Love  illustrated  by  a  Sign. 

Christ's  love  for  His  friends  brings  about  His  owrn  death.  Expressions 
of  affection  and  tenderness  abound  in  the  chapter;  comp.  vv.  3,  5,  11, 
15,  35,  36. 

We  have  now  reached  'the  culminating  point  of  the  miraculous 
activity  of  our  Lord',  and  at  the  same  time  the  'crucial  question'  of 
this  Gospel— the  Raising  of  Lazarus.  Various  objections  have  been 
urged  against  it,  and  through  it  against  the  Fourth  Gospel  as  a  whole. 
The  principal  objections  require  notice.  They  are  based  (i)  on  the 
extraordinary  character  of  the  miracle  itself;  (2)  on  the  silence  of  the 
Synoptists;  (3)  on  the  fact  that  in  spite  of  what  is  narrated  vv.  47—53- 
no  mention  is  made  of  the  miracle  in  the  accusation  and  condemnation 
of  Jesus. 

(i)  The  extraordinary  character  of  the  miracle  "has  been  exagge- 
rated by  looking  at  it  in  the  light  of  modern  ideas.  To  us  the  raising 
of  the  dead  stands  apart  from  other  miracles  in  a  class  by  itself  as 
peculiarly  unexampled  and  incredible.  But  it  was  not  so  regarded  at 
the  time  when  the  Gospel  was  written... In  the  Synoptists  the  answer 
that  Jesus  gives  to  the  disciples  of  John  groups  together  every  class  of 
miracle,  the  raising  of  the  dead  amongst  them,  without  distinction. 
Similar  narratives  in  the  Synoptists,  in  the  Acts,  and  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, are  given  without  any  special  relief  or  emphasis."     S.  p.  186. 

And  surely  this  ancient  view  is  both  more  reverent  and  more  philo- 
sophical than  the  modern  one.  Only  from  a  purely  human  standpoint 
can  one  miracle  be  regarded  as  more  wonderful,  i.e.  more  difficult  of 
performance,  than  another.  To  Omnipotence  all  miracles,  as  indeed 
all  works,  are  equal :  distinctions  of  difficult  and  easy  as  applied  to  the 
Almighty  are  meaningless. 

(2)  It  is  certainly  surprising  that  the  Synoptists  do  not  mention 
this  miracle,  all  the  more  so  because  S.  John  tells  us  that  it  was  the 
proximate  cause  of  Christ's  arrest  and  condemnation.  But  this  sur- 
prising circumstance  has  been  exaggerated.  It  seems  too  much  to  say 
that  "  it  must  always  remain  a  mystery  why  this  miracle,  transcending 
as  it  does  all  other  miracles  which  the  Lord  wrought,... should  have 
been  passed  over  by  the  three  earlier  Evangelists".  Two  considera- 
tions go  a  long  way  towards  explaining  the  mystery,  (i)  "We  are 
accustomed  to  regard  the  Synoptic  Gospels  as  three ;  but  in  the  out- 
line and  by  far  the  greater  part  of  their  narrative  they  are  virtually 
one.  The  groundwork  of  them  all  is  supplied  by  a  single  document, 
that  document  itself  a  compilation,  and  (as  there  is  ample  evidence  to 
show)  a  very  fragmentary  one:'  S.  p.  185.  That  a  fragmentary 
document  or  tradition  should  omit  important  facts  is  not  surprising: 
that  three  writers,  making  use  of  this  defective  evidence,  should  not 


V.  I.]  S.   JOHN,   XI.  227 

I — ^^.     The  Prelude  to  the  Sign. 
Now  a  certain  tnan  was  sick,  named  Lazarus,  of  Bethany,  11 

even  in  this  very  important  instance  supply  the  deficiency,  is  not  more 
than  surprising.  And  the  second  consideration  greatly  diminishes  our 
surprise,  (ii)  The  Synoptists,  until  they  reach  the  last  Passover, 
omit  almost  all  events  in  or  about  Jerusalem :  the  ministry  in  Galilee 
is  their  province.  Therefore  "we  cannot  be  surprised  that  they 
should  omit  an  event  which  is  placed  at  Bethany."  S.  p.  186.  The 
omission  of  this  raising  by  the  Synoptists  is  very  little  more  strange 
than  the  omission  of  the  other  raisings  by  John,  Each  side  keeps  to 
its  own  scheme  of  narration. 

To  explain  that  the  Synoptists  were  silent  in  order  not  to  draw 
attention,  and  perhaps  persecution  (xii.  10,  11),  on  Lazarus  and  his 
sisters,  whereas  when  S.  John  wrote  they  were  dead  (just  as  S.  [ohn 
alone  records  that  it  was  S.  Peter  who  cut  off  the  High  Priest's  servant's 
ear),  is  not  very  satisfactory.  There  is  no  evidence  that  Lazarus  and 
his  sisters  were  living  when  the  first  Gospel  was  written,  still  less 
when  S.  Luke  wrote.  And  if  they  were  alive,  were  the  chief  priests 
alive,  and  their  animosity  still  alive  also?  The  explanation  is  less 
easy  than  the  difficulty. 

(3)  This  last  objection  really  tells  in  favour  of  the  narrative.  The 
hierarchy  would  have  stood  self-condemned  if  they  had  made  His 
raising  the  dead  a  formal  charge  against  Christ.  The  disciples  had 
fled,  and  could  not  urge  the  miracle  in  His  favour;  and  Christ  Him- 
self would  not  break  the  majestic  silence  which  He  maintained  before 
His  accusers  to  mention  such  a  detail. 

There  are  those  who  assume  that  miracles  are  impossible,  and  that 
no  amount  of  evidence  can  render  a  miracle  credible.  This  miracle  is 
therefore  dismissed,  and  we  are  to  believe  either  (i)  Lazarus  was  only 
apparently  dead,  i.e.  that  Christ  was  an  impostor  and  S.  John  a  dupe  or 
an  accomplice;  or  that  (2)  the  parable  of  Lazarus  and  Dives  has  been 
transformed  into  a  miracle;  or  that  (3)  the  narrative  is  a  tiiyth,  or  (4)  an 
allegory,  (i)  and  (2)  only  need  to  be  stated :  of  {3)  and  (4)  we  may  say 
with  Meyer,  "No  narrative  of  the  N.T.  bears  so  completely  the  stamp 
of  being  the  very  opposite  of  a  later  invention....  And  what  an  incredible 
height  of  art  in  the  allegorical  construction  of  history  must  we  ascribe  to 
the  composer!"  Instead  of  an  historical  miracle  we  have  a  literary 
miracle  of  the  second  century.  Contrast  this  chapter  with  the  miracles 
of  the  Apocryphal  Gospels,  and  it  will  seem  impossible  that  both  can 
have  come  from  the  same  source.  To  tear  out  this  or  any  other  page 
from  S.  John,  and  retain  the  rest,  is  quite  inadmissible.  "The  Gospel 
is  like  that  sacred  coat  'without  seam  woven  from  the  top  throughout:' 
it  is  either  all  real  and  true  or  all  fictitious  and  illusory ;  and  the  latter 
alternative  is,  I  cannot  but  think,  more  difficult  to  accept  than  the 
miracle."     S.  p.  188. 

1 — 33.    The  Prelude  to  the  Sign, 
1.    Now  a  certain  man  was  sick]    Note  once  more   the  touching 

^5-2 


228  S.   JOHN,   XI.  [vv.  2,  3. 

3  the  town  of  Mary  and  her  sister  Martha.  (It  was  ///(?/  Mary 
which  anointed  the  Lord  with  ointment,  and  wiped  his  feet 

3  with  her  hair,  whose  brother  Lazarus  was  sick.)  Therefore 
his  sisters  sent  unto  him,  saying,  Lord,  behold,  he  whom 

simpl  icity  of  the  narrative.  '  Now '  should  perhaps  be  '  but, '  though  the 
Greek  particle  may  mean  either.  Here  it  introduces  a  contrast  to  what 
precedes.  Christ  went  into  Peraea  for  retirement,  but  the  sickness  of 
Lazarus  interrupted  it. 

named  Lazarus}  The  theory  that  this  narrative  is  a  parable  trans- 
formed into  a  miracle  possibly  represents  something  like  the  reverse  of 
the  fact.  The  parable  of  Dives  and  Lazarus  was  apparently  snoken 
about  this  time,  i.e.  between  the  Feast  of  Dedication  and  the  last  Pass- 
over, and  it  may  possibly  have  been  suggested  by  this  miracle.  In  no 
other  parable  does  Christ  introduce  a  proper  name.  Some  would 
identify  Lazarus  of  Bethany  with  the  rich  young  ruler  (Matt.  xix.  16; 
Mark  x.  '7;  Luke  xviii.  18),  and  also  with  the  young  man  clad  in  a 
linen  cloth  who  followed  Jesus  in  the  Garden  after  the  disciples  had  fled 
(Mark  xiv.  51;  see  note  there).  The  name  Lazarus  is  an  abbreviated 
Greek  form  of  Eleazar  = ' God  is  my  help.'  It  is  commonly  assumed 
without  much  evidence  that  he  was  younger  than  his  sisters :  S.  Luke's 
silence  about  him  (x.  38,  39)  agrees  well  with  this. 

Bethany\  A  small  village  on  the  S.E.  slope  of  the  Mount  of  Olives, 
about  two  miles  from  Jerusalem  (see  on  Matt.  xxi.  9). 

the  town  of  Mary\  Better,  of  the  village  of  Mary.  The  same  word 
is  used  of  Bethlehem  (vii.  42)  and  in  conjunction  with  'towns'  or  'cities' 
(Luke  xiii.  i^).  It  is  an  elastic  word;  but  its  general  meaning  is 
•village'  rather  than  anything  larger.  Mary  is  here  mentioned  first, 
although  apparently  the  younger  sister  (Luke  x.  28),  because  the 
incident  mentioned  in  the  next  verse  had  made  her  better  known.  They 
would  seem  to  have  been  people  of  position  from  the  village  being 
described  as  their  abode  (to  distinguish  it  from  the  other  Bethany  in 
Peraea,  to  wliich  Christ  had  just  gone).  The  guests  at  the  funeral  (t/z/. 
3t,  45),  the  feast,  the  family  burying-place  (z;.  38),  and  Mary's  costly 
offering  (xii.   2,  3),  point  in  the  same  direction. 

2.  //  was  that  Mary  which  anointed}  This  of  course  does  not 
necessarily  imply  that  the  anointing  had  already  taken  place,  as  those 
who  identify  Mary  with  the  'sinner'  of  Luke  vii.  37  would  insist:  it 
merely  implies  that  when  S.  John  wrote,  this  fact  was  well  known 
about  her,  as  Christ  had  promised  should  be  the  case  (Matt.  xxvi.  13). 
S.  John  tells  two  facts  omitted  in  the  earlier  Gospels;  (i)  that  the  vil- 
lage of  Martha  and  Mary  was  Bethany,  (2)  that  the  anointing  at 
Bethany  was  Mary's  act.  The  identification  of  Mary  of  Bethany  with 
the  prostitute  of  Luke  vii.  is  altogether  at  variance  with  what  S.  Luke 
and  S.  John  tell  us  of  her  character.  Nor  is  there  any  sufficient  reason 
for  identifying  either  of  them  with  Mary  Magdalene.  Mary  of  Bethany, 
Mary  of  Magdala,  and  the  'sinner'  of  Luke  vii.  are  three  distinct  persons. 
3.      Therefore  his  sisters  setit}    This  shews  that  v.  2  ought  not  to  be 


w. 


4—6.]  S.   JOHN,   XI.  229 


thou  lovest  is  sick.     When  Jesus  heard  that,  he  said,  This  4 
sickness  is  not  unto  death,  but  for  the  glory  of  God,  that 
the  Son   of  God  might  be  glorified  thereby.     Now  Jesus  5 
loved  Martha,  and  her  sister,  and  Lazarus.     When  he  had  6 


made  a  parenthesis:  'therefore'  refers  to  the  previous  statement.  Be- 
cause of  the  intimacy,  which  every  one  who  knew  of  the  anointing  would 
understand,  the  sisters  sent.  Note  that  they  are  not  further  described ; 
S.  John  has  said  enough  to  tell  his  readers  who  are  meant :  but  would 
not  a  forger  have  introduced  them  with  more  description? 

he  whom  thou  lovest  is  sick'\  Exquisite  in  its  tender  simplicity.  The 
message  implies  a  belief  that  Christ  could,  and  probably  would,  heal  a 
dangerous  sickness.     See  on  w.  5. 

4.  is  not  unto  death']  i.e.  is  not  to  have  death  as  its  final  result. 
Christ  foresaw  both  the  death  and  the  resurrection,  and  (as  so  often) 
uttered  words  which  His  disciples  did  not  understand  at  the  time,  but 
recognised  in  their  proper  meaning  after  what  He  indicated  had  taken 
place.     Comp.  ii.  22,  xii.  16,  xxi.  23. 

might  be  glorified]  In  two  ways;  because  the  miracle  (i)  would  lead 
many  to  believe  that  He  was  the  Messiah;  (2)  would  bring  about  His 
death.  'Being  glorified'  is  a  frequent  expression  in  this  Gospel  for 
Christ's  Death  regarded  as  the  mode  of  His  return  to  glory  (vii.  39,  xii. 
16,  23,  xiii.  31,  32);  and  this  glorification  of  the  Son  involves  the  glory 
of  the  Father  (v.  23,  x.  30,  38).  Comp.  ix.  3;  in  the  Divine  counsels 
the  purpose  of  the  man's  blindness  and  of  Lazarus'  sickness  is  the  glory 
of  God. 

We  ought  perhaps  to  connect  the  special  meaning  of  'glorified'  with 
the  first  clause:  'This  sickness  is  to  have  for  its  final  issue,  not  the 
temporal  death  of  an  individual,  but  the  eternal  life  of  all  mankind.' 

It  is  worth  noting  that  both  the  first  and  the  last  of  the  seven  miracles 
of  the  ministry  recorded  by  S.  John  are  declared  to  be  manifestations 
of  glory  (ii.  11,  xi.  4,  40)  and  confirmations  of  faith  (ii.  11,  xi.  15). 

thereby]  Both  in  the  English  and  in  the  Greek  this  is  ambiguous :  it 
may  refer  either  to  the  sickness  or  the  glory.     The  former  is  correct. 

5.  Now  Jestis  loved  Martha]  The  English  Version  loses  much  here, 
and  still  more  in  xxi.  15 — 17,  by  using  the  same  word  'love' to  translate 
two  different  Greek  words :  nor  can  the  loss  be  remedied  satisfactorily. 
The  word  used  in  v.  3,  philein  (Lat.  a?nare),  denotes  a  passionate,  emo- 
tional warmth,  which  loves  and  cares  not  to  ask  why ;  the  affection  of 
lovers,  parents,  and  the  like.  The  word  used  here  agapdn,  (Lat. 
diligei-e),  denotes  a  calm,  discriminating  attachment,  which  loves  because 
of  the  excellence  of  the  loved  object ;  the  affection  of  friends.  Philein 
is  the  stronger,  but  less  reasoning;  agapdn  the  more  earnest,  but  less 
intense.  The  sisters  naturally  use  the  more  emotional  word,  describing 
their  own  feeling  towards  their  brother ;  the  Evangelist  equally  naturally 
uses  the  loftier  and  less  impulsive  word.  The  fact  that  the  sisters  are 
here  included  is  not  the  reason  for  the  change  of  expression. 

Martha,  and  her  sister,  and  Lazarus]    The  names  are  probably  in 


230  S.   JOHN,   XI.  [w.  7— lo. 

heard  therefore  that  he  was  sick,  he  abode  two  days  still 

7  in  the  same  place  where  he  was.     Then  after  that  saith  he 

8  to  his  disciples,  Let  us  go  into  Judea  again.  His  disciples 
say  unto  him,  Master,  the  Jews  of  late  sought  to  stone  thee; 

9  and  goest  thou  thither  again?  Jesus  answered.  Are  there 
not  twelve  hours  in  the  day?  If  any  mati  walk  in  the  day,  he 
stumbleth    not,   because   he   seeth  the  light  of  this  world. 

10  But  if  a  man  walk  in  the  night,  he  stumbleth,  because  there 

order  of  age.     This  and  v.  19  confirm  what  is  almost  certain  from  Luke 
X.  38,  that  Martha  is  the  elder  sister. 

6.  When  he  had  heard  iher(fore\  Omit  'had.'  The  connexion  is  a 
little  difficult.  'Therefore'  after  the  statement  in  v.  5  prepares  us  for 
'He  set  out  immediately,'  but  instead  of  that  we  have  the  reverse. 
'Therefore,'  however,  really  leads  on  to  v.  7,  and  consequently  there 
should  be  only  a  semicolon  at  the  end  of  z/.  6.  When,  therefore,  He 
heard  that  he  is  sick,  then  indeed  lie  abode  two  days  in  the  place 
'iuhere  He  was ;  then  after  this  lie  saith,  &c.  The  question  why 
Christ  remained  the  two  days  is  futile :  such  was  the  Divine  Will  with 
regard  to  the  mode  of  working  this  miracle  and  to  His  Messianic  work 
generally.  His  life  was  a  perfect  fulfilment  of  the  Preacher's  rule;  'To 
everything  there  is  a  season,  and  a  time  to  every  purpose  under  heaven' 
(Eccl.  iii.  1  ;  comp.  v.  9,  ii.  4).  There  was  a  Divine  plan,  in  conformity 
with  which  He  worked. 

7.  Let  tts  go  into  yudea  again]  The  again  refers  us  back  to  x.  40. 
His  using  the  general  term,  Judoea,  instead  of  Bethany  leads  to  the 
disciples'  reply.  Judaea  was  associated  with  hostility,  Bethany  with 
love  and  friendship. 

8.  Master,  the  Jews  of  late  sought  to  stone  thee]  Better,  Rabbi  (see  on 
iv.  3 1 )  just  now  the  Jrws  were  seeking  to  stone  Thee  (x.  31)  and  art 
Thou  going  thither  again  ?     '  Again '  is  emphatic. 

9.  Are  there  not  twelve  hours  in  the  day]  As  so  often,  Christ  gives 
no  direct  answer  to  the  question  asked,  but  a  general  principle,  involv- 
ing the  answer  to  the  question.  Comp.  ii.  6,  19,  iii.  5,  10,  iv.  13,  i\, 
vi.  S"!,  5.^,  viii.  7,  25,  54,  X.  25.  The  meaning  seems  lo  be,  'Are  there 
not  twelve  working-hours  in  which  a  man  may  labour  without  fear  of 
stumbling?  I  have  not  yet  reached  the  end  of  My  working-day,  and  so 
can  safely  continue  the  work  I  came  to  do.  The  night  cometh,  when  1 
can  no  longer  work  ;  but  it  has  not  yet  come.'  Comp.  ix.  4.  Thus  it 
is  practically  equivalent  to  '  Mine  hour  is  not  yet  come ;'  it  is  still  safe 
for  Him  to  work  :  but  the  figure  here  adopted  is  of  wider  application, 
and  contains  a  moral  for  the  disciples  and  all  Christians  as  well  as  an 
application  to  Christ.  The  expression  throws  no  light  on  S.  John's 
method  of  reckoning  time.     See  on  xix.  14. 

the  light  of  this  ruorld]     The  sun. 

10.  he  stumbleth]  Christ's  night  came  when  His  hour  came  (xvii.  i). 
Then  the  powers  of  darkness  prevailed  (Luke  xxii.  53)  and  His  enemies 


vv.  II— 13.]  S.   JOHN,   XI.  231 

is  no  light  in  him.     These  thirigs  said  he :  and  after  that  he  n 
saith  unto  them,  Our  friend  Lazarus  sleepeth;  but  I  go,  that 
I  may  awake  him  out  of  sleep.     Then  said  his  disciples,  12 
Lord,  if  he  sleep,  he  shall  do  well.     Howbeit  Jesus  spake  of  13 

became  a  stumblingblock  in  His  path,  bringing  His  work  to  a  close 
(xix.  30).  The  word  for  'stumble'  means  literally  to  'knock  the  foot 
against    something. 

there  is  no  light  ift  him]  Rather,  the  light  is  not  in  him.  This  shews 
that  the  meaning  has  slid  from  the  literal  to  the  figurative.  '  The  light ' 
in  V.  9  is  the  physical  light  in  the  heavens  ;  here  it  is  the  spiritual  light 
in  the  heart. 

11.  and  after  that]  and  after  this.  These  words  indicate  a  pause 
in  the  narrative. 

Our  friend  Lazarus  sleepeth]  Better,  Lazarus  our  friend  is  fallen 
asleep,  or,  is  gone  to  rest.  Sleep  as  an  image  of  death  is  common  from 
the  dawn  of  literature  ;  but  the  Gospel  has  raised  the  expression  from  a 
figure  to  a  fact.  Comp.  Matt,  xxvii.  52;  Acts  vii.  50,  xiii.  36;  r  Cor. 
vii.  39,  xi.  30,  XV.  6,  18;  I  Thess.  iv.  13;  2  Pet.  iii.  4.  The  thoroughly 
Christian  term  'cemetery'  (=  sleeping-place)  in  the  sense  of  a  place  of 
repoSe  for  the  dead  comes  from  the  same  Greek  root.  The  exact  time 
of  Lazarus'  death  cannot  be  determined,  for  we  do  not  know  how  long 
Christ  took  in  reaching  Bethany.  Christ  calls  him  ^ our  friend,'  as 
claiming  the  sympathy  of  the  disciples,  who  had  shewn  unwillingness 
to  return  to  Judaea. 

that  I  may  awake  him]  This  shews  that  no  messenger  has  come  to 
announce  the  death.  Christ  sees  the  death  as  He  foresees  the  resurrec- 
tion :  comp.  V.  4. 

12.  Then  said  his  disciples]  Better,  Therefore  said  the  disciples  to 
Him.     They  catch  at  any  chance  of  escape  from  the  dreaded  journey. 

if  he  sleep,  he  shall  do  well]  Better,  if  he  be  fallen  asleep,  he  shall  be 
saved,  will  be  cured.  Probably  they  thought  that  Christ  meant  to  go 
and  cure  Lazarus  {v.  37,  comp.  ix.  3) ;  and  here  they  infer  from  his 
sleeping  that  he  will  recover  without  Christ's  aid  :  consequently  Christ 
need  not  go.  They  are  too  full  of  anxiety  to  notice  Christ's  significant 
words  'I  go,  that  I  may  awake  him,'  whereas  the  rendering  in  our  Bible 
reads  like  an  expostulation  against  waking  him,  as  if  it  meant  '  a  sick 
man  should  not  be  disturbed.'  For  other  instances  in  which  the  disci- 
ples grossly  misunderstand  Christ,  see  iv.  33,  xiv.  5,  8,  22;  Matt.  xvi.  7; 
and  comp.  iii.  4,  9,  iv.  11,  15,  vi.  34,  52,  vii.  35,  viii.  22,  33,  52.  This 
candour  in  declaring  their  own  failings  adds  to  our  confidence  in  the 
veracity  of  the  Evangelists.  It  is  urged  that  the  misunderstanding  here 
is  too  gross  to  be  probable:  but  they  had  not  unnaturally  understood 
Christ  Himself  to  have  declared  that  Lazarus  would  not  die  (v.  4) ;  this 
being  so,  they  could  not  easily  suppose  that  by  sleep  He  meant  death. 
Moreover,  when  men's  minds  are  on  the  stretch  the  strangest  misappre- 
hensions become  possible. 

13.  Howbeit  Jesus  spake]    Or,  Now  Jesus  had  spoken. 


232  S.   JOHN,  XI.  [vv.  14—16. 

his  death :  but  they  thought  that  he  had  spoken  of  taking  of 
M  rest  in  sleep.     Then  said  Jesus  unto  them  plainly,  Lazarus 

15  is  dead.     And    I   am  glad  for  your  sakes  that  I  was  not 
there,  to  the  intent  ye  may  believe;  nevertheless  let  us  go 

16  unto  him.     Then  said  Thomas,  which  is  called  Didymus, 

had  spoken"]  spake. 

taking  of  rest  in  sleep]  The  word  here  translated  '  taking  of  rest ' 
corresponds  to  '  sleepeth '  or  '  is  gone  to  rest '  in  z/.  11,  and  '  to  sleep '  in 
J/,  1 2.  The  word  translated  '  awake  him  out  of  sleep  '  in  z/.  1 1  is  a  com- 
pound of  the  word  here  rendered,  '  sleep. ' 

14.  Then  said  Jesus]  'Then 'here,  as  in  Rom.  vi.  ^i,  is  made  to 
cover  two  Greek  words,  '  then  '  of  time,  and  '  then '  of  consequence : 
translate,  Then  therefore  said  Jesus. 

plainly]     Without  metaphor  :  see  on  vii,  4  and  x.  24. 

16.  I  am  glad]  Christ  rejoices,  not  at  his  friend's  death,  but  at  His 
own  absence  from  the  scene,  for  the  disciples'  sake.  Had  He  been 
there,  Lazarus  would  not  have  died,  and  the  disciples  would  have  lost 
this  great  sign  of  His  Messiahship. 

to  the  intent  ye  may  believe]  S.  John's  favourite  construction,  indicat- 
ing the  Divine  purpose  :  see  on  ix.  2,  3.  Would  any  forger  have  written 
this?  Would  it  not  seem  utterly  improbable  that  at  the  close  of  His 
ministry  Christ  should  still  be  working  in  order  that  Apostles  might  be- 
lieve? Yet  S.  John,  who  heard  the  words,  records  them,  and  he  knew 
from  sad  experience  (Mark  xiv.  50,  xvi.  11  ;  Luke  xxiv.  11,  21)  that  this 
work  was  not  superfluous.  Just  before  the  trial  of  faith  which  His 
Passion  and  Death  would  bring  to  them.  His  disciples  had  need  of  all  the 
help  and  strength  that  He  could  give.     See  on  ii.  11. 

nevertheless  let  us  go]     He  breaks  off  suddenly. 

16.      Then  said]     Tlierefore  said. 

Thomas,  xvhich  is  calUd  Didyfuus]  S.  John  thrice  (xx.  24,  xxi.  2) 
reminds  his  readers  that  Thomas  is  the  same  as  he  whom  Gentile 
Christians  called  Didymus.  Thomas  is  Hebrew,  Didymus  is  Greek,  for 
a  twin.  Li  all  probability  he  was  a  twin,  possibly  of  S.  Matthew,  with 
whom  he  is  coupled  in  all  three  lists  of  the  Ajiostles  in  the  Gospels  :  in 
the  Acts  he  is  coupled  with  S.  Piiilip.  That  S.  Thomas  received  his  name 
from  Christ  (as  Simon  was  called  I'eter,  and  the  sons  of  Zebedee  Boa- 
nerges) in  consequence  of  his  character,  is  pure  conjecture.  But  the 
coincidence  between  the  name  and  his  twin-mindedness  (James  i.  8, 
iv.  8)  is  remarkable.  "  In  him  the  twins,  unbelief  and  faith,  were  con- 
tending with  one  another  for  mastery,  as  Esau  and  Jacob  in  Rebecca's 
womb  '  (Trench).  It  is  from  S.  John  that  we  know  his  character  :  in 
the  Synoptists  and  the  Acts  he  is  a  mere  name  (see  on  i.  41).  He  seems 
to  have  combined  devotion  to  Christ  with  a  tendency  to  see  the  dark 
side  of  everything.  S.  John's  care  in  distinguishing  him  by  his  Gentile 
name  adds  point  to  the  argument  derived  from  his  never  distinguishing 
John  as  the  Baptist  (see  on  i.  6). 


vv.  17,  18.1  S.  JOHN,  XI.  233 

unto  his  fellow-disciples,  Let  us  also  go,  that  we  may  die 
with  him. 

Then  when  Jesus  came,  he  found  that  he  had  lien  in  the  17 
grave   four   days   already.     Now   Bethany  was   nigh   unto  18 

fellow-disciples']  The  word  occurs  here  only.  It  has  been  remarked  that 
S.  Thomas  would  scarcely  have  taken  the  lead  in  this  way  had  S.  Peter 
been  present,  and  that  had  S.  Peter  been  there  he  would  probably  have 
appeared  in  the  previous  dialogue.  If  he  was  absent,  we  have  an 
additional  reason  for  the  absence  of  this  miracle  from  S.  Mark's  Gospel, 
the  Gospel  of  S.  Peter,  and  undoubtedly  the  representative  of  the  oldest 
form  of  the  Synoptic  narrative. 

die  with  him]  Of  course  with  Christ  {v.  8).  It  is  strange  that  any 
should  understand  it  of  Lazarus.  They  could  not  die  with  him,  for  he 
was  dead  already,  and  S.  Thomas  knew  this  {v.  14). 

17.  Then  when  Jesus  came]  Better,  Wheyt  therefore  Jesus  came, 
not  to  the  house,  nor  to  Bethany,  but  to  the  vicinity  (vv.  20,  30).  In 
V.  16  also  'then'  should  be  therefore,  S.John's  favourite  particle  to 
express  a  sequence  in  fact. 

he  found]  i.e.  on  enquiry.  It  would  seem  as  if  Christ's  miraculous 
power  of  knowing  without  the  ordinary  means  of  information  was  not  in 
constant  activity,  but  like  His  other  miraculous  powers  was  employed 
only  on  fitting  occasions.  It  was  necessary  to  His  work  that  He  should 
know  of  Lazarus'  death;  it  was  not  necessary  that  He  should  know  how 
long  he  had  been  buried,  nor  where  he  had  been  buried  (v.  34).  Comp. 
i.  48,  iv.  r8.  Similarly,  Peter's  prison-gate  opens  'of  its  own  accord;' 
Mary's  house-door  does  not  (Acts  xii.  10 — 16). 

in  the  grave]  Or,  in  the  sepulchre.  Our  translators  use  three  dif- 
ferent English  words  for  the  same  Greek  word  ;  '  grave  '  in  this  chapter, 
v.  28;  Matt,  xxvii.  52,  &c. ;  'tomb'  Matt.  viii.  28;  Mark  v.  2,  vi.  29, 
&c. ;  'sepulchre'  of  Christ's  resting-place.  'Sepulchre'  would  be  best 
in  all  cases.  Another  Greek  word  for  'tomb  '  used  by  S.  Matthew  only 
is  rendered ' tomb '  xxiii.  29,  and  'sepulchre'  xxiii.  27,  xxvii.  61,  64,  66, 
xxviii.  I. 

four  days]  No  doubt  he  had  been  buried  the  day  he  died,  as  is 
usual  in  hot  climates  where  decomposition  is  rapid  ;  moreover,  he  had 
died  of  a  malignant  disease,  probably  a  fever.  Jehu  ordered  Jezebel  to 
be  buried  a  few  hours  after  death  (2  Kings  ix.  34) ;  Ananias  and  Sapphira 
were  buried  at  once  (Acts  v.  6,  to).  If  Christ  started  just  after  Lazarus 
died,  as  seems  probable,  the  journey  had  occupied  four  days.  This  fits 
in  well  with  the  conclusion  that  Bethabara  or  Bethany  was  in  the  north 
of  Palestine,  pos.sibly  a  little  south  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee  ;  near  Galilee  it 
must  have  been  (comp.  i.  28,  29,  43).  But  on  the  other  hand  Lazarus 
may  have  died  soon  after  Christ  heard  of  his  illness  ;  in  which  case  the 
journey  occupied  barely  two  days. 

18.  Now  Bethany  was  nigh  unto  Jerusalem]  The  '  was '  need  not 
imply  that  when  S.  John  wrote  Bethany  had  been  destroyed,  but  this  is 
the  more  probable  meaning ;  especially  as  no  other  Evangelist  speaks  of 


234  S.   JOHN,   XI.  [vv.  19,  20. 

19  Jerusalem,  about  fifteen  furlongs  off:  and  many  of  the  Jews 
came  to    Martha  and  Mary,  to  comfort   them   concerning 

20  their   brother.     Then    Martha,    as  soon  as  she  heard  that 
Jesus  was  coming,  went  and  met  hira:  but  Mary  sat  still 

places  in  the  past  tense,  and  S.  John  does  not  always  do  so.  The  infer- 
ence is  that  he  wrote  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ;  and  that  what 
was  destroyed  in  the  siege  he  speaks  of  in  the  past  tense ;  e.g.  Bethany 
(here),  the  garden  of  Gethsemane  (xviii.  i),  Joseph's  garden  (xix.  41) 
what  was  not  destroyed,  in  the  present  tense ;  e.g.  Bethesda  (v.  2,  where 
see  note). 

about  ffteefi  furlo7tgs\  Literally,  about  fifteen  stades.  A  Greek  stade 
is  18  yards  less  than  an  English  furlong;  but  the  translation  is  suffi- 
ciently accurate,  like  'firkin'  (ii.  6).  This  distance,  therefore,  was  under 
two  miles,  and  is  mentioned  to  account  for  the  many  Jews  who  came  to 
condole  with  the  sisters. 

19.  many  of  the  Jews  came  to  Martha  and  Mary]  Better,  many 
from  among'  the  Jews  had  come,  &c.  The  received  text  with  some 
good  authorities  has  'had  come  to  Martha  and  Mary  and  their  friends,' 
but  this  is  not  the  best-attested  reading.  'The  Jews'  here,  as  usual, 
means  Christ's  opponents ;  they  would  come  mostly,  if  not  entirely,  from 
Jerusalem. 

to  comfort  them]  It  was  part  of  the  Jewish  ceremonial  of  mourning 
that  many  (ten  at  least)  should  come  and  condole.  Gen.  xxvii.  35 ; 
comp.  2  Sam.  xii.  17;  Job  ii.  11.  It  is  said  that  the  usual  period  of 
mourning  was  thirty  days;  three  of  weeping,  seven  of  lamentation, 
twenty  of  sorrow.  But  the  instances  in  Scripture  vary  :  Jacob,  seventy 
days  with  an  additional  seven  (Gen.  1.  3,  10) ;  Aaron  and  Moses,  thirty 
days  (Numb.  xx.  29;  Deut.  xxxiv.  8);  Saul  and  Judith,  seven  days 
(i  Sam.  xxviii.  13;  Jud.  xvi.  24;  comp.  Ecclus.  xxii.  12;  2  Esdr.  v.  20). 
Josephus  tells  us  that  Archelaus  mourned  for  his  father  seven  days,  and 
the  Jews  for  himself,  thirty  days  (B.J.  li.  i.  i ;  III.  ix.  5).  The  Mishna 
prescribes  seven  days  for  near  relations. 

20.  7'hen  Martha]  Or,  Martha,  therefore.  Information  would  be 
brought  to  her  as  the  elder  sister  and  (apparently)  mistress  of  the  house 
(Luke  X.  38).  She  as  usual  takes  the  lead  in  entertaining,  and  Mary 
shrinks  from  it.  "One  most  remarkable  feature  in  the  history  is  the 
coincidence  between  the  characters  of  Mary  and  Martha  as  depicted  here 
and  in  S.  Luke."  S.  p.  185.  It  is  incredible  that  this  coincidence 
should  be  either  fortuitous  or  designed.  It  is  much  easier  to  believe 
that  both  Gospels  give  us  facts  about  real  persons.  Christ  is  unwilling 
to  mingle  at  once  in  the  crowd  of  mourners,  and  halts  outside  the 
village. 

Jesus  was  coming]  Rather,  Jesus  is  coming,  probably  the  very  words 
of  the  message.  Perhaps  they  were  still  on  the  look-out  for  His 
arrival,  although  they  supposed  that  it  was  too  late  for  His  coming 
to  avail  anything. 

Mary  sat  still  in  the  house]     Or,  was  sitting  in  the  house:  the  atti- 


w.  21— 25.]  S.  JOHN,  XI.  235 

in  the  house.  Then  said  Martha  unto  Jesus,  Lord,  if  thou  « 
hadst  been  here,  my  brother  had  not  died.  But  I  know,  32 
that  even  now,  whatsoever  thou  wilt  ask  of  God,  God  will 
give  //  thee.  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  Thy  brother  shall  rise  23 
again.  Martha  saith  unto  him,  I  know  that  he  shall  rise  24 
again  in  the  resurrection  at  the  last  day.     Jesus  said  unto  25 

tude  of  sorrow  and  meditation  (Job  ii.  13).  She  do6s  not  know  of 
Christ's  approach  {vv.  28,  29) :  Martha,  in  discharging  the  duties  of 
hospitality  to  fresh  arrivals,  would  be  more  likely  to  hear  of  it. 

21.  if  thou  hadst  been  here]  Not  a  reproach,  however  gentle  (she 
does  not  say  'hadst  Thou  come'),  but  an  expression  of  deep  regret.  This 
thought  had  naturally  been  often  in  the  sisters'  minds  during  the  last  four 
days  (comp.  v.  32).  They  believe  that  Christ  could  and  would  have 
healed  Lazarus :  their  faith  and  hope  are  not  yet  equal  to  anticipating 
His  raising  him  from  the  dead.  The  gradual  progress  of  Martha's  faith 
is  very  true  to  life,  and  reminds  us  of  similar  development  in  the  woman 
of  Samaria  (iv.  19)  and  the  man  born  blind  (ix.  11),  though  she  starts 
at  a  more  advanced  stage  than  they  do.  If  all  these  three  narratives 
are  late  fictions,  we  have  three  masterpieces  of  psychological  study,  as 
miraculous  in  the  literature  of  the  second  century  as  would  be  a  Gothic 
cathedral  in  the  architecture  of  that  age.  For  the  construction  comp. 
iv.  10,  xiv.  28. 

22.  But  I  know,  that  even  now\  '  But '  must  be  omitted  on  critical 
grounds;  and  the  text  should  run,  and  now  (that  he  is  dead)  /  know 
that,  &c.  She  believes  that  had  Christ  been  there,  He  could  have 
healed  Lazarus  by  His  owti  power  (comp.  iv.  47),  and  that  now  His 
prayer  may  prevail  with  God  to  raise  him  from  the  dead.  She  has  yet 
to  learn  that  Christ's  bodily  presence  is  not  necessary,  and  that  He  can 
raise  the  dead  by  His  own  power.  He  gradually  leads  her  faith  on- 
wards to  higher  truth. 

luhatsoever  thou  wilt  ask]  She  uses  a  word  more  appropriate  to  human 
prayer,  'to  2^\i  for  oneself  (comp.  xiv.  13,  14,  xv.  7,  16,  xvi.  23,  26), 
not  used  by  Christ  of  His  own  prayers  or  by  the  Evangelists  of  Christ's 
prayers  (contrast  xiv.  16,  xvi.  26,  xvii.  9,  15,  20;  Matt.  xxvi.  36,  39, 
42,  44;  Luke  xxii.  32).  She  thus  incidentally  shews  her  imperfect  idea 
of  His  relation  to  God. 

23.  shall  rise  again]  He  uses  an  ambiguous  expression  as  an  exer- 
cise of  her  faith.  Some  think  that  these  words  contain  no  allusion  to 
the  immediate  restoration  of  Lazarus,  and  that  Martha  {v.  24)  under- 
stands them  rightly.  More  probably  Christ  includes  the  immediate 
restoration  of  Lazarus,  but  she  does  not  venture  to  do  so,  and  rejects  the 
allusion  to  the  final  Resurrection  as  poor  consolation. 

24.  /  know  that  he  shall  rise  again]  This  conviction  was  probably 
in  advance  of  average  Jewish  belief  on  the  subject.  The  O.T.  declara- 
tions as  to  a  resurrection  are  so  scanty  and  obscure,  that  the  Sadducees 
could  deny  the  doctrine,  and  the  Pharisees  had  to  resort  to  oral  tradition 
to  maintain  it  (see  on  Mark  xii.  18;  Acts  xxiii.  8), 


236  S.    JOHN,  XI.  [w.  26—30. 

her,  I  am  the  resurrection,  and  the  life:  he  that  beUeveth  in 

26  me,  though  he  were  dead,  yet  shall  he  live :  and  whosoever 
liveth  and  believeth  in  me  shall  never  die.     Believest  thou 

27  this?  She  saith  unto  him,  Yea,  Lord:  I  believe  that  thou  art 
the  Christ,    the  Son  of  God,  which  should  come  into  the 

23  world.     And  when  she  had  so  said,  she  went  her  way,  and 

called  Mary  her  sister  secretly,  saying.  The  Master  is  come, 

.9  and  calleth  for  thee.     As  soon  as  she  heard  that,  she  arose 

30  quickly,  and  came  unto  him.     Now  Jesus  was  not  yet  come 

the  last  (fay]     See  on  vi.  39. 

25.  /am  the  resurrection,  and  the  life']  He  draws  her  from  her  self- 
ish grief  to  Himself  There  is  no  need  for  Him  to  pray  as  man  to  God 
{v.  22);  He  (and  none  else)  is  the  Resurrection  and  the  Life.  There  is 
no  need  to  look  forward  to  the  last  day;  He  is  (not  'will  be')  the 
Resurrection  and  the  Life.  Comp.  xiv.  6;  Col.  iii.  4.  In  what 
follows,  the  first  part  shews  how  He  is  the  Resurrection,  the  second 
how  He  is  the  Life.  '  He  that  believeth  in  Me,  even  if  he  shall  have 
died  (physically),  shall  live  (eternally).  And  every  one  that  liveth 
(physically)  and  believeth  in  Me,  shall  never  die  (eternally).' 

26.  shall  never  die]  See  on  viii.  51;  the  form  of  expression  is  the 
same;  'shall  assuredly  never  die.' 

Believest  thou  this?]  A  searching  question,  suddenly  put.  She 
answers  with  confidence,  and  gives  the  ground  of  her  confidence. 

27.  /  believe]  Literally,  I  have  believed,  i.  e.  /  have  convinced  my- 
self and  do  believe. 

that  thou  art  the  Christ]  She  cannot  have  known  the  full  import  of 
her  confession.  With  the  Apostles  she  shared  her  countrymen's  im- 
perfect views  of  the  character  and  office  of  the  Messiah.     See  on  ix. 

38- 

which  should  come]  Literally,  that  cometli.  Comp.  vi.  14;  Matt. 
xi.  3;  Luke  vii.  19;  Deut.  xviii.  15.  She  believes  that  He  has  the 
powers  mentioned  in  w.  25, 16,  because  He  is  the  Messiah.  How  these 
powers  will  affect  her  own  case  she  does  not  know,  but  with  a  vague 
hope  of  comfort  in  store  for  them  all  she  returns  to  the  house.  See  on 
i.  9  and  xviii.  37. 

28.  secretly]  Because  she  knew  that  some  of  Christ's  enemies  were 
among  the  guests  {v7!.  19,  31).  'Secretly'  belongs  to  'saying,'  not  to 
'called.' 

The  Master  is  come]  Or,  The  Teacher  is  come.  It  is  not  the  Hebrew 
word  'Rabbi'  that  is  here  used,  as  in  i.  50,  iii.  1,  i(\  iv.  31,  vi.  25,  ix. 
2  ;  but  the  Greek  word  given  in  i.  39  as  the  translation  of  'Rabbi,'  and 
in  XX.  16  as  the  translation  of  'Rabboni,'  and  used  by  Christ  (iii.  10)  of 
Nicodemus.  Comp.  xiii.  13,  14;  Mark  xiv.  14.  Martha  avoids  using 
His  name  for  fear  of  being  overheard. 

29.  she  arose  quickly]  As  was  natural  in  one  so  fond  of  sitting  at 
Jesus'  feet. 


vv.  3I--33]  S.   JOHN,   XI.  237 

into  the  town,  but  was  in  that  place  where  Martha  met  him. 
The  Jews  then  which  were  with  her  in  the  house,  and  31 
comforted  her,  when  they  saw  Mary,  that  she  rose  up  hastily 
and  went  out,  followed  her,  saying,  She  goeth  unto  the 
grave  to  weep  there.  Then  when  Mary  was  come  where  32 
Jesus  was,  and  saw  him,  she  fell  down  at  his  feet,  saying 
unto  him,  Lord,  if  thou  hadst  been  here,  my  brother  had  not 
died. 

33—44-     The  Sigti. 
When  Jesus   therefore   saw  her  weeping,  and  the  Jews  33 
also  weeping  which  came  with  her,  he  groaned  in  the  spirit, 

30.  into  the  toziin\  Or,  into  the  village;  see  on  7/.  i.  By  remaining 
outside  He  would  be  able  to  say  what  He  wished  to  say  to  the  sisters 
without  fear  of  interruption. 

was  in  that  placed  was  Still  in  that  place. 

31.  followed  her,  sayiiti^^  For  'saying'  read  with  the  best  authori- 
ties, thinking.  Their  following  interferes  with  the  privacy  at  which 
Martha  had  aimed. 

to  7veep  there]  The  word  rendered  'weep'  here  and  in  v.  33,  as  dis- 
tinct from  the  one  used  in  v.  35,  indicates  a  loud  expression  of  grief; 
wailing  and  crying,  not  merely  shedding  of  tears. 

32.  Then  when  Mary\     Mary  therefore  when. 

she  fell  down  at  his  feet'\  Nothing  of  the  kind  is  reported  of  Martha, 
w.  21.  Here  again  the  difference  of  character  between  the  two  sisters 
appears. 

Lord,  if  thou  hadst  been  here]  The  same  words  as  those  of  Martha, 
V.  11.  No  doubt  the  sisters  had  expressed  this  thought  to  one  another 
often  in  the  last  few  days.  Mary's  emotion  is  too  strong  for  her;  she 
can  say  no  more  than  this;  contrast  v.  22.  The  Jews  coming  up  pre- 
vent further  conversation.     For  the  construction  comp.  iv.  10,  xiv.  28. 

33—44.     The  Sign. 

33.  weeping. .  .weeping]  The  repetition  is  for  emphasis,  and  to  point 
a  contrast  which  is  the  key  to  the  passage. 

he  groaned  in  the  spirit]  Better,  He  was  angered  in  the  spirit. 
The  word  translated  'groaned'  occurs  five  times  in  N.T. ;  here,  v.  38; 
Matt.  ix.  30;  Mark  i.  43,  xiv.  5  (see  notes  in  each  place).  In  all 
cases,  as  in  classical  Greek  and  in  the  LXX.,  it  expresses  not  sorrow 
but  indignation  or  severity.  It  means  (i)  literally,  of  animals,  'to  snort, 
growl;'  then  metaphorically  (2)  'to  be  very  angry  or  indignant;'  (3)  'to 
command  sternly,  under  threat  of  displeasure.'  What  was  He  angered 
at?  Some  translate  ^  at  His  spirit,'  and  explain  (a)  that  He  was  in- 
dignant at  the  human  emotion  which  overcame  Him :  which  is  out  of 
harmony  with  all  that  we  know  about  the  human  nature  of  Christ. 
Others,  retaining  '?«  His  spirit,'  explain  (/3)  that  He  was  indignant  'at 


238  S.   JOHN,   XI.  [vv.  34-37. 

34  and  was  troubled,  and  said.  Where  have  ye  laid  him?  They 

II  say   unto   him.   Lord,  come  and  see.     Jesus  wept.     Then 

37  said  the  Jews,  Behold,  how  he  loved  him.     And  some  of 

them  said,  Could  not  this  mafi,  which  opened  the  eyes  of 

the  unbelief  of  the  Jews  and  perhaps  of  the  sisters :'  but  of  this  there  is 
no  hint  in  the  context.  Others  again,  {7)  that  it  was  '  at  the  sight  of 
the  momentary  triumph  of  evil,  as  death,... which  was  here  shewn  under 
circumstances  of  the  deepest  pathos:'  but  we  nowhere  else  find  the  Lord 
shewing  anger  at  the  physical  consequences  of  sin.  It  seems  better  to 
fall  back  on  the  contrast  pointed  out  in  the  last  note.  He  was  indig- 
nant at  seeing  the  hypocritical  and  sentimental  lamentations  of  His 
enemies  the  Jews  mingling  with  the  heartfelt  lamentations  of  His  loving 
friend  Mary  (comp.  xii.  10):  hypocrisy  ever  roused  His  anger. 

■was  troubled'^  The  margin  is  better;  He  troubled  Himself,  i.e.  agi- 
tated Himself,  allowed  His  emotion  to  become  evident  by  external 
movement  such  as  a  shudder. 

34.  Where  have  ye  laid  him  .?]  This  question  is  against  the  supposi- 
tion, based  oxiv.  31,  that  the  place  where  Jesus  halted  outside  the  vil- 
lage was  close  to  the  grave. 

They  say  unto  him]  '  They'  are  the  two  sisters:  on  both  sides  "grief 
speaks  in  the  fewest  possible  words." 

36.  Jesus  wept]  Or,  shed  tears.  The  word  occurs  nowhere  else 
in  N.T.;  it  expresses  less  loud  lamentation  than  the  word  used  in 
t^-  31.  33-  He  sheds  tears  on  His  way  to  their  brother's  grave,  not 
because  He  is  ignorant  or  doubtful  of  what  is  coming,  but  because  He 
cannot  but  sympathize  with  the  intensity  of  His  friends'  grief.  "  The 
intense  humanity  attributed  to  Jesus,  His  affection.  His  visible  sufter- 
ing,  the  effort  with  which  He  collects  Himself,  are  all  strong  marks  of 
authenticity,  and  the  more  so  because  they  might  be  thought  to  con- 
flict with  the  doctrine  of  the  prologue.  But  this  is  but  one  more 
proof  how  little  that  doctrine  has  disturbed  the  Evangelist's  true  his- 
toric recollection."     S.  pp.  186,  7. 

36.  Then  said loved  him]     Here,  as  in  vv.  12,   14,  16,  17,  20, 

•Ji,  31,  32,  41.  45,  47,  53>  56,  'then'  should  rather  be  therefore, 
as  rightly  given  in  z^.  3,  33,  38,  54:  it  is  S.  John's  favourite  particle 
in  all  these  verses.  Both  the  verbs  here  are  imperfects;  'kept  saying,' 
'  used  to  love.'  What  follows  shews  that  this  remark  was  not  made  by 
all  the  Jews.  The  word  for  '  love '  is  the  more  passionate  word  used 
in  V.  3  by  the  sisters,  not  the  higher  word  used  in  v.  5  by  the  Evan- 
gelist. 

37.  And  some  of  them]  Better,  But  some  of  them,  in  contrast  to 
those  who  speak  in  v.  ^6,  who  are  not  unfriendly,  while  these  sneer. 
The  drift  of  this  remark  is  'He  weeps;  but  why  did  He  not  come  in 
time  to  save  His  friend  ?  Because  He  knew  that  He  could  not.  And 
if  He  could  not,  did  he  really  open  the  eyes  of  the  blind?'  They 
use  the  death  of  Lazarus  as  an  argument  to  throw  fresh  doubt  on  the 
miracle  which  had  so  baffled  them  at  Jerusalem.     Their  reference  to 


VV.38— 4I-]  S.  JOHN,   XI.  239 

the  blind,  have  caused  that  even  this  man  should  not  have 
died?    Jesus  therefore  again  groaning  in  himself  cometh  to  38 
the  grave.     It  was  a  cave,  and  a  stone  lay  upon  it.     Jesus  39 
said,  Take  ye  away  the  stone.     Martha,  the  sister  of  him 
that  was  dead,  saith  unto  him,  Lord,  by  this  time  he  stinketh : 
for  he  hath  been  dead  four  days.     Jesus  saith  unto  her.  Said  40 
I  not  unto  thee,  that,  if  thou  wouldestbeUeve,  thou  shouldest 
see  the  glory  of  God?  Then  they  took  away  the  stone /r^w  41 
the  place  where  the  dead  was  laid.     And  Jesus  lift  up  his 

the  man  born  blind  instead  of  to  the  widow's  son,  or  Jairus'  daughter, 
has  been  used  as  an  objection  to  the  truth  of  this  narrative.  It  is 
really  a  strong  confirmation  of  its  truth.  An  inventor  would  almost 
certainly  have  preferred  more  obvious  parallels.  But  these  Jews  of 
course  did  not  believe  in  those  raisings  of  the  dead :  they  much  more 
naturally  refer  to  a  reputed  miracle  within  their  own  experience. 
Moreover  they  are  not  hinting  at  raising  the  dead,  but  urging  that  if 
Jesus  could  work  miracles  He  ought  to  have  prevented  Lazarus  from 
dying. 

should  not  have  died'\    Rather,  should  not  die. 

38.  groaning  in  himself]  See  on  v.  33.  This  shews  that  '  in  His 
spirit'  not  'at  His  spirit'  is  the  right  translation  there.  Their  sneering 
scepticism  rouses  His  indignation  afresh. 

to  the  gravel  See  on  v.  17.  Insert  now  before  'it  was  a  cave.' 
The  having  a  private  burying-place  indicates  that  the  family  was  well 
off.  The  large  attendance  of  mourners  and  the  very  precious  ointment 
(xii.  3)  point  to  the  same  fact. 

upon  it]  The  Greek  may  mean  '  against  it,'  so  that  an  excavation 
in  the  side  of  a  rock  or  mound  is  not  excluded.  What  is  now  shewn 
as  the  sepulchre  of  Lazarus  is  an  excavation  in  the  ground  with  steps 
down  to  it.     The  stone  would  keep  out  beasts  of  prey. 

39.  the  sister  of  him  that  was  dead]  Not  inserted  gratuitously.  It 
was  because  she  was  his  sister  that  she  could  not  bear  to  see  him  or 
allow  him  to  be  seen  disfigured  by  corruption.  The  remark  comes 
much  more  naturally  from  the  practical  Martha  than  from  the  reserved 
and  retiring  Mary.  There  is  nothing  to  indicate  that  she  was  mis- 
taken; though  some  would  have  it  that  the  miracle  had  begun  from 
Lazarus'  death,  and  that  the  corpse  had  been  preserved  from  decom- 
position. 

he  hath  been  dead  four  days]     Literally,  he  is  of  the  fourth  day. 

40.  Said  I  not]  Apparently  a  reference  to  vv.  25,  26,  and  to  the 
reply  to  the  messenger,  w.  4 :  on  both  occasions  more  perhaps  was  said 
than  is  recorded.     See  notes  on  z/.  4. 

41.  from  the  place  ivhere  the  dead  was  laid]  These  words  are 
omitted  by  an  overwhelming  number  of  authorities.  They  are  a  need- 
less explanation  added  by  a  later  hand. 

And  Jesus  lift]     The  verb  is  identical  with  that  translated  'took 


240  S.   JOHN,   XL  [vv.  42—44. 

eyes,  and  said,  Father,  I  thank  thee  that  thou  hast  heard 

i2  me.     And    I    knew    that    thou    hearest    me    always :    but 

because  of  the  people  which  stand  by  I  said  if,  that  they 

43  may  believe  that  thou  hast  sent  me.  And  when  he  thus  had 
spoken,  he   cried  with  a  loud  voice,  Lazarus,  come  forth. 

44  And  he  that  was  dead  came  forth,  bound  hand  and  foot 
with  graveclothes :  and  his  face  was  bound  about  with  a 
napkin.     Jesus  saith  unto  them,  Loose  him,  and  let  /n'm  go. 

away'  in  the  preceding  clause.  Both  should  be  translated  alike;  more- 
over, 'and'  should  be  'but.'  T/iejy  lifted  therefore  //le  stone.  But 
Jesus  lifted  His  eyes  upwards. 

Father,  1  thank  thee]  Jesus  thanks  the  Father  as  a  public  acknow- 
ledgment that  the  Son  can  do  '  nothing  of  Himself,'  but  that  the  power 
which  He  is  about  to  exhibit  is  from  the  Father  (v.  19 — 26). 

that  thou  hast  heard]  Better,  that  Thou  didst  hear.  The  prayer 
to  which  ihis  refers  is  not  recorded. 

42.  And  I  knew]  Better,  But  /  kne%v,  'I'  being  very  emphatic. 
This  verse  is  added  to  prevent  misunderstanding:  no  one  must  suppose 
from  this  act  of  thanksgiving  that  there  are  any  prayers  of  the  Son 
which  the  Father  does  not  hear. 

I  said  it]     i.e.  I  said  the  words  'I  thank  Thee,  &c.' 
that  thou  hast  sent  me]    Or,  didst  send  il/^     'Thou'  is  emphatic; 
'Thou  and  no  one  else.' 

43.  cried]  The  Greek  word  (rare  in  N.T.  except  in  this  Gospel) 
is  nowhere  else  used  of  Christ.  It  is  elsewhere  used  of  the  shout  of  a 
multitude;  xii.  13,  xviii.  40,  xix.  6,  (12),  15.  Comp.  Matt.  xii.  19; 
Acts  xxii.  23.  This  loud  cry  was  perhaps  the  result  of  strong  emotion, 
or  in  order  that  the  whole  multitude  might  hear.  It  is  natural  to 
regard  it  as  the  direct  means  of  the  miracle,  awakening  the  dead: 
though  some  would  have  it  that  '  I  thank  Thee '  implies  that  Lazarus  is 
already  alive  and  needs  only  to  be  called  forth. 

44.  came  forth]  It  is  safest  not  to  regard  this  as  an  additional 
miracle.  The  winding-sheet  may  have  been  loosely  tied  round  him, 
or  each  limb  may  have  been  swathed  separately:  in  Eg}'ptian  mum- 
mies sometimes  every  finger  is  kept  distinct. 

graveclothes]  The  Greek  word  occurs  here  only  in  N.T.  Comp. 
Prov.  vii.  16.  It  means  the  bandages  which  kept  the  sheet  and  the 
spices  round  the  body.  Nothing  is  said  about  the  usual  spices  (xix.  40) 
here;  and  Martha's  remark  {v.  39)  rather  implies  that  there  had  been 
no  embalming.  If  Lazarus  died  of  a  malignant  disease  he  would  be 
buried  as  quickly  as  possible. 

face]  The  Greek  word  occurs  in  N.T.  only  here,  vii.  24,  and  Rev. 
i.  16 :  one  of  the  small  indications  of  a  common  authorship  (see  on  xv. 
5o  and  xix.  37). 

napkin]  A  Latin  word  is  used  meaning  literally  'a  sweat-cloth.'  It 
occurs  XX.  7;   Luke  xix.  20;   Acts  xix.  12.     Here   the   cloth   bound 


w.  45—48.]  S.  JOHN,  XI.  241 

45 — 57.     Opposite  Results  of  the  Sign, 

Then  many  of  the  Jews  which  came  to  Mary,  and  had  45 
seen  the  things  which  Jesus  did,  beheved  on  him.     But  some  46 
of  them  went  their  ways  to  the  Pharisees,  and  told  them  what 
things  Jesus  had  done.     Then  gathered  the  chief  priests  and  47 
the  Pharisees  a  council,  and  said,  What  do  we?  for  this  man 
doeth  many  miracles.     If  we  let  him  thus  alone,  all  men  will  48 

under  the  chin  to  keep  the  lower  jaw  from  falling  is  probably  meant. 
These  details  shew  the  eyewitness. 

let  him  go']  The  expression  is  identical  with  'let  these  go  their  way' 
(xviii.  8);  and  perhaps  'let  him  go  his  way'  would  be  better  here. 
Lazarus  is  to  be  allowed  to  retire  out  of  the  way  of  harmful  excitement 
and  idle  curiosity. 

The  reserve  of  the  Gospel  narrative  here  is  evidence  of  its  truth, 
and  is  in  marked  contrast  to  the  myths  about  others  who  are  said  to 
have  returned  from  the  grave.  Lazarus  makes  no  revelations  as  to  the 
unseen  world.  The  traditions  about  him  have  no  historic  value:  but 
one  mentioned  by  Trench  (Miracles,  p.  425)  is  worth  remembering. 
It  is  said  that  the  first  question  which  he  asked  Christ  after  being 
restored  to  hfe  was  whether  he  must  die  again ;  and  being  told  that  he 
must,  he  was  never  more  seen  to  smile. 

45—57.    Opposite  Results  of  the  Sign. 

45.  That  many  of  the  ycws\  The  English  Version  is  here  mislead- 
ing, owing  to  inaccuracy  and  bad  punctuation.  It  should  run  thus : — 
Many  therefore  of  the  Jeios,  even  they  that  came  to  Mary  and  beheld 
that  which  He  did  (see  on  vi.  14).  The  Jews  who  witnessed  the  miracle 
all  believed :  '  of  the  Jews '  means  of  the  Jews  generally. 

Biit  some  of  them  went]  Some  of  the  Jews  generally,  not  of  those 
who  saw  and  believed,  went  and  told  the  Pharisees;  with  what  intention 
is  not  clear,  but  probably  not  out  of  malignity.  Perhaps  to  convince 
the  Pharisees,  or  to  seek  an  authoritative  solution  of  their  own  per- 
plexity, or  as  feeling  that  the  recognised  leaders  of  the  people  ought  to 
know  the  whole  case.  The  bad  result  of  their  mission  has  made  some 
too  hastily  conclude  that  their  itttention  was  bad,  and  that  therefore 
they  could  not  be  included  in  those  who  believed. 

47.  a  council]  They  summon  a  meeting  of  the  Sanhedrin.  Even 
the  adversaries  of  Jesus  are  being  converted,  and  something  decisive 
must  be  done.  The  crisis  unites  religious  opponents.  The  chief  priests, 
who  were  mostly  Sadducees,  act  in  concert  with  the  Pharisees;  jealous 
ecclesiastics  with  religious  fanatics  (comp.  vii.  32,  45,  xviii.  3). 

What  do  we .']     Implying  that  something  must  be  done. 

this  man]     Contemptuous,  as  in  ix.  16,  24;  comp.  vii.  49. 

doeth  many  miracles]  It  is  no  longer  possible  to  deny  the  fact  of  the 
signs.    Instead  of  asking  themselves  what  these  '  signs '  must  mean, 

s.  JOHN  16 


242  S.   JOHN,   XI.  [v.  49. 

believe  on  him:  and  the  Romans  shall  come  and  take  away 

49  both   our   ]ilace   and   nation.     And   one   of  them,    named 

Caiaphas,  being  the   high  priest  that  same  year,  said  unto 

their  only  thought  is  how  to  prevent  others  from  drawing  the  obvious 
conclusion. 

48.  the  Ro7)ians  will  come]  They  do  not  inquire  whether  He  is  or 
is  not  the  Messiah ;  they  look  solely  to  the  consequences  of  admitting 
that  He  is.  "  The  Sanhedrin,  especially  the  Pharisaic  section  of  it,  was 
a  national  and  patriotic  body.  It  was  the  inheritor  and  guardian  of  the 
Rabbinical  theories  as  to  the  Messiah.  There  can  have  been  no  class  in 
the  nation  in  which  these  were  so  inveterately  ingrained,  and  therefore 
none  that  was  so  little  accessible  to  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  It  was  from 
first  to  last  unintelligible  to  them.  It  seemed  to  abandon  all  the  national 
hopes  and  privileges,  and  to  make  it  a  sin  to  defend  them.     If  it  were 

successful,  it  seemed  as  if  it  must  leave  the  field  open  to  the  Romans 

It  is  rarely  in  ancient  literature  that  we  find  a  highly  complicated  situa- 
tion so  well  understood  and  described."  S.  pp.  iSS,  189.  This  last 
remark  is  eminently  true  of  the  whole  narrative  portion  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel. 

our  place  and  nation]  'Our'  is  very  emphatic;  both  our  place  and 
our  nation.  '  Place '  is  perhaps  best  understood  of  Jerusalem,  the  seat  of 
the  Sanhedrin,  and  the  abode  of  the  bulk  of  the  hierarchy.  Other  inter- 
pretations are  (i)  the  Temple,  comp.  ^  Mac.  v.  19;  (2)  the  whole  land; 
so  that  the  expression  means  '  our  land  and  people,'  which  is  illogical  : 
the  land  may  be  taken  from  the  people,  or  the  people  from  tlie  land,  but 
how  can  both  be  taken  away?  {3)  'position,  raison  cfctre.''  In  any 
case  the  sentiment  is  parallel  to  that  of  Demetrius,  and  his  fellow- 
craftsmen  (Acts  xix.  27).  They  profess  to  be  very  zealous  for  religion, 
but  cannot  conceal  their  interested  motives. 

49.  Caiaphas]  This  was  a  surname ;  '  who  was  called  Caiaphas '  Matt. 
xxvi.  3  (where  see  note  on  the  Sanhedrin).  His  original  name  was 
Joseph.  Caiaphas  is  either  the  Syriac  form  of  Cephas,  a  'rock,'  or,  ac- 
cording to  another  derivation,  means  'depression.'  The  highpriest- 
hood  had  long  since  ceased  to  descend  from  father  to  son.  Pilate's  pre- 
decessor, Valerius  Gratus,  had  deposed  Annas  and  set  up  in  succession 
Ismael,  Eleazar  (son  of  Annas),  Simon,  and  Joseph  Caiaplias  (son-in-law 
of  Annas);  Caiaphas  held  the  office  from  a.d.  18  to  36,  when  he  was  de- 
posed by  Vitellius.  Annas  in  spite  of  his  deposition  was  still  regarded 
as  in  some  sense  high-priest  (xviii.  13;  lAike  iii.  2;  Acts  iv.  6),  possibly 
as  president  of  the  Sanhedrin  (Acts  v.  21,  fj,  vii.  i,  ix.  i,  2,  xxii.  5, 
xxiii.  2,  4,  xxiv.  i).  Caiaphas  is  not  president  licre,  or  lie  would  not  be 
spoken  of  merely  as  '  one  of  them.' 

that  same  year]  This  has  been  urged  as  an  objection,  as  if  the 
Evangelist  ignorantly  supposed  that  the  highpriesthootl  was  an  annual 
office, — a  mistake  whicli  would  go  far  to  prove  that  the  Evangelist  was 
not  a  Jew,  and  therefore  not  S.  John.  But  there  is  no  '  same '  in  the 
Greek  (comp.  i.  33,  iv.  53,  v.  9,  11),  and  'that  year'  means  'that  nota- 
ble and  fatal  year.'     The  same  expression  recurs  v.  51  and  xviii.   13. 


vv.  50- 53-]  S.   JOHN,   XL  243 

them,    Ye   know   nothing   at  all,    nor   consider   that   it   is  50 
expedient  for  us,  that  one  man  should  die  for  the  people, 
and  that  the  whole  nation  perish  not.     And  this  spake  he  51 
not  of  himself:  but  being  high  priest  that  year,  he  prophesied 
that   Jesus   should   die  for  that   nation;   And  not  for  that  %i 
nation  only,  but  that  also  he  should  gather  together  in  one 
the   children    of  God   that   were   scattered  abroad.     Then  53 
from  that  day  forth  they  took  counsel  together  for  to  put 


Even  if  there  were  not  this  obvious  meaning  for  'that  year,'  the  frequent 
changes  in  the  office  at  this  period  would  fully  explain  the  insertion 
without  the  notion  of  an  amiital  change  being  implied.  There  had  been 
some  twenty  or  thirty  high-priests  in  S.  John's  lifetime. 

Ye  know  nothing  at  all]  An  inference  from  their  asking  '  What  do 
we?'  It  was  quite  obvious  what  they  must  do.  The  'ye'  is  contemp- 
tuously emphatic.  The  resolute  but  unscrupulous  character  of  the  man 
is  evident. 

50.  expedient  for  us]  For  us  members  of  the  Sanhedrin.  But  the 
better  reading  gives,  for  you  half-hearted  Pharisees. 

that  one  /nan]  Literally,  i/i  order  that  one  man  ;  S.  John's  favourite 
particle  pointing  to  the  Divine  purpose:  comp.  iv.  34,  36,  vi.  29,  50, 
ix.  2,  3,  39,  xii.  23,  and  especially  xvi.  7. 

the  people]    The  Jews  as  a  theocratic  community  (laos). 

the  whole  nation]  The  Jews  as  one  of  the  nations  of  the  earth  {ethnos). 
Comp.  Luke  vii.  5 ;  Acts  x.  22.  The  same  word  in  the  plural,  '  the 
nations,'  means  the  Gentiles. 

51.  Jiot  of  hitnself]  Like  Saul,  Caiaphas  is  a  prophet  in  spite  of 
himself. 

being  high  priest]  None  but  a  Jew  would  be  likely  to  know  of  the  old 
Jewish  belief  that  the  high-priest  by  means  of  the  Urim  and  Thummim 
was  the  mouth-piece  of  the  Divine  oracle.  The  Urim  and  Thummim 
had  been  lost,  and  the  high-priest's  office  had  been  shorn  of  much  of  its 
glory,  but  the  remembrance  of  his  prophetical  gift  did  not  become  quite 
extinct  (Hos.  iii.  4);  and  'in  that  fatal  year'  S.  John  might  well  believe 
that  the  gift  would  be  restored. 

52.  not  for  that  nation  only]  S.  John  purposely  uses  the  word  which 
describes  the  Jews  merely  as  one  of  the  nations  of  the  earth  distinct  from 
the  Gentiles.  Of  course  we  are  not  to  understand  that  Caiaphas 
had  any  thought  of  the  gracious  meaning  contained  in  his  infamous 
advice. 

gather  together  in  one]     Comp.  xvii.  21:  for  'in  one'  read  into  one. 

53.  Then  from  that  day]  Therefore  for  '  then'  is  the  more  important 
here  to  bring  out  the  meaning  that  it  was  in  consequence  of  Caiaphas' 
suggestion  that  the  Sanhedrin  practically  if  not  formally  pronounced 
sentence  of  death.  The  question  remained  how  to  get  the  sentence 
executed, 

16 — 2 


244  S.   JOHN,   XI.  [vv.  54—57. 

54  him  to  death.  Jesus  therefore  walked  no  more  openly 
among  the  Jews;  but  went  thence  unto  a  country  near  to  the 
wilderness,  into  a  city  called  Ephraim,  and  there  continued 

55  with  his  disciples.  And  the  Jews'  passover  was  nigh  at  hand : 
and  many  went  out  of  the  country  up  to  Jerusalem  before 

s6  the  passover,  to  purify  themselves.  Then  sought  they  for 
Jesus,  and  spake  among  themselves,  as  they  stood  in  the 
temple.  What  think  ye,  that  he  will  not  come  to  the  feast? 

57  Now  both  the  chief  priests  and  the  Pharisees  had  given  a 
commandment,  that,  if  any  man  knew  where  he  were,  he 
should  shew  it,  that  they  might  take  him. 

64.  therefore]  The  decree  of  the  Sanhedrin  for  His  apprehension 
had  been  published  (v.  57);  the  sentence  of  death  was  probably  a  secret 
among  themselves. 

openly']  Comp.  vii.  10.  He  withdraws  from  all  intercourse  with  His 
adversaries. 

went  thence  unto  a  country]    Departed  thence  into  the  country. 

the  wilderness]  The  desert  of  Judsea,  which  extended  to  the  confines 
of  Jericho,  would  naturally  be  meant  by  '  the  wilderness.' 

Ephraim]  This  place  cannot  be  identified  with  certainty.  Eusebius 
makes  it  eight  miles,  Jerome  twenty  miles,  N.E.  of  Jerusalem :  both 
make  it  the  same  as  Ephron.  If  the  Ephraim  of  2  Chron.  xiii.  19  and 
Josephus  {B.  J.  IV.  ix.  9)  be  meant,  the  wilderness  would  be  that  of 
Bethaven. 

65.  And  the  Je-cus' passover]  Now  the  passover  of  the  Jews.  See 
notes  on  ii.  13  and  vi.  4. 

to  purify  themselves]  (Acts  xxi.  •24.)  Again  we  have  evidence  that 
the  Evangelist  is  a  Jew.  No  purifications  are  ordered  by  the  Law  as  a 
preparation  for  the  Passover.  But  to  be  ceremonially  unclean  was  to  be 
excluded  (xviii.  28) ;  hence  it  was  customary  for  those  who  were  so  to 
go  up  to  Jerusalem  in  good  time  so  as  to  be  declared  clean  before  the 
Feast  began. 

56.  sought... spake]  Both  verbs  are  in  the  imperfect  of  what  went  on 
continually.  There  are  two  questions  in  their  words  ;  '  What  think  ye? 
that  He  certainly  will  not  come  to  the  Feast.' 

57.  Now  both  the  chief  priests,  &c.]  Omit  'both.'  The  word  is 
wanting  in  authority,  and  even  if  it  were  genuine  it  would  not  mean 
'  both '  but  '  moreover.'  The  verse  explains  why  the  people  doubted 
His  coming  to  the  feast.  Note  that  once  more  the  Sadducaean  hierarchy 
takes  the  lead.  Comp.  v.  47,  xii.  10,  xviii.  3,  35,  xix.  6,  15,  21.  In 
the  history  of  the  Passion  the  Pharisees  are  mentioned  only  once  (Matt. 
xxvii.  62),  and  then,  as  here,  after  the  chief  priests. 

a  commandment]  The  better  reading  is,  commands,  which  has  been 
made  singular  because  only  one  command  is  mentioned.  Comp.  our 
phrase  'to  give  orders.' 

that]     Literally,  in  order  that  (see  on  v.  50). 


V.  I.]  S.    JOHN,   XII.  245 

Chap.  XIL     The  Judgment. 
I  — 36.     The  Judgment  of  Men. 
Then  Jesus  six  days  before  the  passover  came  to  Bethany,  12 

*'  We  are  not  told  how  long  our  Lord  stayed  at  Ephraim.  If  we  are 
to  put  faith  in  the  tradition  in  the  Talmud,  and  in  the  inferences  which 
Dr  Caspari  draws  from  it,  an  actual  verdict  of  death  was  passed  at  the 
recent  meeting  of  the  Sanhedrin,  and  was  only  waiting  for  its  execution 
until  an  opportunity  offered,  and  the  legal  period  for  the  production  of 
witnesses  in  the  defence  had  expired.  This  would  make  the  interval  be- 
tween the  retreat  to  Ephraim  and  the  Passover  coincide  more  or  less 
nearly  with  the  forty  days  allowed.  The  data,  however,  are  not  such  as 
we  can  build  on  confidently."  S.  p.  191.  So  that  once  more  we  have 
an  intei-val  of  uncertain  amount.  See  the  introductory  note  to  chapter 
vi.  and  the  note  on  vi.  i. 

Chap.  XII.     The  Judgment. 

We  now  enter  upon  the  third  section  of  the  first  main  division  of  this 
Gospel.  It  may  be  useful  to  state  the  divisions  once  more.  The 
Prologue,  i.  i — 18;  The  Ministry,  i.  19 — xii.  50,  thus  divided — 
(i)  The  Testimony,  i.  19 — ii.  11;  (2)  The  Work,  ii.  13 — xi.  57;  {3) 
The  Judgment,  xii.  This  third  section,  which  now  lies  before  us,  may 
be  subdivided  thus — (a)  the  yudgmettt  of  men,  i — 36  ;  (/3)  the  yudgjuent 
of  the  Evangelist,  37 — 43;  {y)  the  Judgment  of  Christ,  44 — 50. 

We  must  be  content  to  leave  the  precise  method  of  harmonizing  this 
later  portion  of  S.  John's  narrative  with  that  of  the  Synoptists  in  un- 
certainty. "It  is  best  to  hold  fast  to  the  general  scheme  given  by  S. 
John,  and  to  treat  the  Synoptic  sections,  especially  those  in  S.  Luke 
(ix.  51 — xviii.  35),  as  fragments  of  a  great  picture  which  are  more  or  less 
fortuitously  thrown  together,  and  are  no  longer  capable  of  an  exact  re- 
construction."    S.  p.  191. 

1 — 36.    The  Judgment  of  Men. 

Note  the  dramatic  contrast  between  the  difterent  sections  of  this 
division ;  the  devotion  of  Mary  and  the  enmity  of  the  hierarchy,  Christ's 
triumph  and  the  Pharisees'  discomfiture,  &c. 

1.  Then  Jesus']  The  '  then '  or  therefore  simply  resumes  the  narra- 
tive from  the  point  where  it  quitted  Jesus,  xi.  55.  This  is  better  than 
to  make  it  depend  on  xi.  57,  as  if  He  went  to  Bethany  to  avoid  His 
enemies.  His  hour  is  drawing  near,  and  therefore  He  draws  near  to 
the  appointed  scene  of  His  suflerings. 

six  days  before  the  passover']  The  Passover  began  at  sunset  on  Nisan 
14  :  six  days  before  this  would  bring  us  to  Nisan  8.  Assuming  the  year 
to  be  A.  D.  30,  Nisan  8  would  be  Friday,  March  31.  We  may  suppose, 
therefore,  that  Jesus  and  His  disciples  arrived  at  Bethany  on  the  Friday 
evening  a  little  after  the  Sabbath  had  commenced,  having  performed  not 
more  than  'a  Sabbath-Day's  journey'  on  the  Sabbath,  the  bulk  of  the 


246  S.   JOHN,   XII.  [vv.  2,  3. 

where  Lazarus  was  which  had  been  dead,  whom  he  raised 
from  the  dead. 

2 — 8.     The  Devotion  of  Mary. 

2  There  they  made   him   a  supper;   and  Martha   served: 
but  Lazarus  was  one  of  them   that  sat  at   the  table  with 

3  him.     Then  took  Mary  a  pound  of  ointment  of  spikenard, 
very  costly,  and  anointed  the  feet  of  Jesus,  and  wiped  his 

journey  being  over  before  the  day  of  rest  began.     But  it  must  be  remem- 
bered that  this  chronology  is  tentative,  not  certain. 

which  had  been  dead'\  These  words  are  omitted  by  a  large  number  of 
the  best  authorities,  which  give  where  Lazarus  zaas,  who7n  Jesus  raised 
from  the  dead.      They  made  Hivi  therefore,  &c. 

2 — 8.    The  Devotion  of  Mary. 

2.  they  made  him  a  siipperl  'They'  is  indefinite  :  if  we  had  only  this 
account  we  should  suppose  that  the  supper  was  in  the  house  of  Martha, 
Mary,  and  Lazarus ;  but  S.  Mark  (xiv.  3)  and  S.  Matthew  (xxvi.  6)  tell  us 
that  it  was  in  the  house  of  Simon  the  leper,  who  had  possibly  been  healed 
by  Christ  and  probably  was  a  friend  or  relation  of  Lazarus  and  his  sisters. 
Martha's  serving  (comp.  Luke  x.  40)  in  his  house  is  evidence  of  the  latter 
point  (see  the  notes  on  the  accounts  of  S.  Matthew  and  S.  Mark). 

Lazarus  was  one  of  them']  This  is  probably  introduced  to  prove  the 
reality  and  completeness  of  his  restoration  to  life  :  but  it  also  confirms 
the  Synoptic  accounts  by  indicating  that  Lazarus  was  a  guest  rather  than 
a  host. 

sat  at  the  table]     Literally,  reclined,  as  was  the  custom. 

3.  took  Mary  a  found]  S.  John  alone  gives  her  name  and  the 
amount  of  ointment.  The  pound  of  \i  ounces  is  meant.  So  large  a 
quantity  of  a  substance  so  costly  is  evidence  of  her  over-flowing  love. 
Comp.  xix.  39. 

ointment  of  spikenard]  The  Greek  expression  is  a  rare  one,  and 
occurs  elsewhere  only  Mark  xiv.  3,  which  S.  John  very  likely  had  seen : 
his  account  has  all  the  independence  of  that  of  an  eye-witness,  but  may 
have  been  influenced  by  the  .Synoptic  narratives.  The  meaning  of  the 
Greek  is  not  certain:  it  may  mean  (i)  'genuine nard,'  and  spikenard  was 
often  adulterated;  or  (2)  'drinkable,  liquid  nard,'  and  unguents  were 
sometimes  drunk;  or  (3)  'Pistic  nard,'  'Pistic'  being  supposed  to  be  a 
local  adjective.  But  no  place  from  which  such  an  adjective  could  come 
appears  to  be  known.  Of  the  other  two  explanations  the  first  is  to  be 
preferred. 

very  costly]  Horace  offers  to  give  a  cask  of  wine  for  a  very  small  box 
of  it;   'Nardi  parvus  onyx  eliciet  cadum.'     Odes  iv.  xii.  17. 

anointed  the  feet]  The  two  .Synoptists  mention  only  the  usual  (Ps. 
zxiii.  5)  anointing  of  the  head;  S.  John  records  tlie  less  usual  act,  which 
again  is  evidence  of  Mary's  devotion.  The  rest  of  this  verse  is  peculiar 
to  S.  John,  and  shews  that  he  was  present. 


w.  4—8.]  S.   JOHN,   XII.  247 

feet  with  her  hair:  and  the  house  was  filled  with  the  odour 
of  the   ointment.     Then   saith  one  of  his  disciples,  Judas  4 
Iscariot,  Simon's  son,  which  should  betray  him,  Why  was  s 
not  this  ointment  sold  for  three  hundred  pence,  and  given 
to   the   poor?     This  he  said,   not  that   he    cared   for   the  6 
poor;   but  because  he  was  a  thief,  and  had  the  bag,  and 
bare  what  was  put  therein.     Then  said  Jesus,  Let  her  alone :  7 
against  the  day  of  my  burying  hath  she  kept  this.      For  s 

4.  Then  saith,  &c.]  Rather,  But  yudas  Iscariot,  &c.  The  best 
authorities  omit  'Simon's  son.' 

one  of  his  disciples,  Judas  Iscariot'\  S.  Mark  says  quite  indefinitely, 
'some,'  S.  Matthew,  'his  disciples.'  Each  probably  states  just  what  he 
knew;  S.  Mark  that  the  remark  was  made;  S.  Mattliew  that  it  came 
from  the  group  of  disciples;  S.  John  that  Judas  made  it,  and  why  he 
made  it.  S.  John  was  perhaps  anxious  that  the  unworthy  grumbling 
should  be  assigned  to  the  right  person, 

luhich  should  betray^     Comp.  vi.  71. 

5.  three  hundred  pence"]  Here,  as  in  vi.  7,  the  translation  'pence'  is 
very  inadequate  and  misleading;  'three  hundred  shillings'  would  be 
nearer  the  mark  (see  on  vi.  7).  S-  Mark  adds  that  some  were  very  in- 
dignant at  her. 

to  the  poor]  More  accurately,  to  poor  people;  there  is  no  article 
(comp.  Luke  xviii.  22). 

6.  the  bag]  Better,  the  box,  the  cash-box  in  which  the  funds  of  the 
small  company  were  kept.  The  word  means  literally  'a  case  for  mouth- 
pieces' of  musical  instruments,  and  hence  any  portable  chest.  It  occurs 
in  the  LXX.  of  2  Chron.  xxiv.  8,  11,  but  nowhere  in  N.T.  excepting 
here  and  xiii.  29. 

and  bare]  The  Greek  word  may  mean  either  'used  to  carry' or  'used 
to  carry  away,'  i.e.  steal:  comp.  xx.  15.  S.  Augustine,  commenting  on 
'portabat,'  which  he  found  in  the  Italic  Version,  and  which  survives  in 
the  Vulgate,  says  "portabat  an  exportabat?  sed  ministerio  portabat, 
furto  exportabat."  We  have  the  same  play  in  'lift,'  e.g.  ^shop-li/tino-;' 
and  in  the  old  use  of  'convey: '  'To  steal'..."  Convey  the  wise  it  call." 
Merry  IVives  of  Windsor  i.  3.  "O  good!  Convey? — Conveyers  are 
you  all."     Richard  II.  IV.  i. 

what  was  put  therein]  Literally,  the  things  that  ivere  being  cast  into 
it  from  time  to  time ;  the  gifts  of  friends  and  followers. 

7.  hath  she  kept]  The  large  majority  of  authorities,  including  the 
best,  read  that  she  may  keep,  and  the  whole  will  run  :  let  her  alone  that 
she  may  preserve  It  for  the  day  of  My  burial.  The  simplest  interpre- 
tation of  this  is  'Let  her  preserve  what  remains  of  it;  not,  however,  to 
be  sold  for  the  poor,  but  to  be  used  for  My  burial,  which  is  near  at 
hand.'  The  text  has  probably  been  altered  to  bring  it  more  into 
harmony  with  the  Synoptists,  with  whom  the  present  anointing  appears 
as  anointing  for  the  burial  by  anticipation.  The  word  for  'burial'  or 
'entombment'  occurs  only  here  and  Mark  xiv.  8. 


248  S.   JOHN,   XII.  [vv.  9-II. 

the  poor  always  ye  have  with  you;  but  me  ye  have  not 
always. 

9 — II,     The  Hostility  of  the  Priests. 

Much  people  of  the  Jews  therefore  knew  that  he  was 
there  :  and  they  came  not  for  Jesus'  sake  only,  but  that 
they  might  see  Lazarus  also,  whom  he  had  raised  from  the 
~  dead.  But  the  chief  priests  consulted  that  they  might  put 
Lazarus  also  to  death  ;  because  that  by  reason  of  him  many 
of  the  Jews  went  away,  and  believed  on  Jesus. 

8.  For  the  poor,  &c.]  Comp.  Deut.  xv.  ii.  Every  word  of  this 
verse  occurs  in  the  first  two  Gospels,  though  not  quite  in  the  same 
order.  Here  the  emphasis  is  on  'the  poor,'  there  on  'always.'  The 
striking  originality  of  the  saying,  and  the  large  claim  which  it  makes, 
are  evidence  of  its  origin  from  Him  who  spake  as  never  man  spake. 
Considering  how  Christ  speaks  of  the  poor  elsewhere,  these  words  may 
be  regarded  as  quite  beyond  the  reach  of  a  writer  of  fiction. 

9 — 11.     The  Hostility  of  the  Priests. 

9.  Much  people\  Large  caravans  would  be  coming  up  for  the  Pass- 
over, and  the  news  would  spread  quickly  through  the  shifting  crowds, 
who  were  already  on  the  alert  (xi.  55)  about  Jesus,  and  were  now 
anxious  to  see  Lazarus.  Note  that  it  is  a  'large  mvdtltude  of  the  yavs' 
who  come;  i.e.  of  Christ's  usual  opponents.  This  again  (comp.  xi. 
45 — 47)  excites  the  hierarchy  to  take  decisive  measures.     See  on  v. 

10.  Bi/(  the  chief  priests]  Nothing  is  here  said  about  the  Pharisees 
(comp.  xi.  47,  57),  who  are,  however,  not  necessarily  excluded.  Both 
would  wish  to  put  Lazarus  out  of  the  way  for  the  reason  given  inv.  11: 
but  the  chief  priests,  who  were  mostly  Sadducees,  would  have  an 
additional  reason,  in  that  Lazarus  was  a  living  refutation  of  their  doctrine 
that  'there  is  no  resurrection'  (Acts  xxiii.  8).     See  on  xi.  57. 

put  Lazarus  also  to  death]  Whatever  may  be  true  about  xi.  53,  we 
must  not  suppose  that  this  verse  implies  a  formal  sentence  of  death  :  it 
does  not  even  imply  a  meeting  of  the  Sanlicdrin. 

These  repeated  references  to  the  raising  of  Lazarus  (xi.  45,  47,  xii. 
f,  9,  10,  17)  greatly  strengthen  the  historical  evidence  for  the  miracle. 
They  are  quite  inconsistent  with  the  theory  either  of  a  misunderstand- 
ing or  of  deliberate  fraud. 

11.  ivent  away,  and  beliet'ed]  Better,  were  going  away  and  be- 
lieving. It  is  best  to  leave  'going  away'  quite  indefinite:  the  notion 
of  falling  away  from  the  hierarchy  lies  in  the  context  but  not  in  the 
word.     The  imperfects  denote  a  continual  process. 

S.  Augustine  comments  on  the  folly  of  the  priests — as  if  Christ  could 
not  raise  Lazarus  a  second  time!  But  this  ignores  the  'also':  the  hier- 
archy meant  to  jiut  both  to  death.     Their  folly  consisted  in  failing  to 


vv.  12—15.]  S.   JOHN,  XII.  249 

12 — 18.     The  Enthusiasm  of  the  People. 

On    the   next   day  much  people  that  were  come  to  the  ,2 
feast,  when  they  heard  that  Jesus  was  coming  to  Jerusalem, 
took  branches  of  palm  trees,  and  went  forth  to  meet  him,  13 
and   cried,  Hosanna :    Blessed  is  the  King  of  Israel  that 
conieth  in  the  name  of  the  Lord.     And  Jesus,  when  he  had  ,4 
found  a  young  ass,  sat  thereon ;  as  it  is  written,  Fear  not,  15 

see,  not  that  He  could  raise  Lazarus  again,  but  that  He  could  raise 
Himself  (ii.  19).  Note  that  it  is  the  unscrupulous  hierarchy,  who 
attempt  this  crime.     Comp.  xviii.  35,  xix.  6,  15,  21. 

12—18.    The  Enthusiasm  of  the  People. 

12.  On  the  next  day\  From  the  date  given  v.  r,  consequently 
Nisan  0,  from  Saturday  evening  to  Sunday  evening,  if  the  chronology 
given  on  v.  i  is  correct.  S.  John  seems  distinctly  to  assert  that  the 
Triumphal  Entry  followed  the  supper  at  Bethany:  S.  Matthew  and 
S.  Mark  both  place  the  supper  after  the  entry,  S.  Matthew  without 
any  date  and  probably  neglecting  (as  often)  the  chronological  order, 
S.  Mark  also  without  date,  yet  apparently  implying  (xiv.  i)  that  the 
supper  took  place  two  days  before  the  Passover.  But  the  date  in 
Mark  xiv.  i  covers  only  two  verses  and  must  not  be  carried  further  in 
contradiction  to  S.  John's  precise  and  consistent  arrangement.  S.  John 
omits  all  details  respecting  the  procuring  of  the  young  ass. 

tnuch  people]  Not  'Jev^^s',  as  in  v.  9,  but  pilgrims  without  any  bias 
against  Christ.  Here  and  in  v.  9  the  true  reading  perhaps  is,  tke  common 
people. 

13.  branches  of  palm  trees']  More  literally,  the  palm-branches  of 
the  palm-trees;  i.e.  those  which  grew  there,  or  which  were  commonly 
used  at  festivals.  Comp.  Simon's  triumphal  entry  into  Jerusalem 
(i  Mace.  xiii.  51).  The  palm-tree  was  regarded  by  the  ancients  as 
characteristic  of  Palestine.  '  Phoenicia'  (Acts  xi.  19,  xv.  3)  is  pro- 
bably derived  from ///(?«/jr=' palm.'  The  tree  is  now  comparatively 
rare,  except  in  the  Philistine  plain:  at  'Jericho,  the  city  of  palm-trees' 
(Deut.  xxxiv.  3;  1  Chron.  xxxviii.  15)  there  is  not  one. 

Hosanna]  This  is  evidence  that  the  writer  of  this  Gospel  knows 
Hebrew.  In  the  LXX.  at  Ps.  cxvii.  25  we  have  a  translation  of  the 
Hebrew,  'save  we  pray,'  not  a  transliteration  as  here.  (Comp.  'Alle- 
luia' in  Rev.  xix.  i,  6.)  This  Psalm  is  said  by  some  to  have  been 
written  for  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  after  the  return  from  captivity,  by 
others  for  the  founding  or  dedicating  of  the  second  Temple.  In  what 
follows  the  better  reading  is  Blessed  is  He  that  cometh  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord  even  the  king  of  Israel.  The  cry  of  the  multitude  was  of 
course  not  always  the  same,  and  the  different  Evangelists  give  us  differ- 
ent forms  of  it. 

14.  It  is  written]     See  on  ii.  17. 

15.  Fear  not,  &c.     The  quotation  is  freely  made ;  '  fear  not '  is  sub- 


2SO  S.   JOHN,  XII.  [vv.  16—19. 

daughter  of  Sion  :  behold,  thy  King  cometh,  sitting 

16  on  an  ass's  colt.  These  thitigs  understood  not  his  disci- 
ples at  the  first :  but  when  Jesus  was  glorified,  then  re- 
membered they  that  these  things  were  written  of  him,  and 

17  that  they  had  done  these  things  unto  him.  The  people 
therefore  that  was  with  him  when  he  called  Lazarus  out  of 

i8  his  grave,  and  raised  him  from  the  dead,  bare  record.  For 
this  cause  the  people  also  met  him,  for  that  they  heard  that 
he  had  done  this  miracle. 

19.     The  Discomfiture  of  the  Pharisees. 

19  The  Pharisees  therefore  said  among  themselves,  Perceive 
ye  how  ye  prevail  nothing  ?  behold,  the  world  is  gone  after 
him. 

stituted  foi  'rejoice  greatly,'  and  the  whole  is  abbreviated,  Zech.  ix.  9. 
In  adding  '  thy'  to  'Icing'  and  in  writing  'an  ass's  colt'  the  Evangelist 
seems  to  be  translating  direct  from  the  Hebrew.  The  best  editions  of 
the  LXX.  omit  'thy'  and  all  have  'a  young  colt'  for  the  words  here 
rendered  'an  ass's  colt.'  Comp.  i.  29,  vi.  45,  xix.  37.  If  the  writer  of 
this  Gospel  knew  the  O.T.  in  the  original  Hebrew  he  almost  certainly 
was  a  Jew. 

16.  understood  not\  A  mark  of  candour  (see  on  xi.  12):  comp.  ii.  22 
(where  see  note)  and  xx.  9.  Would  a  Christian  of  the  second  century 
have  invented  this  dulness  of  apprehension  in  Apostles?  After  Pentecost, 
however,  much  that  had  passed  unnoticed  or  had  been  obscure  before 
was  brought  to  their  remembrance  and  made  clear  (xiv.  26).  Note 
'these  things'  thrice  repeated;  w.  14,  15  shew  that  the  placing  Him 
on  the  young  ass  is  primarily  meant. 

was  glorified\     Comp.  vii.  39  and  xi.  4,  where  see  notes. 

17.  ivhen  he  called  Lazarus']  See  on  v.  10.  There  is  another 
reading,  well  supported,  which  gives  'that  He  called  Lazarus,'  and  the 
whole  will  then  run; — /"/^f  multitude,  therefore,  which  7vas  with  Him, 
hej>t  bearing  witness  (i.  7)  that  He  called  Lazarus  out  of  the  sepulchre 
and  raised  him  from  the  dead.  But  'when'  is  to  be  preferred  ;  so  that 
there  are  two  multitudes,  one  coming  with  Jesus  from  Bethany  and  one 
{vv.  13,  18)  meeting  Him  from  Jerusalem.     See  on  v.  41. 

18.  this  miracle]  'This'  is  emphatic:  other  miracles  had  made 
comparatively  little  impression,  but  this  sign  had  convinced  even  His 
adversaries. 

19.    The  Discomfiture  of  the  Pharisees. 

19.  Perceive  ye]  Ratlier,  Behold  ye.  The  Greek  may  also  mean 
'Behold'  (imperat.)  or  ye  behold:  the  last  is  perhaps  best;  '  Ve  see 
what  a  mistake  we  have  made ;  we  ought  to  have  adopted  the  plan  of 
Caiaphas  long  ago.' 

the  world]     The  exaggerated  expression  of  their  chagrin,  which  in 


vv.  20—22.]  S.    JOHN,    XII.  251 

20 — 33.     The  Desire  of  the  Gentiles  and  the  Voice  from 

Heaven. 

And  there  were  certain  Greeks  among  them  that  came  up  20 
to  worship  at  the  feast :  the  same  came  therefore  to  Philip,  21 
which  was  of  Bethsaida  of  Galilee,  and  desired  him,  saying, 
Sir,  we  would  see  Jesus.     Philip  cometh  and  telleth  An-  22 

this  Divine  epic  is  brought  into  strong  contrast  with  the  triumph  of 
Jesus.  Comp.  a  similar  exaggeration  from  a  similar  cause  ill.  26;  ^  all 
men  come  to  Him.' 

is  gone  after  hint]  Literally,  is  gone  away  after  Hitn.  The  Greek 
word  is  not  the  same  but  is  similar  in  meaning  to  that  used  in  z'.  11. 
After  this  confession  of  helplessness  the  Pharisees  appear  no  more 
alone ;  the  reckless  hierarchy  help  them  on  to  the  catastrophe. 

20 — 33.    The  Desire  of  the  Gentiles  and  the  Voice 

FROM  Heaven. 

20.  Greeks'\  The  same  word  is  translated  'Gentiles'  vii.  35,  where 
see  note.  Care  must  be  taken  to  distinguish  in  the  N.T.  between  Hel- 
lenes or  '  Greeks,'  i.e.  bom  Gentiles,  who  may  or  may  not  have  become 
either  Jewish  proselytes  or  Christian  converts,  and  Hellenistae  or  '  Gre- 
cians,' as  our  Bible  renders  the  word,  i.e.  Jews  who  spoke  Greek  and 
not  Aramaic.  Neither  word  occurs  in  the  Synoptists.  Hellenes  are 
mentioned  here,  vii.  35,  and  frequently  in  the  Acts  and  in  S.  Paul's 
Epistles.  Hellenistae  are  mentioned  only  in  the  Acts,  vi,  i  and  ix.  29 : 
in  Acts  xi.  20  the  right  reading  is  probably  Hellenes. 

that  came  up  to  worship]  Better,  that  ware  wont  to  go  up  to  wor- 
ship. This  shews  that  they  were  'proselytes  of  the  gate,'  like  the 
Ethiopian  eunuch  (Acts  viii.  27):  see  on  Matt,  xxiii.  15.  In  this  inci- 
dent we  have  an  indication  of  the  salvation  rejected  by  the  Jews  pass- 
ing to  the  Gentiles :  the  scene  of  it  was  probably  the  Court  of  the  Gen- 
tiles; it  is  peculiar  to  S.  John. 

21.  to  Philip']  Their  coming  to  S.  Philip  was  the  result  either  (i)  of 
accident;  or  (2)  of  previous  acquaintance,  to  which  the  mention  of  his 
home  seems  to  point;  or  (3)  of  his  Greek  name,  which  might  attract 
them.     See  on  i.  45,  vi.  5,  xiv.  8. 

Sir]  Indicating  respect  for  the  disciple  of  such  a  Master :  comp.  iv. 
IX,  15,  19. 

we  would  see  fesus]  This  desire  to  'come  and  see'  for  themselves 
would  at  once  win  the  sympathy  of  the  practical  Philip.  See  on  i.  46 
and  xiv.  8. 

22.  telleth  Andre^v]  Another  Apostle  with  a  Greek  name.  They 
were  both  of  Bethsaida  (i.  44),  and  possibly  these  Greeks  may  have 
come  from  the  same  district.  S.  Philip  seems  to  shrink  from  the  respon- 
sibility of  introducing  Gentiles  to  the  Messiah,  and  applies  in  his  diffi- 
culty to  the  Apostle  who  had  already  distinguished  himself  by  bringing 
others  to  Christ  (i.  41,  vi,  8,  9). 


252  S.   JOHN,   XII.  [vv.  23—26. 

23  drew :  and  again  Andrew  and  Philip  tell  Jesus.  And  Jesus 
answered  them,  saying,  The  hour  is  come,  that  the  Son  of 

24  man  should  be  glorified.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you, 
Except  a  corn  of  wheat  fall  into  the  ground  and  die,  it 
abideth  alone :  but  if  it  die,  it  bringeth  forth  much  fruit. 

25  He  that  loveth  his  life  shall  lose  it ;  and  he  that  hateth  his 

26  life  in  this  world  shall  keep  it  unto  life  eternal.     If  any  vian 

and  again]  The  true  reading  is  Andrew  cometb,  and  PhUip,  and 
they  U//  Jesus. 

23.  And  Jestts  answered]  Better,  But  yt'j«J  answereth.  He  an- 
ticipates the  Apostles  and  addresses  them  before  they  introduce  the 
Greeks.  We  are  left  in  doubt  as  to  the  result  of  the  Greeks'  request. 
Nothing  is  said  to  them  in  particular,  though  they  may  have  followed 
and  heard  this  address  to  the  Apostles,  which  gradually  shades  off  into 
soliloquy. 

These  men  from  the  West  at  the  close  of  Chnst  s  life  set  forth  the 
same  truth  as  the  men  from  the  East  at  the  beginning  of  it— that  the 
Gentiles  are  to  be  gathered  in.  The  wise  men  came  to  His  cradle, 
these  to  His  cross,  of  which  their  coming  reminds  Him;  for  only  by 
His  death  could  'the  nations'  be  saved. 

The  hour  is  come]  The  verb  first  for  emphasis  in  the  Greek  as  in 
iv.  21,  as:  'it  hath  come— the  fated  hour.'     Comp.  xiii.  i. 

that  tJw.  Son  of  man]  Literally,  in  order  that,  of  the  Divine  purpose, 
as  in  xi.  50  and  xiii.  i,  where  see  notes.     See  also  the  last  note  on 

*  glorified]     By  His  Passion  and  Death  through  which  He  must  pass 
to  return  to  glory.     See  on  vii.  39  and  xi.  4. 

24.  Verily,  verily]  Strange  as  it  may  seem  to  you  that  the  Mes- 
siah should  die,  yet  this  is  but  the  course  of  nature :  a  seed  cannot  be 
glorified  unless  it  dies.  A  higher  form  of  existence  is  obtained  only 
through  the  extinction  of  the  lower  form  that  preceded  it.     See  on 

26.'  loveth  his  life.. .hateth  his  life... life  eternal]  'Life'  is  here  used 
in  two  senses,  and  in  the  Greek  two  different  words  are  used.  In  the 
first  two  cases  'life'  means  the  life  of  the  individual,  in  the  last,  life  in 
the  abstract.  By  sacrificing  life  in  the  one  sense,  we  may  win  life  in 
tlie  other.  See  notes  on  Matt.  x.  39,  xvi.  25;  Mark  viii.  35;  Luke  ix. 
■24,  xvii.  33.  A  comparison  of  the  texts  will  shew  that  most  of  them 
refer  to  d'ifferent  occasions,  so  that  this  solemn  warning  must  have 
been  often  on  His  lips.     The  present  utterance  is  distinct  from  ail  the 

rest.  . 

shall  lose  it]     Better,  loseth  it;  the  Greek  may  mean  destroyetn  tt. 

hateth  his  life]  i.e.  is  ready  to  act  towards  it  as  if  he  hated  it,  if  need 
so  require.  Neither  here  nor  in  Luke  xiv.  26  must  'hate'  be  watered 
down  to  mean  'be  not  too  fond  of;'  it  means  that  and  a  great  deal 
more.     The  word  rendered  'life'  in  'loveth  his  life'  and  'hateth  his 


V.  27.]  S.   JOHN,   XII.  253 

serve  me,  let  him  follow  me ;  and  where  I  am,  there  shall 
also  my  servant  be :  if  any  man  serve  me,  him   will  7ny 
Father  honour.     Now  is  my  soul  troubled  ;  and  what  shall  27 
I  say  ?     Father,  save  me  from  this  hour  :  but  for  this  cause 

life'  might  also  mean  'soul,'  and  some  would  translate  it  so :  but  would 
Christ  have  spoken  of  hating  one's  soul  as  the  way  to  eternal  life? 

26.  let  him  follow  me]  in  My  life  of  self-sacrifice :  Christ  Himself  has 
set  the  example  of  hating  one's  life  in  this  world.  These  words  are 
perhaps  addressed  through  the  disciples  to  the  Greeks  listening  close  at 
hand.  If  they  'wish  to  see  Jesus'  and  know  Him  they  must  count  the 
cost  first.     'Me'  is  emphatic  in  both  clauses, 

where  I  am]  i.  e.  where  I  shall  be  then,  in  My  kingdom.  Comp. 
xiv.  3,  xvii.  24.  Some  would  include  in  the  'where'  the  road  to  the 
kingdom,  viz.  death.     'I'  and  'My'  are  emphatic. 

serve... honour]  Here  the  verbs  are  emphatic  (not  'Me'),  and  balance 
one  another.  This  verse  is  closely  parallel  to  v.  35:  'let  him  follow 
Me'  corresponds  to  'hateth  his  life  in  this  world;'  ''him  will  the  Father 
honour,'  to  'shall  keep  it  unto  life  eternal.' 

27.  This  is  a  verse  of  well-known  difficulty,  and  the  meaning  can- 
not be  determined  with  certainty,  several  meanings  being  admissible. 
The  doubtful  points  are  (1)  the  position  of  the  interrogation,  whether  it 
should  come  after  'I  say'  or  'from  this  hour;'  {2)  the  meaning  of  'for 
this  cause.' 

Now  is  my  soul  troubled]  The  word  rendered  'soul'  is  the  same  as 
that  rendered  'life'  in  'loveth  his  life'  and  'hateth  his  life.'  To  bring 
out  this  and  the  sequence  of  thought,  'life'  would  perhaps  be  better 
here.  'He  that  would  serve  Me  must  follow  Me  and  be  ready  to  hate 
his  life ;  for  My  life  has  long  since  been  tossed  and  torn  with  emotion 
and  sorrow.'  'Is  troubled '  = /4a j  been  and  still  is  troubled;  a  frequent 
meaning  of  the  Greek  perfect. 

what  shall  I  say?]  Or,  what  must  I  say?  This  appears  to  be  the 
best  punctuation  ;  and  the  question  expresses  the  difficulty  of  framing  a 
prayer  under  the  conflicting  influences  of  fear  of  death  and  willingness 
to  glorify  His  Father  by  dying.  The  result  is  first  a  prayer  under  the 
influence  of  fear— 'save  Me  from  this  hour'  (comp.  'Let  this  cup  pass 
from  Me,'  Matt.  xxvi.  39),  and  then  a  prayer  under  the  influence  of 
ready  obedience— '  Glorify  Thy  Name '  through  My  sufferings.  But  the 
Greek  means  'save  me  out  of  [soson  ek),  i.e.  'bring  Me  safe  out  of;' 
rather  than  'save  Mt/rom'  [sdson  apo),  i.e.  'keep  Me  altogether  away 
from,' as  in  'deliver  us/rom  the  evil'  (Matt.  vi.  13).  S.  John  omits  the 
Agony  in  the  garden,  which  was  in  the  Synoptists  and  was  well  known 
to  every  Christian ;  but  he  gives  us  here  an  insight  into  a  less  known 
truth,  which  is  still  often  forgotten,  that  the  agony  was  not  confined  to 
Gethsemane,  but  was  part  of  Christ's  whole  life.  Others  place  the  ques- 
tion at  'from  this  hour,'  and  the  drift  of  the  whole  will  then  be,  'How 
can  I  say.  Father  save  Me  from  this  hour?  Nay,  I  came  to  suffer; 
therefore  My  prayer  shall  be,  Father,  glorify  Thy  Name.' 


254  S.  JOHN,  XII.  [vv.  28— 3r. 

28  came  I  unto  this  hour.     Father,  glorify  thy  name.      I'hen 
came  there  a  voice  from  heaven,  saying,  I  have  both  glori- 

29  fied  it,  and  will  glorify  //  again.     The  people  therefore,  that 
stood  by,  and  heard  it,  said  that  it  thundered  :  others  said, 

30  An   angel  spake  to  him.     Jesus  answered  and  said,  This 

31  voice  came  not  because  of  me,  but  for  your  sakes.     Now  is 
the  judgment  of  this  world  :  now  shall  the  prince  of  this 

for  this  cause]  These  words  are  taken  in  two  opposite  senses;  (i) 
that  I  might  be  saved  out  of  this  hour;  (2)  that  Thy  Name  might  be 
glorified  by  My  obedience.  Both  make  good  sense.  If  the  latter  be 
adopted  it  would  be  better  to  transpose  the  stops,  placing  a  full  stop 
after  'from  this  hour'  and  a  colon  after  'unto  this  hour.' 

28.  Then  came  there]  Better,  77uTe  came  therefore,  i.  e.  in  answer 
to  Christ's  prayer.  There  can  be  no  doubt  what  S.  John  wishes  us  to 
understand ; — that  a  voice  was  heard  speaking  articulate  words,  that 
some  could  distinguish  the  words,  others  could  not,  while  some  mistook 
the  sounds  lor  thunder.  To  make  the  thunder  the  reality,  and  the  voice 
and  the  words  mere  imagination,  is  to  substitute  an  arbitraiy  explanation 
for  the  Evangelist's  plain  meaning.  For  similar  voices  comp.  that  heard 
by  Elijah  (i  Kings  xix.  12,  13);  by  Nebuchadnezzar  (Dan.  iv.  31);  at 
Christ's  Baptism  (Mark  i.  11)  and  Transfiguration  (Mark  ix.  7) ;  and  at 
S.  Paul's  Conversion  (Acts  ix.  4.  7,  xxii.  9),  where  it  would  seem  that 
S.  Paul  alone  could  distinguish  the  words,  while  his  companions  merely 
heard  a  sound  (see  on  Acts  ix.  4).  One  of  the  conditions  on  which 
power  to  distinguish  what  is  said  depends  is  sympathy  with  the 
speaker. 

have  glorified  it]  in  all  God's  works  from  the  Creation  onwards, 
especially  in  the  life  of  Christ. 

will  glorify  it]  in  the  death  of  Christ  and  its  results. 

29.  The  people... thundered... spake]  Better,  The  multitude... had 
thundered...'h.2iX\\  spoken. 

30.  yesiis  ans7vered]  He  answered  their  discussions  about  the  sound, 
and  by  calling  it  a  voice  He  decides  conclusively  against  those  who  sup- 
posed it  to  be  thunder.  But  those  who  recognised  that  it  was  a  voice 
were  scarcely  less  seriously  mistaken  ;  their  error  consisted  in  not  recog- 
nising that  tlie  voice  had  a  meaning  for  them.  Not  for  My  sake  hatli 
this  voice  come,  but  for  your  sakes,  i.e.  that  ye  might  believe.  Comp. 
xi.  42. 

31.  Nozu...now]  With  prophetic  certainty  Christ  speaks  of  the 
victory  as  already  won. 

the  judgment  of  this  world]  The  sentence  passed  on  this  world  (see 
on  iii.  17  and  v.  29)  for  refusing  to  believe.  The  Cross  is  the  condemna- 
tion of  all  who  reject  it. 

the  prince  of  this  luorld]  Eiterally,  the  niler  of  this  world.  This  is 
one  of  the  apparently  Gnostic  phrases  which  may  have  contributed  to 
render  this  Gospel  suspicious  in  the  eyes  of  the  Alogi  (see  Introduction, 
Chap.  II.  i.) :  it  occurs  again  xiv.  30,  xvi.  11,  and  nowhere  else.     It 


w,  32—34.]  S.   JOHN,  XII.  255 

world  be  cast  out.  And  I,  if  I  be  lifted  up  from  the  earth,  32 
will  draw  all  men  unto  me.  This  he  said,  signifying  what  33 
death  he  should  die. 

34 — 36.     The  Perplexity  of  the  Multitude. 

The  people  answered  him,  We  have  heard  out  of  the  34 
law  that  Christ   abideth  for   ever:    and  how  sayest   thou, 

was  a  Gnostic  view  tliat  the  creator  and  ruler  of  the  material  universe 
was  an  evil  being.  But  in  the  Rabbinical  writings  'prince  of  this  world' 
was  a  common  designation  of  Satan,  as  ruler  of  the  Gentiles,  in  op- 
position to  God,  the  Head  of  the  Jewish  theocracy.  But  just  as  the 
Messiah  is  the  Saviour  of  the  believing  world,  whether  Jew  or  Gentile, 
so  Satan  is  the  ruler  of  the  unbelieving  world,  whether  Gentile  or  Jew. 
shall. ..be  cast  otit\  By  the  gradual  conversion  of  unbelievers.  This 
is  a  process  which  will  continue  until  the  last  day. 

32.  And  /]  'I '  is  very  emphatic  in  opposition  to  'the  ruler  of  this 
world.'  The  glorified  Christ  will  rule  men's  hearts  in  place  of  the 
devil. 

be  lifted  up\  Raised  up  to  heaven  by  means  of  the  Cross:  we  need 
not,  as  in  iii.  14  and  viii.  28,  confine  the  meaning  to  the  Crucifixion, 
although  the  lifting  up  on  the  Cross  may  be  specially  indicated.  The 
words  'from  the  earth'  (literally,  out  of  the  earth)  seem  to  point  to  the 
Ascension ;  yet  the  Cross  itself,  apparently  so  repulsive,  has  through 
Christ's  Death  become  an  attraction;  and  this  viay  be  the  meaning 
here.  For  the  hypothetical  form  't/T  be  lifted  up,'  comp.  'if\  go,' 
xiv.  3.  In  both  cases  Christ  is  concerned  not  with  the  time  of  the  act, 
but  with  the  consequences  of  it;  hence  He  does  not  say  'when,'  but  'if.' 

will  draw]  There  are  two  Greek  words  for  'draw'  in  the  N.T.,  one 
of  which  necessarily  implies  violence,  the  other  does  not :  it  is  the  latter 
that  is  used  here  and  in  vi.  44;  the  former  is  used  Acts  xiv.  19  and  xvii. 
6.  Man's  will  is  free;  he  can  refuse  to  be  drawn:  and  there  is  no  vio- 
lence; the  attraction  is  moral.  We  see  from  vi.  44  that  before  the 
'lifting  up'  it  is  the  Father  who  draws  men  to  the  Son. 

all  me/i]  Not  only  the  Jews  represented  by  the  Twelve,  but  the 
Gentiles  represented  by  these  Greeks. 

unto  fue]     Better,  unto  Myself,  up  from  the  earth. 

33.  what  death]  Literally,  by  what  manner  of  death:  comp.  x.  32, 
xviii.  32,  xxi.  9. 

should  die]  The  word  translated  '  should '  is  the  same  as  that  used  of 
the  traitor,  v.  4  and  vi.  71.  It  is  used  (i)  of  what  is  about  to  happen, 
(2)  of  what  (seeing  that  it  has  happened)  may  be  regarded  as  necessary 
and  fore-ordained. 

34 — 36.    The  Perplexity  of  the  Multitude. 

34.  The  people  answered]     The  multitude  therefore  answered. 

out  of  the  law]  In  its  widest  sense,  including  the  Psalms  and  the 
Prophets.     Comp.  Ps.  Ixxxix.  29,  36,  ex.  4;  Is.  ix.  7;  Ezek.  xxxvii. 


256  S.  JOHN,  XII. [vv.  35,  36- 

The  Son   of  man   must   be   lift   up?    who  is  this  Son  of 

35  man  ?  Then  Jesus  said  unto  them,  Yet  a  little  while 
is  the  light  with  you.  Walk  while  ye  have  the  light,  lest 
darkness  come  upon  you  :  for  he  that  walketh  in  darkness 

36  knoweth  not  whither  he  goeth.  While  ye  have  light,  believe 
in  the  light,  that  ye  may  be  the  children  of  light.     These 

25,  &c.  The  people  rightly  understand  'lifted  up  from  the  earth'  to 
mean  removal  from  the  earth  by  death;  and  they  argue— 'Scripture 
says  that  the  Christ  (see  on  i.  20)  will  abide  for  ever.  You  claim  to  be 
the  Christ,  and  yet  you  say  that  you  will  be  lifted  up  and  therefore  not 
abide.' 

■who  is  this  Son  of  man?]  'This'  is  contemptuous  :  'a  strange  Mes- 
siah this,  with  no  power  to  abide!'  (on  'Son  of  Man'  see  i.  51). 
"Here  we  have  the  secret,  unexplained  by  the  Synoptists,  why  even 
when  the  scale  is  seeming  to  turn  for  a  moment  in  favour  of  belief,  it  is 
continually  swayed  down  again  by  the  discovery  of  some  new  particular 
in  which  the  current  ideas  respecting  the  Messiah  are  disappointed  and 
contradicted."  S.  p.  199.  One  moment  the  people  are  convinced  by 
a  miracle  that  Jesus  is  the  Messiah,  the  next  that  it  is  impossible  to 
reconcile  His  position  with  the  received  interpretations  of  Messianic 
prophecy.     It  did  not  occur  to  them  to  doubt  the  interpretations. 

35.  Then  Jesus  said]  Better,  Jesus  therefore  said:  instead  of  an- 
swering their  contemptuous  question  He  gives  them  a  solemn  warning. 

while  ye  have]  The  l^etter  reading  is,  as  j^  have :  'walk  in  a  manner 
suitable  to  the  fact  of  there  being  the  Light  among  you:  make  use  of 
the  Light  and  work.' 

darA'ness]   that  darkness  '  in  which  no  man  can  work.' 

come  upon  you]  like  a  bird  of  prey.  The  same  Greek  verb  is  used 
of  the  last  day;  i  Thess.  v.  4;  and  in  the  LXX.  of  sin  overtaking  the 
sinner;  Num.  xxxii.  23. 

for  he  that  walketh  in  darkness]  And  he  that  walketh  tn  the  dark- 
ness. ,  1      • 

■whither  he  goeth]  Or,  gocth  away ;  knows  not  to  what  end  he  is 
departing:  comp.  i  John  ii.  11.  _ 

36.  IVhile  ye  have]  Here  again  the  better  reading  is  as  ye  have; 
and  'light'  should  be  'the  Light.'  Note  the  emphatic  repetition  so 
common  in  S.  John. 

that  ye  may  be]  Rather,  that  ye  may  ■become.  Faith  is  only  the 
beginning;  it  does  not  at  once  make  us  children. 

children  of  light]  No  article :  but  in  all  the  four  preceding  cases 
'light'  has  the  article  and  means  Christ,  the  Light,  as  in  i.  5,  7,  8,  9. 
The  expression  '  child  of  or  '  son  of  is  frequent  in  Hebrew  poetry  to 
indicate  very  close  connexion  as  between  product  and  producer  (see  on 
xvii.  12).  Thus,  'son  of  peace,'  Luke  x.  6;  'children  of  this  world, 
xvi.  8;  'sons  of  thunder,^  Mark  iii.  17.  Such  expressions  are  very 
frequent  in  the  most  Hebraistic  of  the  Gospels :  comp.  Matt.  v.  9, 
viii.  12,  ix.  15,  xiii.  38,  xxiii.  15. 


vv.  37— 39-1  S.  JOHN,  XII.  257 

things  spake  Jesus,  and  departed,  and  did  hide  himself  from 
them. 

37 — 43.     The  Judgment  of  the  Evangelist. 

But  though  he  had  done  so  many  miracles  before  them,  37 
yet  they  believed  not  on  him  :  that  the  saying  of  Esaias  the  38 
prophet  might  be  fulfilled,  which  he  spake.  Lord,  who  hath 
believed  our  report?  and  to  whom  hath  the  arm  of 
the  Lord  been   revealed?     Therefore   they  could   not  39 

and  departed^  Probably  to  Bethany,  to  spend  the  last  few  days 
before  His  hour  came  in  retirement,  Comp.  Matt.  xxi.  17;  Mark  xi. 
II ;  Luke  xxi.  37. 

did  hide  /n'msclfl     Rather,  was  Mdden. 

37 — 43.     The  Judgment  of  the  Evangelist. 

S.  John  here  sums  up  the  results  of  the  ministry  which  has  just 
come  to  a  close.  Their  comparative  poverty  is  such  that  he  can  ex- 
plain it  in  no  other  way  than  as  an  illustration  of  that  judicial  blind- 
ness which  had  been  foretold  and  denounced  by  Isaiah.  The  tragic 
tone  returns  again:  see  on  i.  5. 

37.  so  7nany  miracles']  The  Jews  admitted  His  miracles,  vii.  31; 
xi.  47.  They  are  assumed  by  S.  John  as  notorious,  although  he  him- 
self records  only  seven  of  them.     Comp.  ii.  23,  iv.  45,  vii,  31,  xi.  47. 

before  them]  i.e.  before  their  very  eyes. 

38.  Thai]  Or,  in  order  that,  indicating  the  Divine  purpose. 
Comp.  xiii.  18,  xv.  25,  xvii.  12,  xviii.  9,  32,  xix.  24,  36.  It  is  the  two 
specially  Hebraistic  Gospels  that  most  frequently  remind  us  that 
Christ's  life  was  a  fulfilment  of  Hebrew  prophecy.  Comp.  Matt.  i.  22, 
ii.  15,  17,  iv.  14,  viii.  17,  xii.  17,  xiii.  35,  xxi.  4,  xxvi.  54,  56,  xxvii.  9. 
See  on  Matt.  i.  22. 

Lord,  who  hath  believed]     The  quotation  closely  follows  the  LXX. 

our  report]  Literally,  that  which  they  hear  from  us;  comp.  Rom. 
x.  16. 

the  arm  of  the  Lord]  His  power.  There  seems  to  be  no  sufficient 
authority  for  interpreting  this  expression  of  the  Messiah,  although  it  is 
the  power  of  God  as  manifested  in  the  Messiah  that  is  here  specially 
meant.     Comp.  Luke  i.  51;  Acts  xiii.  17. 

39.  Therefore]  Or,  For  this  cause  (vv.  18,  27);  see  on  vii.  21,  22. 
It  refers  to  what  precedes,  and  the  '  because'  which  follows  gives  the 
reason  more  explicitly.  This  use  is  common  in  S.  John  :  comp,  v,  18, 
viii.  47,  x.  17. 

they  could  not]  It  had  become  morally  impossible.  Grace  may  be 
refused  so  persistently  as  to  destroy  the  power  of  accepting  it.  'I  will 
not'  leads  to  'I  cannot.'  Pharaoh  first  hardened  his  heart  and  then 
God  hardened  it.     Comp.  Rom.  ix.  6  to  xi.  32. 

S.JOHN  ly 


258  S.  JOHN,  XII.  [vv.  40—43. 

40  believe,  because  that  Esaias  said  again,  He  hath  blinded 
their  eyes,  and  hardened  their  heart;  that  they 
should  not  see  with  their  eyes,  nor  understand 
with    their  heart,  and  be  converted,  and   I   should 

41  heal  them.     These  tilings  said   Esaias,  when  he  saw  his 

42  glory,  and  spake  of  him.  Nevertheless  among  the  chief 
rulers  also  many  believed  on  him ;  but  because  of  the 
Pharisees  they  did  not  confess  him,  lest  they  should  be  put 

4j  out  of  the  synagogue :  for  they  loved  the  praise  of  men  more 
than  the  praise  of  God. 

40.  He  halh  blinded^  Not  Christ,  nor  the  devil,  but  God.  The 
quotation  is  free,  following  neither  the  Hebrew  nor  the  LXX.  very 
closely. 

/  should  heal\  '  I'  =  Christ.  God  has  hardened  their  hearts  so  that 
they  could  not  be  converted,  and  therefore  Christ  could  not  heal  them. 
Comp.  Matt.  xiii.  14,  15,  where  Christ  quotes  this  text  to  explain  why 
He  teaches  in  parables;  and  Acts  xxviii.  26,  where  S.  Paul  quotes  it  to 
explain  the  rejection  of  his  preaching  by  the  Jews  in  Rome. 

41.  when  he  saiv]  The  better  reading  is,  toecause  he  saw.  We 
had  a  similar  double  reading  in  v.  17,  where  '  when'  is  to  be  preferred. 
In  the  Greek  the  difference  is  only  a  single  letter,  5re  and  &ti..  Christ's 
glory  was  revealed  to  Isaiah  in  a  vision,  and  therefore  he  spoke  of  it. 
The  glory  of  the  Son  before  the  Incarnation,  when  He  was  '  in  the 
form  of  God'  (Phil.  ii.  6),  is  to  be  understood. 

42.  Nez'ertheless']  In  spite  of  the  judicial  blindness  with  which  God 
had  visited  them  many  even  of  the  Sanhedrin  believed.  We  know  of 
Joseph  of  Arimathea  and  Nicodemus. 

because  of  the  Pharisees]  The  recognised  champions  of  orthodoxy 
both  in  and  outside  the  Sanhedrin.     Comp.  vii.  13,  ix.  22. 

did  not  con/ess']  Imperfect  tense;  they  were  perpetually  omitting  to 
do  so. 

43.  the  praise  of  men  &c.]  Better,  the  glory  {that  cometh)  from 
men  rather  than  the  glory  {that  cometh)  from  God  (see  on  v.  41,  44). 
The  word  rendered  'praise'  is  the  same  as  that  rendered  'glory'  in 
V.  41.  Moreover  'more  than'  is  not  strong  enough;  it  should  be 
rather  than.  Joseph  and  Nicodemus  confessed  their  belief  after  the 
crisis  of  the  Crucifixion.  Gamaliel  did  not  even  get  so  far  as  to  believe 
on  Him. 

44— BO.    The  Judgment  of  Christ. 

The  Evangelist  has  just  summed  up  the  results  of  Christ's  ministry 
(37 — 43).  He  now  corroborates  that  estimate  by  quoting  Christ  Him- 
self But  as  V.  36  seems  to  give  us  the  close  of  the  ministr)',  we  are 
probably  to  understand  that  what  follows  was  uttered  on  some  occasion 
or  occasions  previous  to  v.  36.  Perhaps  it  is  given  us  as  an  epitome  of 
what  Christ  often  taught. 


w.  44—49-]  S.  JOHN,   XII.  259 

44 — 50,     The  Judgment  of  Christ. 

Jesus  cried  and  said,  He  that  believeth  on  me,  believeth  44 
not  on  me,  but  on  him  that  sent  me.    And  he  that  seeth  me  45 
seeth  him  that  sent  me.     I  am  come  a  light  into  the  world,  46 
that  whosoever  believeth  on  me  should  not  abide  in  dark- 
ness.    And  if  any  man  hear  my  words,  and  believe  not,  I  47 
judge  him  not :  for  I  came  not  to  judge  the  world,  but  to 
save  the  world.     He  that  rejecteth  me,  and  receiveth  not  48 
my  words,  hath  one  that  judgeth  him  :  the  word  that  I  have 
spoken,  the  same  shall  judge  him  in  the  last  day.     For  I  49 

44.  cried'\  Comp.  vii.  28,  37  The  expression  implies  public 
teaching. 

believeth  not  on  nie\  His  belief  does  not  end  there  ;  it  must  include 
more.  This  saying  does  not  occur  in  the  previous  discourses;  but  in 
V.  36  and  viii.  19  we  have  a  similar  thought.  Jesus  came  as  His  Fa- 
ther's ambassador,  and  an  ambassador  has  no  meaning  apart  from  the 
sovereign  who  sends  him.  Not  only  is  it  impossible  to  accept  the  one 
without  the  other,  but  to  accept  the  representative  is  to  accept  not  him 
in  his  own  personality  but  the  prince  whom  he  personates.  These 
words  are,  therefore,  to  be  taken  quite  literally. 

45.  seeth^  Or,  belioldeth,  contetnplateth.  The  same  verb  is  used 
vi.  40,  62,  vii.  3  and  frequently  in  S.  John. 

46.  J  am  come']  Emphatic;  '  I  and  none  other.'  Comp.  z/z/.  35,  36, 
viii.  12,  ix.  5. 

abide  in  darkness]  Till  the  Light  comes,  all  are  in  darkness;  the 
question  remains  whether  they  will  remain  so  aftei-  the  Light  has 
come. 

47.  hear  my  words]  'Hear'  is  a  neutral  word,  implying  neither 
belief  nor  unbelief.  Matt.  vii.  24,26;  Mark  iv.  15,  16.  For  'words' 
read  sajdngs  (see  on  v.  47)  both  here  and  in  v.  48. 

and  believe  not]  The  true  reading  is  and  keep  them  not,  i.  e.  fulfil 
them  (comp.  Luke  xi.  28,  xviii.  21).  One  important  MS.  omits  the 
'  not,'  perhaps  to  avoid  a  supposed  inconsistency  between  v.  47  and 

V.  48. 

48.  my  words]  Better,  il^  sasdngs  (see  on  v.  47):  'word'  in  the 
next  clause  is  right. 

hath  one  that  judgeth  him]  Hath  his  judge  already,  without  My 
sentencing  him.  Comp.  iii.  18,  v.  45.  The  hearer  may  refuse  the 
word,  but  he  cannot  refuse  the  responsibility  of  having  heard  it. 

in  the  last  day]  Peculiar  to  this  Gospel:  comp.  vi.  39,  40,  44,  54, 
xi.  24.  This  verse  is  conclusive  as  to  the  doctrine  of  the  last  judgment 
being  contained  in  this  Gospel. 

49.  For]  Or,  Because:  it  introduces  the  reason  why  one  who 
rejects  Christ's  word  will  be  judged  by  His  word; — because  that  word 
is  manifestly  Divine  and  proceeds  from  the  Father. 

17 — 2 


26o  S.  JOHN,  XII.  [v.  so. 

have  not  spoken  of  myself;  but  the  Father  which  sent  me, 
he  gave  me  a  commandment,  what  I  should  say,  and  what 
50  I  should  speak.  And  I  know  that  his  commandment  is 
life  everlasting :  whatsoever  I  speak  therefore,  even  as  the 
Father  said  unto  me,  so  I  speak. 

xiii. — xvii.     The  inner  Glorification  of  Christ  in  His 
last  Discourses. 

of  myself]  Literally,  out  of  Myself  {ek)  without  commission  from  the 
Father.     Com^.  f-om  Myself  (apo)  v.  30,  vii.  16,  28,  viii.  -28. 

he  gave  me]  Himself  (and  none  other)  hatli  given  Me.  .See  on 
X.  18. 

say.,  speak]  'Say'  probably  refers  to  the  doctrine,  'speak'  to  the 
form  in  which  it  is  expressed.     See  on  viii.  43. 

50.  And  I  know]  The  Son's  testimony  to  tlie  Father.  '  The  com- 
mission which  He  hath  given  Me  is  eternal  life.'  (See  on  iii.  16.) 
His  commission  is  to  save  tlie  world. 

as  the  Father  tai'd]  The  same  distinction  as  in  the  previous  verse: 
the  matter  of  the  revelation  comes  from  the  Father,  the  external  ex- 
pression of  it  from  the  Son. 

With  this  the  first  main  division  of  the   Gospel  ends.     Christ's 

REVELATION  OF  HiMSELF  TO  THE  WORLD  IN  HiS  MINISTRY  is  con- 
cluded. The  Evangelist  has  set  before  us  the  Testimony  to  the 
Christ,  the  Work  of  the  Christ,  and  the  Judgment  respecting  the 
work,  which  has  ended  in  a  conflict,  and  the  conflict  has  reached  a 
climax.     We  have  reached  the  beginning  of  the  end. 

Chap.  XIH. 

We  now  enter  upon  the  second  main  division  of  the  Gospel.  The 
Evangelist  has  given  us  thus  far  a  narrative  of  Christ's  Ministry  pre- 
sented to  us  in  a  series  of  typical  scenes  (i.  iS — xii.  50).  He  goes  on 
to  set  forth  the  Issues  of  Christ's  Ministry  (xiii — xx).  The  last 
chapter  (xxi.)  forms  the  Epilogue,  balancing  the  first  eighteen  verses 
(i.  I — 18),  which  form  the  Prologue. 

The  second  main  division  of  the  Gospel,  like  the  first,  falls  into  three 
parts:  i.  the  inner  Glorification  of  Christ  in  His  last 
Discourses  (xiii. — xvii.);  2.  the  outer  Glorification  of  Christ 
IN  His  Passion  (xviii,  xix.) ;  3.  the  Victory  completed  in  the 
Resurrection  (xx.).  These  parts  will  be  subdivided  as  we  reach 
them. 

xiii.— xvii.     The  inner  Glorification  of  Christ  in  His 
last  Discourses. 

r.  //ts  Love  in  Humiliation  [xiii.  1 — 30);  2,  His  Love  in  keeping  His 
07vn  (xiii.  30 — xv.  27);  3.  the  Promise  of  the  Paraclete  and  of  Christ's 
Return  (xvi.) :  4.  Chrisfs  Prayer  for  Himself  the  Apostles,  and  all 
Believers  (xvii.). 


vv.  1,2.]  S.   JOHN,   XIII.  261 

Chap.  XIII.  i — 30.    Love  in  Htimiliation. 

Now  before  the  feast  of  the  passover,  when  Jesus  knew  13 
that  his  hour  was  come  that  he  should  depart  out  of  this 
world  unto  the  Father,  having  loved  his  own  which  were  in 
the  world,  he  loved  them  unto  the  end.     And  supper  being  2 
ended,  the  devil  having  now  put  into  the  heart  of  Judas 

Chap.  XIII.  1—30.     Love  in  Humiliation. 

This  section  has  two  parts  in  strong  and  dramatic  contrast;  i.  the 
washing  of  the  disciples'  feet  (1—20);  2.  the  self-excommunication  of 
the  traitor  (21 — 30). 

1.  Now  before  the  feast  of  the  passover\  These  words  give  a  date  not 
to  any  one  word  in  the  verse,  whether  '  knew '  or  '  having  loved  '  or 
'loved,'  but  to  the  narrative  which  follows.  Their  most  natural  mean- 
ing is  that  some  evening  before  the  Passover  Jesus  was  at  supper  with 
His  disciples.  This  was  probably  Thursday  evening,  the  beginning  of 
Nisan  14:  but  thedifficult  question  of  the  Day  of  the  Crucifixion  is  too 
long  for  a  note  and  is  discussed  in  Appendix  A. 

■when  Jesus  k7inv\  Or,  Jesus  knowing  {v.  3).  The  Greek  may  mean 
either  '  although  He  knew'  or  'because  He  knew.'  The  latter  is  better : 
it  was  precisely  because  He  knew  that  He  would  soon  return  to  glory 
that  He  gave  this  last  token  of  self-humiliating  love. 

his  hour  was  come']  See  on  ii.  4,  vii.  6,  xi.  9.  Till  His  hour  had 
come  His  enemies  could  do  nothing  but  plot  (vii.  30,  viii.  20). 

that  he  shoulc{\  Literally,  in  order  that  He  should,  of  the  Divine 
purpose.     See  on  xii.  23. 

depart  out  of]  Or,  pass  over  ozet  of:  it  is  the  same  verb  and  prepo- 
sition as  in  v.  24 ;   '  haXh  passed  over  out  of  death  into  life.' 

his  own]  Those  whom  God  had  given  Him,  i.  ir,  12,  xvii.  ri; 
Acts  iv.  23,  xxiv.  23. 

unto  the  end]  The  end  of  Ilis  life  is  the  common  interpretation, 
which  may  be  right.  Comp.  Matt.  x.  22  and  xxiv.  13,  where  the  same 
Greek  expression  is  translated  as  it  is  here;  and  i  Thess.  ii.  16,  where 
it  is  translated  'to  the  uttermost.'  In  Luke  xviii.  5  'continual  coming' 
is  literally  '  coming  to  the  end.'  In  all  these  passages  the  meaning  may 
either  be  'at  the  last,  finally,'  or,  'to  the  uttermost,  utterly.'  To  tlie 
uttermost  is  perhaps  to  be  preferred  here.  Comp.  the  LXX.  of  Amos 
ix.  8 ;  Ps.  xii.  i. 

2.  supper  being  ended]  There  are  two  readings  here,  but  neither  of 
them  means  'being  ended,'  moreover  the  supper  is  not  ended  {v.  26). 
The  common  reading  would  mean  'supper  having  begun,' and  the  better 
reading,  'when  supper  was  at  hand,'  or,  'when  supper  was  beginning.' 
"It  was  the  custom  for  slaves  to  wash  the  feet  of  the  guests  before 
sitting  down  to  meat;  and  we  are  tempted  to  suppose  that  the  symboli- 
cal act,  which  our  Evangelist  relates  here,  took  the  place  of  this  custom." 
b.  p.  214. 


262  S.  JOHN,  XIII.  [vv.  3—5. 

3  Iscariot,  Simon's  son,  to  betray  him;  Jesus  knowing  that  the 
Father  had  given  all  things  into  his  hands,  and  that  he  was 

4  come  from  God,  and  went  to  God  ;  he  riseth  from  supper, 
and  laid  aside  his  garments ;  and  took  a  towel,  and  girded 

5  himself.      After   that,   he  poureth  water  into  a  bason,  and 

the  devil to  betray  him]  The  true  reading  gives  us,  The  devil  hav- 
ing flow  put  it  into  the  heart,  that  Judas,  Simons  son,  Iscariot,  should 
betray  Him.  Whose  heart  ?  Only  two  answers  are  possible  grammati- 
cally; (i)  the  heart  of  Judas,  (■2)  the  devil's  own  heart.  The  latter  is 
incredible,  if  only  for  the  reason  that  S.John  himself  has  shewn  that  the 
devil  had  long  been  at  work  with  Judas.  The  meaning  is  that  of  the 
received  reading,  but  more  awkwardly  expressed.  '  To  betray'  is 
literally  S.  John's  favourite  form  '  in  order  that  he  should  betray.'  The 
traitor's  name  is  given  in  full  for  greater  solemnity,  and  in  the  true  text 
comes  last  for  emphasis.  Note  the  position  of  Iscariot,  confirming  the 
view  (see  on  vi.  71)  that  the  word  is  a  local  epithet  rather  than  a  proper 
name. 

3.  yesus  knowing]  The  Greek  is  the  same  as  of  'when  Jesus  knew' 
in  z/.  I,  and  may  have  either  of  the  two  meanings  given  there.  Here 
also  '  because  He  knew  '  is  better. 

given  all  things]     Comp.  Eph.  i.  11;  Phil.  ii.  9 — 11. 
and  went  to  God]     Better,  and  is  going  to  God. 

4.  He  riseth  from  stepper,  &c.]  Or,  from  the  supper :  the  article 
perhaps  marks  the  supper  as  no  ordinary  one.     "This  is  the  realism  of 

history  indeed The  carefulness  with  which  here,  as  in  the  account 

of  the  cleansing  of  the  temple,  the  successive  stages  in  the  action  are 
described,  proclaim  the  eye-witness."  S.  p.  ■216.  One  is  unfiling  to 
surrender  the  view  that  this  symbolical  act  was  intended  among  other 
purposes  to  be  a  tacit  rebuke  to  the  disciples  for  the  'strife  among  them, 
which  of  them  should  be  accounted  the  greatest'  (Luke  xxii.  24);  and 
certainly  'I  am  among  you  as  he  that  serveth'  (v.  27)  seems  to  point  di- 
rectly to  this  act.  This  view  seems  all  the  more  probable  when  we 
remember  that  a  similar  dispute  was  rebuked  in  a  similar  way,  viz.  by 
symbolical  action  (Luke  ix.  46 — 48).  The  dispute  may  have  arisen 
about  their  places  at  the  table.  Tliat  S.  Luke  places  the  strife  after  the 
supper  is  not  fatal  to  this  view  ;  he  gives  no  note  of  time,  and  the  strife 
is  singularly  out  of  place  tliere,  immediately  after  their  ^Laste^'s  self- 
humiliation  and  in  the  midst  of  the  last  farewells.  We  may  therefore 
believe,  in  spite  of  S.  Luke's  arrangement,  that  the  strife  preceded  the 
supper.  "One  thing  is  clear,  that  S.  John,  if  he  had  read  S.  Luke's 
Gospel  at  this  point,  has  not  copied  or  followed  it.  He  proceeds  with 
tlie  same  peculiar  independence  which  we  have  noticed  in  him  all 
through."     S.  p.  215. 

his  garments]  Or,  His  upper  garments,  which  would  impede  His 
movements. 

6.  into  a  bason]  Better,  into  the  bason,  which  stood  there  for  such 
purposes,  the  large  copper  bason  commonly  found  in  oriental  houses. 


vv.  6—8.]  S.   JOHN,   XIII.  263 

began  to  wash  the  disciples'  feet,  and  to  wipe  them  with  the 
towel  wherewith  he  was  girded.     Then  cometh  he  to  Simon  6 
Peter :  and  Peter  saith  unto  him,  Lord,  dost  thou  wash  rny 
feet  ?     Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  him,  What  I  do  thou  7 
knowest  not  now ;  but  thou  shalt  know  hereafter.      Peter  8 
saith  unto   him,   Thou    shalt  never  wash  my  feet.     Jesus 
answered  him,  If  I  wash  thee  not,  thou  hast  no  part  with 

began  to  zvasK\  Began  is  not  a  mere  amplification  as  in  the  other 
Gospels  (Matt.  xi.  7,  xxvi.  ■22,  37,  74;  Mark  iv.  i,  vi.  2,  7,  34,  55; 
Luke  vii.  15,  24,  38,  49;  &c.  &c.),  and  in  the  Acts  (i.  i,  ii.  4,  xviii,  26, 
&c.).  The  word  occurs  nowhere  else  in  S.  John,  and  here  is  no  mere 
periphrasis  for  '  washed.'  He  began  to  wash,  but  was  interrupted  by 
the  incident  with  S.  Peter.  With  whom  He  began  is  not  mentioned : 
from  very  early  times  some  have  conjectured  Judas. 

Contrast  the  mad  insolence  of  Caligula — quosdam  suttunis  honoribus 
fundos . .  .ad  pedes  stare  sitccinctos  linteo  passus  est.  Suet.  Calig.  xxvi. 
Linteum  in  a  Greek  form  is  the  very  word  here  used  for  towel. 

6.  Then  cometh  he]  Better,  //e  cometh  therefore,  i.  e.  in  consequence 
of  having  begun  to  wash  the  feet  of  each  in  turn.  The  natural  impres- 
sion is  that  S.  Peter's  turn  at  any  rate  did  not  come  first.  But  if  it  did, 
this  is  not  much  in  favour  of  the  primacy  of  S.  Peter,  which  can  be 
proved  from  other  passages,  still  less  of  a  supremacy,  which  cannot  be 
proved  at  all. 

dost  thou  wash  my  feet  ?]  There  is  a  strong  emphasis  on  'Thou.' 
Comp.  'Comest  Thou  to  me?'     (Matt.  iii.  14.) 

7.  What  [do  thou  kttotvest  not]  Here  both  pronouns  are  emphafic 
and  are  opposed.  Peter's  question  implied  that  he  knew,  while  Christ 
did  not  know,  what  He  was  doing  :  Christ  tells  him  that  the  very  re- 
verse of  this  is  the  fact.     On  '  now  '  see  note  on  xvi.  31. 

hereafter]  hiteraWy,  after  these  thing^s  {iii.  22,  v.  i,  14,  vi.  r,  vii.  i, 
xix.  38).  '  Hereafter '  conveys  a  wrong  impression,  as  if  it  referred  to 
the  remote  future.  Had  this  been  intended  the  words  used  for  '  now  ' 
and  '  afterwards '  in  v.  36  would  probably  have  been  employed  here. 
The  reference  probably  is  to  the  explanation  of  this  symbolical  action 
given  in  vv.  12 — 17.  This  seems  clear  from  the  opening  words  {v.  12), 
^ A'now  ye  what  I  have  done  to  you?' — all  the  more  so,  because  it  is  the 
same  word  for  'know'  as  here  for 'thou  shalt  know  '  (gtuSsl'etn);  where- 
as the  Greek  for  'thou  knowest'  in  this  verse  is  a  different  and  more 
general  word  (oidas):  'what  /am  doing,  thou  knowest  not  just  now, 
but  thou  shalt  recognise  presently.'     See  notes  on  vii.  26  and  viii.  55. 

8.  Thoii  shalt  never  wash  my  feet]  The  negative  is  the  strongest 
form  possible  ;  '  thou  shalt  certainly  not  wash  my  feet  for  ever.'  See  on 
viii.  51,  and  comp.  Matt.  xvi.  22. 

no  part  with  me]  The  Greek  is  the  same  as  in  Matt.  xxiv.  51  and 
Luke  xii.  46.  The  expression  is  of  Hebrew  origin ;  comp.  Deut.  x.  9, 
xii.  12,  xiv.  27.  To  reject  Christ's  self-humiliating  love,  because  it 
humiliates  Him  (a  well-meaning  but  false  principle),  is  to  cut  oneself  off 


264  S.  JOHN,  XIII.  [w.  9— 12. 

9  me.     Simon  Peter  saith  unto  him,  Lord,  not  my  feet  only, 

TO  but  also  my  hands  and  77iy  head.     Jesus  saith  to  him.  He 

that   is   washed   needeth  not  save  to  wash  his  feet,  but  is 

1 1  clean  every  whit :  and  ye  are  clean,  but  not  all.  For  he 
knew  who  should  betray  him ;  therefore  said  he.  Ye  are  not 
all  clean. 

12  So  after  he  had  washed  their  feet^  and  had  taken  his 
garments,  and    was   set   down   again,   he   said   unto  them, 

from  Him.  It  requires  much  more  humility  to  accept  a  benefit  which 
is  a  serious  loss  to  the  giver  than  one  which  costs  him  nothing.  In 
this  also  the  surrender  of  self  is  necessary. 

9.  not  Diy  feet  on/y]  The  impetuosity  which  is  so  marked  a  charac- 
teristic of  S.  Peter  in  the  first  three  Gospels  (comp.  especially  Luke  v.  8 
and  Matt.  xvi.  22),  comes  out  very  strongly  in  his  three  utterances  here. 
It  is  incredible  that  this  should  be  deliberate  invention  ;  and  if  not, 
the  independent  authority  of  this  narrative  is  manifest. 

10.  J/e  that  is  washed]  Rather,  He  that  is  bathed  (comp.  Heb.  x.  22 
and  1  Pet.  ii.  22).  In  the  Greek  we  have  quite  a  different  word  from  the 
one  rendered  '  wash '  elsewhere  in  these  verses :  the  latter  means  to 
wash  part  of  the  body,  this  to  bathe  the  whole  person.  A  man  who 
has  bathed  does  not  need  to  bathe  again  when  he  reaches  home,  but  only 
to  wash  the  dust  off  his  feet :  then  he  is  wholly  clean.  So  also  in  the 
spiritual  life,  a  man  whose  moral  nature  has  once  been  thoroughly 
purified  need  not  think  that  this  has  been  all  undone  if  in  the  walk 
through  life  he  contracts  some  stains :  these  must  be  washed  away, 
and  then  he  is  once  more  wholly  clean.  Peter,  conscious  of  his  own 
imperfections,  in  Luke  v.  S,  and  possibly  here,  rushes  to  the  conclusion 
that  he  is  utterly  unclean.  But  his  meaning  here  perhaps  rather  is;  'If 
having  part  in  Thee  depends  on  being  washed  by  Thee,  wash  all  Thou 
canst.'  S.  Peter  excellently  illustrates  Christ's  saying.  His  love  for  his 
Master  proves  that  he  had  bathed;  his  boastfulness  (v.  37),  his  attack 
on  Malchus  (xviii.  10),  his  denials  (25,  27)  his  dissimulation  at  Anlioch 
(Gal.  ii.),  all  shew  how  often  he  had  need  to  wash  his  feet. 

but  not  all^  This  is  the  second  indication  of  the  presence  of  a  traitor 
among  them  (comp.  vi.  70).  Apparently  it  did  not  attract  much  atten- 
tion: each,  conscious  of  his  own  faults,  thought  the  remark  only  too 
true.  The  disclosure  is  made  gradually  but  rapidly  now  (w.  18,  21, 
26). 

11.  who  should  betray  hini]  Ox,  him  that  was  betraying  Him,  The 
Greek  construction  is  exactly  equivalent  to  that  of  'He  that  should 
come'  (Matt.  xi.  3;  Luke  vii.  ly);  in  both  cases  it  is  the  present  parti- 
ciple with  the  definite  article — 'the  betraying  one,'  'the  coming  one.' 

therefore]     Or,  for  this  cause:  see  on  xii.  39. 

12.  7vas  set  down]  The  Greek  verb  occurs  frequently  in  the  Gospels 
(and  nowhere  else  in  N.T.)  of  reclining  at  meals.  It  always  implies  a 
change  of  position  (see  on  v.  1^,  and  comp.  vi.  10,  xxi.  20;  Matt.  xv. 
35;  Mark  vi.  40;  Luke  xi.  37). 


w.  13—18.]  S.  JOHN,  XIII.  265 

Know  ye  what  I  have  done  to  you  ?  Ye  call  me  Master  13 
and  Lord  :  and  ye  say  well ;  for  so  I  am.  If  I  then,  your  14 
Lord  and  Master,  have  washed  your  feet ;  ye  also  ought  to 
wash  one  another's  feet.  For  I  have  given  you  an  example,  15 
that  ye  should  do  as  I  have  done  to  you.  Verily,  verily,  I  16 
say  unto  you,  The  servant  is  not  greater  than  his  lord; 
neither  he  that  is  sent  greater  than  he  that  sent  him.  If  ye  17 
know  these  things,  happy  are  ye  if  ye  do  them.     I  speak  18 

Know ye\  'Do  ye  recognise  the  meaning  of  it?'  (see  on  v.  7).  The 
question  directs  their  attention  to  the  explanation  to  be  given. 

13.  Master  and  Lord\  Or,  The  Master  {Teacher)  and  the  Lord. 
These  are  the  ordinary  titles  of  respect  paid  to  a  Rahbi :  '  Lord '  is  the 
correlative  of  'servant,'  so  that  'Master'  might  be  a  synonym  for  that 
also ;  but  the  disciples  would  no  doubt  use  the  word  with  deeper  mean- 
ing as  their  knowledge  of  their  Master  increased.  In  the  next  verse  the 
order  of  the  titles  is  reversed,  to  give  emphasis  to  the  one  with  this 
deeper  meaning. 

14.  yoicr  Lord  and  Master,  have  washed^  Rather,  the  Loj-d  and  the 
Master,  washed.     For  the  construction  comp.  xv.  20  and  xviii.  23. 

ye  also  ought  to  wash  one  another's  feet^  The  custom  of  'the  feet- 
washing'  on  Maundy  Thursday  in  literal  fulfilment  of  this  typical  com- 
mandment is  not  older  than  the  fourth  century.  The  Lord  High 
Almoner  washed  the  feet  of  the  recipients  of  the  royal  'maundy'  as  late 
as  1731.  James  II.  was  the  last  English  sovereign  who  went  through 
the  ceremony.  In  i  Tim.  v.  lo  'washing  the  saints'  feet'  is  perhaps 
given  rather  as  a  type  of  devoted  charity  than  as  a  definite  act  to  be 
required. 

15.  as  I  have  done  to  you]  Not,  ^what  1  have  done  to  you,'  but 
'even  as  I  have  done  :'  this  is  the  spirit  in  which  to  act— self-sacrificing 
humility — whether  or  no  it  be  exhibited  precisely  in  this  way.  Mutual 
service,  and  especially  mutual  cleansing,  is  the  obligation  of  Christ's 
disciples.     Comp.  James  v.  i6. 

16.  The  servant  is  not  greater  than  his  lord]  This  saying  occurs 
four  times  in  the  Gospels,  each  time  in  a  different  connexion:  (i)  to 
shew  that  the  disciples  must  expect  no  better  treatment  than  their 
Master  (Matt.  x.  24) ;  (2)  to  impress  the  Apostles  with  their  responsi- 
bilities as  teachers,  for  their  disciples  will  be  as  they  are  (Luke  vi.  40) ; 
(3)  here ;  (4)  with  the  same  purpose  as  in  Matt.  x.  -24,  but  on  another 
occasion  (xv.  20).  We  infer  that  it  was  one  of  Christ's  frequent  sayings  : 
it  is  introduced  here  with  the  double  'verily'  as  of  special  importance 

(i-  50- 

he  that  is  sent]     An  Apostle  {apostolos). 

17.  happy  are  ye  if  ye  do  them]  Better,  blessed  are  ye,  &c.  It  is 
the  same  Greek  word  as  is  used  in  xx.  29  and  in  the  Beatitudes  both  in 
S.  Matthew  and  in  S.  Luke.  Comp.  Luke  xi.  28,  xii.  43;  Matt,  vii 
21  ;  Rev.  i.  3. 


266  '  S.   JOHN,   XITI.  [v.  19. 

not  of  you  all :  I  know  whom  I  have  chosen  :  but  that  the 

scripture  may  be  fulfilled,  He  that  eateth  bread  with 

19  me  hath  lift  up  his  heel  against  me.     Now  I  tell  you 

before  it  come,   that,  when  it    is   come   to   pass,  ye   may 

18.  /  speak  not  of  you  all'\  There  is  one  who  knows  these  things, 
and  does  not  do  them,  and  is  the  very  reverse  of  blessed. 

I  know  ivhom  I  have  chosen^  The  first  'I'  is  emphatic:  '/know  the 
character  of  the  Twelve  whom  I  chose ;  the  treachery  of  one  has  been 
foretold;  it  is  no  surprise  to  Me.'     Comp.  vi.  70. 

biitthat^  This  elliptical  use  of  'but  that'  (  =  'but  this  was  done  in 
order  that')  is  frequent  in  S.  John:  i.  8,  ix.  3,  xiv.  31,  xv.  25;  i  John 
ii.  19.  Here  another  way  of  filling  up  the  ellipsis  is  possible;  'But  I 
chose  them  in  order  that.' 

may  be  ftdjilkd]  See  on  xii.  38.  The  quotation  is  taken,  but  with 
freedom,  from  the  Hebrew  of  Ps.  xli.  9;  for  'lifted  up  his  heel'  both  the 
Hebrew  and  the  LXX.  have  'magnified  his  heel.'  (See  on  vi.  45.)  The 
metaphor  here  is  of  one  raising  his  foot  before  kicking,  but  the  blow  is 
not  yet  given.  This  was  the  attitude  of  Judas  at  this  moment.  It  has 
been  remarked  that  Christ  omits  the  words  '  Mine  own  familiar  friend 
whom  I  trusted:'  He  had  not  trusted  Judas,  and  had  not  been  de- 
ceived, as  the  Psalmist  had  been :  '  He  knew  what  was  in  man '  (ii. 
-25). 

He  that  eateth  bread  with  me]  Or,  //e  that  eateth  the  bread  with  Me. 
The  more  probable  reading  gives.  My  bread  for  'the  bread  with  Me.' 
The  variations  from  the  LXX.  are  remarkable,  (i)  The  word  for  'eat' 
is  changed  from  the  common  verb  (e(r^tw)used  in  Ps.  xli.  10  to  the  much 
less  common  verb  (rpw^w)  used  of  eating  Christ's  Flesh  and  the  Bread 
from  Heaven  (vi.  54,  56,  57,  58,  where  see  notes),  and  nowhere  else  in 
the  N.T.,  excepting  Matt.  xxiv.  38.  (2)  'Bread'  or  'loaves'  (aprous) 
has  been  altered  to  'the  bread'  {rhv  dprov).  (3)  '  My'  has  possibly  been 
strengthened  to  'with  Me:'  to  eat  bread  with  a  man  is  more  than  to  eat 
his  bread,  which  a  servant  might  do.  These  changes  can  scarcely  be 
accidental,  and  seem  to  point  to  the  fact  that  the  treachery  of  Judas  in 
violating  the  bond  of  hospitality,  so  universally  held  sacred  in  the  East, 
was  aggravated  by  his  having  partaken  of  the  Eucharist.  That  Judas 
did  partake  of  the  Eucharist  seems  to  follow  from  Luke  xxii.  19—21, 
but  the  point  is  one  about  which  there  is  much  controversy. 

S.  John  omits  the  institution  of  the  Eucharist  for  the  same  reason  that 
he  omits  so  much, — because  it  was  so  well  known  to  every  instructed 
Christian ;  and  for  such  he  writes. 

19.  Now]  Better,  as  the  margin,  From  henceforth  (comp.  i.  51, 
xiv.  7;  Rev.  xiv.  13).  Hitherto  Christ  had  been  reserved  about  the 
presence  of  a  traitor ;  to  point  him  out  would  have  been  to  make  him 
desperate  and  deprive  hiq^  of  a  chance  of  recovery.  But  every  good 
influence  has  failed,  even  the  Eucharist  and  the  washing  of  his  feet; 
and/rom  this  time  oinvard  Christ  tells  the  other  Apostles. 

before  it  come]     Add  to  pass,  as  in  the  next  clause.     Comp.  xiv.  29. 


w.  20~23.J  S.   JOHN,  XIII.  267 

believe  that  I  am  he.     Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  He  20 
that  receiveth  whomsoever  I  send  receiveth  me ;   and  he 
that  receiveth  me  receiveth  him  that  sent  me. 

21 — 30.     The  self-exco??imunication  of  the  traitor. 

When  Jesus  had  thus  said,  he  was  troubled  in  spirit,  and  21 
testified,  and  said.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  that  one 
of  you  shall  betray  me.     Then  the  disciples  looked  one  on  22 
another,    doubting   of  whom   he   spake.      Now  there  was  23 
leaning  on  Jesus'  bosom  one  of  his  disciples,  whom  Jesus 

The  success  of  such  treachery  might  have  shaken  their  faith  had  it  taken 
them  unawares :  by  foretelling  it  He  turns  it  into  an  aid  to  faith. 
may  believe  that  I  am  he^     See  on  viii.  24,  28,  58. 

20.  He  that  receiveth,  &c.]  The  connexion  of  this  saying,  solemnly 
introduced  with  the  double  'verily,'  with  what  precedes  is  not  easy  to 
determine.  The  saying  is  one  with  which  Christ  had  sent  forth  the 
Apostles  in  the  first  instance  (Matt.  x.  40).  It  is  recalled  at  the  moment 
when  one  of  them  is  being  denounced  for  treacheiy.  It  was  natural 
that  such  an  end  to  such  a  mission  should  send  Christ's  thoughts  back 
to  the  beginning  of  it.  Moreover  He  would  warn  them  all  from  sup- 
posing that  such  a  catastrophe  either  cancelled  the  mission  or  proved  it 
to  be  worthless  from  the  first.  Of  every  one  of  them,  even  of  Judas 
himself,  the  saying  still  held  good,  'he  that  receiveth  tvhomsoever  I 
send,  receiveth  Me.'  The  unworthiness  of  the  minister  cannot  annul  the 
commission. 

21 — 30.     The  self-excommunication  of  the  traitor. 

21.  he  was  troubled  in  spirif]  Once  more  the  reality  of  Christ's 
human  nature  is  brought  before  us  (comp.  xi.  33,  35,  38,  xii.  27);  but 
quite  incidentally  and  without  special  point.  It  is  the  artless  story  of 
one  who  tells  what  he  saw  because  he  saw  it  and  remembers  it.  The 
life-like  details  which  follow  are  almost  irresistible  evidences  of  truth- 
fulness. 

22.  looked  one  on  another]  'Began  to  enquire  among  themselves' 
(Luke  xxii.  23).  The  other  two  Evangelists  say  that  all  began  to  say  to 
Him  'Is  it  I?'  They  neither  doubt  the  statement,  nor  ask  'Is  it  he?^ 
Each  thinks  it  is  as  credible  of  himself  as  of  any  of  the  others.  Judas 
asks,  either  to  dissemble,  or  to  see  whether  he  really  was  known  (Matt. 
xxvi.  25). 

23.  there  was  leaning  on  Jesus'  bosom]  Better,  there  was  reclining 
on  Jesus'  lap.  It  is  important  to  mark  the  distinction  between  this  and 
the  words  rendered  'lying  on  Jesus'  breast'  in  v.  25.  The  Jews  had 
adopted  the  Persian,  Greek,  and  Roman  custom  of  reclining  at  meals, 
and  had  long  since  exchanged  the  original  practice  of  standing  at  the 
Passover  first  for  sitting  and  then  for  reclining.  They  reclined  on  the 
left  arm  and  ate  with  the  right.     This  is  the  posture  of  the  beloved 


268  S.  JOHN,   XIII.  [vv.  24— 26. 

24  loved.     Simon   Peter  therefore  beckoned  to  him,   that  he 

25  should  ask  who  it  should  be  of  whom  he  spake.     He  then 
lying   on   Jesus'  breast   saith  unto  him,  Lord,  who  is  it? 

26  Jesus  answered.  He  it  is,  to  whom  I  shall  give  a  sop,  when 
I  have  dipped  //.     And  when  he  had  dipped  the  sop,  he 

disciple  indicated  here,  which  continued  throughout  the  meal :  \nv.  25 
we  have  a  momentary  change  of  posture. 

whom  Jesus  loved}  This  explains  how  S.  John  came  to  be  nearest 
(see  Introduction  11.  iii.  3  b),  and  "out  of  the  recollection  of  that  sacred, 
never-to-be-forgotten  moment,  there  breaks  from  him  for  the  first  time 
this  nameless,  yet  so  expressive  designation  of  himself  "(Meyer).  Comp. 
xix.  ■26,  xxi.  7,  20;  not  xx.  2.  S.  John  was  on  our  Lord's  right.  Who 
was  next  to  Him  on  the  left?  Some  think  Judas,  who  must  have 
been  very  close  for  Christ  to  answer  him  without  the  others  hearing. 

24.  that  he  should  ask... spake}  The  better  reading  gives,  and  saith 
to  Mm,  Say  who  it  is  of  whom  He  speaketh.  S.  Peter  thinks  that  the 
beloved  disciple  is  sure  to  know.  The  received  reading,  besides  being 
wanting  in  authority,  contains  au  optative  mood,  which  S.  John  never 
uses. 

25.  lying  on  yesus^  breast}  Our  version  does  well  in  using  different 
words  from  those  used  in  v.  23,  but  the  distinction  used  is  inadequate. 
Moreover  the  same  preposition,  'on,' is  used  in  both  cases;  in  the  Greek 
the  prepositions  differ  also.  In  v.  23  we  have  the  permanent  posture; 
here  a  change,  the  same  verb  being  used  as  m  v.  12  (see  note).  The 
meaning  is  leaning  back  on  to  Jesus'  breast.  Comp  xxi.  20,  where 
our  translators  give  a  similarly  inadequate  rendering.  "This  is  among 
the  most  striking  of  those  vivid  descriptive  traits  which  distinguish  the 
narrative  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  generally,  and  whicli  are  especially  re- 
markable in  these  last  scenes  of  Jesus'  life,  where  the  beloved  disciple 
was  himself  an  eye-witness  and  an  actor.  It  is  therefore  to  be  regretted 
that  these  fine  touches  of  the  picture  should  be  blurred  in  our  English 
Bibles."     Lightfoot,  On  Revision,  p.  73. 

Some  good  MSS.  insert  'thus'  before  'on  to  Jesus'  breast'  (comp.  iv. 

6)- 

26.  to  ivhom  I  shall  give  a  sop,  when  I  have  dipped  it}     The  text 

here  is  uncertain,  but  there  is  no  doubt  as  to  the  meaning.  Perhaps  the 
better  reading  is,  for  whom  I  shall  dip  the  morsel  and  give  it  to  him. 
Copyists  have  possibly  tried  to  correct  tlie  awkwardness  of  'for 
whom'  and  'to  him.'  In  any  case  'sop'  or  'morsel'  must  have  the 
article.  The  Greek  word  is  derived  from  'rub'  or  'break,'  and  means 
'a  piece  broken  off:'  it  is  still  the  common  word  in  Greece  for  'bread.' 
To  give  such  a  morsel  at  a  meal  was  an  ordinary  mark  of  goodwill, 
somewhat  analogous  to  taking  wine  with  a  person  in  modern  times. 
Christ,  therefore,  as  a  forlorn  hope,  gives  the  traitor  one  more  mark  of 
affection  before  dismissing  him.  It  is  the  last  such  mark:  'Friend, 
wherefore  art  thou  come?'  (Matt.  xxvi.  50)  should  rather  be  'Comrade, 
(do  that)  for  which  thuu  art  come,'  and  is  a  sorrowful  rebuke  rather  than 


VV.27— 30.]  S.  JOHN,   XIII.  269 

gave  //  to  Judas  Iscariot,  the  son  of  Simon.     And  after  the  27 
sop  Satan  entered  into  him.     Then  said  Jesus  unto  him, 
That   thou  doest,  do  quickly.     Now  no  man  at  the  table  28 
knew  for  what  intent  he  spake  this  unto  him.     For  some  ^29 
them  thought,  because  Judas  had  the  bag,  that  Jesus  had 
said  unto  him.  Buy  those  things  that  we  have  need  of  against 
the  feast;  or  that  he  should  give  something  to  the  poor. 
He  then  having  received  the  sop  went  immediately  out :  3° 
and  it  was  night. 

an  affectionate  greeting.  "Whether  the  morsel  was  a  piece  of  the  un- 
leavened bread  dipped  in  the  broth  of  bitter  herbs  depends  upon  whether 
this  supper  is  regarded  as  the  Paschal  meal  or  not. 

And  when,  &c.]  The  true  reading  is,  Therefore,  when  He  had  dipped, 
the  morsel  He  taketh  and  glvetli  it.  The  name  of  Judas  is  once  more 
given  with  solemn  fulness  as  in  vi.  71,  Judas  the  son  ^Simon  Iscariot. 
Comp.  V.  2. 

27.  Satan  entered  into  him]  Literally,  at  that  moment  Satan 
entered  into  him.  At  first  Satan  made  suggestions  to  him  [v.  2)  and 
Judas  listened  to  them;  now  Satan  takes  full  possession  of  him.  Desire 
had  conceived  and  brought  forth  sin,  and  the  sin  full  grown  had  en- 
gendered death  (James  i.  15).  Satan  is  mentioned  here  only  in  S. 
John. 

Then  said]  Once  more  we  must  substitute  therefore  for  'then.' 
Jesus  knew  that  Satan  had  claimed  his  own,  and  therefore  bad  him  do 
his  work. 

do  quickly]  Literally,  do  more  quickly;  carry  it  out  at  once,  even 
sooner  than  has  been  planned.  Now  that  the  winning  back  of  Judas 
has  become  hopeless,  delay  was  worse  than  useless :  it  merely  kept  Him 
from  His  hour  of  victory.     Comp.  Matt,  xxiii.  32. 

28.  no  man ..  .knew]  Even  S.  John,  who  now  knew  that  Judas  was  the 
traitor,  did  not  know  that  he  would  act  at  once,  and  that  it  was  to  this 
Jesus  alluded. 

29.  For  some  of  theni]  Shewing  that  they  could  not  have  under- 
stood. 

had  the  bag]     See  on  xii.  6. 

against  the  feast]     This  agrees  with  v.  r,  that  this  meal  precedes  the 
Passover. 
to  the  poor]     Comp.  xii.  5;  Neh.  viii.  10,  \i;  Gal.  ii.  10. 

30.  He  then  having  received  the  sop]  Better,  He  therefore  kciving 
received  the  va.Ots&X.  The  pronoun  here  and  mv.  2-j  iekeinos)  indicates 
that  Judas  is  an  alien.  Comp.  vii.  ri,  ix.  12,  28.  The  last  two  verses 
are  a  parenthetical  remark  of  the  Evangelist;  he  now  returns  to  the 
narrative,  repeating  with  solemnity  the  incident  which  formed  the  last 
crisis  in  the  career  of  Judas. 

went  immediately  out]  This  is  no  evidence  as  to  the  meal  not  being 
a  Paschal  one.     The  rule  that  'none  should  go  out  at  the  door  of  his 


270  S.   JOHN,   XIII.  [vv.  31,  32. 

XIII.  31 — XV.  27.     Christ's  Love  in  keeping  His  own. 

31  Therefore,  when  he  was  gone  out,  Jesus  said.  Now  is  the 

32  Son  of  man  glorified,  and  God  is  glorified  in  him.     If  God 

house  until  the  morning'  (Exod.  xii.  22)  had,  like  standing  at  the  Pass- 
over, long  since  been  abrogated.  "When  Satan  entered  into  him,  he 
went  out  from  the  presence  of  Christ,  as  Cain  went  out  from  the  presence 
of  the  Lord." 

and  it  was  nighf^  The  tragic  brevity  of  this  has  often  been  remarked, 
and  will  never  cease  to  lay  hold  of  the  imagination.  It  can  scarcely 
be  meant  merely  to  tell  us  that  at  the  time  when  Judas  went  out  night 
had  begun.  In  the  Gospel  in  which  the  Messiah  so  often  appears  as 
the  Light  of  the  World  (i.  4 — 9,  iii.  19 — 21,  viii.  12,  ix.  5,  xii.  35,  36, 
46),  and  in  which  darkness  almost  invariably  means  moral  darkness  (i. 
5,  viii.  12,  xii.  35,  46)  a  use  peculiar  to  S.  John  (i  John  i.  5,  ii.  8,  9, 
11), — we  shall  hardly  be  wrong  in  understanding  also  that  Judas  went 
forth  from  the  Light  of  the  World  into  the  night  in  which  a  man  cannot 
but  stumble  'because  there  is  no  light  in  him'  (xi.  10).  Thus  also 
Christ  Himself  said  some  two  hours  later,  'This  is  your  hour,  and  the 
power  of  darkness'  (Luke  xxii.  53).  For  other  remarks  of  telling  brevity 
and  abruptness  comp.  'Jesus  wept'  (xi.  35);  'He  saith  to  them,  I  am 
He'  (xviii.  5);  'Now  Barabbas  was  a  robber'  (xvlii.  40). 

These  remarks  shew  the  impropriety  of  joining  this  sentence  to  the 
next  verse;  'and  it  was  night,  therefore,  when  he  had  gone  out;'  a 
combination  which  is  clumsy  in  itself  and  quite  spoils  the  effect. 

XIII.  31— XV.  27.     Christ's  Love  in  keeping  His  own. 

31 — 35.  Jesus,  freed  from  the  oppressive  presence  of  the  traitor, 
bursts  out  into  a  declaration  that  the  glorification  of  the  Son  of  Man  has 
begun.  Judas  is  already  beginning  that  series  of  events  which  will 
end  in  sending  Him  away  from  them  to  the  Father ;  therefore  they 
must  continue  on  earth  the  kingdom  which  He  has  begun — the  reign  of 
Love. 

This  section  forms  the  first  portion  of  those  parting  words  of  heavenly 
meaning  which  were  spoken  to  the  faithful  eleven  in  the  last  moments 
before  His  Passion.  At  first  the  discourse  takes  the  form  of  dialogue, 
which  lasts  almost  to  the  end  of  chap.  xiv.  Then  they  rise  from  the 
table,  and  the  words  of  Christ  become  more  sustained,  while  the 
disciples  remain  silent  with  the  exception  of  xvi.  17,  18,  29,  30.  Then 
follows  Christ's  prayer,  after  which  they  go  forth  to  the  garden  of  Geth- 
semane  (xviii.  i). 

31.  Therefore,  when  he  was  gone  otii]  Indicating  that  the  presence 
of  Judas  had  acted  as  a  constraint,  but  also  that  he  had  gone  of  his  own 
will :  there  was  no  casting  out  of  the  faithless  disciple  (ix.  34). 

A^ow]     With  solemn  exultation  :  the  beginning  of  the  end  has  come. 

(he  Son  0/ man]    See  on  i.  51. 

glorified]  In  finishing  the  work  which  the  Father  gave  Him  to  do 
(xvii.  4) ;  and  thus  God  is  glorified  in  Him. 


vv.  33,  34.]  S.   JOHN,   XIII.  271 


be  glorified  in  him,  God  shall  also  glorify  him  in  himself, 
and    shall   straightway  glorify  him.     Little  children,  yet  a  33 
little  while  I  am  with  you.     Ye  shall  seek  me :  and  as  I 
said  unto  the  Jews,  Whither  I  go,  ye  cannot  come ;  so  now 
I  say  to  you.     A  new  commandment  I  give  unto  you.  That  34 
ye  love  one  another ;  as  I  have  loved  you,  that  ye  also  love 

32.  If  God  be  glorified  in  him]  These  words  are  omitted  in  the  best 
MSS.,  and  though  they  might  easily  be  left  out  accidentally  owing  to 
the  repetition,  yet  they  spoil  the  balance  and  rhythm  of  the  clauses. 

God  shall  also  glorify  kini]  Better,  And  God  shall  glorify  Him. 
This  refers  to  the  heavenly  glory  which  He  had  with  the  Father  before 
the  world  was.  Hence  the  future  tense :  the  glory  of  completing  the 
work  of  redemption  has  already  begun ;  that  of  departing  to  the  Father 
as  the  Son  of  Man  and  returning  to  the  Father  as  the  Son  of  God  will 
straightway  follow. 

in  himself^  i.e.  in  God:  as  God  is  glorified  in  the  Messianic  work  of 
the  Son,  so  the  Son  shall  be  glorified  in  the  eternal  blessedness  of  the 
Father.  Comp.  xvii.  4,  5  ;  Phil.  ii.  9. — Between  this  verse  and  the  next 
some  would  insert  the  institution  of  the  Eucharist. 

33.  Little  children]  Nowhere  else  in  the  Gospels  does  Christ  use 
this  expression  of  tender  affection  [teknia],  which  springs  from  the 
thought  of  His  orphaned  disciples.  S.  John  appears  never  to  have  for- 
gotten it.  It  occurs  frequently  in  his  First  Epistle  (ii.  i,  12,  28,  iii.  7, 
18,  iv.  4,  V.  21),  and  perhaps  nowhere  else  in  the  N.T.  In  Gal.  iv.  19 
the  reading  is  doubtful.  'Children'  in  xxi.  5  is  a  different  word 
(paidia). 

a  little  while]     See  on  vii.  33,  34,  viii.  21. 

Ye  shall  seek  me]  Christ  does  not  add,  as  He  did  to  the  Jews,  'and 
shall  not  find  Me,'  still  less,  'ye  shall  die  in  your  sin.'  Rather,  'ye 
shall  seek  Me:  and  though  ye  cannot  come  whither  I  go,  yet  ye  shall 
find  Me  by  continuing  to  be  My  disciples  and  loving  one  another.'  The 
expression  'the  Jews'  is  rare  in  Christ's  discourses;  comp.  iv.  22,  xviii. 
20,  36. 

34.  A  new  commandment]  The  commandment  to  love  was  not  new, 
for  'thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself  (Lev.  xix.  18)  was  part 
of  the  Mosaic  Law.  But  the  motive  is  new;  to  love  our  neighbour  be- 
cause Christ  has  loved  us.  We  have  only  to  read  the  'most  excellent 
way'  of  love  set  forth  in  i  Cor.  xiii.,  and  compare  it  with  the  measured 
benevolence  of  the  Pentateuch,  to  see  how  new  the  commandment 
had  become  by  having  this  motive  added.  There  are  two  words  for 
'new'  in  Greek;  one  looks  forward,  'young,'as  opposed  to  'aged;'  the 
other  looks  back,  'fresh,'  as  opposed  to  'worn  out.'  It  is  the  latter 
that  is  used  here  and  in  xix.  41.  Both  are  used  in  Matt.  ix.  17,  but  our 
version  ignores  the  difference — '  They  put  tiew  wine  into  fresh  wine- 
skins.' The  phrase  'to  give  a  commandment'  is  peculiar  to  S.  John; 
comp.  xii.  49;  I  John  iii.  23. 

as  I  have  loved  yon]    These  words  are  rightly  placed  in  the  second 


272  S.   JOHN,   XIII.  [vv.  35—38. 

35  one  another.     By  this  shall  all  men  know  that  ye  are  my 
disciples,  if  ye  have  love  one  to  another. 

36  Simon  Peter  said  unto  him,  Lord,  whither  goest  thou? 
Jesus  answered  him.  Whither  I  go,  thou  canst  not  follow 

37  me  now ;  but  thou  shalt  follow  me  afterwards.     Peter  said 
unto  him,  Lord,  why  cannot  I  follow  thee  now  ?     I  will  lay 

38  down  my  life  for  thy  sake.     Jesus  answered  him.  Wilt  thou 
lay  down  thy  life  for  my  sake  ?     Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto 


half  of  the  verse.  They  do  not  mean  'love  one  another  in  the  same  way 
as  I  have  loved  you ; '  but  they  give  the  reason  for  tlie  fresh  command- 
ment— 'even  as  I  have  loved  you.'  S.  John  states  the  same  principle 
in  the  First  Epistle  (iv.  11)  'If  God  so  loved  us,  we  ought  also  to 
love  one  another.'     Comp.  xv.  13. 

35.  By  this  shall  all  men  know  that  ye  are  my  disciples']  This  is  the 
true  '  Note  of  the  Church ; '  not  miracles,  not  formularies,  not  numbers, 
but  love.  "The  working  of  such  love  puts  a  brand  upon  us;  for  see, 
say  the  heathen,  how  they  love  another,"  Tertullian,  Apol.  xxxix. 
Comp.  I  John  iii.  10,  14.     'My  disciples'  is  literally,  disciples  to  Me. 

36.  Lord,  whither  goest  thou?]  The  affectionate  Apostle  is  absorbed 
by  the  declaration  '  Whither  I  go,  ye  cannot  come,'  and  he  lets  all  the 
rest  pass.  His  Master  is  going  away  out  of  his  reach ;  he  must  know 
the  meaning  of  that. 

thou  shalt  follow  me  afterwards]  Alluding  probably  not  merely  to 
the  Apostle's  death,  but  also  to  the  manner  of  it:  comp.  xxi.  18,  19. 
But  his  hour  has  not  yet  come ;  he  has  a  great  mission  to  fulfil  first 
(Matt.  xvi.  18).  The  beautiful  story  of  the  Doinine,  quo  vadis?  should 
be  remembered  in  connexion  with  this  verse.  See  Introduction  to  the 
Epistles  of  S.  Peter,  p.  56. 

37.  /  will  lay  down  my  life]  St  Peter  seems  to  see  that  Christ's 
going  away  means  death.  With  his  usual  impulsiveness  (see  on  v.  9)  he 
declares  that  he  is  ready  to  follow  at  once  even  thither.  He  mistakes 
strong  feeling  for  moral  strength.  On  the  phrase  '  lay  down  my  life ' 
see  last  note  on  x.  ir. 

38.  /  say  unto  thee]  In  the  parallel  passage  in  S.  Luke  (xxii.  34) 
Christ  for  the  first  and  only  time  addresses  the  Apostle  by  the  name 
which  He  had  given  him, — 'I  tell  thee,  Peter ;^  as  if  He  would  remind 
him  that  the  rock-like  strength  of  character  was  not  his  own  to  boast  of, 
but  must  be  found  in  humble  reliance  on  the  Giver. 

S.  Luke  agrees  with  S.  John  in  placing  the  prediction  of  the  triple 
denial  in  the  supper-room :  St  Matt.  (xxvi.  30 — 35)  and  S.  Mark  (xiv. 
•26 — 30)  place  it  on  the  way  from  the  room  to  Gethsemane.  It  is  possi- 
ble but  not  probable  that  the  prediction  was  repeated ;  though  some 
would  even  make  three  predictions  recorded  by  (i)  S.  Luke,  (2)  S.  John, 
(3)  S.  Matt,  and  S.  Mark.  See  introductory  note  to  Chapter  xii.  and 
Appendix  B. 


V.  I.]  S.   JOHN,  XIII.   XIV.  273 

thee,  The  cock  shall  not  crow,  till  thou  hast  denied  me 
thrice. 

Chap.  XIV.     Chrisfs  love  in  keeping  His  own  {continued). 
Let   not   your   heart   be   troubled :    ye   believe  in  God,  14 

thrice]  All  four  accounts  agree  in  this.  S.  Mark  adds  two  details: 
(i)  that  the  cock  should  crow  twice,  (2)  that  the  prediction  so  far  from 
checking  S.  Peter  made  him  speak  only  the  more  vehemently,  a  par- 
ticular which  S.  Peter's  Gospel  more  naturally  contains  than  the  other 
three.  S.  Matthew  and  S.  Mark  both  add  that  all  the  disciples  joined 
in  S.  Peter's  protestations. 

It  has  been  objected  that  fowls  were  not  allowed  in  the  Holy  City. 
The  statement  is  wanting  in  authority,  and  of  course  the  Romans  would 
pay  no  attention  to  any  such  rule,  even  if  it  existed  among  the  Jews. 

Chap.  XIV. 

"  We  come  now  to  the  last  great  discourse  (xiv. — xvii.),  which  con- 
stitutes a  striking  and  peculiar  element  in  the  Fourth  Gospel we 

cannot  but  recognise  a  change  from  the  compact  lucid  addresses  and 

exposition  of  the  Synoptists This  appears  not  so  much  in  single 

verses  as  when  we  look  at  the  discourse  as  a  whole.  In  all  the  Synop- 
tic Gospels,  imperfectly  as  they  are  put  together,  there  is  not  a  single 
discourse  that  could  be  called  involved  in  structure,  and  yet  I  do  not  see 
how  it  is  possible  to  refuse  this  epithet  to  the  discourse  before  us  as 
given  by  S.  John.  The  different  subjects  are  not  kept  apart,  but  are 
continually  crossing  and  entangling  one  another.  The  later  subjects  are 
anticipated  in  the  course  of  the  earlier ;  the  earlier  return  in  the  later." 
Comp.  the  spiral  movement  noticed  in  the  Prologue,  i.  18. 

"  For  instance,  the  description  of  the  functions  of  the  Paraclete  is 

broken  up into  five  fragments  (xiv.  16,  17;  25,  26;  xv.  26;  xvi.  8 — ■ 

15;  23 — 25) The  relation  of  the  Church  and  the  world  is  intersected 

just  in  the  same  way  (xiv.  22 — 24,  xv.  18 — 25,  xvi.  i — 3),  besides  scat- 
tered references  in  single  verses We  may  consider  the  discourse 

perhaps  under  these  heads:  (i)  the  departure  and  the  return,  (2)  the 
Paraclete,  (3)  the  vine  and  its  branches,  (4)  the  disciples  and  the  world." 
S.  pp.  221 — 232.  On  the  discourses  in  this  Gospel  generally  see  the 
introductory  note  to  chapter  iii. 

Chap.  XIV.    Christ's  love  in  keeping  His  own  (continued). 

1.  Let  not  your  heart  be  troubled]  There  had  been  much  to  cause 
anxiety  and  alarm  ;  the  denouncing  of  the  traitor,  the  declaration  of 
Christ's  approaching  departure,  the  prediction  of  S.  Peter's  denial.  The 
last  as  being  nearest  might  seem  to  be  specially  indicated  ;  but  what 
follows  shews  that  '  let  not  your  heart  be  troubled '  refers  primarily  to 
'  whither  I  go,  ye  cannot  come '  (xiii.  33). 

ye  believe  in  God,  believe  also]  The  Greek  for  'ye  believe  '  and  '  be- 
lieve '  is  the  same,  and  there  is  nothing  to  indicate  that  one  is  indicative 

S.JOHN  J  3 


274  S.   JOHN,   XIV.  [vv.  2— 4. 

2  believe  also  in  me.     In  my  Father's  house  are  many  man- 
sions :  if  //  were  not  so,  I  would  have  told  you.     I  go  to 

3  prepare  a  place  for  you.     And  if  I  go  and  prepare  a  place 
for  you,  I  will  come  again,  and  receive  you  unto  myself; 

4  that  where  I  am,  there  ye  may  be  also.     And  whither  I  go 


and  the  other  imperative.  Both  may  be  indicative  ;  but  probably  both 
are  imperative  :  believe  in  God,  and  believe  in  Me ;  or  perhaps,  trust  in 
God,  and  trust  in  Me.  It  implies  the  belief  which  moves  towards  and 
reposes  on  its  object  (see  last  note  on  i.  12).  In  any  case  a  genuine 
belief  in  God  leads  to  a  belief  in  His  Son. 

2.  In  my  Father's  house'\  Heaven.  Comp.  '  The  Lord's  throne  is 
in  heaven,'  Ps.  xi.  4 ;  'Our  Father,  Which  art  in  heaven  '  (Matt.  vi.  9), 
&c. 

are  many  mansions^  Nothing  is  said  about  mansions  differing  in 
dignity  and  beauty.  There  may  be  degrees  of  happiness  hereafter,  but 
such  are  neither  expressed  nor  implied  here.  What  is  said  is  that  there 
are  '  many  mansions ;'  there  is  room  enough  for  all.  The  word  for 
'  mansions,'  common  in  classical  Greek,  occurs  in  the  N.  T.  only  here 
and  V.  23.  It  is  a  substantive  from  the  verb  of  which  S.  John  is  so  fond, 
'to  abide,  dwell,  remain'  (see  note  on  i.  33),  which  occurs  w.  10,  16,  17, 
25,  and  twelve  times  in  the  next  chapter.  This  substantive,  therefore, 
means  'an  abode,  dwelling,  place  to  remain  in.'  'Mansion,'  Scotch 
'  manse,'  and  French  'maison,'  are  all  from  the  Latin  form  of  the  same 
root. 

if  it  were  not  so,  I  would  have  told yoti\  The  Greek  may  have  more 
than  one  meaning,  but  our  version  is  best.  Christ  appeals  to  His  fair- 
ness :  would  He  have  invited  them  to  a  place  in  which  there  was  not 
room  for  all  ?  Others  connect  this  with  the  next  verse  ;  '  should  I  have 
said  to  you,  I  go  to  prepare  a  place  for  you?'  or,  'I  would  have  said  to 
you,  I  go,  &c.'  The  latter  cannot  be  right.  Christ  had  already  said, 
and  says  again,  that  He  is  going  to  shew  them  the  way  and  to  prepare 
for  them  (xiii.  36,  xiv.  3). 

/  go  to  prepare^  We  must  insert  '  for'  on  overwhelming  authority; 
'  for  I  go  to  prepare.'    This  proves  that  there  will  be  room  for  all. 

3.  And  if  1  gd\  The  'if  does  not  here  imply  doubt  any  more  than 
'  when '  would  have  done  :  but  we  have  '  if '  and  not  '  when  '  because  it 
is  the  result  of  the  departure  and  not  the  date  of  it  that  is  emphasized 
(see  on  xii.  32). 

/  will  come  again,  and  receive']  Literally,  /  am  coming  again  and 
I  will  receive  (see  on  i.  11  and  xix.  16).  There  is  no  doubt  about  the 
meaning  of  the  going  away ;  but  the  coming  again  may  have  various 
meanings,  and  apparently  not  always  the  same  one  throughout  this  dis- 
course ;  either  the  Resurrection,  or  the  gift  of  the  Paraclete,  or  the 
death  of  individuals,  or  the  presence  of  Christ  in  his  Church,  or  the 
Second  Advent  at  tlie  last  day.  The  last  seems  to  be  the  meaning  here 
(comp.  vi,  39,  40). 


w.  5-7.]  S.   JOHN,  XIV.  275 

ye  know,  and  the  way  ye  know.     Thomas  saith  unto  him,  5 
Lord,  we  know  not  whither  thou  goest ;  and  how  can  we 
know  the  way  ?     Jesus  saith  unto  him,  I  am  the  way,  the  6 
truth,  and  the  Hfe  :  no  man  cometh  unto  the  Father,  but  by 
me.     If  ye  had  known    me,  ye    should   have   known   my  ^ 

4.  whither  I  go  ye  know,  and  the  way  ye  kn(m)\  The  true  text  seems 
once  more  to  have  been  altered  to  avoid  awkwardness  of  expression  (see 
on  xiii.  ■26).  Here  we  should  read,  Whither  I  go,  ye  know  the  way. 
This  is  half  a  rebuke,  implying  that  they  ought  to  know  more  than 
they  did  know  :  they  had  heard  but  had  not  heeded  (x.  7,  9,  xi.  25). 
Thus  we  say  'you  know,  you  see,' meaning  'you  might  know,  you  might 
see,  if  you  would  but  take  the  trouble.' 

5.  Thomas]  Nothing  is  to  be  inferred  from  the  omission  of  '  Didy- 
mus'  here  (comp.  xi.  16,  xx.  24,  xxi.  2).  For  his  character  see  on  xi.  i6. 
His  question  here  has  a  melancholy  tone  combined  with  some  dulness 
of  apprehension.  But  there  is  honesty  of  purpose  in  it.  He  owns  his 
ignorance  and  asks  for  explanation.  This  great  home  with  many  abodes, 
is  it  the  royal  city  of  the  conquering  Messiah,  who  is  to  restore  the  king- 
dom to  Israel  (see  on  Acts  i.  6) ;  and  will  not  that  be  Jerusalem  ?  How 
then  can  He  go  away  ? 

and  how  can  we  know]     The  true  reading  is,  How  know  we. 

6.  /  am  the  way]  The  pronoun  is  emphatic ;  I  and  no  other :  Ego  sum 
Via,  Veritas,  Vita.  S.  Thomas  had  wished  rather  to  know  about  the 
goal ;  Christ  shews  that  for  him,  and  therefore  for  us,  it  is  more  important 
to  know  the  way.  Hence  the  order ;  although  Christ  is  the  Truth  and 
the  Life  before  He  is  the  Way.  The  Word  is  the  Truth  and  the  Life 
from  all  eternity  with  the  Father :  He  becomes  the  Way  for  us  by 
taking  our  nature.  He  is  the  Way  to  the  many  abodes  in  His  Father's 
home,  the  Way  to  the  Father  Himself ;  and  that  by  His  doctrine  and 
example,  by  His  Death  and  Resurrection.  In  harmony  with  this 
passage  '  the  Way '  soon  became  a  recognised  name  for  Christianity ; 
Acts  ix.  2,  xix.  9,  23,  xxii.  4,  xxiv.  22  (comp.  xxiv.  14;  2  Pet.  ii.  2). 
But  this  is  obscured  in  our  version  by  the  common  inaccuracy  'this-vta-y^ 
or  '  that  way  '  for  Uhe  Way.'     (See  on  i.  21,  25,  vi.  48.) 

the  truth]  Better,  and  the  Truth,  being  from  all  eternity  in  the  form 
of  God,  Who  cannot  lie  (Phil.  ii.  6;  Heb.  vi.  18),  and  being  the  repre- 
sentative on  earth  of  a  Sender  Who  is  true  (viii.  26).  To  know  the 
Truth  is  also  to  know  the  Way  to  God,  Who  must  be  approached  and 
worshipped  in  truth  (iv.  23).     Comp.  Heb.  xi.  6 ;   i  John  v.  20. 

and  the  life]  Comp.  xi.  25.  He  is  the  Life,  being  one  with  the 
living  Father  and  being  sent  by  Him  (vi.  57,  x.  30).  See  on  i.  4, 
vi.  50,  51,  and  comp.  i  John  v.  12;  Gal.  ii.  20.  Here  again  to  know 
the  Life  is  to  know  the  Way  to  God. 

no  man  cometh  unto  the  Father,  but  by  me]  Christ  continues  to  insist 
that  the  Way  is  of  the  first  importance  to  know.  '  Through  Him  we 
have  access  unto  the  Father '  (Eph.  ii.  18).  Comp.  Hebr.  x.  19 — 22; 
I  Pet.  iii.  18. 

7.  If  ye  had  known  me]     In  the  better  MSS.  we  have  here -again 

18—2 


276  S.   JOHN,   XIV.  [vv.  8,  9. 

Father  also :  and  from  henceforth  ye  know  him,  and  have 

8  seen  him.    Phihp  saith  unto  him,  Lord,  shew  us  the  Father, 

9  and  it  sufificeth  us.     Jesus  saith  unto  him,  Have  I  been  so 
long  time  with  you,  and  jfi?/  hast  thou  not  known  me,  Philip? 

two  different  words  for  'know'  (see  on  vii.  ■26,  viii.  55,  xiii.  7),  and  the 
emphasis  in  the  first  clause  is  on  'known'  in  the  second  on  'Father.' 
Bewaie  of  the  common  mistalce  of  putting  an  emphasis  on  'Me.'  The 
meaning  is  :  'If  ye  had  recognised  Me,  ye  would  liave  known  My 
Father  also.'  The  veil  of  Jewish  prejudice  was  still  on  their  hearts, 
hiding  from  them  the  true  meaning  both  of  Messianic  prophecy  and  of 
the  Messiah's  acts. 

from  henceforik'\  The  same  expression  as  is  mistranslated  '  now ' 
in  xiii.  19:  it  is  to  be  understood  literally,  not  proleptically. 

ye  know  hit7i\  Or,  recognise  Him.  From  this  time  onwards,  after 
the  plain  declaration  of  Himself  in  v.  6,  they  begin  to  recognise  the 
Father  'n  Him.     Philip's  request  leads  to  a  fuller  statement  oiv.  6. 

8.  Philip']  For  the  fourth  and  last  time  S.  Philip  appears  in  this 
Gospel  (see  notes  on  i.  44 — 49,  vi.  5 — 7,  xii.  22).  Thrice  he  is  mentioned 
in  close  connexion  with  S.  Andrew,  who  may  have  brought  about  his 
being  found  by  Christ ;  twice  he  follows  in  the  footsteps  of  S.  Andrew 
in  bringing  others  to  Christ,  and  on  both  occasions  it  is  specially  to  see 
Him  that  they  are  brought;  'Come  and  see'  (i.  45);  'We  would  5^1? 
Jesus'  (xii.  21).  Like  S.  Thomas  he  has  a  fondness  for  the  practical  test 
of  personal  experience ;  he  would  see  for  himself,  and  have  others  also 
see  for  themselves.  His  way  of  stating  the  difficulty  about  the  5000 
(vi.  7)  is  quite  in  harmony  with  this  practical  turn  of  mind.  Like 
S.  Thomas  also  he  seems  to  have  been  somewhat  slow  of  apprehension, 
and  at  the  same  time  perfectly  honest  in  expressing  the  cravings  which 
he  felt.     No  fear  of  exposing  himself  keeps  either  Apostle  back. 

Lord,  shew  us  the  Father]  He  is  struck  by  Christ's  last  words,  'Ye 
have  seen  the  Father,'  and  cannot  find  that  they  are  true  of  himself. 
It  is  what  he  has  been  longing  for  in  vain ;  it  is  the  one  thing  wanting. 
He  has  heard  the  voice  of  the  P'ather  from  Heaven,  and  it  has  awak- 
ened a  hunger  in  his  heart.  Christ  has  been  speaking  of  the  Father's 
home  with  its  many  abodes  to  which  He  is  going ;  and  Philip  longs  to 
see  for  himself.  And  when  Christ  tells  him  that  he  has  seen,  he  unre- 
servedly opens  his  mind :  '  Only  make  that  saying  good,  and  it  is 
enough.'  He  sees  nothing  impossible  in  this.  There  were  the  theo- 
phanies,  which  had  accompanied  the  giving  of  the  Law  by  Moses. 
And  a  greater  than  Moses  was  here — "that  Prophet  whom  Moses  had 
foretold.  He  looked,  like  all  the  Jews  of  his  time,  to  see  the  wonders 
of  the  old  dispensation  repeated.     Hence  his  question."     S.  p.  225. 

9.     so  long  time]     Philip  had  been  called  among  the  first  (i.  43). 

hast  thou  not  known  me]  Or,  hast  not  recognised  Me,  as  in  v.  7. 
The  Gospels  are  full  of  evidence  of  how  little  the  Apostles  understood 
of  the  life  which  they  were  allowed  to  share:  and  the  candour  with 
which  this  is  confessed  confirms  our  trust  in  the  narratives.     Not  until 


vv.  lo— 12.]  S.  JOHN,   XIV.  277 

he  that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father ;  and  how  sayest 
thou  then,  Shew  us  the  Father?  BeUevest  thou  not  that 
I  am  in  the  Father,  and  the  Father  in  me  ?  the  words  that 
I  speak  unto  you,  I  speak  not  of  myself:  but  the  Father 
that  dwelleth  in  me,  he  doeth  the  works.  Beheve  me  that 
I  am  in  the  Father,  and  the  Father  in  me  :  or  else  believe 
me  for  the  very  works'  sake.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you, 
He  that  believeth  on  me,  the  works  that  I  do  shall  he  do 

Pentecost  were  their  minds  fully  enlightened.  Comp.  x.  6,  xii.  16; 
Matt.  XV.  16,  xvi.  8;  Mark  ix.  32;  Luke  ix.  45,  xviii.  34,  xxiv.  25; 
Acts  i.  6;  Hebr.  v.  12.  Christ's  question  is  asked  in  sorrowful  but 
affectionate  surprise ;  hence  the  tender  repetition  of  the  name.  Had 
S.  Philip  recognised  Christ,  he  would  have  seen  the  revelation  of  God 
in  Him,  and  would  never  have  asked  for  a  vision  of  God  such  as  was 
granted  to  Moses.  See  notes  on  xii.  44,  45.  There  is  no  reference  to 
the  Transfiguration,  of  which  S.  Philip  had  not  yet  been  told;  Matt. 
xvii.  9. 

and  how  sayest  thou  then]  The  'and'  is  of  doubtful  authority; 
'  then '  is  an  insertion  of  our  translators. 

10.  BeUevest  thou  not]  S.  Philip's  question  seemed  to  imply  that  he 
did  not  believe  this  truth,  although  Christ  had  taught  it  publicly  (x.  38). 
What  follows  is  stated  in  an  argumentative  form.  'That  the  Father  is 
in  Me  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  My  words  do  not  originate  with  My- 
self; and  this  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  My  works  do  not  originate  with 
Myself,  but  are  really  His.'  No  proof  is  given  of  this  last  statement : 
Christ's  works  speak  for  themselves;  they  are  manifestly  Divine.  It 
matters  little  whether  we  regard  the  argument  as  h  fortiori,  the  works 
being  stronger  evidence  than  the  words;  or  as  inclusive,  the  works 
covering  and  containing  the  words.  The  latter  seems  to  agree  best 
with  viii.  28.  On  the  whole  statement  that  Christ's  words  and  works 
are  not  His  own  but  the  Father's,  comp.  v.  19,  30,  viii.  26 — 29, 
xii.  44. 

the  Father  that  dwelleth  in  me,  he  doeth  the  zuorh]  The  better  read- 
ing gives  us,  the  Father  abiding  in  Me  doeth  His  works  {in  Me). 
And  thus  the  saying  'Ye  have  seen  the  Father'  {v.  7)  is  justified:  the 
Father  is  seen  in  the  Son. 

11.  Believe  me]  The  English  obliterates  the  fact  that  Christ  now 
turns  from  S.  Philip  and  addresses  all  the  eleven :  'believe'  is  plural  not 
singular.  'You  have  been  with  Me  long  enough  to  believe  what  I  say; 
but  if  not,  at  any  rate  believe  what  I  do.  My  words  need  no  creden- 
tials :  but  if  credentials  are  demanded,  there  are  My  works.'  He  had 
said  the  same,  somewhat  more  severely,  to  the  Jews  (x.  37,  38);  and 
he  repeats  it  much  more  severely  in  reference  to  the  Jews  (xv.  22,  24). 
Note  the  progress  from  'believe  Me'  here  to  'believe  on  Me'  in  the 
next  verse;  the  one  grows  out  of  the  other. 

12.  Venly,  verily]     See  notes  on  i.  51. 

the  works  that  I  do  shall  he  do  also]    i.  e.  like  Me,  he  shall  do  the 


278  S.  JOHN,  XIV.  [vv.  13—16. 

also ;  and  greater  works  than  these  shall  he  do ;  because  I 
13  go  unto  my  Father.     And  whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  in  my 

name,  that  will  I  do,  that  the  Father  may  be  glorified  in  the 
M  Son.     If  ye  shall  ask  any  thing  in  my  name,  I  will  do  it. 
16      If  ye  love  me,  keep  my  commandments.      And  I  will 

works  of  the  P'ather,  the  Father  dwelling  in  Him  through  the  Son 
{v.  23).  _ 

and  greater  works  than  these]  There  is  no  reference  to  healing  by 
means  of  S.  Peter's  shadow  (Acts  v.  15)  or  of  handkerchiefs  that  had 
touched  S.  Paul  (Acts  xix.  12).  Even  from  a  human  point  of  view  no 
miracle  wrought  by  an  Apostle  is  greater  than  the  raising  of  Lazarus. 
But  from  a  spiritual  point  of  view  no  such  comparisons  are  admissible ; 
to  Omnipotence  all  works  are  alike.  These  'greater  works'  refer 
rather  to  the  results  of  Pentecost ;  the  victory  over  Judaism  and 
Paganism,  two  powers  which  for  the  moment  were  victorious  over 
Christ  (Luke  xxii.  53).  Christ's  work  was  confined  to  Palestine  and 
had  but  small  success;  the  Apostles  went  everywhere,  and  converted 
thousands. 

because  I  go  unto  my  Father]  For  '  My'  read  'the'  with  all  the  best 
MSS.  The  reason  is  twofold:  (i)  He  will  have  left  the  earth  and  be 
unable  to  continue  these  works;  therefore  believers  must  continue  them 
for  Him  ;  (2)  He  will  be  in  heaven  ready  to  help  both  directly  and  by 
intercession  ;  therefore  believers  will  be  able  to  continue  these  works 
and  surpass  them. 

It  is  doubtful  whether  there  should  be  a  comma  or  a  full  stop  at  the 
end  of  tliis  verse.  Perhaps  our  punctuation  is  better ;  but  to  make 
the  'because'  run  on  into  the  next  verse  makes  little  difference  to  the 
sense. 

13.  whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  in  my  name]  Comp.  xv.  16,  xvi.  23, 
24,  26.  Anything  that  can  rightly  be  asked  in  His  name  will  be 
granted;  there  is  no  other  limit.  By  'in  My  name'  is  not  of  course 
meant  the  mere  using  the  formula  'through  Jesus  Christ.'  Rather,  it 
means  praying  and  working  as  Christ's  representatives  in  the  same 
spirit  in  which  Christ  prayed  and  worked,  —  'Not  My  will,  but  Thine 
be  done.'  Prayers  for  other  ends  than  this  are  excluded;  not  that  it  is 
said  that  they  will  not  be  granted,  but  there  is  no  promise  that  they 
will.     Comp.  2  Cor.  xii.  8,  9. 

that  the  Father  may  be  glorified]     See  notes  on  xi.  4,  xii.  28,  xiii.  31. 

14.  /  -will  do  it]  '  I '  is  emphatic.  In  both  verses  the  prayer  is 
regarded  as  addressed  to  the  Father,  but  granted  by  the  Son,  who  is 
one  with  the  Father.  But  the  most  ancient  authorities  here  add  'Me;' 
if  ye  shall  ask  Me  anything.  In  xv.  16  and  xvi.  23  with  equal  truth 
the  Father  grants  the  prayer;  but  in  xv.  16  the  Greek  may  mean  either 
'  He  may  give'  or  '  I  may  give.' 

16.  Jy ye  love  me]  The  connexion  with  what  precedes  is  again  not 
quite  clear.  .Some  would  see  it  in  the  condition  'in  My  name,'  which 
includes  willing  obedience  to  His  connnands.     Perhaps  it  is  rather  to 


V.  i6.]  S.  JOHN,  XIV.  279 

pray  the  Father,  and  he  shall  give  you  another  Comforter, 

be  referred  to  the  opening  and  general  drift  of  the  chapter.  'Let  not 
your  heart  be  troubled  at  My  going  away.  You  will  still  be  Mine,  I 
shall  still  be  yours,  and  we  shall  still  be  caring  for  one  another.  I  go 
to  prepare  a  place  for  you,  you  remain  to  continue  and  surpass  My 
work  on  earth.  And  though  you  can  no  longer  minister  to  Me  in  the 
flesh,  you  can  prove  your  love  for  Me  even  more  perfectly  by  keeping 
My  commandments  when  I  am  gone.'  'My'  is  emphatic ;  not  those  of 
the  Law  but  of  the  Gospel. 

keep\  The  better  reading  is  ye  will  keep.  Only  in  these  last  dis- 
courses does  Christ  speak  of  His  commandments:  comp.  v.  21,  xiii.  34, 
XV.  10,  l^^     See  on  v.  27. 

16.  And  I  ivill  pray  the  Father]  T  is  emphatic:  'you  do  your 
part  on  earth,  and  I  will  do  mine  in  Heaven.'  Our  translators  have 
once  more  rightly  made  a  distinction  but  an  inadequate  one  (see  on 
xiii.  23,  25).  The  word  for  '  pray'  here  is  different  from  that  for  'ask' 
vv.  13,  14;  but  of  the  two  the  one  rendered  'pray'  [erdtdft)  is  (so  far 
as  there  is  a  distinction)  the  less  suppliant.  It  is  the  word  always 
used  by  S.  John  when  Christ  speaks  of  His  prayers  to  the  Father  (xvi. 
26,  xvii.  9,  15,  20);  never  the  word  rendered  'ask'  [aitein),  which 
however  Martha,  less  careful  than  the  Evangelist,  uses  of  Christ's  prayers 
(xi.  22).  But  the  distinction  must  not  be  pressed  as  if  aitein  were 
always  used  of  inferiors  (against  which  Deut.  x.  12;  Acts  xvi.  29; 
I  Pet.  iii.  15  are  conclusive),  or  erdtdjt  always  of  equals  (against  which 
Mark  vii.  26;  Luke  iv.  38,  vii.  3;  John  iv.  40,  47;  Acts  iii.  3  are 
equally  conclusive),  although  the  tendency  is  in  that  direction.  In 
I  John  V.  16  both  words  are  used.  In  classical  Greek  erdtdn  is  never 
'to  make  a  request,'  but  always  (as  in  i.  19,  21,  25,  ix.  2,  15,  19,  21, 
23,  &c. )  'to  ask  a  question.'     (See  on  xvi.  23.) 

another  Comforter]  Better,  another  Advocate.  The  Greek  word, 
Paraclete  (Xlapd/cXT/Tos)  is  employed  five  times  in  the  N.T. — four  times 
in  this  Gospel  by  Christ  of  the  Holy  Spirit  (xiv.  16,  26,  xv.  26,  xvi.  7), 
once  in  the  First  Epistle  by  S.  John  of  Christ  (ii.  i).  Our  translators 
render  it  'Comforter'  in  the  Gospel,  and  'Advocate'  in  the  Epistle. 
As  to  the  meaning  of  the  word,  usage  appears  to  be  decisive.  It  com- 
monly signifies  'one  who  is  summoned  to  the  side  of  another'  to  aid 
him  in  a  court  of  justice,  especially  the  'counsel  for  the  defence.'  It  is 
passive,  not  active ;  '  one  who  is  summoned  to  plead  a  cause, '  not 
'one  who  exhorts,  or  encourages,  or  comforts.'  A  comparison  of  the 
simple  word  (>cX7;t6s= 'called;'  Matt.  xx.  16,  xxii.  14  ;  Rom.  i.  i,  6,  7  ; 
I  Cor.  i.  I,  2,  &c.)  and  the  other  compounds,  of  which  only  one  occurs 
in  the  N.  T.  (w^Y/cXTjros^' unaccused;'  r  Cor.  i.  8;  Col.  i.  22,  &c.),  or 
a  reference  to  the  general  rule  about  adjectives  similarly  formed  from 
transitive  verbs,  will  shew  that  '  Paraclete '  must  have  a  passive  sense. 
The  rendering  'Comforter'  has  arisen  from  giving  the  word  an  active 
sense,  which  it  cannot  have.  Moreover,  '  Advocate '  is  the  sense  which 
the  context  suggests,  wherever  the  word  is  used  in  the  Gospel:  the 
idea  of  pleading,  arguing,  convincing,  instructing,  is  prominent  in  every 


28o  S.  JOHN,  XIV.  [vv.  17,  18. 

17  that  he  may  abide  with  you  for  ever ;  Even  the  Spirit  of 
truth;  whom  the  world  cannot  receive,  because  it  seeth 
him  not,  neither  knoweth  him  :  but  ye  know  him ;  for  he 

18  dwelleth  with  you,  and  shall  be  in  you.     I  will  not  leave 

instance.  Here  the  Paraclete  is  the  '  Spirit  oi  truth,''  whose  reasonings 
fall  dead  on  the  ear  of  the  world,  and  are  taken  in  only  by  the  faithful. 
In  V.  26  He  is  to  teack  and  remind  them.  In  xv.  26  He  is  to  liear 
witness  to  Christ.  In  xvi.  7 — ri  He  is  to  convince  or  cotwict  the 
world.  In  short,  He  is  represented  as  the  Advocate,  the  Counsel,  who 
suggests  true  reasonings  to  our  minds  and  true  courses  for  our  lives, 
convicts  our  adversary  the  world  of  wrong,  and  pleads  our  cause  before 
God  our  Father.  In  the  Te  Denm  the  Holy  Spirit  is  rightly  called  'the 
Comforter,'  but  that  is  not  the  function  which  is  set  forth  here.  To 
substitute  'Advocate'  will  not  only  bring  out  the  right  meaning  in  the 
Gospel,  but  will  bring  the  language  of  the  Gospel  into  its  true  relation 
to  the  language  of  the  Epistle.  '  He  will  give  you  another  Advocate ' 
acquires  fresh  meaning  when  we  remember  that  S.  John  calls  Christ 
our  'Advocate:'  the  Advocacy  of  Christ  and  the  Advocacy  of  the  Spirit 
mutually  illustrating  one  another.  At  the  same  time  an  important  co- 
incidence between  the  Gospel  and  Epistle  is  preserved,  one  of  the  many 
which  help  to  prove  that  both  are  by  one  and  the  same  author,  and 
therefore  that  evidence  of  the  genuineness  of  the  Epistle  is  also  evidence 
of  the  genuineness  of  the  Gospel.  See  Lightfoot,  On  Revision,  pp.  50 — 
56,  from  which  nearly  the  whole  of  this  note  is  taken. 

It  is  worth  noting  that  although  S.  Paul  does  not  use  the  word 
Paraclete,  yet  he  has  the  doctrine:  in  Rom.  viii.  27,  34  the  same 
language,  'maketh  intercession  for,'  is  used  both  of  the  Spirit  and  of 
Christ. 

that  he  may  abide  with  yon  for  ever]  Their  present  Advocate  has 
come  to  them  and  will  leave  them  again;  this  'other  Advocate'  will 
come  and  never  leave  them.  And  in  Him,  who  is  the  Spirit  of  Christ 
(Rom.  viii.  9),  Christ  will  be  with  them  also  (Matt,  xxviii.  20). 

17.  the  Spirit  of  truth]  This  expression  confirms  the  rendering  'Ad- 
vocate.' Truth  is  much  more  closely  connected  with  the  idea  of  advo- 
cating a  cause  than  with  that  of  comforting.  Comp.  xv.  26,  xvi.  13; 
I  John  V.  6.  The  Paraclete  is  the  Spirit  of  Truth  as  being  the  Bearer 
of  the  Divine  revelation,  bringing  truth  home  to  the  hearts  of  men. 
In  I  John  iv.  6  it  is  opposed  to  the  'spirit  of  error.'  Comp.  1  Cor. 
ii.  12. 

the  world]    See  notes  on  i.  9,  10. 

it  seeth  him  7iot]  Because  the  Spirit  and  'the  things  of  the  Spirit' 
must  be  'spiritually  discerned'  (i  Cor.  ii.  14).  The  world  may  have 
intelligence,  scientific  investigation,  criticism,  learning  ;  but  not  by  these 
means  is  the  Spirit  of  Truth  contemplated  and  recognised  ;  rather  by 
humility,  self-investigation,  faith,  and  love. 

for  he  dtvclleth]  Because  lie  abideth  :  it  is  the  same  Greek  word  as 
in  the  previous  clause.     Comp.  v.  28. 

and  shall  be  in  you]     A  reading  of  higher  authority  gives  us,  'and  is 


vv.  19—21.]  S.   JOHN,  XIV.  281 

you  comfortless :    I  will  come  to  you.     Yet  a  little  while,  19 
and  the  world  seeth  me  no  more  ;  but  ye  see  me  :  because 
I  live,  ye  shall  live  also.     At  that  day  ye  shall  know  that  1 20 
am  in  my  Father,  and  you  in  me,  and  I  in  you.     He  that  21 
hath  my  commandments,  and  keepeth  them,  he  it  is  that 
loveth  me :    and  he  that  loveth  me  shall  be  loved  of  my 
Father,  and  I  will  love  him,  and  will  manifest  myself  to 


in  you.^    All  the  verbs  are  in  the  present  tense.     The  Spirit  was  in  the 
Apostles  already,  though  not  in  the  fulness  of  Pentecost. 

Note  throughout  these  two  verses  (16,  17)  the  definite  personality  of 
the  Spirit,  distinct  both  from  the  Father  Who  gives  Him  and  from  the 
Son  Who  promises  Him.  Note  also  the  three  prepositions  (in  vv.  16, 
1 7) :  the  Advocate  is  with  us  for  fellowship  {nieta) ;  He  abides  by  our 
side  to  defend  us  {para) ;  He  is  /;/  us  as  a  source  of  power  to  each  indi- 
vidually [en). 

18.  comfortless]  Rather  (with  Wiclif)  fatherless,  as  the  word  is 
translated  James  i.  27,  the  only  other  place  in  the  N.  T.  where  it  occurs; 
or  (with  the  margin)  orphans,  the  very  word  used  in  the  Greek.  The 
inaccurate  rendering  '  comfortless  '  gives  unreal  support  to  the  inaccu- 
rate rendering  *  Comforter.'  In  the  Greek  there  is  no  connexion 
between  orphans  and  Paraclete.  We  must  connect  this  rather  with 
the  tender  address  in  xiii.  33  ;  He  will  not  leave  His  '  little  children ' 
fatherless. 

I  will  come  to  yoii]  Or,  /am  coming  to  you,  in  the  Holy  Spirit, 
whom  I  will  send.  The  context  seems  to  shew  clearly  that  Christ's 
spiritual  reunion  with  them  through  the  Paraclete,  and  not  His  bodily 
reunion  with  them  either  through  the  Resurrection  or  through  the  final 
Return  is  intended. 

19.  a  little  while\    Comp.  xiii.  33,  xvi.  16. 

but  ye  see  me]     In  the  Paraclete,  ever  present  with  you. 

because  I  live,  ye  shall  live  also]  i.  e.  that  higher  and  eternal  life  over 
which  death  has  no  power  either  in  Christ  or  His  followers.  Christ  has 
this  life  in  Himself  (v.  26) ;  His  followers  derive  it  from  Him  (v.  21). 

20.  Ai  that  day]  Comp.  xvi.  23,  26.  Pentecost,  and  thenceforth 
to  the  end  of  the  world.  They  will  come  to  know,  for  experience  will 
teach  them,  that  the  presence  of  the  Spirit  is  the  presence  of  Christ,  and 
through  Him  of  the  Father. 

ye  in  me,  and  I  in  you]     Comp.  xv.  4,  5,  xvii.  21,  23;   i  John  iii.  24, 

iv.  13,  15.  16. 

21.  hath  my  commandments,  and  keepeth  them]  Bears  them  in  his 
mind  and  observes  them  in  his  life. 

he  it  is]    With  great  emphasis  ;  he  and  no  one  else. 

will  manifest  myself  to  him]  Once  more  willing  obedience  is  set  forth 
as  the  road  to  spiritual  enlightenment  (see  on  vii.  17).  The  word  for 
'manifest '  is  not  S.  John's  favourite  word  {phaneroun)  but  one  which 
he  uses  only  in  these  two  verses  [eniphanizein). 


282  S.   JOHN,   XIV.  [vv.  22,  23. 

22  him.  Judas  saith  unto  him,  not  Iscariot,  Lord,  how  is  it 
that  thou  wilt  manifest  thyself  unto  us,   and  not  unto  the 

23  world  ?  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  him.  If  a  man  love 
me,  he  will  keep  my  words :  and  my  Father  will  love  hhn, 
and  we  will  come  unto  him,  and  make  our  abode  with  him. 


22.  yudas\  Excluding  the  genealogies  of  Christ  we  have  six  persons 
of  this  name  in  the  N.  T. 

I.  This  Judas,  who  was  the  son  of  a  certain  James  (Luke  vi.  16; 
Acts  i.  13):  he  is  commonly  identified  with  Lebbaeus  or  Thaddaeus 
(see  on  Matt.  x.  3).  ■2.  Judas  Iscariot.  3.  The  brother  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  of  James,  Joscs,  and  Simon  (Matt.  xiii.  55;  Mark  vi.  3).  4.  Judas, 
surnamed  Barsabas  (Acts  xv.  22,  -27,  32).  5.  Judas  of  Galilee  (Acts 
V-  37).  6.  Judas  of  Damascus  (Acts  ix.  11).  Of  these  six  the  third 
is  probably  the  author  of  the  Epistle;  so  that  this  remark  is  the  only 
thing  recorded  in  the  N.  T.  of  Judas  the  Apostle  as  distinct  from  the 
other  Apostles.  Nor  is  anything  really  known  of  him  from  other 
sources. 

how  is  ii\  Literally,  What  hath  come  to  pass;  'what  has  happened 
to  determine  Thee?' 

manifest  thyself^  The  word  'manifest'  rouses  S.  Judas  just  as  the 
word  'see'  roused  S.  Philip  (z/.  7).  Both  go  wrong  from  the  same  cause, 
inability  to  see  the  spiritual  meaning  of  Christ's  words,  but  they  go 
wrong  in  different  ways.  Philip  wishes  for  a  vision  of  the  Father,  a 
Theophany,  a  suitable  inauguration  of  the  Messiah's  kingdom.  Judas 
supposes  with  the  rest  of  his  countrymen  that  the  manifestation  of  the 
Messiah  means  a  bodily  appearance  in  glory  before  the  whole  world, 
to  judge  the  Gentiles  and  restore  the  kingdom  to  the  Jews.  Once  more 
we  have  the  Jewish  point  of  view  given  with  convincing  precision. 
Comp.  vii.  4. 

23.  Jesus  ans7uered\  The  answer  is  given,  as  so  often  in  our 
Lord's  replies,  not  directly,  but  by  repeating  and  developing  the  state- 
ment which  elicited  the  question.  Comp.  iii.  5 — 8,  iv.  14,  vi.  44 — 51, 
53 — ^58,  &c.  The  condition  of  receiving  the  revelation  is  loving  obe- 
dience; those  who  have  it  not  cannot  receive  it.  This  shews  that 
the  revelation  cannot  be  universal,  cannot  be  shared  by  those  who 
hate  and  disobey  (xv.  18). 

my  words]     Rather,  Afy  word  ;  the  Gospel  in  its  entirety. 

we  ivill  come']     For  the  use  of  the  plural  comp.  x.  30. 

abode]  See  on  v.  1.  The  thought  of  God  dwelling  among  His  peo- 
ple was  familiar  to  every  Jew  (Ex.  xxv.  8,  xxix.  45  ;  Zech.  ii.  10;  &c.). 
This  is  a  thought  far  beyond  that, — God  dwelling  in  the  licart  of  tlie 
individual ;  and  later  Jewish  philosophy  had  attained  to  this  also.  But 
the  united  indwelling  of  the  Father  and  the  Son  by  means  of  the  Spirit 
is  purely  Christian. 

In  these  two  verses  (23,  24)  the  changes  'words' 'sayings' 

'word'  give  a  wrong  impression:  they  should  run — 'word' — 'words' 


w.  24—27.]  S.   JOHN,   XIV.  283 

He  that  loveth  me  not  keepeth  not  my  sayings :  and  the  24 
word  which  you  hear  is  not  mine,  but  the  Father's  which 
sent  me. 

These  things  have  I  spoken  unto  you,  being  yet  present  25 
with  you.     But  the  Comforter,  which  is  the  Holy  Ghost,  26 
whom  the  Father  will  send  in  my  name,  he  shall  teach  you 
all  things,  and  bring  all  thi?igs  to  your  remembrance,  what- 
soever  I  have  said  unto  you.     Peace  I  leave  with  you,  my  i^ 

...'word.'  In  the  Greek  we  have  the  same  substantive,  twice  n  the 
singular  and  once  in  the  plural. 

24.  is  not  mine]     To  be  understood  literally  :  see  on  xii.  44. 

25.  beitig  yet  present]  Better,  while  abiding;  it  is  S.John's  favourite 
verb  (see  on  i.  33).  With  this  verse  the  discourse  takes  a  fresh  start 
returning  to  the  subject  of  the  Paraclete.  Perhaps  there  is  a  pause 
after  v.  24. 

26.  But  the  Comforter]     Better,  Bttt  the  Advocate  (see  on  v.  16). 
■which   is  the  Holy    Ghost]      Even  the  Holy  Spirit.      The  epithet 

'holy'  is  given  to  the  Spirit  thrice  in  this  Gospel;  i.  33,  xx.  22,  and 
here  (in  vii.  39  the  '  holy'  is  very  doubtful).  It  is  not  frequent  in  any 
Gospel  but  the  third  ;  five  times  in  S.  Matthew,  four  in  S.  Mark, 
twelve  in  S.  Luke.  S.  Luke  seems  fond  of  the  expression,  which  he 
uses  about  forty  times  in  the  Acts ;  and  he  rarely  speaks  of  the  Spirit 
without  prefixing  the  'holy.'  Here  only  does  S.  John  give  the  full 
phrase,  both  substantive  and  epithet  having  the  article :  in  i.  33  and 
XX.  22  there  is  no  article. 

in  my  name]    As  My  representative,  taking  My  place  and  continuing 

My  work  (see  on  v.  13).     '  He  shall  not  speak  of  Himself He  shall 

receive  of  Mine  and  shew  it  unto  you '  (xvi.  13,  14).  The  mission  of 
the  Paraclete  in  reference  to  the  glorified  Redeemer,  is  analogous  to  the 
mission  of  the  Messiah  in  reference  to  the  Father. 

shall  teach  you  all  things]  i.e.  'guide  you  into  all  the  truth'  (xvi.  13). 
He  shall  teach  them  the  Divine  truth  in  its  fulness;  all  those  things 
which  they  'cannot  bear  now,'  and  also  '  things  to  come.' 

bring  all  things  to  your  remembrance]  Not  merely  the  words  of 
Christ,  a  particular  in  which  this  Gospel  is  a  striking  fulfilment  of  this 
promise,  but  also  the  meaning  of  them,  which  the  Apostles  often  failed 
to  see  at  the  time  :  comp.  ii.  22,  xii.  16;  Luke  ix.  45,  xviii.  34,  xxiv.  8. 
"  It  is  on  the  fulfilment  of  this  promise  to  the  Apostles,  that  their  suffi- 
ciency as  Witnesses  of  all  that  the  Lord  did  and  taught,  and  conse- 
quently the  authenticity  of  the  Gospel  narrative,  is  grounded  "  (Alford). 

27.  Peace  I  leave  with  you]  "Finally  the  discourse  returns  to  the 
point  from  which  it  started.  Its  object  had  been  to  reassure  the  sor- 
rowful disciples  against  their  Lord's  departure,  and  with  words  of  reas- 
surance and  consolation  it  concludes.  These  are  thrown  into  the  form  of 
a  leave-taking  or  farewell."  S.  p.  226,  'Peace  I  leave  with  you'  is 
probably  a  solemn  adaptation  of  the  conventional  form  of  taking  leave 


284  S.  JOHN,  XIV.  [vv.  28, 29. 

peace  I  give  unto  you  :  not  as  the  world  giveth,  give  I  unto 
you.     Let   not   your  heart  be  troubled,    neither  let  it  be 

28  afraid.  Ye  have  heard  how  I  said  unto  you,  I  go  away, 
and  come  again  unto  you.  If  ye  loved  me,  ye  would 
rejoice,  because  I  said,  I  go  unto  the  Father:  for  my  Father 

29  is  greater  than  I.     And  now  I  have  told  you  before  it  come 

in  the  East :  comp.  '  Go  in  peace,'  Judg.  xviii.  6;  i  Sam.  i.  17,  xx.  42, 
xxix,  7  ;  2  Kings  v.  19  ;  Mark  v.  34,  &c.  See  notes  on  James  ii.  16 
and  I  Pet.  v.  14.  The  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  perhaps  purposely 
substitutes  in  his  Epistles  '  Grace  be  with  you  all '  for  the  traditional 
Jewish  '  Peace.' 

my  peace  I  give  latto  yoii]  'My '  is  emphatic  ;  this  is  no  mere  conven- 
tional wish.     Comp.  xvi.  33,  xx.  19,  21,  26.     The  form  of  expression, 
peace  that  is  mine,  is  common  in  this  Gospel.     Comp.   the  joy  that  is 
mine  (iii.  29,  xv.  11,  xvii.   13);  the  judgment  that  is  mine  (v.  30,  viii. 
16) ;  the  rommandmetits  that  are  mine  (xiv.  15) ;  the  love  that  is  mine 

(xv.  10). 

jiot  as  the  world  giveth^  It  seems  best  to  understand  '  as  literally  of 
the  world's  manner  of  giving,  not  of  its  gifts,  as  if  '  as  '  were  equivalent 
to  'what.'  The  world  gives  from  interested  motives,  because  it  has 
received  or  hopes  to  receive  as  much  again  (Luke  vi.  33,  34) ;  it  gives  to 
friends  and  withholds  from  enemies  (Matt.  v.  43) ;  it  gives  what  costs  it 
nothing  or  what  it  cannot  keep,  as  in  the  case  of  legacies  ;  it  pretends 
to  give  that  which  is  not  its  own,  especially  when  it  says  'Peace,  peace,' 
when  there  is  no  peace  (Jer.  vi.  14).  The  manner  of  Christ's  giving  is 
the  very  opposite  of  this.  He  gives  what  is  His  own,  what  He  might 
have  kept,  what  has  cost  Him  a  life  of  suffering  and  a  cruel  death  to 
bestow,  what  is  open  to  friend  and  foe  alike,  who  have  notliing  of  their 
own  to  give  in  return. 

Let  not  your  heart  be  ti-onbled\  See  on  w.  i .  Was  He  not  right  in 
giving  them  this  charge?  If  He  sends  them  another  Advocate,  through 
whom  both  the  Father  and  He  will  ever  abide  with  them,  if  He  leaves 
them  His  peace,  what  room  is  there  left  for  trouble  and  fear  ? 

The  word  for  'be  afraid  '  is  frequent  in  the  LXX.  but  occurs  nowhere 
else  in  the  N.  T.      '  Be  fearful '  is  the  literal  meaning. 

28.  Ye  have  heard,  &c.]  Literally,  Ye  heard  that  /  said  to  you, 
/am  going  a7oay  and  I  am  coming  unto  you:  comp.  vz'.  i,  2,  18. 
because  J  said,  I  go,  &c.]  Omit  'I  said,'  which  is  wanting  in  all 
the  best  authorities  :  If  ye  had  loved  Me,  ye  wojdd  have  rejoiced  that 
I  am  going  unto  the  Father.  The  construction  is  the  same  as  in  iv.  10, 
xi.  21,  32,  xiv.  28.  Their  affection  is  not  free  from  selfishness:  they 
ought 'to  rejoice  at  His  gain  rather  than  mourn  over  their  own  loss. 

for  my  'Father  is  greater  than  I]  Because  the  Father  is  greater 
than  I.  Therefore  Christ's  going  to  Him  is  gain.  This  was  a  favourite 
text  with  the  Arians,  as  implying  the  inferiority  of  the  Son.  There  is  a 
real  sense  in  which  even  in  theGodhead  the  Son  is  subordinate  to  the 
Father:  this  is  involved  in  the  Eternal  Generation  and  in  the  Son's 


vv.  30,  31.]  S.   JOHN,   XIV.  285 

to  pass,  that,  when  it  is  come  to  pass,  ye  might  beheve. 
Hereafter  I  will  not  talk  much  with  you  :  for  the  prince  of  3° 
this  world  cometh,  and  hath  nothing  in  me.     But  that  the  3' 
world  may  know  that  I  love  the  Father ;  and  as  the  Father 
gave   me   commandment,   even  so  I  do.     Arise,    let  us  go 
hence. 

being  the  Agent  by  whom  the  Father  works  in  the  creation  and  preser- 
vation of  all  things.  Again,  there  is  the  sense  in  which  the  ascended 
and  glorified  Christ  is  'inferior  to  the  Father  as  touching  His  manhood.' 
Lastly,  there  is  the  sense  in  which  Jesus  on  earth  was  inferior  to  His 
Father  in  Heaven.  Of  the  three  this  last  meaning  seems  to  suit  the 
context  best,  as  shewing  most  clearly  how  His  going  to  the  Father 
would  be  a  gain,  and  that  not  only  to  Himself  but  to  the  Apostles  ;  for 
at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father,  who  is  greater  than  Himself,  He  will 
have  more  power  to  advance  His  kingdom.  See  notes  on  i  Cor.  xv. 
27,  28 ;  Mark  xiii.  32,  [xvi.  19]. 

29.  ye  might  believe]  Better,  ye  may  believe.  The  brevity  of  the 
expression  makes  it  ambiguous.  It  may  mean  either,  '  ye  may  believe 
that  1  am  He'  (as  in  xiii.  19),  in  which  case  'I  have  told  you'  probably 
refers  to  the  sending  of  the  Paraclete  ;  or,  'ye  may  believe  Me  '  (as  in 
V.  11),  in  which  case  '  I  have  told  you '  probably  refers  to  Christ's  going 
to  the  Father.     The  former  seems  better. 

30.  Hereafter  1  will  not  talk  much']  Literally,  No  longer  shall  I 
speak  many  things :  comp.  xv.  15. 

the  prince  of  this  world  cometh]  Better,  the  ruler  of  the  world  is 
coining.  The  powers  of  darkness  are  at  work  in  Judas  and  his  employ- 
ers.    See  on  xii.  31. 

and  hath  nothing  in  me]  Quite  literal :  there  is  nothing  in  Jesus  over 
which  Satan  has  control.  '  Let  no  one  think  that  My  yielding  to  his 
attack  implies  that  he  has  power  over  Me.  The  yielding  is  voluntary 
in  loving  obedience  to  the  Father.'  This  declaration,  in  me  lie  hath 
nothing,  could  only  be  true  if  Jesus  were  sinless.  On  the  import  of 
this  confident  appeal  to  His  own  sinlessness  see  notes  on  viii.  29,  46 
and  XV.  10. 

31.  But  that]  Once  more  we  have  an  instance  of  S.  John's  ellipti- 
cal use  of  these  words  (see  on  xiii.  18),  '  But  (this  is  done,  i.  e.  Satan 
cometh)  in  order  that,  &c.'  Some,  however,  would  omit  the  full  stop 
at  'I  do  '  and  make  '  that '  depend  upon  '  Arise  :'  '  But  that  the  world 
may  know  that  I  love  tlie  Father,  and  that  as  the  Father  commanded 
Me  so  I  do,  arise,  let  us  go  hence.'  There  is  a  want  of  solemnity,  if  not 
a  savour  of  '  theatrical  effect,'  in  this  arrangement.  Moreover  it  is  less 
in  harmony  with  S.  John's  style,  especially  in  these  discourses.  The 
more  simple  construction  is  the  more  probable. 

let  us  go  hence]  '  Let  us  go  and  meet  the  power  before  which  I  am 
willing  in  accordance  with  God's  will  to  fall.' 

We  are  probably  to  understand  that  they  rise  from  table  and  prepare 
to  depart,  but  that  the  contents  of  the  next  three  chapters  are  spoken 


286  S.   JOHN,  XV.  [vv.  I,  2. 

Chap.  XV.  i — ii.     The  Union  of  tJu  Disciples  with  Christ. 
The  Allegory  of  the  Vine. 

15      I  am  the  true  vine,  and  my  Father  is  the  husbandman. 
2  Every  branch  in  me  that  beareth  not  fruit  he  taketh  away : 

before  they  leave  the  room  (comp.  xviii.  r).  Others  suppose  that  the 
room  is  left  now  and  that  the  next  two  chapters  are  discourses  on  the 
way  towards  Gethsemane,  chap.  xvii.  being  spoken  at  some  halting 
place,  possibly  the  Temple.     See  introductory  note  to  chap.  xvii. 

Chap.  XV. 

The  general  subject  still  continues  from  xiii.  31 — Christ's  love  in 
KEEPING  His  own.  This  is  still  further  set  forth  in  this  chapter  in 
three  main  aspects  :  i.  Their  union  with  Him,  illustrated  by  the  allegory 
of  the  Vine  (i — 11)  ;  2.  Their  union  with  one  another  in  Him  (12 — 17); 
3.    The  hatred  of  the  world  to  both  Him  and  them  (18 — 25). 

1 — 11.     The  Union  of  the  Disciples  with  Christ. 

The  Allegory  of  the  Vine. 

The  allegory  of  the  Vine  is  similar  in  kind  to  that  of  the  Door  and  of 
the  Good  Shepherd  in  chap.  x.  (see  introductory  note  there):  this  sets 
forth  union  from  within,  the  other  union  from  without. 

1.  /  a7n  the  true  vine]  We  have  here  the  same  word  for  '  true '  as 
in  i.  9,  vi.  32;  Rev.  iii.  14.  Christ  is  the  true,  the  genuine,  the  ideal, 
the  perfect  Vine,  as  He  is  the  perfect  Light,  the  perfect  Bread,  and  the 
perfect  Witness  (see  on  i.  9).  "  The  material  creations  of  God  are  only 
inferior  examples  of  that  finer  spiritual  life  and  organism  in  which  the 
creature  is  raised  up  to  partake  of  the  Divine  nature"  (Alfoi'd).  Whether 
the  allegory  was  suggested  by  anything  external, — vineyards,  or  the  vine 
of  the  Temple  visible  in  the  moonlight,  a  vine  creeping  in  at  the  win- 
dow, the  '  fruit  of  the  vine '  (Matt.  xxvi.  29)  on  the  table  which  they 
had  just  left, — it  is  impossible  to  say.  Of  these  the  last  is  far  the  most 
probable,  as  referring  to  the  Eucharist  just  instituted  as  a  special  means 
of  union  with  Him  and  with  one  another.  But  the  allegory  may  easily 
have  been  chosen  for  its  own  merits  and  its  O.  T.  associations  (Ps.  Ixxx. 
8 — 19  ;  Is.  V.  I — 7  ;  Jer.  ii.  21 ;  &c.)  without  any  suggestion  from  with- 
out. The  vine  was  a  national  emblem  under  the  Maccabees  and  appears 
on  their  coins. 

the  husbandman]  The  Owner  of  the  soil  Who  tends  His  Vine 
Himself  and  establishes  the  relation  between  the  Vine  and  the  branches. 
There  is  therefore  a  good  deal  of  difference  between  the  form  of  this 
allegory  and  the  parable  of  the  Vineyard  (Mark  xii.  i)  or  that  of  the 
Fruitless  Fig-tree  (Luke  xiii.  6).  The  word  'husbandman  '  occurs  no- 
where else  in  the  Gospels  except  of  the  wicked  husbandmen  in  the 
parable  of  the  Vineyard. 

2.  Every  branch]  The  word  for  •  branch '  in  these  six  verses  occurs 
here  only  in  N.  T.,  and  in  classical  Greek  is  specially  used  of  the  vine. 


vv. 


3—5.]  S.   JOHN,   XV.  287 


and  every  branch  that  beareth  fruit,  he  purgeth  it,  that  it 
may  bring  forth  more  fruit.     Now  ye  are  clean  through  the  3 
word  which  I  have  spoken  unto  you.     Abide  in  me,  and  1  4 
in  you.     As  the  branch  cannot  bear  fruit  of  itself,  except  it 
abide  in  the  vine ;  no  more  can  ye,  except  ye  abide  in  me. 
I  am  the  vine,  ye  are  the  branches  :  He  that  abideth  in  5 
me,  and  I  in  him,  the  same  bringeth  forth  much  fruit :  for 


The  word  used  in  the  other  Gospels  (Matt.  xiii.  32,  xxi.  8,  xxiv.  32  ; 
Mark  iv.  32,  xiii.  28;  Luke  xiii.  9),  and  in  Rom.  xi.  16 — 21,  is  of  the 
same  origin  (from  '  to  break ')  but  of  more  general  meaning,  —the 
smaller  branch  of  any  tree.  So  that  the  very  word  used,  independently 
of  the  context,  fixes  the  meaning  of  the  allegory.  It  is  every  z'm^-branch, 
i.  e.  every  one  who  is  by  origin  a  Christian.  If  they  continue  such  by 
origin  only,  and  give  forth  no  fruit,  they  are  cut  off.  The  allegory  takes 
no  account  of  the  branches  of  other  trees  :  neither  Jews  nor  heathen  are 
included.     Christ  would  not  have  called  them  branches  '  in  Me.' 

he  taketh  away]  Literally,  Hd  taketh  it  away ;  in  both  clauses  we 
have  a  notninativus  pendens. 

he  purgeth  it]  Better,  //e  cleanseth  it,  in  order  to  bring  out  the  con- 
nexion with  '  ye  are  clean  '  {v.  ^).  The  Greek  words  rendered  'purg- 
eth '  and  *  clean  '  are  from  the  same  root.  There  is  also  a  similarity  of 
jw/w^  between  the  Greek  words  for  'taketh  away'  and  'cleanseth,'  like 
'bear  and  forbear'  in  English  {airei  and  kathairei).  This  may  be  in- 
tentional, but  it  cannot  be  reproduced  in  translation.  By  cleansing  is 
meant  freeing  from  excrescences  and  useless  shoots  which  are  a  drain 
on  the  branch  for  nothing.  The  eleven  were  now  to  be  cleansed  by 
suffering. 

bring  forth]     Better,  as  before,  bear. 

3.  Now  ye  are  clean]  Already  are  ye  clean.  *  Ye '  is  emphatic ; 
many  more  will  be  made  clean  hereafter. 

through  the  word]  Better,  on  accoiuit  of  the  word.  This  is  a  fre- 
quent error  in  our  version,  Sid  with  the  accusative  being  translated  as  if 
it  had  the  genitive.  Comp.  Matt.  xv.  3,  6,  where  ''by  your  tradition' 
should  be  'for  the  sake  of  your  tradition.'  'The  word'  (xvi.  23)  here 
means  the  whole  teaching  of  Christ,  not  any  particular  utterance ;  but 
there  may  be  special  reference  to  the  present  discourses,  through  which 
Peter,  Thomas,  Philip,  and  Judas  I^bbaeus  have  been  cleansed  from 
self-confidence  and  ignorance. 

4.  Abide  in  me,  and  I  in  you]  See  on  vi.  56.  '  And  I  in  you ' 
may  be  taken  either  as  a  promise  ('  and  then  I  will  abide  in  you ')  or  as 
the  other  side  of  the  command  ('take  care  that  I  abide  in  you');  the 
latter  seems  to  be  better. 

except  ye  abide]  There  is  this  mysterious  property  in  the  branches 
of  the  spiritual  Vine,  that  they  can  cut  themselves  off,  as  Judas  had  done. 
Nature  does  something,  and  grace  does  more;  but  grace  may  be  rejected. 

5.  ye  are  the  branches]    This  has  been  implied,  but  not  stated  yet. 


288  S.   JOHN,  XV.  [vv.6— 9. 

6  without  me  ye  can  do  nothing.  If  a  man  abide  not  in  me, 
he  is  cast  forth  as  a  branch,  and  is  withered ;  and  meii 
gather  them,    and  cast  them  into    the   fire,  and   they   are 

7  burned.  If  ye  abide  in  me,  and  my  words  abide  in  you, 
ye  shall  ask  what  ye  will,  and  it  shall  be  done  unto  you. 

8  Herein  is  my  Father  glorified,  that  ye  bear  much  fruit ;  so 

9  shall  ye  be  my  disciples.     As  the  Father  hath  loved  me,  so 

for  without  me]  Better,  because  apart  from  Me,  or  (as  the  margin) 
severed  from  Me.     Comp.  i.  3;  Eph.  ii.  12. 

ye  can  do  vol  king]  Christians  cannot  live  as  Christians  apart  from 
Christ.  Nothing  is  said  here  about  those  who  are  not  Christians,  al- 
though there  is  a  sense  in  which  the  words  are  true  of  them  also. 

6.  he  is  cast  forth]  The  verb  is  in  a  past  tense ;  he  is  already  cast 
forth  by  the  very  fact  of  not  abiding  in  Christ.  This  consequence  follows 
so  inevitably  that  to  state  the  one  is  to  state  the  other.  The  same  re- 
mark applies  to  'is  withered.'  But  the  cast-out  branch  may  be  grafted 
in  again  (Rom.  xi.  23)  and  the  dead  branch  may  be  raised  to  life  again 
(v.  21,  25).  The  rest  of  the  picture  looks  forward  to  the  day  of  judg- 
ment. '  Men  gather '  should  be  quite  indefinitely,  they  gather  (see  on 
Luke  xii.  20). 

they  are  burned]     Or,  they  burn. 

1.     viy  zoords]     Better,  My  sayings  :  see  on  v.  3  and  v.  47. 

ye  shall  ash  what  ye  will]  The  better  reading  gives,  ask  Whatsoever 
ye  ivill,  in  the  imperative.  The  promise  is  similar  to  that  in  xiv.  13,  14 
both  in  its  comprehensiveness  and  in  its  limitation.  One  who  abides 
in  Christ  and  has  His  words  abiding  in  him  cannot  ask  amiss. 

8.  Herein  is  my  Father  glorifiaf]  As  in  v.  6,  the  verb  is  the  aorist 
passive;  not  'is  being  glorified'  but  'is  glorified,'  i.e.  whenever  the 
occasion  arises.  The  aorist  is  used  of  an  act  regarded  in  itself  as  ac- 
complished at  any  conceivable  moment:  comp.  xvii.  26.  '  When  ye  pray 
and  obtain  your  prayers  through  abiding  in  Me,  My  Father  is  glorified 
already.'  It  is  best  to  understand  'herein  '  as  referring  to  what  precedes 
(comp.  iv.  37  and  xvi.  30),  in  order  to  give  the  proper  meaning  to 
'that.' 

that  ye  bear]  Literally,  in  order  that  ye  may  bear:  it  is  S.  John's 
favourite  particle  once  more,  expressing  the  Divine  purpose  (comp. 
viii.  56,  ix.  2,  3,  xi.  15,  50,  xii.  23,  xiii.  i,  1,  Sec).  'Herein'  cannot 
refer  to  '  in  order  that '  without  awkwardness. 

so  shall  ye  be  7ny  disciples]  Rather,  and  may  become  My  disciples. 
The  construction  introduced  by  '  in  order  that '  continues  to  the  end  of 
the  verse ;  moreover  the  difference  between  'to  be'  and  'to  become' 
should  be  preserved  (see  on  x.  19,  i.  6).  The  sense  of  the  whole  will 
therefore  be;  'In  granting  your  prayers  My  Father  is  glorified,  in  order 
that  ye  may  be  fruitful  and  become  My  disciples.' 

9.  As  the  Father,  Sec]  The  Greek  construction  is  ambiguous.  It 
would  be  quite  possible  to  translate.  Even  as  the  Father  loved  Me  and 


vv.  lo,  II.]  S.   JOHN,   XV.  289 

have  I  loved  you  :  continue  ye  in  my  love.     If  ye  keep  my  10 
commandments,  ye  shall  abide  in  my  love ;  even  as  I  have 
kept  my  Father's  commandments,  and  abide  in  his  love. 

These  things  have  I  spoken  unto  you,  that  my  joy  might  n 
remain  in  you,  and  that  your  joy  might  be  full. 

I  loved  you,  abide  in  My  love.  But  our  version  is  better  as  keeping 
in  due  prominence  the  main  statement,  that  the  love  of  Christ  for  His 
disciples  is  analogous  to  that  of  the  Father  for  the  Son.  In  any  case 
'abide'  is  better  than  'continue;'  the  same  Greek  word  is  used  through- 
out these  verses  (4 — 16),  a  fact  which  our  translators  obscure  by  giving 
three  English  words,  'abide, ''continue,'  and  'remain,'  and  that  in  three 
consecutive  verses  (9 — 11).  Throughout  the  Gospel  '  abide '  should  be 
maintained  as  the  rendering  of  S.  John's  favourite  verb  jxhew  (see  on 
i.  33).  The  whole  should  run.  Even  as  the  Father  loved  Me,  I  also 
loved  jc?<  (comp.  xvii.  18,  xx.  21) ;  abide  in  My  love.  The  verbs  are 
aorists,  not  perfects,  and  Christ's  work  is  regarded  as  a  completed 
whole,  already  perfect  in  itself.  But  perhaps  this  is  just  one  of  those 
cases  where  the  English  perfect  may  be  allowed  to  translate  the  Greek 
aorist :  see  on  viii.  29. 

in  my  lovel  The  Greek  might  mean  '  the  love  of  Me,'  but  '  My 
love '  for  you  is  more  natural  and  suits  the  context  better,  which  speaks 
of  His  love  towards  them  as  similar  to  the  Father's  towards  Him. 
The  other,  however,  need  not  be  altogether  excluded.  See  on  xiv. 
27. 

10.  If  ye  keep]  See  on  xiv.  15,  21,  24.  To  keep  His  command- 
ments not  only  proves  our  love  for  Him  but  secures  His  love  for 
us. 

/  have  kept  my  Father's  covimandmettts']  This  being  in  a  subordinate 
sentence  the  tremendous  import  of  it  is  liable  to  pass  unnoticed.  Look- 
ing back  over  a  life  of  thirty  years  Jesus  says,  '  I  have  kept  the  Father's 
commandments.'  Would  the  best  man  that  ever  lived,  if  only  a  man, 
dare  to  make  such  a  statement  ?     See  on  xiv.  30. 

11.  These  thitigs  have  I  spoken]  The  verse  forms  a  conclusion  to 
the  allegory  of  the  Vine.     Comp.  v.  17,  xvi.  25,  33. 

jjiight  remain]  Better,  may  abide  :  but  the  reading  is  doubtful,  and 
perhaps  ought  to  be  simply  'may  be;'  that  My  joy  (see  on  xiv.  27) 
may  be  in  you.  This  does  not  mean  '  that  I  may  have  pleasure  in  you ;' 
but  that  the  joy  which  Christ  experienced  through  consciousness  of  Hif 
fellowship  with  the  Father,  and  which  supported  Him  in  His  sufferings, 
might  be  in  His  disciples  and  support  them  in  theirs.  Here  first,  on 
the  eve  of  His  sufferings,  does  Christ  speak  of  His  joy. 

fnight  be  full]  Or,  may  be  fulfilled.  This  expression  of  joy  being 
fulfilled  is  peculiar  to  S.  John  (comp.  iii.  29,  xvi.  24,  xvii.  13 ;  i  John 
i.  4;  2  John  12).  The  active  occurs  Phil.  ii.  2;  'make  my  joy  full;' 
but  nowhere  else.  Human  happiness  can  reach  no  higher  than  to  share 
that  joy  which  Christ  ever  felt  in  being  loved  by  His  Father  and  doing 
His  will. 


S.  JOHN 


19 


290  S.   JOHN,   XV.  [vv.  12—15. 

12 — 17.     The  Union  of  the  Disciples  with  one  another  in 

Christ. 

12  Tliis  is  my  commandment,  That  ye  love  one  another,  as  I 

13  have  loved  you.  Greater  love  hath  no  man  than  this,  that 
'4  a  man  lay  down  his  life  for  his  friends.  Ye  are  my  friends, 
15  if  ye  do  whatsoever  I  command  you.     Henceforth  I  call  you 

12 — 17.    The  Union  of  the  Disciples  with  one  another  in 

Christ. 

12.  This  is  my  commandment]  Literally,  This  is  the  commandment 
that  is  Mine  (see  on  xiv.  27).  In  v.  10  He  said  that  to  keep  His  com- 
mandments was  the  way  to  abide  in  His  love.  He  now  reminds  them 
what  His  commandment  is  (see  on  xiii.  34).  It  includes  all  others. 
A  day  or  two  before  this  Christ  had  been  teaching  that  all  the  Law  and 
the  Prophets  hang  on  the  two  great  commands,  '  love  God  with  all  thy 
heart'  and  'love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself  (Matt.  xxii.  37 — 40). 
S.  John  teaches  us  that  the  second  really  implies  the  first  (i  John 
iv.  20). 

That  ye  love  one  another]  Literally,  in  order  that  ye  love  one  another : 
this  is  the  purpose  of  the  commandment.  .See  next  verse  and  on 
V.  8,  vi.  29,  and  xvii.  3. 

as  I  have  loved]  Even  as  I  loved ;  comp.  v.  9.  Christ  looks  back 
from  a  point  still  further. 

13.  that  a  man  lay  down]  Literally,  in  order  that  a  man  lay  down  : 
the  greatest  love  is  that  of  which  the  purpose  is  dying  for  those  loved. 
On  'lay  down  his  life'  see  note  on  x.  11. 

/or  his  friends]  Needless  difficulty  has  been  made  about  this,  as  if 
it  were  at  variance  with  Romans  v.  6 — 8.  Christ  here  says  that  the 
greatest  love  that  any  one  can  shew  towards  his  friends  is  to  die  for 
them.  S.  Paul  says  that  such  cases  of  self-sacrifice  for  good  men  occur ; 
but  they  are  very  rare.  Christ,  however,  surpassed  them,  for  He  died 
not  only  for  His  friends  but  for  His  enemies,  not  only  for  the  good 
but  for  sinners.  There  is  no  contradiction.  Nor  is  there  any  emphasis 
on  'friends;'  as  if  to  suffer  for  friends  were  higher  than  to  suffer  for 
strangers  or  enemies.  The  order  of  the  Greek  words  throws  the  em- 
phasis on  '  life  :'  it  is  the  unique  character  of  the  thing  sacrificed  that 
proves  the  love.  Christ  says  'for  His  friends'  because  He  is  addressing 
His  friends. 

14.  Ye  are  my  friends]  '  Ye '  is  emphatic  :  '  and  when  I  say 
"friends,"  I  mean  you.'  This  shews  that  'friends'  was  used  simply  be- 
cause He  was  speaking  to  the  Apostles. 

whatsoez'er  I  command  you]  Better,  the  things  which  I  am  com- 
manding ^'^m. 

15.  Henceforth  I  call  you  not  servants]  Better,  No  longer  do  I  call 
you  servants  (comp.  xiv.  30  and  see  on  viii.  34).  He  had  implied  tliat 
they  were  servants  before  (xii.  26,  xiii.  13 — 16).  Perhaps  the  gentler 
word  'servant'    is  better  here,  although    '  bond -servant '  would  bring 


I 


vv.  i6,  17.]  S.  JOHN,  XV.  291 

not  servants;  for  the  servant  knoweth  not  what  his  lord 
doeth  :  but  I  have  called  you  friends ;  for  all  things  that 
I  have  heard  of  my  Father  I  have  made  known  unto  you. 
Ye  have  not  chosen  me,  but  I  have  chosen  you,  and  or  16 
dained  you,  that  you  should  go  and  bring  forth  fruit,  and 
that  your  fruit  should  remain  :  that  whatsoever  ye  shall  ask 
of  the  Father  in  my  name,  he  may  give  it  you.  These  17 
things  I  command  you,  that  ye  love  one  another. 

out  the  contrast  more  strongly.  Where  the  Apostles  and  others  use  it 
of  themselves  the  gentler  rendering  is  certainly  to  be  preferred  (Rom. 
i.  i;  Gal.  i.  10;  Jas.  i.  i ;  2  Pet.  i.  i;  &c.  &c.). 

what  his  lord  doeth']  To  be  taken  literally.  The  slave  or  servant 
may  see  what  his  master  is  doing,  but  does  not  know  the  meaning  or 
purpose  of  it.     '  Doeth'  need  not  be  made  equal  to  a  future. 

/  have  called  yoii  friends]  Or,  you  have  I  called  fi'iends ;  '  you '  is 
emphatic.  He  who  wills  to  do  His  will  as  a  servant,  shall  know  of  the 
doctrine  as  a  friend  (vii.  17). 

I  have  made  known  unto  you]  As  they  were  able  to  bear  it  (xvi.  12). 
After  Pentecost  they  would  be  able  to  bear  much  more.  Both  verbs  are 
aorists; — I  heard — I  made  known :  comp.  vv.  9  and  12. 

16.  Ye  have  not,  &c.]  Better,  Ye  chose  Me  not,  but  I  chose  you  r 
'  Ye '  and  '  I '  are  emphatic  ;  there  is  no  emphasis  on  '  Me.'  The  refer- 
ence is  to  their  election  to  be  Apostles,  as  the  very  word  used  seems  to 
imply  (comp.  vi.  70,  xiii.  18;  Acts  i.  2);  therefore  the  aorist  as  re- 
ferring to  a  definite  act  in  the  past  should  be  preserved  in  translation. 

ordained yoti]  Better,  appointed  y^w  (as  2  Tim.  i.  1 1  and  Heb.  i.  2), 
in  order  to  avoid  an  unreal  connexion  with  ordination  in  the  ecclesias- 
tical sense.  The  same  word  used  in  the  same  sense  as  here  is  rendered 
'  set '  in  Acts  xiii.  47  and  i  Cor.  xii.  28,  '  ordained '  i  Tim.  ii.  7,  and 
'made '  Acts  xx.  28. 

go  and  bring  forth  fruit]  '  Go '  must  not  be  insisted  on  too  strongly 
as  if  it  referred  to  the  missionary  journeys  of  the  Apostles.  On  the 
other  hand  it  is  more  than  a  mere  auxiliary  or  expletive  :  it  implies  the 
active  carrying  out  of  the  idea  expressed  by  the  verb  with  which  it  is 
coupled  (comp.  Luke  x.  37;  Mat.  xiii.  44,  xviii.  15,  xix.  21),  and  per- 
haps also  separation  from  their  Master  (Matt.  xx.  4,  7).  The  mission- 
ary work  of  gathering  in  souls  is  not  specially  indicated  here:  the 
'  fruit '  is  rather  the  holiness  of  their  own  lives  and  good  works  of  all 
kinds.     '  Bring  forth '  should  be  hear  as  in  z/.  5. 

should  remain]     Better,  should  z^ida  (see  on  v.  9).     Comp.  iv.  36. 

whatsoever  ye  shall  ask]     See  on  v.  7  and  xiv.  13. 

he  may  give  it]  The  Greek  may  also  mean  '/may  give  it'  (comp. 
xiv.  13),  the  first  and  third  persons  being  alike  in  this  tense;  and  several 
ancient  commentators  take  it  as  the  first. 

17.  These  things  I  command  you,  &.C.]  M.OTie\i\.erdi\\y,  These  things! 
am  commanding  you,  in  order  that  ye  may  love  one  another.  '  These 
things '  does  not  refer  to  '  that  ye  love  one  another,'  but  to  what  has 

1 9 — 2 


ign.  S.   JOHN,   XV.  \vv.  18—20. 

18 — 25.     TAe  Hatred  of  the  World  to  both  Him  and  them. 

x8      If  the  world  hate  you,  ye  know  that  it  hated  me  before  // 

19  hated  you.  If  ye  were  of  the  world,  the  world  Avould  love 
his  own  :  but  because  ye  are  not  of  the  world,  but  I  have 
chosen  you  out  of  the  world,  therefore  the  world  hateth  you. 

20  Remember  the  word  that  I  said  unto  you,  The  servant  is  not 
greater  than  his  lord.     If  they  have  persecuted  me,  they  will 

already  been  said  about  being  one  with   Him  and  with  each  other. 
Comp.  V.  II,  xiv.  25,  xvi.  25,  33. 

18 — 25.    The  Hatred  of  the  World  to  both  Him  and  them. 

In  strong  contrast  to  the  love  and  union  between  Christ  and  His 
disciples  and  among  the  disciples  themselves  is  the  hatred  of  the  world 
to  Him  and  them.  He  gives  them  these  thoughts  to  console  them  in 
encountering  this  hatred  of  the  world,  (i)  It  hated  Him  first  :  in  this 
trial  also  He  has  shewn  them  the  way.  (2)  The  hatred  of  the  world 
proves  that  they  are  not  of  the  world.  (3)  They  are  sharing  their 
Master's  lot,  whether  the  world  rejects  or  accepts  their  preaching. 
(4)  They  will  suffer  this  hatred  not  only  with  Him,  but  for  His  sake. 
All  this  tends  to  shew  that  the  very  hatred  of  the  world  intensifies  their 
union  with  Him. 

18.  ye  know  that  it  hated  me]  Better,  know  that  it  hath  hated  me 
(comp.  V.  20).  As  in  xiv.  i  the  principal  verb  may  be  either  indicative 
or  imperative,  and  the  imperative  is  preferable  :  the  second  verb  is  the 
perfect  indicative,  of  that  which  has  been  and  still  is  the  case. 

before  it  hated  you]  '  It  hated '  is  an  insertion  by  our  translators, 
and  '  before  you  '  is  literally  '  first  of  you,'  like  '  before  me '  in  i.  15  (see 
note  there)  and  30 ;  excepting  that  here  we  have  the  adverb  and  there 
the  adjective. 

19.  the  world  would  love  his  own]  In  vii.  7  He  told  His  brethren, 
who  did  not  believe  on  Him,  that  the  world  could  not  hate  them.  This 
shews  why  :  in  their  unbelief  it  still  found  something  of  its  own  (comp. 
I  John  iv.  5).  '  His  own,'  or  Its  07un,  is  neuter  singular  not  masculine 
plural.  The  selfishness  of  the  world's  love  is  thus  indicated  :  it  loves 
not  so  much  them,  as  that  in  them  which  is  to  its  own  advantage  ;  and 
hence  the  lower  word  for  '  love  '  is  used  (phileiti),  not  the  higlier  one 
(agapdn)  as  in  v.  17.  It  is  mere  natural  liking.  Note  the  solemn  repe- 
tition of  '  world '  in  this  verse.  For  the  construction  comp.  v.  46,  viii. 
19,  42,  ix.  41,  xviii.  36  and  contrast  iv.  10,  xi.  21,  xiv.  28. 

/  have  chosen]     I  chose  :  see  on  v.  16. 

therefore  the  world  hateth  you]  Or,  for  this  cause  (see  on  viii.  47  and 
xii.  39)  &c.     Comp.  i  John  iii.  13. 

20.  Remember]  See  note  on  xiii.  16:  of  the  passages  noticed  there 
Malt.  X.  24  is  similar  in  meaning  to  this.  Christ  may  here  be  alluding  to 
the  occasion  recorded  in  Matt.  x.  24.  On  the  blcssednc.^.s  of  sliaring  the 
lot  of  Christ  comp.  i  Pet.  iv.  12,  13. 


w.  21—24]  S.   JOHN,  XV.  293 

also  persecute  you ;  if  they  have  kept  my  saying,  they  will 
keep  yours  also.  But  all  these  things  will  they  do  unto  you  21 
for  my  name's  sake,  because  they  know  not  him  that  sent  me. 
If  I  had  not  come  and  spoken  unto  them,  they  had  not  22 
had  sin :  but  now  they  have  no  cloke  for  their  sin.  He  23 
that  hateth  me  hateth  my  Father  also.  If  I  had  not  done  24 
among  them  the  works  which  none  other  man  did,  they  had 

if  they  have  kept  my  saying,  they  will  keep]  Better,  If  they  kept 
(comp.  xiii.  14,  xviii.  23)  My  word,  they  will  keep.  'Keep'  must  not 
be  exchanged  for  'watch,  lay  wait  for,'  in  a  hostile  sense;  as  if  both 
halves  of  the  verse  were  alike  instead  of  being  opposed.  The  phrase 
'keep  the  word  (or  words)'  of  any  one  is  frequent  in  this  Gospel  (viii. 
5I'  5^)  55.  xiv.  23,  24,  xvii.  6);  always  in  the  sense  of  the  parallel 
phrase  'keep  my  commandments'  (xiv.  15,  21,  xv.  10).  Both  phrases 
form  a  link  not  only  between  the  Gospel  and  the  First  Epistle  (ii.  3, 
4,  5,  iii.  22,  24,  v.  2,  3),  but  also  between  these  two  and  the  Apocalypse 
(iii.  8,  10,  xii.  17,  xiv.  12,  xxii.  7,  9).  Comp.  John  ix.  16;  Rev.  i.  3, 
ii.  26,  iii.  3.  (See  on  xi.  44,  xix.  37,  xx.  16).  All  these  passages 
shew  that  it  is  impossible  to  take  'keep'  in  a  hostile  sense.  The  phrase 
'  to  keep  the  word'  of  any  one  occurs  in  S.  John's  writings  only.  '  To 
keep  the  commandments  (or  commandment)'  occurs  elsewhere  only 
Matt.  xix.  17  (comp.  xxviii.  20)  and  i  Tim.  vi.  14.  The  meaning 
of  the  verse  as  a  whole  is  that  both  in  failure  and  in  success  they  will 
share  His  lot.     For  the  construction  comp.  xiii.  14,  xviii.  23. 

21.  for  my  name's  sake]  This  thought  is  to  turn  their  suffering  into 
joy.     Comp.  Acts  v.  41,  xxi.  13;  2  Cor.  xii.  10;  Gal.  vi.   14;  Phil.  ii. 

17,  18;   I  Pet.  iv.  14. 

they  know  not  him  that  sent  me]  Comp.  vii.  28,  xvi.  3,  xvii.  25.  They 
not  merely  did  not  know  that  God  had  sent  Jesus ;  they  did  not  know 
God  Himself,  for  their  idea  of  Him  was  radically  wrong. 

22.  If  I  had  not  come  and  spoken  unto  them]  He  had  spoken  as 
man  had  never  spoken  before  (vii.  46),  and  His  words  sufficed  to  tell 
unprejudiced  minds  Who  He  was.  Their  hatred  was  a  sin  against 
light;  if  there  had  been  no  light,  there  would  have  been  no  sin. 
'To  have  sin'  is  a  phrase  peculiar  to  S.  John  {v.  24,  ix.  41,  xix.  11 ; 
I  John  i.  8). 

no  cloke]  Better  (with  the  margin),  no  excuse :  not  only  have  they 
sin,  but  they  have  sin  without  excuse.  The  same  word  is  rendered 
'  cloke,'  I  Thess.  ii.  5.  But  the  notion  is  not  that  of  hiding,  but  of  ex- 
cusing what  cannot  be  hid  :  'colour  '  (Acts  xxvii.  30)  is  a  better  render- 
ing than  '  cloke.'  Comp.  Ps.  cxl.  4. 
for  their  sifi\     Literally,  concerniiig  their  sin :  comp.  xvi.  8. 

23.  hateth  my  Father  also]     Comp.  v.  23,  xiv.  9. 

24.  the  works]  If  they  did  not  see  that  His  words  were  Divine 
they  might  at  least  have  seen  that  His  works  were  such.  Comp.  x. 
38,  xiv.  II,  V.  36.  Here  again  their  sin  was  against  light;  for  they 
admitted  the  works  (xi.  47). 


294  S.   JOHN,   XV.  [vv.  25,  26. 

not  had  sin  :  but  now  have  they  both  seen  and  hated  both 

25  me  and  my  Father.  But  this  cometh  to  pass,  that  the  word 
might  be  fulfilled  that  is  written  in  their  law,  They  hated 

26  me  without  a  cause.  But  when  the  Comforter  is  come, 
whom  I  will  send  unto  you  from  the  Father,  even  the  Spirit 
of  truth,  which  proceedeth  from  the  Father,  he  shall  testify 

which  none  other  man  did'\     Comp.  ix.  32. 

seen...my  Father'\     Comp.  xiv.  9,  10. 

26.  in  their  law]  '  Law '  is  used  in  the  wide  sense  for  the  O.  T. 
generally.     Comp.  x.  34,  xii.  34,  xv.  25 ;  Rom.  iii.  19. 

without  a  cause]  The  passage  may  be  from  either  Ps.  Ixix.  4  or 
XXXV.  19:  there  are  similar  passages  cix.  3  and  cxix.  161.  'Without  a 
cause,'  gratuitously ;  so  that  here  again  they  are  without  excuse. 

26.     the  Comfo7-ter'\     Better,  the  Advocate  (see  on  xiv.  16). 

whom  I  will  sold]  '  I '  is  emphatic.  Here  it  is  the  Son  Who  sends 
the  Paraclete  from  the  Father.  In  xiv.  16  the  Father  sends  in  answer 
to  the  Son's  prayer.  In  xiv.  26  the  Father  sends  in  the  Son's  name. 
These  are  three  ways  of  expressing  that  the  mission  of  the  Paraclete 
is  the  act  both  of  the  Father  and  of  the  .Son,  Who  are  one. 

from  the  Father']  See  note  on  '  from  God '  i.  6 :  the  preposition  and 
case  are  here  the  same ;  irapa  with  the  genitive. 

the  Spirit  of  truth]     See  on  xiv.  17. 

which  proceedeth  from  the  Father]  It  seems  best  to  take  this  much 
discussed  clause  as  simply  yet  another  way  of  expressing  the  fact  of  the 
mission  of  the  Paraclete.  If  the  Par.iclete  is  sent  by  the  Son  from  the 
Father,  and  by  the  Father  in  the  Son's  name  and  at  the  Son's  request, 
then  the  Paraclete  'proceedeth  from  the  Father.'  If  this  be  correct, 
then  this  statement  refers  to  the  office  and  not  to  the  Person  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  has  no  bearing  either  way  on  the  great  question  between  the 
Eastern  and  Western  Churches,  the  Filioque  added  in  the  West  to  the 
Nicene  Creed.  The  word  used  here  for  '  proceed  '  is  the  same  as  that 
used  in  the  Creed  of  Nicea,  and  the  Easterns  quote  these  words  of 
Christ  Himself  as  being  against  not  merely  the  insertion  of  the  clause 
'  and  the  Son '  into  the  Creed  (which  all  admit  to  have  been  made  ir- 
regularly), but  against  the  truth  of  the  statement  that  the  Spirit,  not 
only  in  His  temporal  mission,  but  in  His  Person,  from  all  eternity  pro- 
ceeds from  both  the  Father  and  the  Son.  On  the  whole  question  see 
Pearson  (9«  the  Creed,  Art.  viii.;  Reunion  Conference  at  Bonn,  1875, 
pp.  9 — 85,  Rivingtons;  Pusey  On  the  Clause  ^^ and  the  Son,"  a  Letter 
to  Dr  Liddon,  Parker,  1876.  The  word  rendered  'proceedeth'  occurs 
in  this  Gospel  only  here  and  v.  29,  but  is  frequent  in  the  other  Gospels 
and  in  Revelation  (Matt.  iii.  5,  iv.  4,  xv.  11,  18;  Mark  vii.  15,  18,  20, 
21,  23;  Luke  iv.  22,  37;  Rev.  i.  16,  iv.  5,  &c.),  and  there  seems  to  be 
nothing  in  the  word  itself  to  limit  it  to  the  Eternal  Procession.  On  the 
other  hand  the  preposition  used  here  (para  ~ '  from  the  side  of ')  is 
strongly  in  favour  of  the  reference  being  to  the  mission.  Comp.  xvi.  27, 
xvji.  8, 


w.  27;  I.]  S.   JOHN,  XV.   XVI.  295 

of  me :  and  ye  also  shall  bear  witness,  because  ye  have  been  27 
with  me  from  the  beginning. 

Chap.  XVI. 
The  Promise  of  the  Paraclete  and  of  Christ's  Return. 
I — II.     The  World  and  the  Paraclete. 
These  things  have  I  spoken  unto  you,  that  ye  should  not  16 

he  shall  testify  ofmel  Better,  He  shall  Toe^T  witness.  It  is  the  same 
word  as  is  used  in  the  next  verse  and  is  one  of  the  words  characteristic 
of  this  Gospel  (see  on  i.  7).  '  He '  is  emphatic,  in  opposition  to  the 
world  which  hates  and  rejects  Christ.  Christ  has  the  witness  of  the 
Spirit  of  truth,  which  has  the  authority  of  the  Father :  it  is  impossible 
to  have  higher  testimony  than  this. 

27.  And  ye  also  shall  bear  ■witness'\  Better,  Nay,  ye  also  beax  wit- 
ness :  the  verb  is  present,  not  future.  It  is  also  possible  to  take  the  verb 
as  an  imperative  (comp.  v.  \%  and  xiv.  i),  but  the  conjunctions  used 
are  against  this.  The  testimony  of  the  disciples  is  partly  one  and  the 
same  with  the  testimony  of  the  Spirit,  partly  not.  It  is  partly  the  same, 
so  far  as  it  depends  on  the  illumination  of  the  Spirit,  who  was  to  bring 
all  things  to  their  remembrance  and  lead  them  into  all  truth.  This 
would  not  be  true  in  its  fulness  until  Pentecost.  It  is  partly  not  the 
same,  so  far  as  it  depends  upon  the  Apostles'  own  personal  experience 
of  Christ  and  His  work.  This  is  the  case  at  once ;  the  experience  is 
already  there  ;  and  hence  the  present  tense.  Comp.  Acts  v.  32,  where 
the  Apostles  clearly  set  forth  the  twofold  nature  of  their  testimony,  and 
Acts  XV.  -28,  where  there  is  a  parallel  distinction  of  the  two  factors. 

have  been  with  me\  Literally,  are  with  Me ;  i.  e.  have  been  and 
still  are. 

from  the  beginning]  As  usual  the  context  decides  the  meaning  of 
'beginning'  (see  on  i.  i).  Here  plainly  the  meaning  is  from  the  be- 
ginning of  Christ's  ministry.  They  could  bear  witness  as  to  what  they 
themselves  had  seen  and  heard.     Comp.  Acts  i.  22 ;  Luke  i.  2. 

Chap.  XVI. 
We  are  still  in  the  first  part  of  the  second   main  division  of  the 

Gospel,  THE  INNER  GLORIFICATION  OF  CHRIST  IN  HiS  LAST  DIS- 
COURSES (xiii. — xvii. ).  We  now  enter  upon  the  third  division  of  this 
first  part  (see  introductory  note  to  chap.  xiii. ). 

The  Promise  of  the  Paraclete  and  of  Christ's  Return. 

As  has  been  remarked  already,  the  subjects  are  not  kept  distinct ; 
they  cross  and  interlace,  like  the  strands  in  a  rope.  But  the  following 
divisions  may  conduce  to  clearness;  i.  The  World  and  the  Paraclete 
(i — 11);  2.  The  Disciples  and  the  Paraclete  (12 — 15);  The  Sorrow  of 
Christ's  Departure  turned  into  Joy  by  His  Return  (16 — 24);  4.  Sum- 
mary and  Conclusion  of  the  Discourses  (25 — 33). 


296  S.   JOHN,   XVI.  [vv.  2—4. 

3  be  ofifended.  They  shall  put  you  out  of  the  synagogues  : 
yea,  the  time  cometh,  that  whosoever  killeth  you  will  think 

3  that  he  doeth  God  service.  And  these  things  will  they  do 
unto  you,  because  they  have  not  known  the  Father,  nor  me. 

4  But  these  things  have  I  told  you,  that  when  the  time  shall 
come,  ye  may  remember  that  I  told  you  of  them.  And 
these  things  I  said  not  unto  you  at  the  beginning,  because 

1 — 11.      The  World  and  the  Paraclete. 

1.  These  ihings\  These  discourses  generally,  especially  the  last 
section  about  the  world's  hatred  of  Him  and  them  (xv.  18 — 27). 

should  not  be  offended'^  Literally,  should  not  be  made  to  stumble: 
comp.  vi.  61  ;  i  John  ii.  10.  The  metaphor  is  frequent  in  S.  Matt,  and 
S.  Mark,  occurs  thrice  in  S.  Luke  (vii.  23,  xvii.  i,  2),  and  twice  in 
S.  John.  The  fanatical  hatred  of  the  Jews  might  make  Jewish  Apostles 
stumble  at  the  truth. 

2.  out  of  the  synagogues']  Or,  out  of  the  ssTiagogue,  i.  e.  excommu- 
nicate you.     Comp.  ix.  22 ;  xii.  42. 

yea,  the  time  cometh]  Better,  nay,  there  cometli  an  hour.  Comp. 
7'.  25.  'You  might  think  excommunication  an  extreme  measure;  but 
(aXXa)  they  will  go  far  greater  lengths  than  this.' 

that  whosoever]  Literally,  in  order  that  every  one  who.  The  Divine 
purpose  is  again  clearly  indicated  (see  on  xii.  23).  Every  one,  Jew  and 
Gentile  alike,  will  put  down  the  Christians  as  blasphemers  and  atheists 
and  the  perpetrators  of  every  crime.  The  history  of  religious  persecu- 
tion is  the  fulfilment  of  this  prophecy. 

doeth  God  service]  Better,  offereth  service  to  God.  The  verb  ex- 
presses the  offering  of  sacrifice  (comp.  Heb.  v.  i,  viii.  3,  ix.  7);  the 
substantive  expresses  a  religious  service  (Rom.  ix.  4;  Heb.  ix.  1.  6). 

3.  unto  you]     These  words  are  of  doubtful  authority. 

they  have  not  known]  Better,  they  did  not  recognise.  The  verb  im- 
plies that  they  had  the  opportunity  of  knowing  ;  but  they  had  failed  to 
see  that  God  is  Love,  and  that  Jesus  came  not  to  shut  out,  but  to  bring 
in,  not  to  destroy,  but  to  save.  The  very  names  '  Father  '  (here  used 
with  special  point)  and  '  Jesus '  might  have  taught  them  better  things. 

4.  But]    Making  a  fresh  start ;  But,  to  return  (to  v.  i). 
have  ft  old]     See  on  z'.  6. 

when  the  time]  Rather,  ivhen  their  hour,  according  to  the  better 
reading;  i.  e.  the  hour  appointed  for  these  things  (v.  2). 

ye  may of  them]   Better,  ye  may  remember  them,  that  I  told  you. 

'  I'  is  emphatic,  'I  Myself,  the  object  of  your  faith.' 

And  these  things beginning]     Better,  But  these  things  /told  you 

not  from  the  beginning.  Not  exactly  the  same  phrase  as  in  xv.  27  (dw' 
^PX^s),  I'nt  ii  o-PXV^  (here  and  vi.  64  only) :  the  one  expresses  simple 
departure,  the  other  consequence  and  continuity.  There  is  no  inconsis- 
tency between  this  statement  and  passages  like  Matt.  x.  16 — 39,  xxiv.  9; 
Luke  vi.  22,  &c.     'These  things  '  will  cover  a  great  deal  more  than  the 


w.  5—8.]  S.   JOHN,   XVI.  297 

I  was  with  you.     But  now  I  go  my  way  to  him  that  sent  s 
me ;  and   none   of  you   asketh   me,  Whither   goest  thou  ? 
But  because  I  have  said  these  things  unto  you,  sorrow  hath  6 
filled  your  heart.     Nevertheless  I  tell  you  the  truth ;  It  is  7 
expedient  for  you  that  I  go  away :  for  if  I  go  not  away, 
the  Comforter  will  not  come  unto  you;  but  if  I  depart, 
I  will  send  him  unto  you.       And  when   he  is  come,  he  8 

prediction  of  persecutions,  e.  g.  the  explanation  of  the  persecutions,  the 
promise  of  the  Paraclete,  &c. 

because  I  was  with  yoti\     See  notes  on  Matt.  ix.  15. 

5.  I  go  my  way  to]  C3r,  /go  away  unto ;  the  notion  is  that  of  with- 
drawal (see  on  v.  7).  Hitherto  He  has  been  with  them  to  protect  them 
and  to  be  the  main  object  of  attack  :  soon  they  will  have  to  bear  the 
brunt  without  Him.  This  is  all  that  they  feel  at  present, — how  His  de- 
parture affects  themselves,  not  how  it  affects  Him.  And  yet  this  latter 
point  is  all  important  even  as  regards  themselves,  for  He  is  going  in 
order  to  send  the  Paraclete. 

none  of  you  asketh]  As  far  as  words  go  S.  Peter  had  asked  this 
very  question  (xiii.  56)  and  S.  Thomas  had  suggested  it  (xiv.  5);  but 
altogether  in  a  different  spirit  from  what  is  meant  here.  They  were 
looking  only  at  their  own  loss  instead  of  at  His  gain. 

6.  /  have  said]  Better,  /  have  spoken  as  in  z/.  i.  A  similar  cor- 
rection is  needed  in  v.  4  for  '  have  I  told  :'  it  is  the  same  Greek  word  in 
all  three  cases,  and  means  'to  speak,'  not  '  to  say '  or  '  to  tell.' 

sorrow  hath  filled]  So  that  there  is  no  room  for  thoughts  of  My  glory 
and  your  future  consolation. 

7.  /  tell  you  the  truth]  'I'  is  again  emphatic;  'I  who  know,  and 
who  have  never  misled  you.'     Comp.  xiv.  2. 

It  is  expedietit]  So  Caiaphas  had  said  (xi.  50)  with  more  truth  than 
he  knew;  so  also  the  taunt  at  the  crucifixion,  'Himself  He  cannot  save.' 
'  That '  here  = '  in  order  that '  (S.  John's  favourite  particle,  ha).  Comp. 
V.  1  and  xii.  43. 

/  go  away]  There  are  three  different  Greek  verbs  in  vv.  5,  7,  and 
10,  and  our  translators  have  not  been  happy  in  distinguishing  them. 
The  verb  in  vv.  5  and  10  should  be  I  go  away:  here  for  '  I  go  away' 
we  should  have  I  depart,  and  for  '  I  depart '  we  should  have  I  go  My 
way.  In  the  first  the  primary  idea  is  withdrawal ;  in  the  second,  sepa- 
ration ;  in  the  third,  going  on  to  a  goal. 

the  Comfin-ter]  The  Advocate  (see  on  xiv.  16).  The  Spirit  could  not 
come  until  God  and  man  had  been  made  once  more  at  one.  In  virtue 
of  His  glorified  and  ascended  Manhood  Christ  sends  the  Paraclete. 
'  Humanity  was  to  ascend  to  heaven  before  the  Spirit  could  be  sent  to 
humanity  on  earth.' 

8.  The  threefold  office  of  the  Advocate  towards  those  who  do  not 
believe  but  may  yet  be  won  over.  And  He  when  He  is  come  will  con- 
vict the  world  concerning  sin,  and  concerning  righteousness,  and  dQix- 
GQxninQ  judgment. 


298  S.   JOHN,  XVI.  [w.  9,  10. 

will  reprove   the  world  of  sin,   and  of  righteousness,  and 

10  of  judgment:  of  sin,  because  they  believe  not  on  me;  of 

righteousness,  because  I  go  to  my  Father,  and  ye  see  me 

he  will  reprove]  '  Convince '  (as  the  margin)  or  convict  is  to  be 
preferred  (see  on  iii.  20).  This  rendering  gives  additional  point  to  the 
rendering  'Advocate'  for  Paraclete.  To  convince  and  convict  is  a  large 
part  of  the  duty  of  an  advocate.  He  must  vindicate  and  prove  the 
truth  ;  and  whoever,  after  such  proof,  rejects  the  truth,  does  so  with 
responsibility  in  proportion  to  the  interests  involved.  The  word  occurs 
once  in  S.  Matthew  (xviii.  15)  and  once  in  S.  Luke  (iii.  19);  but  is 
somewhat  frequent  in  the  Epistles.  Comp.  i.  Cor.  xiv.  24  ;  Titus  i.  9, 
13,  ii.  15;  James  ii.  9;  Jude  15,  [22],  &c. 

The  conviction  wrought  by  the  Advocate  may  bring  either  salvation 
or  condemnation,  but  it  must  bring  one  of  the  two.  It  is  given  to  men 
'for  their  wealth  ;'  but  it  may  'be  unto  them  an  occasion  of  falling,'  if 
it  is  wantonly  set  aside. 

9.  Of  sitt]  Or,  Concerning  sin.  This  naturally  comes  first :  the 
work  of  the  Spirit  begins  with  convincing  man  that  he  is  a  fallen,  sinful 
creature  in  rebellion  against  God. 

because  they  believe  not  on  me]  This  is  the  source  of  sin — unbelief ; 
formerly,  unbelief  in  God,  now  unbelief  in  His  Ambassador.  Not  that 
the  sin  is  limited  to  unbelief,  but  this  is  the  beginning  of  it :  '  Because '  does 
not  explain  '  sin,'  but  'will  convict.'  The  Spirit,  by  bringing  the  fact  of 
unbelief  home  to  the  hearts  of  men,  shews  what  the  nature  of  sin  is. 

10.  righteousness]  The  word  occurs  here  only  in  this  Gospel ;  but 
comp.  I  John  ii.  29,  iii.  7,  10;  Rev.  xix.  11.  Righteousness  is 
the  keeping  of  the  law,  and  is  the  natural  result  of  faith ;  so  much  so 
that  faith  is  reckoned  as  if  it  were  righteousness  (Rom.  iv.  3 — 9),  so  cer- 
tain is  this  result  regarded.  Here  'righteousness'  is  used  not  in  the 
lower  sense  of  keeping  prescribed  ordinances  (Matt.  iii.  15),  but  in  the 
highest  and  widest  sense  of  keeping  the  law  of  God  ;  internal  as  well  as 
external  obedience.  The  lower  sense  was  almost  the  only  sense  both  to 
Jew  and  Gentile  (Matt.  v.  20).  The  Spirit,  having  convinced  man  that 
sin  is  much  more  than  a  breaking  of  certain  ordinances,  viz.  a  rejection 
of  God  and  His  Christ,  goes  on  to  convince  him  that  righteousness  is 
much  more  than  a  keeping  of  certain  ordinances. 

I  go  to  my  Father]  Better,  /  go  away  (see  on  v.  7)  to  the  Father ;  ■ 
'  My'  is  wanting  in  the  best  texts.  Once  more  '  because '  explains  '  will 
convict,'  not '  righteousness.'  The  life  of  Christ  on  earth  as  the  pattern 
for  all  mankind  being  completed,  and  the  reconciliation  of  man  to  God 
being  completed  also,  the  Spirit  makes  known  to  man  the  nature  of  that 
life,  and  thus  shews  what  the  nature  of  righteousness  is.  Sin  being 
resistance  to  God's  will,  rigliteousness  is  perfect  harmony  with  it. 

ye  see  me  no  more]  '  Contemplate  '  or  behold  would  be  better  than 
'see'  (comp.  v.  16,  vi.  40,  62,  vii.  3,  xiv.  19,  &c.).  He  shews  His 
disciples  that  He  has  sympathy  for  them  ;  in  speaking  of  His  return  to 
glory  He  does  not  forget  the  sorrow  which  they  feel  and  expect  (erro- 
neously, as  Acts  ii.  46  shews)  always  to  feel. 


1 


vv.  II— 13.]  S.   JOHN,   XVI.  299 

no  more  ;  of  judgment,  because  the  prince  of  this  world  is  u 
judged. 

12 — 15.    The  Disciples  and  the  Paraclete. 

I  have  yet  many  things  to  say  unto  you,  but  ye  cannot  12 
bear  them  now.     Howbeit  when  he,  the  Spirit  of  truth,  is  n 
come,  he   will  guide  you  into  all  truth :   for  he  shall   not 
speak  of  himself;  but  whatsoever  he  shall  hear,  that  shall  he 

11.  Of  judgment .judged\    Better,  Concerning  judgment,  because 

the  ruler  of  this  world  hatli  been  judged  (see  on  xii.  3 1  and  xiv.  30) . 
As  the  world  has  had  its  own  false  views  about  sin  and  righteousness, 
so  also  it  has  had  its  own  false  standards  of  judgment.  The  Advocate 
convicts  the  world  of  its  error  in  this  point  also.  The  world  might 
think  that  '  the  power  of  darkness '  conquered  at  Gethsemane  and  Cal- 
vary, but  the  Resurrection  and  Ascension  proved  that  what  looked  like 
victory  was  most  signal  defeat:  instead  of  conquering  he  was  judged. 
This  result  is  so  certain  that  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  Spirit's  com- 
ing it  is  spoken  of  as  already  accomplished. 

12 — 15.    The  Disciples  and  the  Paraclete. 

The  Paraclete  not  only  convicts  and  convinces  the  world.  He  also 
enlightens  the  Apostles  respecting  Christ  and  thereby  glorifies  Him, 
for  to  make  Christ  known  is  to  glorify  Him.  These  verses  are  very 
important  as  shewing  the  authority  of  the  Apostles'  teaching  :  it  is  not 
their  own,  but  the  truth  of  Christ  revealed  by  the  Spirit. 

12.  many  thifigs  to  say]  They  are  His  friends  (xv.  15),  and  there  is 
nothing  which  He  wishes  to  keep  back  from  them;  He  would  give 
them  His  entire  confidence.  But  it  would  be  useless  to  tell  them  what 
they  cannot  understand ;  cruel  to  impart  knowledge  which  would  only 
crush  them.  '  Now  '  is  emphatic  (see  on  z/.  31) :  at  Pentecost  they  will 
receive  both  understanding  and  strength.  The  word  here  used  for 
'bear '  appears  again  in  xix.  17  of  Christ  bearing  the  Cross. 

13.  the  Spirit  of  truth']     See  on  xiv.  17. 

he  will  guide  you]  '  He  and  no  other  will  be  your  guide. '  Christ  is 
the  Way  and  the  Truth.  The  Spirit  leads  men  into  the  Way  and  thus 
to  the  Truth.  But  He  does  no  more  than  guide  :  He  does  not  compel. 
He  does  not  carry.  They  may  refuse  to  follow,  and  if  they  follow  they 
must  exert  themselves.  Contrast  Matt.  xv.  14;  Luke  vi.  39;  Acts 
viii.  31. 

i7ito  all  truth]  Better,  into  all  the  truth,  i.  e.  the  truth  in  its  entirety : 
this  is  very  clearly  expressed  in  the  Greek. 

he  shall  not  speak  of  himself]  This  does  not  mean  '  shall  not  speak 
about  Himself  but  ''from  Himself.'  The  Spirit,  like  the  Son,  cannot 
speak  what  proceeds  from  Himself  as  distinct  from  what  proceeds  from 
the  Father:  He  is  the  Source  of  Divine  energy  and  truth.  Comp.  v.  19 
and  vii.  18.  This  expression  'from  himself,  from  itself  (ajr6)  is  peculiar 
to  S.  John-:  comp.  xi.  51,  xv.  4. 


300  S.   JOHN,   XVI.  [w.  14—16. 

14  speak :  and  he  will  shew  you  things  to  come.  He  shall 
glorify  me:  for  he  shall  receive  of  mine,  and  shall  shew  it 

15  unto  you.  All  i/migs  that  the  Father  hath  are  mine:  there- 
fore said  I,  that  he  shall  take  of  mine,  and  shall  shew  // 
unto  you. 

16 — 24.     The  sorrow  of  Christ's  departure  turned  into  joy 

by  His  return. 

16  A  little  while,  and  ye  shall  not  see  me:  and  again,  a 
little  while,  and  ye  shall  see  me,  because  I  go  to  the  Father. 


he  will  shew  you  things  to  come']  Better,  He  shall  declare  to  you 
tlie  things  that  are  coining.  The  Greek  verb  means  'to  announce, 
proclaim,  declare'  rather  than  'shew.'  Note  the  thrice  repeated  'He 
shall  declare  to  you.'  The  phrase  '  the  things  that  are  coming '  is  iden- 
tical in  form  with  'He  that  cometh'  (Luke  vii.  19) :  among  these  things 
we  may  place  the  constitution  of  the  Church  and  the  revelation  re- 
specting the  Last  Judgment  and  its  results. 

14.  He  shall  glorify  me]  Both  pronouns  are  emphatic  ;  '  Me  shall 
that  Spirit  of  truth  glorify.'  Just  as  the  Son  glorifies  the  Father  by 
revealing  Him  (i.  18;  xvii.  4)  both  in  word  and  work,  so  does  the  Spirit 
glorify  the  Son  by  revealing  Him.  In  both  cases  to  reveal  is  necessarily 
to  glorify :  the  more  the  Truth  is  known,  the  more  it  is  loved  and 
adored. 

for  he  shall  receive unto  you]     Better,  because  He  shall  take  of 

Mine  and  shall  declare  it  to  you.  The  verb  rendered  '  receive  '  is  the 
same  as  that  rendered  '  take'  in  v.  15,  and  'take'  is  better,  as  implying 
that  the  recipient  is  not  wholly  passive  {lambanein,  not  dechesthai). 
Comp.  X.  17,  xii.  48,  xx.  22. 

15.  All  things]     Literally,  All  things  whatsoever :  comp.  xvii.  lo. 
therefore  said  I]    For  this  cause  (xii.  18,  27)  said  I:  see  on  v.  16,  18. 
shall  take"]     Better,  taketh  :  the  Spirit  is  already  revealing  the  Truth 

which  is  both  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son. 

16 — 24.    The  sorrow  of  Christ's  departure  turned  into  joy 

BY  His  return. 

16.  ye  shall  not  see  me]  Better,  ^v behold  Me  no  more  (comp.  v.  10) : 
the  verb  for  'see'  in  the  second  half  of  the  verse  is  a  more  general 
term.  When  His  bodily  presence  was  withdrawn  their  view  of  Him  was 
enlarged ;  no  longer  known  after  the  flesh.  He  is  seen  and  known  by 
faith. 

ye  shall  see  me]  In  the  spiritual  revelation  of  Christ  by  the  Para- 
clete from  Pentecost  onwards:  Matt,  xxviii.  20. 

because  I  go  to  the  Father]  I'hese  words  have  probably  been  in- 
serted to  suit  the  next  verse ;  the  best  MSS.  omit  theni. 


vv.  T7— 20.]  S.  JOHN,  XVI.  3ot 

Then  said  some  of  his  disciples  among  themselves,  What  17 
is  this  that  he  saith  unto  us,  A  little  while,  and  ye  shall  not 
see  me:  and  again,  a  little  while,  and  ye  shall  see  me:  and. 
Because  I  go  to  the  Father?    They  said  therefore,  What  is  18 
this  that  he  saith,  A  little  while?  we  cannot  tell  what  he 
saith.     Now  Jesus  knew  that  they  were  desirous  to  ask  him,  19 
and  said  unto  them.  Do  ye  inquire  among  yourselves  of  that 
I  said,  A  Httle  while,  and  ye  shall  not  see  me:  and  again,  a 
little  while,  and  ye  shall  see  me?    Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  20 
you,   That  ye  shall  weep  and  lament,  but  the  world  shall 
rejoice:  and  ye  shall  be  sorrowful,  but  your  sorrow  shall  be 

17.  Then disciples]     Better,    Some   of  His   disciples   therefore 

said. 

among  themselves']  Better,  as  in  iv.  33,  one  to  another  ;  so  also  in 
xix.  24.     The  Greek  for  'among  themselves  '  (xii.  19)  is  different. 

ye  shall  not  see]  Ye  behold  Me  not.  As  in  the  previous  verse  we 
have  two  different  verbs  for  '  see. ' 

and.  Because  I  go]  They  refer  to  what  was  said  in  v.  10.  The 
Apostles  are  perplexed  both  about  the  apparent  contradiction  of  not 
beholding  and  yet  seeing  and  also  the  departure  to  the  Father.  'Be- 
cause' (6rt)  should  probably  be  'that,'  to  introduce  the  saying  'I  go 
to  the  Father.'  As  already  indicated,  the  reason,  ^because  I  go,  &c.'  in 
V.  16  is  not  genuine. 

18.  we  cannot  tell  what  he  saith]  More  literally,  we  know  not  what 
He  speaketh. 

19.  Now  yesus  hiexu]  More  literally,  yestis  7'ecognised  or  perceived 
(see  on  viii.  55).  We  have  here  an  indication  that  His  supernatural 
power  of  reading  the  thoughts  did  not  supersede  His  natural  powers  of 
observation,  and  perhaps  was  not  used  when  the  latter  were  sufficient : 
comp.  v.  6,  vi.  15.  A  different  verb  is  used  for  His  supernatural  know- 
ledge (vi.  61,  64,  xiii.  I,  3,  ri,  18,  xviii.  4,  xix.  28).  But  this  distinc- 
tion between  ginoskein  and  eidenai  is  not  always  observed :  comp.  ii. 
24,  25,  where  ginoskein  is  used  of  supernatural  knowledge.  Omit 
'now '  at  the  beginning  of  the  verse. 

among  yourselves]  Or,  with  one  another.  This  is  a  third  expression, 
differing  from  'among  yourselves'  (xii.  19)  and  from  '  one  to  another 
(iv-  33).  See  on  z/.  17.  The  whole  should  run.  Concerning  this  do  ye 
enquire  with  one  another,  that  I  said. 

ye  shall  not  see  me]     As  in  vv.  16,  17,  ye  behold  Me  not. 

20.  ye  shall  weep  and  lament]  In  the  Greek  '  ye '  comes  last  in  em- 
phatic contrast  to  the  world.  The  verbs  express  the  outward  manifesta- 
tion of  grief.  Comp.  xx.  11;  Luke  xxiii.  27.  The  world  rejoiced 
at  being  rid  of  One  whose  life  was  a  reproach  to  it  and  whose  teaching 
condemned  it. 

and  ye  shall  be  sorrowful]  Here  we  have  the  feeling  as  distinct  from 
the  manifestation  of  grief.    Omit  'and.' 


302  S.   JOHN,   XVI.  [w.  21—24, 

21  turned  into  joy.  A  woman  when  she  is  in  travail  hath 
sorrow,  because  her  hour  is  come  :  but  as  soon  as  she  is 
delivered  of  the  child,  she  remembereth  no  more  the  anguish, 

2-'  for  joy  that  a  man  is  born  into  the  world.  And  ye  now 
therefore  have  sorrow:  but  I  will  see  you  again,  and  your 
heart  shall  rejoice,  and  your  joy  no  man  taketh  from  you. 

23  And  in  that  day  ye  shall  ask  me  nothing.  Verily,  verily, 
I    say  unto  you,  Whatsoever  ye   shall   ask   the  Father   in 

24  my  name,  he  will   give   it  you.     Hitherto   have  ye  asked 

sorrow  shall  be  turned  into  joy]  Not  merely  sorrow  shall  be  succeeded 
by  joy,  but  shall  become  joy.  The  withdrawal  of  the  bodily  presence 
of  Christ  shall  be  first  a  sorrow  and  then  a  joy.  We  have  the  same 
Greek  construction  of  the  rejected  stone  becoming  the  head  of  the  corner 
(Matt.  xxi.  42;  Acts  iv.  11),  of  the  mustard  sprout  becoming  a  tree 
(Luke  xiii.  19),  of  the  first  man  Adam  becoming  a  living  soul  (i  Cor. 
XV.  45). 

21.  A  womaTt]  Or,  The  woman,  like  'the  servant'  (xv.  15) :  in  each 
case  the  article  is  generic,  expressing  the  general  law.  The  figure  is 
frequent  in  O.  T.;  Isai.  Ixvi.  7;  Hos.  xiii.  13;  Mic.  iv.  9.  See  on 
Mark  xiii.  8. 

for  joy\     Better,  for  tliBjoy,  the  joy  peculiar  to  the  case. 
a  man]     A  human  being,  one  of  the  noblest  of  God's  creatures.^ 

22.  And  ye  now  therefore]  Or,  Yc  also  therefore  now.  As  in  the 
case  of  childbirth,  the  suffering  of  the  disciples  was  the  necessary  condi- 
tion of  the  joy.  This  suffering  was  to  repeat  itself  in  a  new  form  in  the 
work  of  converting  souls  (Gal.  iv.  19). 

/  will  see  you]  In  vv.  16,  1 7,  19  we  had  '  ye  shall  see  Me :'  here  we 
have  the  other  side  of  the  same  truth  ;  and  the  same  verb  for  '  see '  is 
used  iu  all  four  cases.  In  Gal.  iv.  9  we  have  both  sides  of  the  truth 
stated  (see  on  i  Cor.  viii.  3). 

no  man  taketh]  Or,  according  to  some  good  authorities,  no  one  shall 
take.     Their  sorrow  shall  depart,  their  joy  shall  remain. 

23.  in  that  day]  Not  the  forty  days  of  His  bodily  presence  between 
the  Resurrection  and  the  Ascension,  but  the  many  days  of  His  spiritual 
presence  from  Pentecost  onwards.     Comp.  v.  •26  and  xiv.  20. 

ye  shall  ask  me  nothing]  The  Greek  is  as  ambiguous  as  the  English. 
It  is  the  same  verb  {erStdn)  as  is  used  in  v.  19,  and  may  mean  either,  as 
there,  'ask  no  question,' or,  '  make  no  petition  '  (see  on  xiv.  16).  The 
former  is  better.  When  they  are  illuminated  by  the  Spirit  there  will  be 
no  room  for  such  questions  as  '  What  is  this  little  while?  How  can  we 
know  the  way?  Whither  goest  Thou?  How  is  it  that  Thou  wilt 
manifest  Thyself  unto  us  and  not  unto  the  world?'  His  going  to  the 
Father  will  gain  for  them  (i)  perfect  knowledge. 

Verily,  verily]     See  on  i.  51. 

Whatsoever .give  it  you]    The  better  reading  gives,  It  ye  shall  ask 

anything  of  the  Father,  He  will  give  it  you  In  My  name.     The  word 


vv.  25,  26.]  S.   JOHN,   XVI.  303 

nothing  in  my  name:  ask,  and  ye  shall  receive,  that  your  joy 
may  be  full. 

25 — 33.    Summary  and  conclusion  of  these  discourses. 

These    things    have    I    spoken    unto   you   in   proverbs:  2$ 
but  the  time  cometh,  when  I  shall  no  more  speak  unto 
you    in   proverbs,    but   I    shall   shew   you   plainly   of  the 
Father.     At  that  day  ye  shall  ask  in  my  name :  and  I  say  not  26 

for  '  ask '  here  and  in  the  next  verse  is  aitein  not  erStdn.  Note  that  the 
answer  as  well  as  the  prayer  (xiv.  13,  xv.  16)  is  in  Christ's  name,  and  all 
such  prayers  will  be  answered.  His  return  to  the  Father  will  gain  for 
them  (2)  perfect  response  to  prayer. 

24.  nothing  in  my  name]  Because  Jesus  was  not  yet  glorified,  was 
not  yet  fully  known  to  the  Apostles. 

ask]  The  full  meaning  of  the  Greek  is  go  on  asking;  it  is  the  present 
not  aorist  imperative.  Comp.  v.  14,  [viii.  11,]  xx.  17,  and  contrast 
Matt.  vii.  7  with  Mark  vi.  22. 

may  be  full']  Or,  7?iay  be  fulfilled,  so  as  to  be  complete  and  remain  so. 
His  return  to  the  Father  will  gain  for  them  (3)  perfect  joy.  See  on  xv. 
II  and  comp.  xvii.  13;  i  John  i.  4;  2  John  12. 

25 — 33.    Summary  and  conclusion  of  these  discourses. 

25.  These  things']  As  in  v.  1  there  is  some  uncertainty  as  to  how 
much  is  included.  Some  refer  'these  things'  to  v.  19—24;  others  to 
XV.  I — xvi.  24.  Perhaps  even  the  latter  is  too  narrow  a  limit.  The 
words  can  apply  to  all  Christ's  teaching,  of  which  there  was  much  which 
the  multitudes  were  not  allowed  (Matt.  xiii.  11)  and  the  Apostles  were 
not  able  (ii.  22)  to  understand  at  the  time. 

in  proverbs]     Better,  ift  allegories  (see  on  x.  6). 

but  the  time  cometh]  Better,  there  cometh  an  hour  (iv.  21,  23,  v.  25, 
xvi.  2,  32).     Omit  'but'  with  the  best  authorities. 

shew]  Or,  declare,  as  in  vv.  13,  14,  15.  The  best  MSS.  give  a 
different  compound  of  the  same  verb  as  is  used  in  vv.  13,  14,  15,  but 
the  difference  cannot  well  be  marked  in  English. 

plainly]  Frankly,  without  reserve  (see  on  vii.  4  and  comp.  vii.  13, 
26,  X.  24,  xi.  14,  54,  xviii.  20). 

26.  At  that  day]     As  in  v.  23  and  xiv.  20  from  Pentecost  onwards. 
ye  shall  ask  in  my  name]     With  the  perfect  knowledge  just  promised 

they  will  discern  What  may  be  asked  in  His  name  (see  on  xiv.  13): 
'  cognitio  parit  orationetn.' 

I  say  not  unto  you]  This  does  not  mean  'I  need  not  say  unto  you; 
for  of  course  I  shall  do  so;'  which  does  not  harmonize  with  v.  27.  The 
meaning  rather  is,  that  so  long  as  through  the  power  of  the  Advocate 
they  have  direct  communion  with  the  Father  in  Christ's  name,  there  is 
no  need  to  speak  of  Christ's  intercession.  But  this  communion  may  be 
interrupted  by  sin,  and  then  Christ  becomes  their  Advocate  (i  John  ii. 
i;  Rom.  viii.  34). 


304  S.  JOHN.  XVI.  [vv.  27—30. 

27  unto  you,  that  I  will  pray  the  Father  for  you :  for  the  Father 
himself  loveth  you,  because  ye  have  loved  me,  and  have 

28  believed  that  I  came  out  from  God.  I  came  forth  from  the 
Father,  and  am  come  into  the  world:  again,  I  leave  the 
world,  and  go  to  the  Father. 

29  His   disciples   said   unto   him,    Lo,   now   speakest   thou 

30  plainly,  and  speakest  no  proverb.     Now  are  we  sure  that 

that  I  will  pray]     The  pronoun  is  emphatic.     On  the  word  here  ren- 
dered 'pray'  (erotdn)  see  on  xiv.  16. 
for  you]     More  literally,  concertiing you. 

27.  himself]     Without  My  intercession. 

loveth  you]  On  the  ditiference  between  the  two  Greek  verbs  for  'love' 
see  on  xi.  5.  It  is  the  more  emotional  word  that  is  used  here  in  both 
cases.  At  first  sight  it  appears  the  less  appropriate  to  express  God's 
love  for  the  disciples :  but  the  point  is  that  it  is  a  Father's  love,  it  flows 
spontaneously  from  a  tiatural relationship  as  distinct  from  discriminating 
friendship. 

because  ye  have  loved  vie]  Both  pronouns  are  emphatic  and  are  next 
one  another  in  the  Greek,  pointing  to  the  closeness  of  the  relationship ; 
because  ye  Ale  have  loved.  Note  the  'because ;'  it  is  their  love  for  Christ 
which  wins  the  Father's  love  (xiv.  21,  23). 

have  loved have  believed]     Both  perfects  signify  what  has  been 

and  still  continues.  No  argument  can  be  drawn  from  the  order  of  the 
verbs  as  to  love  preceding  faith:  'have  loved'  naturally  comes  first  on 
account  of  '  loveth '  immediately  preceding.  '  Love  begets  love '  is  true 
both  between  man  and  man  and  between  God  and  man.  'Faith  begets 
faith '  cannot  have  any  meaning  between  God  and  man. 

from  God]  The  better  reading  is,  from  the  Father  (see  on  i.  6,  xv. 
26).  It  was  specially  because  they  recognised  Him  as  the  Son  sent 
from  the  Father,  and  not  merely  as  a  Prophet  sent  from  God  (i.  6),  that 
they  won  the  Father's  love. 

28.  I  came  forth  fom]  Our  translators  are  again  right  in  marking  a 
difference  but  not  quite  right  in  their  way  of  doing  so  (see  on  v.  7). 
The  Greek  rendered  'I  coAtie forth  from'  here  ditiers  in  the  preposition 
used  {ek)  from  that  rendered  'I  came  out  from'  in  z/.  27  {para).  It 
would  be  better  to  transpose  the  translations.  In  z/.  27  it  is  the  temporal 
mission  of  Christ  from  the  Father  that  is  meant  (comp.  xvii.  8) ;  in  v. 
28  the  Eternal  Generation  of  the  Son  is  also  included  (comp.  viii.  42). 
The  verse  would  almost  form  a  creed.  The  Son,  of  one  Substance  with 
the  Father,  was  born  into  the  world,  suffered,  and  returned  to  the 
Father. 

29.  said]    Rather,  say. 

plainly]  Literally,  in  plainness  ox  openness.  As  in  vii.  4,  the  word 
here  has  a  preposition  (see  on  vii.  26). 

30.  are  we  sure]  Better,  we  know ;  it  is  the  same  verb  as  '  thou 
knowest,'  and  the  capricious  change  of  rendering  is  regrettable.  There 
is  a  similarly  capricious  change  2  Cor.  xii.  2,  3.     Christ  had  spoken  in 


vv.  31,  32.]  S.   JOHN,    XVI.  305 

thou   knowest  all   things,   and   needest   not  that  any  man 
should  ask  thee :  by  this  we  believe  that  thou  earnest  forth 
from  God.     Jesus   answered   them,    Do   ye   now   believe?  31 
Behold,  the  hour  cometh,  yea,  is  now  come,  that  ye  shall  be  33 
scattered,  every  man  to  his  own,  and  shall  leave  me  alone : 
and  yet  I  am  not  alone,  because  the  Father  is   with   me. 

the  future  tense  [v.  23);  they  emphatically  speak  in  the  present ;  ''iimv 
we  know.'  They  feel  that  His  gracious  promise  is  already  being  ful- 
filled. 

thou  knowest  all  things']  He  had  shewn  them  that  He  had  read  their 
hearts  {v.  19);  like  the  Samaritan  woman  (iv.  29,  39)  they  conclude  that 
He  knows  all. 

by  this]  Or,  Herein  (see  on  iv.  37);  literally  'in  this.'  His  all-em- 
bracing knowledge  is  that  in  which  their  faith  has  root. 

we  believe  thai]  The  Greek  might  mean,  'we  believe,  because,  &c.' 
But  the  A.  V.  is  more  in  accordance  with  the  context  and  with  S.  John's 
usage. 

forth  from  God]  They  refer  to  Christ's  mission  only  {v.  27),  not  to 
the  Eternal  Generation  of  the  Son  [v.  28). 

31.  Do  ye  now  believe?]  The  words  are  only  half  a  question  {comp. 
XX.  29).  The  belief  of  which  they  are  conscious  is  no  illusion,  but  it 
is  not  yet  as  perfect  as  they  in  their  momentary  enthusiasm  suppose. 
'Now'  means  'at  this  stage  of  your  course;'  it  is  not  the  word  used 
by  the  Apostles  (vv.  29,  30),  but  another  of  which  S.  John  makes  much 
use.  The  one  {mtn)  regards  the  present  moment  only,  'now'  abso- 
lutely ;  the  other  {arti)  regards  the  present  in  relation  to  the  past  and 
future,  'at  this  crisis.'     Comp.  v.  12,  xiii.  7,  19,  33,  37,  &c. 

32.  the  hour  cometh]    Better  (as  in  v.  25),  there  cometh  an  hour. 
yea,  is  now  come]     Omit  'now;'  the  expression  is  not  the  same  as 

iv.  23. 

that  ye  shall  be  scattered]  Rather,  that  ye  msbj  be  scattered.  'That'  = 
'in  order  that,'  expressing  the  Divine  purpose  (comp.  v.  2).  This  part 
of  the  allegory  of  the  sheep-fold  is  to  be  illustrated  even  in  the  shepherds 
themselves  (x.  12). 

to  his  own]  'To  his  own  home,'  as  the  margin  has  it  here  and  the 
text  of  xix.  27;  or  more  generally  'to  his  own  property  and  pursuits,' 
his  belongings  and  surroundings.  Comp.  i.  11.  The  Greek  in  all 
three  passages  is  the  same,  'his  own'  being  neuter  plural. 

shall  leave]     Rather,  may  leave,  depending  upon  '  in  order  that.' 

and  yet]  The  'yet'  is  not  expressed  in  the  Greek,  but  implied,  as 
often  in  S.  John,  in  the  collocation  of  the  sentences.  Comp.  i.  10,  rr, 
iii.  19,  32,  vi.  70,  vii.  4,  26,  viii.  20,  ix.  30.  Our  translators  have 
as  a  rule  wisely  omitted  the  'yet,'  leaving  S.  John's  simple  constructions 
to  tell  their  own  meaning.     Here  the  'yet'  is  almost  necessary. 

the  Father  is  with  me]  The  Divine  background  (as  it  seems  to  us)  of 
Christ's  life  was  to  Him  a  Presence  of  which  He  was  always  conscious 
(viii.  29),  with  the  awfiil  exception  in  Matt,  xxvii.  46. 

S.  JOHN  gQ 


3o6  S.   JOHN,   XVI.  [v.  33. 

33  These  things  I  have  spoken  unto  you,  that  in  me  ye  might 
have  peace.  In  the  world  ye  shall  have  tribulation :  but  be 
of  good  cheer;  I  have  overcome  the  world. 

33.      These  things]     These  farewell  discourses. 

might  have  peace]  Better,  may  have  peace.  Christ's  ministry  ends, 
as  His  life  began,  with  a  message  of  peace  (Luke  ii.  14). 

ye  shall  have]     Rather,  ye  have ;  the  tribulation  has  already  begun. 

I  have  overcome]  The  pronoun  is  very  emphatic.  At  the  very  moment 
when  He  is  face  to  face  with  treachery,  and  disgrace,  and  death,  Christ 
triumphantly  claims  the  victory.  Comp.  i  John  ii.  13,  14,  v.  4.  In 
His  victory  His  followers  conquer  also. 

Chap.  XVH.    The  Prayer  of  the  Great  High  Priest. 

"The  prayer  which  follows  the  last  discourse  as  its  fit  crown  and 
conclusion  has  been  designated  by  an  old  tradition  the  Prayer  of  the 
High  Priest,  now  about  to  take  upon  Him  His  office,  and  to  offer 
atonement  for  the  sins  of  the  people."  S.  p.  235.  It  is  unique  in  the 
Gospels.  The  other  Evangelists,  especially  S.  Luke,  mention  the 
fact  of  Christ  praying  (Matt.  xiv.  23;  Mark  i.  35;  Luke  iii.  21,  v.  16, 
vi.  12,  ix.  18,  &c.),  and  give  some  words  of  His  prayer  at  Gethsemane; 
but  here  the  substance  of  a  long  act  of  devotion  is  preserved.  S.  John 
never  mentions  the  fact  of  Christ  praying,  but  in  xii.  27  he  perhaps 
gives  us  a  few  words  of  prayer,  and  in  xi.  41  a  thanksgiving  which  im- 
plies previous  prayer.  There  is  an  approach  to  the  first  portion  of  this 
prayer  in  the  thanksgiving  in  Matt.  xi.  25,  26. 

This  Oratio  Summi  Sacerdotis  falls  naturally  into  three  portions; 
1.  for  Hitnself  {1  —  i);  2.  for  the  disciples  (6 — 19);  3.  for  the  %v]iole  Church 
(20 — 26),  the  last  two  verses  forming  a  summary,  in  which  the  relations 
of  Christ  to  the  Father  and  to  His  own,  and  of  His  own  to  both  Father 
and  Son  are  gathered  up. 

The  prayer  was  spoken  aloud  {v.  i),  and  thus  was  not  only  a  prayer, 
but  a  source  of  comfort  to  those  who  heard  it  {v.  13),  and  by  its  preser- 
vation a  means  of  faith  and  life  to  all  (xx.  31).  No  doubt  it  was  spoken 
in  Aramaic,  and  we  have  here  also,  as  in  the  discourses,  no  means  of 
determining  how  far  the  Greek  version  preserves  the  very  words,  how 
far  only  the  substance  of  what  was  spoken.  We  must  take  it  reverently 
as  it  has  been  given  to  us,  and  we  shall  find  abundant  reason  for  be- 
lieving that  on  the  one  hand  it  quite  transcends  even  the  beloved  dis- 
ciple's powers  of  invention;  on  the  other  that  there  is  notliing  in  it  to 
make  us  doubt  that  this  report  of  it  is  from  his  pen.  "It  is  urged  that 
the  triumphant  elevation  of  this  prayer  is  inconsistent  with  the  Synoptic 
account  of  the  Agony.  But  the  liability  to  fluctuations  of  feeling  and 
emotion  is  inherent  in  humanity,  and  was  assumed  wiili  His  manhood 
by  Him  Who  was  perfect  man."  S.  p.  238.  "All  human  experience 
bears  witness  in  common  life  to  the  naturalness  of  abrupt  transitions 
from  joy  to  sadness  in  the  contemplation  of  a  supreme  trial.  The 
absolute  insight  and  foresight  of  Christ  makes  such  an  alternation  even 


w.  I,  2.]  S.   JOHN,   XVII.  307 

Chap.  XVII.     The  Prayer  of  the  Great  High  Priest. 

I — 5.     The  Prayer  for  Himself. 

These  words  spake  Jesus,  and  lift  up  his  eyes  to  heaven,  17 
and  said,  Father,  the  hour  is  come;  glorify  thy  Son,  that  thy 
Son  also  may  glorify  thee :  as  thou  hast  given  him  power  over  a 

more  intelligible.  He  could  see,  as  man  cannot  do,  both  the  complete- 
ness of  His  triumph  and  the  suffering  through  which  it  was  to  be 
gained."  W.  p.  237.  The  three  characteristics  of  the  Gospel,  sim- 
plicity, subtlety,  and  sublimity,  reach  a  climax  here.  Bengal  calls  this 
chapter  the  simplest  in  language,  the  profoundest  in  meaning,  in  the 
whole  Bible. 

The  place  where  these  words  were  spoken  is  not  stated.  If  the  view 
taken  above  (xiv.  31)  is  correct,  they  were  spoken  in  the  upper  room, 
after  the  company  had  risen  from  supper,  in  the  pause  before  starting 
for  the  Mount  of  Olives  (xviii.  i).  Westcott  thinks  that  "the  upper 
chamber  was  certainly  left  after  xiv,  31,"  and  that  as  "it  is  inconceiv- 
able that  chap.  xvii.  should  have  been  spoken  anywhere  except  under 
circumstances  suited  to  its  unapproachable  solemnity,"  these  would  best 
be  found  in  the  Temple  Courts.  Here  was  the  great  Golden  Vine,  to 
suggest  the  allegory  of  the  Vine  (xvi.  i — 11),  and  "nowhere  could  the 
outlines  of  the  future  spiritual  Church  be  more  fitly  drawn  than  in  the 
sanctuary  of  the  old  Church."  It  is  perhaps  slightly  against  this  at- 
tractive suggestion,  that  surroundings  so  rich  in  meaning  would  prob- 
ably have  been  pointed  out  by  a  writer  so  full  of  feeling  for  dramatic 
contrasts  and  harmonies  as  the  writer  of  this  Divine  Epic  (comp.  iii.  2, 
iv,  6,  xiii.  30,  xviii.  3,  5,  28,  40,  xix.  23—27,  31—42). 

1 — 5.     The  Prayer  for  Himself. 

The  Son  was  sent  to  give  to  men  eternal  life,  which  consists  in  the 
knowledge  of  God.  This  work  the  Son  has  completed  to  the  glory  of 
the  Father,  and  therefore  prays  to  be  glorified  by  the  Father. 

1.     Thesewords']    More  exactly,  these  tilings,  as  in  xvi.  i,  4,  6,  25,  33. 

lifted  up  his  eyes]  in  calm  confidence  and  in  the  assurance  of  victory 
(xvi.  33).  The  attitude  is  in  marked  contrast  to  His  falling  on  His 
face  in  the  garden  (Matt.  xxvi.  39).  '  To  heaven  '  does  not  prove  that 
He  was  in  the  open  air:  comp.  Acts.  vii.  55;  Luke  xviii.  13, 

Father]  This  is  His  claim  to  be  heard.  Comp.  'Abba,  Father'  in 
Mark  xiv.  36,  and  see  Lightfoot  on  Gal.  iv.  6. 

the  hour]  See  on  ii.  4  and  xii.  27.  S.  John  loves  to  mark  each 
great  crisis  in  Christ's  life ;  this  is  the  last. 

glorify  thy  Son]  By  His  return  to  glory  (z/.  5)  through  suffering  and 
death.     Comp.  Phil.  ii.  9 — 11. 

that  thy  Son  also  may  glorify]  By  making  known  the  glory  of  God, 
through  the  Son.  To  make  God  known  is  to  glorify  Him,  'Also' 
must  be  omitted,  and  for  '  Thy  Son '  we  ought  perhaps  to  read  '  the 
Son.' 

20 — 2 


3o8  S.   JOHN,   XVII.  [vv.  3,  4. 

all  flesh,  that  he  should  give  eternal  life  to  as  many  as  thou 

3  hast  given  him.     And  this  is  life  eternal,  that  they  might 
know  thee  the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ,  whom  thou 

4  hast  sent.     I  have  glorified  thee  on  the  earth :  I  have  finished 

2.  As  thou  hast  given  him  power]  Better,  Even  as  Thou  gavest 
Him  authority.  The  authority  was  given  once  for  all,  and  is  the 
reason  for  the  petition  in  v.  i.     Comp.  v.  27. 

all  flesh]  A  Hebraism  not  used  elsewhere  in  this  Gospel.  Comp. 
Matt.  xxiv.  22;  Luke  iii.  6;  Acts  ii.  17;  Rom.  iii.  20,  &c.  Fallen  man, 
man  in  his  frailty,  is  specially  meant;  but  the  Second  Adam  has  do- 
minion also  over  '  all  sheep  and  oxen,  yea,  and  the  beasts  of  the  field, 
the  fowl  of  the  air,  and  the  fish  of  the  sea.'  Ps.  viii.  7,  8._  In  the  fol- 
lowing texts  'all  flesh'  includes  the  brute  creation;  Gen.  vi.  19,  vii.  15, 
16,  21,  viii.  17,  ix.  II,  15,  16,  17;  Ps.  cxxxvi.  25;  Jer.  xxxii.  27,  xlv.  5. 
Once  more,  therefore,  Jewish  enclusiveness  is  condemned.  The  Mes- 
siah is  King  of  'all  flesh,'  not  of  the  Jews  only. 

that  he  should  give,  &c.]  Literally,  in  order  that  all  that  Thou  hast 
given  Him,  He  should  give  to  them  eternal  life.  'AH  that '  is  neuter 
singular;  'to  them'  is  masculine  plural.  Believers  are  given  to  Christ 
as  a  united  whole ;  they  earn  eternal  life  as  individuals.  Comp.  i.  11, 
vi,  37. 

3.  And  this  is  life  eternal]  More  exactly,  But  the  life  eternal  i3 
this.  '  The  life  eternal '  means  that  which  has  just  been  mentioned ; 
and  'is  this'  means  '  this  is  what  it  consists  in:'  comp.  iii.  19,  xv.  12. 

that  they  might  know]  Literally,  in  order  that  they  may  recognise ; 
comp.  vi.  29,  XV.  12;  I  John  iii.  11,  23,  v.  3;  2  John  6.  The  eternal 
life  is  spoken  of  as  already  present  (see  on  iii.  36,  v.  24,  vi.  47,  54); 
hence  'may,'  not  'might.'  Moreover  it  is  the  appropriation  of  the 
knowledge  that  is  specially  emphasized;  hence  'recognise'  rather  than 
simply  'know.'     Comp.  Wisdom  xv.  3.  ^ 

thee  the  only  true  God]  i.e.  'Thee  as  the  only  true  God.  For 
'true'  see  note  on  i.  9  and  comp.  iv.  23,  vi.  32,  xv.  i :  '  the  only  true 
God  '  is  directed  against  the  many  false,  spurious  gods  of  the  heathen. 
This  portion  of  the  truth  was  what  the  Gentiles  so  signally  failed  to 
recognise. 

Jesus  Christ,  whom  thou  hast  sent]  Better,  Him  whom  Thou  didst 
send— Jesus  Christ;  or,  Jesus  as  Christ.  This  portion  of  the  truth 
the  Jews  failed  to  recognise.  But  the  words  are  not  without  difficulty, 
even  when  we  insert  the  'as;'  and  the  run  of  the  Greek  words  is 
rather  against  the  insertion  of 'as.'  If  'Christ 'were  a  predicate  and 
not  part  of  the  proper  name  we  should  expect  'Jesus,  whom  Thou  didst 
send,  as  Christ. '  Probably  in  this  verse  we  have  the  stihstance  and  not 
the  exact  words  of  Christ's  utterance.  That  He  should  use  the  name 
'Jesus'  here  is  perhaps  improbable;  that  He  should  anticipate  the  use 
of  'Jesus  Christ'  as  a  proper  name  is  very  improbable;  and  the  expres- 
sion '  the  true  God  '  is  not  used  elsewhere  by  Christ  and  is  used  by  S. 
John  (i  John  v.  20).  We  conclude,  therefore,  that  the  wording  here  is 
the  Evangelist's,  perhaps  abbreviated  from  the  actual  words. 


vv.  5—7-]  S.   JOHN,   XVII.  309 

the  work  which  thou  gavest  me  to  do.     And  now,  O  Father,  5 
glorify  thou  me  with  thine  own  self  with  the  glory  which  I 
had  with  thee  before  the  world  was. 

6 — 19.     The  Prayer  for  His  Disciples. 

I  have  manifested  thy  name  unto  the  men  which  thou  6 
gavest  me  out  of  the  world :  thine  they  were,  and  thou  gavest 
them  me;  and  they  have  kept  thy  word.     Now  they  have  7 

4.  /  have  glorified]  Better,  I  glorified.  In  confident  anticipation 
Christ  looks  backs  from  the  point  when  all  shall  be  accomplished,  and 
speaks  of  the  whole  work  of  redemption  as  one  act.  Our  translators 
have  been  very  capricious  throughout  this  chapter,  rendering  aorists  as 
perfects  and  perfects  as  aorists.    Comp.  vv.  6,  8,  18,  21,  22,  23,  25,  26. 

/  have  finished\  According  to  the  right  reading,  having  finished  or 
perfected.  This  is  the  way  in  which  God  is  glorified,  the  completion 
of  the  work  of  revelation. 

gavest  me]  Better,  hast  given  Me.  Christ  did  not  choose  for  Him- 
self. 

_  to  do]  Literally,  in  order  that  I  may  do  it:  this  was  GoA'?,  purpose  in 
giving  it.  It  is  S.  John's  favourite  particle;  comp.  v.  36  and  see  on 
V.  3. 

5.  And  noiv\     When  the  ministry  is  completed. 

glorify  thou  me]  The  pronouns  are  placed  side  by  side  for  emphasis, 
as  in  V.  4,  where  the  Greek  runs,  'I  Thee  glorified.'  The  two  verses 
are  parallels;  'I  Thee  glorified  on  earth;  glorify  Me  Thou  in  heaven.' 

■with  thine  own  self]  In  fellowship  with  Thee.  The  following  great 
truths  are  contained  in  these  two  verses;  (i)  that  the  Son  is  in  Person 
distinct  from  the  Father;  (2)  that  the  Son,  existing  in  glory  with  the 
Father  from  all  eternity,  working  in  obedience  to  the  Father  on  eartli, 
existing  in  glory  with  the  Father  now,  is  in  Person  one  and  the 
same. 

I  had]     Imperfect  tense,  implying  continual  possession. 

6 — 19.     The  Prayer  for  His  Disciples. 

6 — 8.  The  basis  of  the  intercession ; — they  have  received  the  revela- 
tion given  to  them.     The  intercession  itself  begins  v.  9. 

6.  I  have  manifested]  Better,  I  manifested :  see  on  v.  4  and 
i.  31- 

which  thou  gavest]  Better,  whom  Thou  hast  given :  in  the  next 
clause  'gavest'  is  right.  Sometimes  the  Father  is  said  to  'give'  or 
'draw'men  to  Christ  {v.  24,  vi.  37,  44,  65,  x.  29,  xviii.  9);  sometimes 
Christ  is  said  to  'choose'  them  (vi.  70,  xv.  16):  but  it  is  always  in  their 
power  to  refuse;  there  is  no  compulsion  (i.  11,  12,  iii.  18,  19,  xii.  47, 
48). 

Irpt  thy  word]  S.  John's  favourite  phrase  (see  on  viii.  51):  the 
notion  is  that  of  intent  watching,     Christ's  revelation  of  Himself  and  of 


3IO  S.   JOHN,   XVII.  [vv.  8— II. 

known  that  all  things  whatsoever  thou  hast  given  me  are  of 

8  thee.  For  I  have  given  unto  them  the  words  which  thou 
gavest  me;  and  they  have  received  them,  and  have  known 
surely  that  I  came  out  from  thee,  and  they  have  believed 

9  that  thou  didst  send  me.  I  pray  for  them :  I  pray  not  for 
the  world,  but  for  them  which  thou  hast  given  me ;  for  they 

10  are  thine.     And  all  mine  are  thine,  and  thine  are  mine;  and 

11  I  am  glorified  in  them.     And  now  I  am  no  more  in  the 

the  Father  is  the  Father's  word  (vii.   i6,  xii.  49) ;  His  doctrine  as  a 
whole. 

7.  they  have  knowii\  Rather,  they  know:  hterally,  'they  have 
recognised,  come  to  know.'     Comp.  v.  42,  vi.  69,  viii.  52,  55,  xiv.  9. 

whatsoever  thou  hast  giveii\  Both  His  doctrine  and  His  mission,  as 
the  next  verse  explains.  The  whole  of  Christ's  work  of  redemption  in 
word  and  act  was  in  its  origin  and  still  is  (present  tense)  of  God. 

8.  the  %vords'\  Or,  the  sayings  (see  on  v.  47).  This  is  not  the  plural 
of 'word'  {logos)  in  v.  6;  but  the  other  noun  {rhemata),  the  singular  of 
which  is  not  used  by  S.  John.  It  means  the  separate  utterances  as  dis- 
tinct from  the  doctrine  as  a  whole. 

they  have  received.,  have  k7iown... have  believed\  Better,  M^j/received 
...recognised... believed.     See  on  z/.  4. 

carne  out  from']  Better,  came  fortli  frofu  (see  on  xvi.  28).  They 
recognised  that  His  mission  was  Divine :  they  believed  that  He  was  sent 
as  the  Messiah.  They  had  p7-oof  of  the  first  point ;  the  second  was  a 
matter  of  faith. 

9 — 19.     The  intercession  for  the  disciples  based  on  their  need. 

9.  I  pray  for  them,  &c.]  Literally,  I  am  praying  concei-ning  them ; 
concerning  the  world  I  am  not  praying,  but  concerning  them  whom,  &c. 
'I,'  'them,'  and  'the  world'  are  emphatic.  'For  them  who  have  be- 
lieved I  in  turn  am  praying;  for  the  world  I  am  not  praying.'  On  the 
word  here  used  for  'pray'  see  on  xiv.  16.  Of  course  this  verse  does  not 
mean  that  Christ  never  prays  for  unbelievers;  v.  23  and  Luke  xxiii.  34 
prove  the  contrary;  but  it  is  for  the  chosen  few,  in  return  for  their 
allegiance,  that  He  is  praying  now. 

they  are  thitte]     Although  they  have  been  given  to  the  Son. 

10.  all  mine  are  thine]  Better,  all  things  that  are  Mine  are  Thine. 
The  statement  does  not  refer  to  persons  only,  but  continues  and  ampli- 
fies the  reason  with  which  v.  9  concludes;  'Because  they  are  Thine,  and 
all  My  things  are  Thine.'  There  should  be  no  full  stop  at  the  end  of 
V.  9. 

thine  are  mine]  Or,  the  things  that  are  Thine  are  Mine.  The 
statement  is  made  conversely  to  insist  on  the  perfect  union  between  the 
Father  and  the  Son. 

/am  glorified]  Better,  I  have  been  glorified;  have  been  and  still 
am. 

in  them]  As  the  vine  is  glorified  in  its  branches  and  fruit.  They  are 
the  vehicles  and  monuments  of  the  glory.     Comp.  i  Thess.  ii.  20. 


V.  12.]  S.   JOHN,   XVII.  311 

world,  but  these  are  in  the  world,  and  I  come  to  thee.  Holy 
Father,  keep  through  thine  own  name  those  whom  thou  hast 
given  me,  that  they  may  be  one,  as  we  are.  While  I  was  12 
with  them  in  the  world,  I  kept  them  in  thy  name :  those  that 
thou  gavest  me  I  have  kept,  and  none  of  them  is  lost,  but 
the  son  of  perdition;  that  the  scripture  might  be  fulfilled. 

11 — 16.  In  ziv.  6 — 8  the  disciples'  acceptance  of  Christ  is  given  as 
the  basis  of  intercession  for  them  :  here  another  reason  is  added, — their 
need  of  help  during  Christ's  absence.  This  plea  is  first  stated  in  all 
simplicity,  and  then  repeated  at  intervals  in  the  petition. 

11.  dui  these\  Rather,  and  these.  The  coupling  of  the  sentences  is 
solemnly  simple;  'And  now. ..and  these. ..and  I.' 

Holy  Father\  The  expression  occurs  nowhere  else;  but  comp.  Rev. 
vi.  10;  I  John  ii.  20;  and  'Righteous  Father,'  v.  25.  The  epithet 
agrees  with  the  prayer  that  God  would  preserve  the  disciples  from  the 
unholiness  of  the  world  {v.  15)  in  the  holiness  which  Christ  had  revealed 
to  them  and  prays  the  Father  to  give  them  (z;.  17). 

keep . .  .giveii]  The  true  reading  gives  us,  keep  them  in  Thy  name 
which  Thou  hast  given  Me.  In  any  case  the  Greek  here  rendered 
through  Thy  name,'  and  in  v.  12  'm  Thy  name,'  is  the  same,  and 
should  be  translated  in  the  same  manner  in  both  verses.  Comp.  Rev.  ii. 
17,  xix.  12,  xxii.  4.  God  has  given  His  name  to  Christ  to  reveal  to  the 
disciples;  and  Christ  prays  that  they  may  be  kept  true  to  that  revela- 
tion.    On  the  meaning  of  'name'  see  on  i.  12. 

may  be  one\  They  had  just  received  a  new  bond  of  union.  For  long 
there  had  been  oneness  of  belief  Now  they  had  been  made  one  by 
union  with  Jesus;  they  were  one  bread  and  one  body,  for  they  had  all 
partaken  of  the  one  Bread  (i  Cor.  x.  17). 

as  we  are]  Or,  even  as  7ve  are  (comp.  v.  2) :  in  perfect  spiritual 
union  conforming  to  the  essential  union  between  the  Father  and  the 
Son. 

12.  in  the  world']     These  words  are  omitted  by  the  best  authorities. 
/  kept]     Literally,  /  was  keeping:  Christ's  continual  watching  over 

His  disciples  is  expressed.  'I'  is  emphatic,  implying  'now  that  I  am 
leaving  them,  do  Thou  keep  them. ' 

/  have  kept]  Rather,  I  guarded  :  both  verb  and  tense  are  changed. 
This  expresses  the  protection  which  is  the  result  of  the  watching.  More- 
over the  reading  must  be  changed  as  m  v.  u  ;  /  kept  them  in  Thy  name 
which  Thou  hast  given  Me  ;  and  I  guarded  them. 

none  of  them  is  lost]     Better,  not  one  of  them  perished. 

the  son  of  perdition]  The  phrase  is  used  twice  only  in  N.  T. ;  here  of 
Judas,  in  2  Thess.  ii.  3  of  the  'man  of  sin.'  Comp.  'children  of  light,' 
'children  of  darkness.'  Such  expressions  are  common  in  Hebrew  (see  on 
xii.  36).  'Children  of  perdition'  occurs  Is.  Ivii.  4,  'people  of  perdition' 
Ecclus.  xvi.  9,  and  'son  of  death'  2  Sam.  xii.  5.  We  cannot  here  pre- 
serve the  full  force  of  the  original,  in  which  'perish'  and  'perdition'  are 
represented  by  cognate  words;  'none  perished  but  the  son  of  perishing. ' 


312  S.   JOHN,  XVII.  [vv.  13—18. 

13  And  now  come  I  to  thee;  and  these  thhigs  I  speak  in  the 
world,  that  they  might  have  my  joy  fulfilled  in  themselves. 

14 1  have  given  them  thy  word  ;  and  the  world  hath  hated  them, 
because  they  are  not  of  the  world,  even  as  I  am  not  of  the 

15  world.  I  pray  not  that  thou  shouldest  take  them  out  of  the 
world,    but   that  thou  shouldest  keep  them  from  the  evil. 

16  They  are  not  of  the  world,  even  as  I  am  not  of  the  world. 
'7  Sanctify  them  through  thy  truth :  thy  word  is  truth.     As  thou 

that  the  scripture]  Ps.  xli.  9:  see  on  x.  35  and  xiii.  18  and  comp.  xii.  38. 

13.  And  now  cofue  /]  Better,  But  now  I  cotne.  The  conjunction 
introduces  a  contrast.  Hitherto  Christ  has  been  with  them  watching 
over  them;  'but  now'  it  is  so  no  longer. 

that  they  might]  Better,  that  they  may.  Christ  is  praying  aloud  in 
order  that  His  words  may  comfort  them  when  they  remember  that  He 
Himself  consigned  them  to  His  Father's  keeping.     Comp.  xi.  42. 

my  joy\     Literally,  the  joy  that  is  Aline:  see  on  xiv.  27  and  xv.  11. 

14.  I  have  given]     'I*  in  emphatic  opposition  to  the  world. 

thy  word]     The  revelation  of  God  as  a  whole  (see  on  v.   16  and 

V.  47)- 

hath  hated]  Rather,  hated;  the  aorist  expresses  the  single  act  of 
hate  in  contrast  to  the  perfect,  '  I  have  given '  a  gift  which  they  continue 
to  possess.  These  are  the  two  results  of  discipleship ;  on  the  one  side, 
Christ's  protection  [v.  12)  and  the  gift  of  God's  word;  on  the  other,  the 
hatred  of  the  world. 

15.  I  pray  not]  See  on  xiv.  16.  The  nature  of  the  protection  is 
made  clear  to  the  listening  disciples;  not  exemption  from  attack  and 
temptation,  but  freedom  from  the  permanent  influence  of  the  enemy. 

frotn  the  evil]  Rather, /;-(?»« theevWone;  comp.  i  John  ii.  13,  iii.  12, 
and  especially  v.  18.  'From'=  'out  of:'  just  as  Christ  is  that  in  which 
His  disciples  live  and  move,  so  the  evil  one,  'the  ruler  of  this  world' 
(xii.  31,  xvi.  11),  is  that  otit  ^  which  He  prays  that  they  may  be  kept. 
Thus  "the  relation  of  man  to  good  and  evil  is  a.  personal  relation:" 
comp.  I  John  iv.  4. 

16.  They  are  not. ..world]  What  was  stated  in  v.  14  as  the  reason 
for  the  world's  hatred  is  repeated  here  as  the  introduction  to  a  new  and 
more  definite  petition ;  not  merely  protection,  but  sanctification.  There 
is  a  slight  change  from  the  order  of  the  words  m  v.  14;  'Of  the  world 
they  are  not,  even  as  I  am  not  of  the  world.'  In  both  verses  'I'  is 
emphatic. 

17.  Sanctify]  Or,  consecrate.  The  word  expresses  God's  destina- 
tion of  them  for  their  work  and  His  endowment  of  them  with  the 
powers  necessary  for  their  work.  The  word  is  used  of  God's  consecra- 
tion of  Jeremiah,  Moses,  and  the  chosen  people  (Jer.  i.  5;  Ecclus.  xlix. 
7,  xiv.  4;  2  Mac.  i.  25).  This  prayer  has  been  called  "the  Prayer  of 
Consecration." 

through  thy  trnlli]  Rather,  in  the  truth.  'Thy'  is  a  gloss,  rightly 
explaining  the  text,  but  wantint^  in  all  the  best  MSS.     The  Truth  is  the 


w.  19—21.]  S.   JOHN,   XVII.  313 

hast  sent  me  into  the  world,  even  so  have  I  also  sent  them 
into  the  world.     And  for  their  sakes  I  sanctify  myself,  that  19 
they  also  might  be  sanctified  through  the  truth. 

20 — 26.     TAe  Prayer  for  the  whole  Church. 

Neither  pray  I  for  these  alone,  but  for  them  also  which  20 
shall  believe  on  me  through  their  word;  that  they  all  may  be  21 

whole  Christian  revelation,  the  new  environment  in  which  believers  are 
placed,  and  which  helps  to  work  their  sanctification;  just  as  a  sickly 
wild  plant  is  strengthened  and  changed  by  transplanting  it  to  a  garden. 
thy  word]  Literally,  ike  word  that  is  Thine,  a  mode  of  expression 
which  gives  prominence  to  the  adjective.  Comp.  'My  doctrine  is  not 
Mine,  but  His  that  sent  Me,'  vii.  16.  The  Greek  for  'word'  is  logos, 
God's  revelation  as  a  whole,  not  any  single  utterance  or  collection  of 
utterances.     See  on  v.  47. 

18.  As  thou  hast  sent]    Better,  Even  as  Thou  didst  send.    Comp.  x. 

36. 

even  so  have  I  also  sent]  Better,  I  also  did  send.  Comp.  xx.  21, 
XV.  9.  The  Apostles  had  already  received  their  commission  (Matt.  x. 
5 — 15;  Mark  vi.  7;  Luke  ix.  2—5),  which  is  about  to  be  renewed. 

19.  sanctify^  Or,  consecrate,  as  in  w.  17.  Christ  does  for  Himself  that 
which  He  prays  the  Father  to  do  for  His  disciples.  In  x.  36  He  speaks 
of  Himself  as  consecrated  by  the  Father ;  set  apart  for  a  sacred  purpose. 
But  only  thus  far  is  the  consecration  of  Christ  and  of  His  disciples  the 
same.  In  them  it  also  implied  redemption  and  cleansing  from  sin ;  and 
in  this  sense  the  word  is  frequently  connected  with  '  purify '  (2  Cor.  vii. 
I ;  Eph.  V.  26;  2  Tim.  ii.  21 ;  Heb.  ix.  13).  The  radical  meaning  of  the 
word  is  not  separation,  as  is  sometimes  stated,  but  holiness,  which  in- 
volves separation,  viz.  the  being  set  apart  yi^r  God. 

might  be  sanctified  through  the  truth]  Rather,  may  be  sanctified  or 
consecrated  in  trutli.  '  In  truth '  =  in  reality  and  not  merely  in  name 
or  appearance  ;  the  expression  is  quite  distinct  from  '  in  the  truth  '  in  v. 
17.  As  a  Priest  consecrated  by  the  Father  (x.  36)  He  consecrates 
Himself  as  a  Sacrifice  (Eph.  v.  2),  and  thereby  obtains  a  real  internal 
consecration  for  them  through  the  Paraclete  (xvi.  7). 

20 — 26.    The  Prayer  for  the  whole  Church. 

20.  Neither  pray  I  for  these  alone]  More  accurately,  Byxt  not  con- 
ca-ning  these  only  do  I  pray  (see  on  xiv.  16).  The  limitation  stated  in 
V.  9  is  at  an  end :  through  the  Church  He  prays  for  the  world  (v.  21). 

which  shall  believe]  The  true  reading  gives,  wbo  believe.  The  future 
body  of  believers  is  regarded  by  anticipation  as  already  in  existence : 
the  Apostles  are  a  guarantee  and  earnest  of  the  Church  that  is  to  be. 

on  me  through  their  word]  Perhaps  through  their  word  on  Me  would 
be  better.  The  order  of  the  Greek  insists  on  the  fact  that  those  who 
believe  believe  through  the  Apostles'  word. 

21.  That  they  all  may  be  one]     This  is  the  purpose  rather  than  the 


314  S.   JOHN,   XVII.  [w.  22,  23. 

one;  as  thou,  Father,  art  in  me,  and  I  in  thee,  that  they  also 
may  be  one  in  us :  that  the  world  may  believe  that  thou  hast 

22  sent  me.     And  the  glory  which  thou  gavest  me  I  have  given 

23  them ;  that  they  may  be  one,  even  as  we  are  one :  I  in  them, 
and  thou  in  me,  that  they  may  be  made  perfect  in  one;  and 
that  the  world  may  know  that  thou  hast  sent  me,  and  hast 

purport  of  the  prayer :  Christ  prays  for  blessings  for  His  Church  with 
this  end  in  view, — tliat  all  may  be  one. 

as\  Or,  even  as.  The  unity  of  believers  is  like  the  unity  of  the 
Father  with  the  Son  (x.  30),  not  a  merely  moral  unity  of  disposition 
and  purpose,  but  a  vital  unity,  in  which  the  members  share  the  life  of 
one  and  the  same  organism  (see  on  Rom.  xii.  4,  5).  A  mere  agreement 
in  opinion  and  aim  would  not  convince  the  world.  See  on.  v.  11.  Omit 
'art,'  which  is  an  insertion  of  our  translators. 

may  be  07ie  in  us\  The  balance  of  authority  is  against  'one,'  which 
may  be  an  explanatory  gloss.  In  vi.  ^d  and  xv.  4,  5  Christ's  followers 
are  said  to  abide  in  Him  :  this  is  to  abide  in  His  Father  also. 

hast  sent\  Better,  didst  send  (comp.  v.  18).  The  eternal  unity  of  be- 
lievers with  one  another  will  produce  such  external  results  ('see  how 
these  Christians  love  one  another '),  that  the  world  will  be  induced  to 
believe.  Christian  unity  and  love  (Matt.  vii.  12;  Luke  vi.  31;  i  Cor. 
xiii.)  is  a  moral  miracle,  a  conquest  of  the  resisting  will  of  man,  and 
therefore  more  convincing  than  a  physical  miracle,  which  is  a  conquest 
of  unresisting  nature.  Hence  the  divisions  and  animosities  of  Christians 
are  a  perpetual  stumbling-block  to  the  world. 

22.  Having  prayed  for  them  with  a  view  to  their  unity.  He  states 
what  He  Himself  has  done  for  tliem  with  the  same  end  in  view. 

gavest'\  Better,  hast  given  (see  on  v.  4).  The  meaning  of  this  gift 
of  '  glory '  seems  evident  from  v.  24 ;  the  glory  of  the  ascended  and 
glorified  Christ  in  which  l:)elievers  are  'joint-lieirs'  with  Him  (see  on 
Rom.  viii.  17).  Looking  forward  with  confidence  to  the  issue  of  the 
conflict,  Christ  speaks  of  this  glory  as  already  given  back  to  him  {v.  5) 
and  shared  with  His  followers.     Comp.  xvi.  33. 

23.  I  in  them,  and  thou  in  me]  And  therefore,  'Thou  in  them  and 
they  in  Thee.' 

viade perfect  in  one]  Literally,  perfected  into  one;  i.  e.  completed  and 
made  one.  In  the  unity  the  completeness  consists.  The  expression 
'into  one'  occurs  elsewhere  only  xi.  52  (comp.  i  John  v.  8).  For  'per- 
fected' comp.  I  John  ii.  5;  iv.  12,  17,  18. 

may  kjiow]  Or,  come  to  know,  reco&nlse  {v.  3)  gradually  and  in 
time.  This  is  the  second  effect  of  the  unity  of  Christians,  more  perfect 
than  the  first.  The  first  {v.  21)  was  that  the  world  is  induced  to  believe 
that  God  sent  Christ ;  the  second  is  that  the  world  comes  to  knmv  that 
God  sent  Christ,  and  moreover  that  He  loved  the  world  even  as  He 
loved  Christ.  'Hast  sent'  and  'hast  loved'  in  both  places  are  literally 
didst  send  and  didst  love;  but  in  the  case  of  the  second  of  the  two 
verbs  the  English  perfect  is   perhaps  the  best   representative  of  the 


vv.  24,  25.]  S.   JOHN,   XVII.  315 

loved  them,  as  thou  hast  loved  me.     Father,  I  will  that  24 
they  also,  whom  thou  hast  given  me,  be  with   me   where 

1  am;  that  they  may  behold  my  glory,  which  thou  hast 
given  me:  for  thou  lovedst  me  before  the  foundation  of 
the  world. 

25,  26,    Summary. 

O  righteous  Father,  the  world  hath  not  known  thee :  but  25 

Greek  aorist.  The  second  *Thou'  in  the  verse  and  the  last  'Me' 
are  emphatic. 

24.  Father]  Comp.  w.  r,  5,  ir,  xi.  41,  xii.  27.  The  relationship 
is  the  ground  of  the  appeal ;  He  knows  that  His  '  will '  is  one  with  His 
Father's. 

Iwiir\  Comp.  xxi.  22;  Matt.  viii.  3,  xxiii.  37,  xxvi.  39;  Luke  xii. 
49.  He  has  already  granted  this  by  anticipation  {v.  12) ;  He  wills  that 
this  anticipation  may  be  realised. 

i/iey  wkotnl  Literally,  that  wMcli ;  the  faithful  as  a  body.  See  on 
V,  2. 

where  I  ani\     Comp.  xiv,  3. 

behold]  In  the  sense  of  sharing  and  enjoying  it ;  for  the  faithful  'shall 
also  reign  with  Him.'  2  Tim.  ii.  12.  This  glory  they  behold  with 
unveiled  face,  on  which  it  is  reflected  as  on  the  face  of  Moses.     See  on 

2  Cor.  iii.  18  and  comp.  i  John  iii.  2. 

my  glory]  Literally,  the  glory  which  is  Mine,  a  stronger  expression 
than  that  in  w.  22 :  see  on  xiv.  27. 

which  thotc  hast  given  me]  Not  the  glory  of  the  Word,  the  Eternal 
Son,  which  was  His  in  His  equality  with  the  Father,  but  the  glory  of 
Christ,  the  Incarnate  Son,  with  which  the  risen  and  ascended  Jesus 
was  endowed.  In  sure  confidence  Christ  speaks  of  this  as  already  given, 
and  wills  that  all  believers  may  behold  and  share  it.  Thus  two  gifts  of 
the  Father  to  the  Son  meet  and  complete  one  another:  those  whom  He 
has  given  behold  the  gloiy  that  He  has  given. 

fo}-]    Better,  because. 

the  foundation  of  the  world]  Our  Lord  thrice  uses  this  expression, 
here,  Luke  xi.  50,  and  Matt.  xxv.  34.  Two  of  those  who  heard  it 
reproduce  it  (i  Pet.  i.  20;  Rev,  xiii.  8,  xvii.  8):  comp.  Eph.  i.  4;  Heb. 
iv.  3,  ix.  26,  xi.  II. 

25,  26.     Summary. 

25.  righteous  Father]  The  epithet  (comp.  v.  11)  harmonizes  with  the 
appeal  to  the  justice  of  God  which  follows,  which  is  based  on  a  simple 
statement  of  the  facts.  The  world  knew  not  God ;  Christ  knew  Him  ; 
the  disciples  knew  that  Christ  was  sent  by  Him,  '  Shall  not  the  Judge 
of  all  the  earth  do  right  ? ' 

hath  not  known]  Better,  knew  not.  So  also  '  have  known  '  should 
in  both  cases  be  knew,  and  '  hast  sent '  should  be  didst  send.  The 
verbs  are  all  aorists.     The  conjunction  kai  before  '  the  world  '  may  be 


3i6  S.  JOHN,  XVII.  [v.  26. 

I  have  known  thee,  and  these  have  known  that  thou  hast 
26  sent  me.     And  I  have  declared  unto  them  thy  name,  and 
will   declare  //.•  that  the  love  wherewii/i  thou  hast  loved 
me  may  be  in  them,  and  I  in  them. 

rendered  'indeed,'  meaning  'it  is  true  the  world  knew  Thee  not,  but 
yet  &c.'  Translate;  the  world  indeed  knew  Tliee  not,  but  I  knew 
Thee. 

26.  Aave  declared... will  declare"]  Better,  made  known... wz7/ make 
known.  The  verb  is  cognate  with  that  rendered  '  know '  in  v.  25,  and 
here  as  there  the  aorist  is  used,  not  the  perfect.  Christ  knows  the 
Father  and  makes  known  His  name,  i.e.  His  attributes  and  will  (see  on 
i.  12),  to  the  disciples.  This  imparting  of  knowledge  is  already  accom- 
plished in  part, — '  I  made  known  '  (comp.  xv.  15) ;  but  the  knowledge 
and  the  love  which  imparts  it  being  alike  inexhaustible,  there  is  room 
for  perpetual  instruction  throughout  all  time,  especially  after  the  Para- 
clete has  been  given, — 'I  will  make  known '  (comp.  xiv.  26,  xvi.  13). 

wherewith  thott  hast  loved  me]  In  the  Greek  we  have  a  double  accu- 
sative, as  in  Eph.  ii.  4.  '  Hast  loved  '  should  be  didst  love  (see  on  v.  4) : 
but  possibly  this  is  a  case  where  the  English  present  might  be  admitted 
as  the  best  equivalent  of  the  Greek  aorist  (see  on  xv.  8). 

may  be  in  them]  May  rule  in  their  hearts  as  a  guiding  principle, 
without  which  they  cannot  receive  the  knowledge  here  promised ;  for 
'  he  that  loveth  not,  knoweth  not  God  '  (i  John  iv.  8). 

I  in  them]  These  last  words  of  Christ's  Mediatorial  Prayer  sum  up 
its  purpose.  They  are  the  thread  which  runs  through  all  these  farewell 
discourses.  He  is  going  away,  and  yet  abides  with  them.  His  bodily 
presence  passes  away,  His  spiritual  presence  remains  for  ever  ;  not  seen 
with  the  eye  without,  but  felt  as  life  and  strength  within.  Having 
known  Christ  after  the  flesh,  now  they  know  Him  so  no  more :  they  are 
in  Christ,  a  new  creation  (2  Cor.  v.  16,  17). 

Chap.  XVIII. 

We  enter  now  upon  the  second  part  of  the  second  main  division  of  the 
Gospel.  The  Evangelist  having  given  us  the  inner  Glorification 
OF  Christ  in  His  last  Discourses  (xiii. — xvii.),  now  sets  forth 
Ills  OUTER  Glorification  in  His  Passion  and  Death  (xviii.,  xix.). 
This  part,  like  the  former  (see  introduction  to  chap,  xiii.),  may  be 
divided  into  four.  i.  The  Betrayal  (xviii.  i — 11);  2.  The  Jewish 
Trial  (12 — 27);  3.  The  Roman  Trial  (xviii.  28 — xix.  16);  4.  The 
Death  and Burial\\^, — 42). 

"  We  return  once  more  from  discourse  to  narrative,  which  preponde- 
rates in  the  whole  of  the  remaining  portion  of  the  (.jospel.  Accordingly 
as  we  have  found  hitherto  that  in  the  narrative  portions  the  marks  of  an 
eye-witness  at  once  begin  to  multiply,  so  here  especially  they  occur 
in  such  large  amount  and  in  such  rapid  succession  that  it  appears  impos- 
sible to  resist  the  conviction  that  from  an  eye-witness  and  no  one  else  the 
account  proceeds."     S.  p.  239. 


S.   JOHN,    XVIII.  317 

Dr  Westcott  {Speaker's  Commentary,  N.T.,  Vol.  II.  p.  ■249)  observes; 
"  r.  It  is  a  superficial  and  inadequate  treatment  of  his  narrative  to 
regard  it  as  a  historical  supplement  of  the  other  narratives,  or  of  the 
current  oral  narrative  on  which  they  are  based The  record  is  inde- 
pendent and  compute  in  itself.  It  is  a  whole,  and  like  the  rest  of  the 
Gospel  an  interpretation  of  the  inner  meaning  of  the  history  which  it 
contains. 

Thus  in  the  history  of  the  Passion  three  thoughts  among  others  rise 
into  clear  prominence  : 

(i)    The  voluntariness  of  Christ's  sufferings ;  xviii.  4,  8,  11,  36; 
xix.  28,  30. 

(2)  The  fulfilment  of  a  divine  plan  in  Chrisfs  sufferings;  xviii. 

4,  9,  11;  xix.  ii.  24,  28,  36,  37. 

(3)  The  majesty  which  shines  through  Christ's  sufferings;  xviii.  6, 

20 — 23  (comp.  Luke  xxii.  53),  37;  xix.  11,  26,  27,  30. 
The  narrative  in  this  sense  becomes  a  commentary  on  earlier  words 
which  point  to  the  end;  (i)  x.  17,  18;  (2)  xiii.  r;  (3)  xiii.  31. 

2.  In  several  places  the  full  meaning  of  S.  John's  narrative  is  first 
obtained  by  the  help  of  words  or  incidents  preserved  by  the  synoptists. 
His  narrative  assumes  facts  found  in  them:  e.g.  xviii.  11,  33,  40, 
xix.  41. 

3.  The  main  incidents  recorded  by  more  than  one  of  the  other 
Evangelists  which  are  omitted  by  S.  John  are  :  (by  all  three)  the  agony, 
traitor's  kiss,  mockery  as  prophet,  council  at  daybreak,  impressment  of 
Simon,  reproaches  of  the  spectators,  darkness,  confession  of  the  centu- 
rion; (by  S,  Matthew  and  S.  Mark)  the  desertion  by  all,  examination 
before  the  Sanhedrin  at  night,  false  witness,  adjuration,  great  Con- 
fession, mockery  after  condemnation,  cry  from  Ps.  xxii,  rending  of  the 
veil. 

Other  incidents  omitted  by  S.  John  are  recorded  by  single  Evange- 
lists :  (S.  Matthew)  power  over  the  hosts  of  heaven,  Pilate's  wife's  mes- 
sage, Pilate's  hand-washing,  self-condemnation  of  the  Jews,  earthquake; 
{S.  Mark)  flight  of  the  young  man,  Pilate's  question  as  to  the  death  of 
Christ ;  (S.  Luke)  examination  before  Herod,  lamentation  of  the  women, 
three  '  words '  from  the  Cross  (xxiii.  34,  43,  46),  repentance  of  one  of 
the  robbers. 

4.  The  main  incidents  peculiar  to  S.  fohn  are :  the  words  of  power 
at  the  arrest,  examination  before  Annas,  first  conference  of  the  Jews 
with  Pilate  and  Pilate's  private  examination,  first  mockery  and  Ecce 
Homo,  Pilate's  maintenance  of  his  words,  the  last  charge  (xix.  25 — 27), 
the  thirst,  piercing  of  the  side,  ministry  of  Nicodemus. 

5.  In  the  narrative  of  incidents  recorded  elsewhere  6".  yohn  con- 
stantly adds  details,  often  minute  and  yet  most  significant :  e.  g.  xviii.  i, 
2,  ID,  II,  12,  15,  16,  26,  28,  xix.  14,  17,41.     See  the  notes. 

6.  In  the  midst  of  great  differences  of  detail  the  Synoptists  and 
S.  yohn  offer  many  impressive  resemblances  as  to  the  spirit  and  character 
of  the  proceedings  :  e.g.  (i)  the  activity  of  the  'High  Priests'  (i.e.  the 
Sadducaean  hierarchy)  as  distinguished  from  the  Pharisees ;  (2)  the 
course  of  the  accusation — civil  charge,  religious  charge,  personal  influ- 
ence ;  (3)  the  silence  of  the  Lord  in  His  public  accusations,  with  the 


3i8  S.   JOHN,  XVIII.  [vv.  I,  2. 

1 — II.     The  Betrayal. 

18        When  Jesus  had  spoken  these  words,  he  went  forth  with 

his  disciples  over  the  brook  Cedron,  where  was  a  garden, 

3  into  the  wliich  he  entered,  and  his  disciples.     And  Judas 

also,  which  betrayed  him,  knew  the  place :  for  Jesus  ofttimes 

significant  exception,  Matt,  xxvi,  64;  (4)  the  tone  of  mockery ;  (5)  the 
character  of  Pilate." 

1 — 11.    The  Betrayal. 

1.  he  went  forth']  From  the  upper  room.  The  same  word  is  used 
of  leaving  the  room,  Matt.  xxvi.  30;  Mark  xiv.  26;  Luke  xxii.  39.  Those 
who  suppose  that  the  room  is  left  at  xiv.  31  (perhaps  for  the  Temple), 
interpret  this  of  the  departure  from  the  city,  ■which  of  course  it  may 
mean  in  any  case. 

the  brjok  Cedron]  Literally,  the  ravine  of  the  Kedron,  or  of  the 
cedars,  according  to  the  reading,  the  differences  of  which  are  here  ex- 
ceedingly interesting.  Of  the  cedars  {tCjv  KeZpwi>)  is  the  reading  of  the 
great  majority  of  the  authorities ;  but  of  the  Kedron  [tov  Kedpov  or  toS 
K(dpwv)  is  well  supported.     Of  the  cedars  is  the  reading  of  the  LXX.  in 

1  K.  XV.  13  and  occurs  as  a  various  reading  2  S.  xv.  23;   i  K.  ii.  37; 

2  K.  xxiii.  6,  12.  The  inference  is  that  both  names  were  current,  the 
Hebrew  having  given  birth  to  a  Greek  name  of  different  meaning  but 
very  similar  sound.  Kedron  or  Kidron=  'black,'  and  is  commonly  sup- 
posed to  refer  to  the  dark  colour  of  the  water  or  the  gloom  of  the  ravine. 
But  it  might  possibly  refer  to  the  black  green  of  cedar  trees,  and  thus  the 
two  names  would  be  united.  This  detail  of  their  crossing  the  *  Wady  ' 
of  the  Kidron  is  given  by  S.  John  alone  ;  but  he  gives  no  indication  of 
a  "reference  to  the  history  of  the  flight  of  David  from  Absalom  and 
Ahitophel  "  (2  S.  xv.  23).  'Brook'  is  misleading;  the  Greek  word 
means  'winter-torrent,'  but  even  in  winter  there  is  little  water  in  the 
Kidron.  Neither  this  word  nor  the  name  Kedron  occurs  elsewhere  in 
N.  T. 

a  gardeft]  Or,  orchard.  S.  Matthew  and  S.  Mark  give  us  the  name 
of  the  enclosure  or  'parcel  of  ground'  (John  iv.  5)  ratlier  than  'place,' 
of  which  this  'garden'  formed  the  whole  or  part.  Gethsemane  =  oil- 
press,  and  no  doubt  olives  abounded  there.  The  very  ancient  olive-trees 
still  existing  on  the  traditional  site  were  probably  put  there  by  pilgrims 
who  replanted  the  spot  after  its  devastation  at  the  siege  of  Jerusalem. 
S.  John  gives  no  hint  of  a  comparison  between  the  two  gardens,  Eden 
and  Gethsemane,  which  commentators  from  Cyril  to  Isaac  Williams 
have  traced.     See  on  Mark  i.  13  for  another  comparison. 

and  his  disciples]  Literally,  Himself  and  His  disciples,  Judas  ex- 
cepted. 

2.  which  betrayed]  Better,  who  was  betraying  :  he  was  at  that 
moment  at  work.     Comp.  v.  5. 

knew  the  place]    Therefore  Christ  did  not  go  thither  to  hide  or  escape. 


3.]  S.  JOHN,   XVIII.  319 


resorted    thither   with   his   disciples,     Judas   then,   having  3 
received  a  band  of  men,  and  officers  from  the  chief  priests 
and  Pharisees,  cometh  thither  with  lanterns  and  torches  and 

as  Celsus  scoffingly  asserted.     Origen  {Cels.  11.  10)  appeals  to  w.  4  and 
S  as  proving  that  Jesus  deliberately  surrendered  Himself. 

ofttit)ies\  Comp.  viii.  i,  and  see  on  Luke  xxi.  37,  xxii.  39.  The 
owner  must  have  known  of  these  gatherings,  and  may  himself  have  been 
a  disciple. 

resorted  thitherl  Literally,  assembled  there ;  as  if  these  gatherings 
were  for  teaching  of  a  more  private  kind  than  was  given  to  the 
multitude. 

3.  Judas  then']  Better,  Judas  therefore  ;  S.  John's  favourite  parti- 
cle, as  va.w.  4,  6,  7,  10,  11,  12,  16,  17,  19,  24,  27,  28,  29,  31,  33,  37, 
40.  It  was  because  Judas  knew  that  Jesus  often  went  thither  that  he 
came  thither  to  take  Him.  "Our  English  version  gives  little  idea  of  the 
exactness  of  the  description  which  follows."     S.  p.  241. 

a  band  of  vien]  Rather,  the  band  ^soldiers.  This  is  one  part  of 
the  company ;  Roman  soldiers  sent  to  prevent  '  an  uproar '  among  the 
thousands  of  pilgrims  assembled  to  keep  the  Passover  (see  on  Matt. 
xxvi.  5).  The  word  for  band,  speira,  seems  elsewhere  in  N.  T.  to  mean 
'cohort,'  the  tenth  of  a  legion  (Matl.  xxvii.  27 ;  Mark  xv.  16;  Acts  x.  i, 
xxi.  31,  xxvii.  i),  and  with  this  Polybius  (xi.  xxi.  i;  [xxiii.  i])  agrees. 
But  Polybius  sometimes  (vi.  xxiv.  5,  xv.  ix.  7,  iii.  cxiii.  3)  appears 
to  use  sfeira  for  'maniple,'  the  third  part  of  a  cohort  and  about  200 
men.  In  any  case  only  a  portion  of  the  cohort  which  formed  the  garri- 
son of  the  fortress  of  Antonia  can  here  be  meant :  but  that  the  arrest  of 
Jesus  was  expected  to  produce  a  crisis  is  shewn  by  the  presence  of  the 
chief  o'iiic&x  of  the  cohort  (z/.  12).  The  Jewish  hierarchy  had  no  doubt 
communicated  with  Pilate,  and  his  being  ready  to  try  the  case  at  so  early 
an  hour  as  5  A.  M.  may  be  accounted  for  in  this  way. 

officers  from  the  chief  priests  and  Pharisees]  i.  e.  from  the  Sanhedrin. 
These  may  have  been  either  officers  of  justice  appointed  by  the  Sanhe- 
drin, or  a  portion  of  the  Levitical  temple-police :  that  some  of  the  latter 
were  present  is  clear  from  Luke  xxii.  4,  52.  This  is  a  second  part 
of  the  company.  S.  Luke  (xxii.  52)  tells  us  that  some  of  tne  chief  priests 
themselves  were  there  also.  Thus  there  were  (i)  Roman  soldiers, 
(2)  Jewish  officials,  (3)  chief  priests. 

with  lanterns  and  torches]  The  ordinary  equipment  for  night  duty, 
which  the  Paschal  full-moon  would  not  render  useless.  It  was  possible 
that  dark  woods  or  buildings  would  have  to  be  searched.  The  word  for 
'  lantern, '/^a«05,  occurs  here  only  in  N.  T. ;  and  here  only  is  latnpas 
rendered  'torch;'  elsewhere  either  'light'  (Acts  xx.  8)  or  'lamp'  (Matt. 
XXV.  I — 8  ;  Rev.  iv.  5,  viii.  10).  '  Torch  '  would  perhaps  be  best  in  all 
cases,  even  in  Matt.  xxv.  i — 8,  leaving  'lamp'  free  as  the  translation  of 
luchttos  (v.  35;  Matt.  v.  15,  vi.  22;  Mark  iv.  21;  Luke  viii.  16,  xi.  33, 
34,  36,  &c.)  for  which  'light'  and  'candle'  are  either  inadequate  or 
misleading.  Torches  were  fed  with  oil  carried  in  a  vessel  (Matt.  xxv.  4) 
for  the  purpose. 


320  S.   JOHN,   XVI 1 1.  [w.  4—6. 

4  weapons.     Jesus   therefore,  knowing  all  things  that  should 
come   upon   him,  went  forth,  and  said  unto  them,  Whom 

5  seek  ye  ?     They  answered  him,  Jesus  of  Nazareth.     Jesus 
saith  unto  them,  I  am  he.     And  Judas  also,  which  betrayed 

6  him,  stood  with  them.     As  soon  then  as  he  had  said  unto 

4.  all  things  that  should  come]  Better,  all  the  tMngs  that  were 
coming. 

■went  forth']  From  what?  (i)  from  the  shade  into  the  light; 
(2)  from  the  circle  of  disciples;  (3)  from  the  depth  of  the  garden; 
(4)  from  the  garden  itself.  It  is  impossible  to  say  which  of  these  sug- 
gestions is  right ;  the  last  is  not  contradicted  by  v.  26.  The  kiss  of 
Judas  is  by  some  placed  here,  by  others  after  v.  8.  While  'His  hour 
was  not  yet  come '  (vii.  30,  viii.  20),  He  had  withdrawn  from  danger 
(viii.  59,  xi.  54,  xii.  36) ;  now  he  goes  forth  to  meet  it.  He  who  had 
avoided  notoriety  (v,  13)  and  royalty  (vi.  15),  goes  forth  to  welcome 
death. 

said]  The  better  reading  gives  saith.  His  question  perhaps  had 
two  objects;  to  withdraw  attention  from  the  disciples  [v.  8),  and  to 
make  His  captors  realise  what  they  were  doing. 

6.  Jestis  of  Nazareth]  Or,  fesus  the  Nazarene  (Matt.  ii.  13),  a 
rather  more  contemptuous  expression  than  '  Jesus  of  Nazareth '  (i.  46  ; 
Acts  X.  38;  comp.  Matt.  xxi.  11).  '  The  Nazarene  '  in  a  contemptuous 
sense  occurs  xix.  19;  Matt.  xxvi.  71;  Mark  xiv.  67.  It  is  sometimes 
used  in  a  neutral  sense  (Mark  x.  47;  Luke  xviii.  37,  xxiv.  19).  Later 
on  the  contempt  of  Jews  and  heathen  became  the  glory  of  Christians 
(Acts  ii.  22,  iii.  6,  iv.  10,  vi.  14). 

I  am  he]  The  'he'  is  not  expressed  in  the  Greek:  and  'I  am'  to 
Jewish  ears  was  the  name  of  Jehovah.  We  have  had  the  same  expres- 
sion several  times  in  this  Gospel  (iv.  26),  vi.  20,  viii.  24,  28,  58,  xiii.  13 
(see  notes  in  each  place).  Judas,  if  not  the  chief  priests,  must  have 
noticed  the  significant  words.  There  is  nothing  in  the  narrative  to 
shew  that  either  the  whole  company  were  miraculously  blinded  (Luke 
xxiv.  16),  or  that  Judas  in  particular  was  blinded  or  paralysed.  Even 
those  who  knew  Him  well  might  fail  to  recognise  Him  at  once  by 
night  and  with  the  traces  of  the  Agony  fresh  upon  Him. 

which  betrayed  him,  stood]  Literally,  who  was  betraying  Him  [v.  2), 
was  standing.  This  tragic  detail  is  impressed  on  S.  John's  memory. 
In  this  as  in  the  lanterns  and  torches,  which  he  alone  mentions,  we 
have  the  vividness  of  the  eye-witness.  S.  Luke  (xxii.  47)  tells  us  that 
'Judas,  one  of  the  twelve,  went  before  them,  and  drew  near  unto  Jesus 
to  kiss  Him.'  Apparently,  after  having  done  this,  he  fell  back  and 
rejoined  Christ's  enemies,  standing  in  the  foreground. 

6.  As  soon  then  as  he  had  said]  Better,  when  therefore  (see  on  v.  3) 
He  said.  The  Evangelist  intimates  that  what  followed  was  the  imme- 
diate consequence  of  Christ's  words. 

went  backward,  and  fell]  Whether  this  was  the  natural  effect  of 
guilt  meeting  with  absolute  innocence,  or  a  supernatural  effect  wrought 


vv.  7— lo.]  S.   JOHN,   XVIII.  321 

them,  I  am  he,  they  went  backward,  and  fell  to  the  ground. 
Then  asked  he  them  again,  Whom  seek  ye?     And  they  said,  7 
Jesus  of  Nazareth.     Jesus  answered,  I  have  told  you  that  I  s 
am  he:  if  therefore  ye  seek  me,  let  these  go  their  way:  that  9 
the  saying  might  be  fulfilled,  which  he  spake,  Of  them  which 
thou   gavest   me   have   I   lost   none.     Then   Simon   Peter  10 

by  Christ's  will,  is  a  question  which  we  have  not  the  means  of  deter- 
mining. Moreover,  the  distinction  may  be  an  unreal  one.  Is  it  not 
His  will  that  guilt  should  quail  before  innocence?  The  result  in  this 
case  proved  both  to  the  disciples  and  to  His  foes  that  His  surrender 
was  entirely  voluntary  (x.  18).  Once  before,  the  majesty  of  His  words 
had  overwhelmed  those  who  had  come  to  arrest  Him  (vii.  46) ;  and  it 
would  have  been  so  now,  had  not  He  willed  to  be  taken.  Comp. 
Matt.  xxvi.  53,  where  the  expression  ^legions  of  angels'  may  have 
reference  to  the  fragment  of  a  legion  that  had  come  to  superintend  His 
capture. 

7.  The)i  asked  he  them  again]  Again  therefore  {v.  3)  //e  asked 
them.  Their  first  onset  had  been  baffled;  He  Himself  therefore  gives 
them  another  opening.  They  repeat  the  terms  of  their  warrant;  they 
have  been  sent  to  arrest  Jesus  the  Nazarene. 

8.  I  have  told]      Rather,  I  told. 

let  these]  At  first  Jesus  had  gone  forward  {v.  4)  from  His  company, 
as  Judas  from  his.  Judas  had  fallen  back  on  his  followers  while  the 
disciples  followed  up  and  gathered  round  Christ.  Thus  the  two  bands 
confronted  one  another. 

9.  thou  gavest  me  have  I  lost]  Better,  I'hou  hast  given  me  I  lost 
(see  on  xvii.  4).  The  reference  is  to  xvii.  12,  and  is  a  strong  confirma- 
tion of  the  historical  truth  of  chap.  xvii.  If  the  prayer  were  the  compo- 
sition of  the  Evangelist  to  set  forth  in  an  ideal  form  Christ's  mental 
condition  at  the  time,  this  reference  to  a  definite  portion  of  it  would  be 
most  unnatural.  The  change  from  *  not  one  of  them  perished '  to  '  I 
lost  of  them  not  one'  brings  out  more  clearly  the  protective  intervention 
of  Christ. 

It  does  not  follow,  because  S.  John  gives  this  interpretation  of 
Christ's  words,  that  therefore  they  have  no  other.  This  was  a  first  ful- 
filment, within  an  hour  or  two  of  their  utterance,  an  earnest  of  a  larger 
fulfilment  in  the  future.  The  meaning  here  must  not  be  limited  to 
bodily  preservation.  Had  they  been  captured,  apostasy  (at  least  for  a 
time)  might  have  been  the  result,  as  was  actually  the  case  with  S. 
Peter. 

10.  Theft  Simon  Peter]  Simon  Peter  therefore  {v.  3),  because  he 
'saw  what  would  follow'  (Luke  xxii.  49).  All  four  Evangelists  men- 
tion this  act  of  violence;  S.  John  alone  gives  the  names.  While  S. 
Peter  was  alive  it  was  only  prudent  not  to  mention  his  name;  and  prob- 
ably S.  John  was  the  only  one  who  knew  [v.  15)  the  servant's  name. 
S.  Peter's  impetuous  boldness  now  illustrates  his  impetuous  words 
xiii.  37  and  Mark  viii.  32. 

S.  JOHN  2  I 


322  S.   JOHN,   XVIII.  [vv.  II— 13. 

having  a  sword  drew  it,  and  smote  the  high  priest's  servant, 
and  cut  off  his  right  ear.     The  servant's  name  was  Malchus. 

11  Then  said  Jesus  unto  Peter,  Put  up  thy  sword  into  the 
sheath:  the  cup  which  my  Father  hath  given  me,  shall  I 
not  drink  it? 

12 — 27.     The  Jewish  or  Ecclesiastical  Trial. 

12  Then  the  band  and  the  captain  and  officers  of  the  Jews 

13  took  Jesus,  and  bound  him,  and  led  him  away  to  Annas 

having  a  sword'\  Probably  one  of  the  two  produced  in  misunder- 
standing of  Christ's  words  at  the  end  of  the  supper  (Luke  xxii.  38). 
To  carry  arms  on  a  feast-day  was  forbidden;  so  that  we  have  here 
some  indication  that  the  Last  Supper  was  not  the  Passover. 

the  high  priesfs  servant]  No  doubt  he  had  been  prominent  in  the 
attack  on  Jesus,  and  S.  Peter  had  aimed  at  his  liead.  S.  Luke  also 
mentions  that  it  was  the  right  ear  that  was  cut,  and  he  alone  mentions 
the  healing,  under  cover  of  which  S.  Peter  probably  escaped. 

11.      Then  said  ^esus]     Jesus  therefore  [v.  3)  said. 

the  cup]  S.  John  alone  gives  these  words.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
Synoptists  alone  give  Christ's  prayer  in  the  garden  (Matt.  xxvi.  39,  &c.) 
to  which  they  obviously  refer.  Thus  the  two  accounts  confirm  one 
another.  See  on  ii.  19.  For  the  metaphor  comp.  Ps.  Ixxv.  8,  Ix.  3; 
Job  xxi.  20;  Jer.  xxv.  15;  Rev.  xiv.  lo,  xvi.  19,  &c.  S.  Matthew  gives 
another  reason  for  putting  up  the  sword  into  its  place;  'all  they  that 
take  the  sword  shall  perish  with  the  sword  '  (xxvi.  52). 

12—27.    The  Jewish  or  Ecclesiastical  Trial. 

12.  Then  the  band,  and  the  captain]  Therefore  (v.  3)  the  band  &c., 
because  of  this  violent  attempt  at  resistance.  The  captain  or  chiliairh 
is  the  tribune  or  chief  officer  of  the  Roman  cohort.  The  representa- 
tions of  the  hierarchy  to  the  Romans  are  confirmed  by  S.  Peter's  act: 
Jesus  the  Nazarene  is  a  dangerous  character  who  stirs  up  His  followers 
to  rebellion  ;  He  must  be  properly  secured  and  bound.  Perhaps  also 
their  falling  to  the  ground  on  meeting  Him  impressed  them  with  the 
necessity  of  using  the  utmost  caution,  as  with  a  powerful  magician. 
The  whole  force  is  required  to  secure  Him. 

13.  to  Annas  first]  Whether  Annas  was  '  chief  of  the  priests 
(2  K.  xxv.  18),  or  president,  or  vice-president,  of  the  Sanhedrin,  we 
have  no  information.  Certainly  he  was  one  of  the  most  influential 
members  of  the  hierarchy,  as  is  shewn  by  his  securing  the  high-priest- 
hood for  no  less  than  live  of  his  sons  as  well  as  for  his  son-in-law 
Caiaphas,  after  he  liad  been  deposed  himself  He  held  office  A.  D. 
7—14,  his  son  Eleazar  a.d.  16,  Joseph  Caiaphas  a.d.  18 — 36;  after 
him  four  sons  of  Annas  held  the  office,  the  last  of  whom,  another 
Annas  (a.d.  62),  put  to  dcatli  S.  James,  the  first  bishop  of  Jerusalem. 
The  high-priests  at  this  time  were  often  mere  nominees  of  the  civil 


w.  14—16.]  S.   JOHN,   XVIII.  323 

first;  for  he  was  father  in  law  to  Caiaphas,  which  was  the 
high  priest  that  same  year.     Now  Caiaphas  was  he,  which  14 
gave  counsel  to  the  Jews,  that  it  was  expedient  that  one 
man  should  die  for  the  people. 

And   Simon   Peter   followed  Jesus,  and  so   did   another  15 
disciple:  that  disciple  was  known  unto  the  high  priest,  and 
went  in  with  Jesus  into  the  palace  of  the  high  priest.     But  16 

power,  and  were  changed  with  a  rapidity  which  must  have  scandalised 
serious  Jews.  There  were  probably  five  or  six  deposed  high-priests  in 
the  Sanhedrin  which  tried  our  Lord  (see  on  Luke  iii.  2).  Other  forms 
of  the  name  Annas  are  Ananias,  Ananus,  and  Hanan. 

for  he  was  father-in- lazv\  And  therefore  Caiaphas  would  be  sure  to 
respect  the  results  of  a  preliminary  examination  conducted  by  him. 
Possibly  the  chief  priests  thought  that  Annas  was  a  safer  man  than 
Caiaphas,  and  the  father-in-law  having  taken  the  lead  which  they 
wanted  the  high-priest  would  be  compelled  to  follow.  This  examina- 
tion before  Annas  is  given  us  by  S.  John  only,  who  tacitly  corrects  the 
impression  that  the  examination  before  Caiaphas  was  the  only  one. 

that  same  year-"]  Omit  'same'  and  see  on  xi.  49.  Comp.  xx.  19  and 
Mark  iv.  35,  where  '  same  '  is  improperly  inserted,  as  here. 

14.  Now  Caiaphas  was  he^  See  on  xi.  50 — 52.  The  remark  is 
made  here  to  recall  the  prophecy  now  so  near  fulfilment,  and  perhaps 
to  intimate  that  with  Caiaphas  and  his  father-in-law  to  direct  the  trial 
it  could  have  but  one  issue. 

15.  followed'\    Or,  was  following;  the  descriptive  imperfect. 
anotha-  disciple\     Some  good  authorities  read  'the  other  disciple,'  but 

the  balance  is  very  decidedly  in  favour  of  '  awother. '  There  is  no  reason 
for  doubting  the  almost  universal  opinion  that  this  'other'  was  S.  John 
himself;  an  opinion  which  agrees  with  the  Evangelist's  habitual  reserve 
about  himself  (i.  40,  xiii.  23 — 25,  xix.  26,  xx.  2 — 8,  xxi.  20 — 24);  and 
also  vdth  the  fact  that  S.  John  frequently  accompanies  S.  Peter  (Luke 
xxii.  8;  Acts  iii.  i,  iv.  13,  viii.  14).  But  it  must  be  allowed  that  the 
opinion  is  short  of  certain ;  although  the  fact  that  S.  John  elsewhere 
designates  himself  as  'the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved' is  in  no  degree 
against  the  identification.  Here  the  description,  'the  disciple  whom 
Jesus  loved,'  would  explain  nothing  and  would  therefore  be  out  of 
place  (see  Introduction,  chap.  11.  iii.  (3)  b).  S.  Augustine,  Calvin  and 
others  suppose  some  person  otherwise  unknown  to  be  meant.  Other 
conjectures  are,  S.  James,  the  Evangelist's  brother,  and  (strangely 
enough)  Judas  I.scariot. 

was  h>iown]  The  nature  of  this  'acquaintance'  (Luke  ii.  44,  xxiii. 
49)  is  nowhere  explained. 

the  hi^h  priest]  Caiaphas  is  probably  meant  {vv.  13,  24);  but  as  de- 
posed high  priests  still  kept  the  title  sometimes  (Luke  iii.  2;  Acts  iv.  6), 
it  is  possible  that  Annas  is  intended. 

the  pa/ace]  Rather,  the  court  or  open  space  in  the  centre  or  in  front 
of  the  house  (Luke  xxii.  55).     The  same  word  is  used  for  the  'sheep- 

21 — 2 


324  S.  JOHN,  XVIII.  [vv.  17—19. 

Peter  stood  at  the  door  without.     Then  went  out  that  other 
disciple,  which  was  known  unto  the  high  priest,  and  spake 

17  unto  her  that  kept  the  door,  and  brought  in  Peter.  Then 
saith  the  damsel  that  kept  the  door  unto  Peter,  Art  not  thou 

18  also  one  of  this  man's  disciples  ?  He  saith,  I  am  not.  And 
the  servants  and  officers  stood  there,  who  had  made  a  fire  of 
coals;  for  it  was  cold:  and  they  warmed  themselves:  and 
Peter  stood  with  them,  and  warmed  himself. 

19  The  high  priest  then  asked  Jesus  of  his  disciples,  and  of 


fold'  (x.  T,  16).  It  is  not  improbable  that  Annas  lived  in  a  portion  of 
the  official  residence  of  his  son-in-law ;  but  even  if  this  was  not  the  case, 
it  is  no  violent  supposition  that  Annas  conducted  a  preliminary  examina- 
tion in  the  house  of  Caiaphas  (see  on  v.  13). 

16.  stood'\  Or,  was  standing;  the  descriptive  imperfect  again. 
Comp.  vv.  5,  15.  The  details  here  also  indicate  the  report  of  an  eye- 
witness. 'At  the  door  without''  seems  to  indicate  that  the  'court'  was 
inside  rather  than  in  front  of  the  building. 

her  that  kept  the  door\     Comp.  Rlioda,  Acts  xii.  13. 

17.  Then  saith  the  damscl\     The  damsel  therefore  [v.  3)  saith. 
Art  not  thou  also\     Rather,  Art  thou  also  (as  well  as  thy  companion) 

or,  surely  thou  art  not:  S.  Peter's  denial  is  thus,  as  it  were,  put  into  his 
mouth.  Sec  on  iv.  29  and  comp.  iv.  33,  vi.  67,  vii.  47,  ix.  40.  In  all 
these  passages  the  form  of  the  question  anticipates  a  negative  answer. 

one  of  this  man's  disciples^  Or,  one  of  the  disciples  of  this  man.  'This 
man'  and  the  turn  of  the  sentence  are  contemptuous.  Comp.  ix.  16,  24, 
xi.  47.  S.  John  had  hurried  on  to  the  room  where  Christ  was  being 
examined;  as  at  the  Cross  (xix.  26)  he  kept  close  to  his  Master;  and  in 
neither  case  was  mole  ted.  S.  Peter,  who  'followed  afar  off  (Luke  xxii. 
54)  and  that  rather  out  of  curiosity  'to  seethe  end'  (Matt.  xxvi.  58)  than 
out  of  love,  encountered  temptation  and  fell. 

18.  And  the  servants,  &c.]  Belter,  Now  the  servants  and  the  officers, 
having  made... were  standing  and  warming  themselves.  The  triljune 
(z/.  12)  having  deposited  his  prisoner  in  safety,  has  withdrawn  with  his 
men.  Only  the  Jewish  oflicials  remain,  joined  now  by  the  household 
servants  of  the  high  priests. 

a  fire  of  coal s^  Charcoal  in  a  brazier,  'to  the  light'  of  which  (Luke 
xxii.  56)  S.  Peter  turned.     Comp.  xxi.  9;  Ecclus.  xi.  32. 

for  it  was  cold]  Cold  nights  are  exceptional  but  not  uncommon  in 
Palestine  in  April.     Jerusalem  stands  high. 

and  Peter,  &c.]  Rather,  And  Peter  also  was  with  them,  standing 
and  warming  himself,  pretending  to  be  indifferent,  but  restlessly 
changing  his  posture.     S.  Luke  says  he  'sat  to  the  light.' 

19.  Jhe  high  priest  then]  Rather,  therefore  {v.  3),  connecting  what 
follows  with  vv.  13,  I4.  Again  we  are  in  doubt  as  to  who  is  meant  by 
the  high-priest  (see  on  v.  15),  but  it  will  be  safest  to  consider  th.at 
Caiaphas  is  meant  throughout.    Neither  hypothesis  is  free  from  difficulty. 


vv.  20—23.]  S.   JOHN,   XVIII.  325 

his  doctrine.     Jesus  answered  him,  I  spake  openly  to  the  20 
world;  I  ever  taught  in  the  synagogue,  and  in  the  temple, 
whither  the  Jews  always  resort;  and  in  secret  have  I  said 
nothing.     Why  askest  thou  me?  ask  them  which  heard  me.,  21 
what  I  have  said  unto  them:  bthold,  they  know  what  I  said. 
And  when  he  had  thus  spoken,  one  of  the  officers  which  22 
stood  by  stroke  Jesus  with  the  palm  of  his  hand,  saying, 
Answerest  thou  the   high  priest  so?     Jesus  answered  him,  23 
If  I  have  spoken  evil,  bear  witness  of  the  evil:  but  if  well, 

If  the  high  priest  here  is  Caiaphas,  the  difficulty  is  to  explain  v.  ■24  (see 
note  there).  But  we  may  suppose  that  while  Annas  is  conducting  the 
examination  Caiaphas  enters  and  takes  part  in  it. 

of  his  disciples,  &c.]  It  was  hoped  that  some  evidence  might  be 
obtained  which  would  be  of  service  in  the  formal  trial  that  was  to 
follow. 

20.  /  spake\  The  true  reading  gives,  I  have  spoken.  There  is  a 
strong  emphasis  on  'I.'  Christ  answers  no  questions  about  His  disciples ; 
He  bears  the  brunt  Himself  alone.  Moreover  He  seems  to  contrast  the 
openness  of  His  proceedings  with  the  secrecy  of  His  enemies. 

openly\     See  on  vii.  4,  26. 

to  the  world^     Not  to  a  secret  society.     Comp.  viii.  26. 

in  the  synagogue']  All  the  best  MSS.  omit  the  article;  in  synagogue, 
as  we  say  'in  church.'     See  on  vi.  59. 

whither  the  yews  always  resort]  The  better  reading  gives,  where  all 
the  yews  come  together.  The  word  rendered  'resort'  is  not  the  same 
as  that  rendered  'resort'  in  v.  2.  'I  always  taught  in  public  places, 
where  all  the  Jews  meet.'  Nothing  could  be  more  open  than  His 
teaching.     Comp.  Matt.  x.  27. 

have  I  said]  Rather,  I  spake,  the  aorist  of  the  verb  in  the  first  clause, 
which  is  in  the  perfect.     See  next  verse. 

21.  which  heard]  Better,  Who  have  heard;  and  'I  liave  said' should 
again  be  I  spake. 

they  know]  Or,  these  know,  as  if  implying  that  they  were  present  and 
ought  to  be  examined.  According  to  Jewish  rule  witnesses  for  the  de- 
fence were  heard  first.  'These'  cannot  refer  to  S.  Peter  and  S.  John. 
S.  Peter  is  still  outside  by  the  fire. 

22.  struck  Jesus  with  the  palm  of  his  hand]  Literally,  gave  a  blow, 
and  the  word  for  'blow'  (elsewhere  xix.  3,  Mark  xiv.  65  only)  etymo- 
logically  means  a  'blow  with  a  rod,'  but  is  also  used  for  a  'blow  with 
the  open  hand.'  The  word  used  for  'smite'  in  v.  23  is  slightly  in 
favour  of  the  former :  but  Matt.  v.  39  and  Acts  xxiii.  2  are  in  favour  of 
the  latter. 

23.  If  I  have  spokeii]  Rather  (as  at  the  end  of  w.  20,  11),  If  I 
spake  (comp.  xiii.  14,  xv.  20).  This  seems  to  shew  that  Christ  does  not 
refer,  as  our  version  would  lead  us  to  suppose,  to  His  answer  to  the 
high-priest,  but  to  the   teaching  about  which  He  is  being  examined. 


326  S.   JOHN,   XVIII.  [w.  24—26. 

24  why  smitest  thou  me?  Now  Annas  had  sent  him  bound  unto 
Caiaphas  the  high  priest. 

25  And  Simon  Peter   stood   and   warmed   himself.     They 
said    therefore   unto   him,    Art   not   thou   also  one  of  his 

26  disciples?    He  denied  it,  and  said,  I  am  not.     One  of  the 
servants   of  the  high  priest,  being  kis  kinsman  whose  ear 

He  here  gives  His  own  illustration  of  His  own  precept  (Matt.  v.  39); 
to  exclude  personal  retaliation  does  not  exclude  calm  protest  and  re- 
buke. 

24.  No2v  Annas  had  sent  him  bound'\  The  received  text,  following 
important  authorities,  has  no  conjunction.  The  Sinaitic  MS.  and  some 
minor  authorities  insert  'now'  or  'but'  {5i).  But  an  overwhelming 
amount  of  evidence,  including  the  Vatican  MS.,  gives  S.  John's  favourite 
particle,  therefore  (odv).  Moreover  the  verb  is  aorist,  not  pluperfect. 
Annas  tlierefore  sent  Him.  It  is  not  necessary  to  enquire  whether  the 
aorist  may  not  virtually  be  pluperfect  in  meaning.  Even  if  'now'  were 
genuine  and  the  remark  were  an  after-thought  which  ought  to  have  pre- 
ceded V.  19,  the  aorist  might  still  be  rendered  literally,  as  in  Matt.  xxvi. 
48  ('gave  them,'  not   'had  given  them   a  sign').     Comp.    Matt,   xiv, 

3.  4. 

But  'therefore  shews  that  the  remark  is  not  an  after-thought.  Be- 
cause the  results  of  the  preliminary  investigation  before  Annas  were 
such  (there  was  a  primd  facie  case,  but  nothing  conclusive),  'Annas 
tJierefore  sent  Him'  {or  formal  trial  to  Caiaphas,  who  had  apparently 
been  present  (see  on  v.  19)  during  the  previous  interrogation  and  had 
taken  part  in  it. 

bound'\  He  had  been  bound  by  the  Roman  soldiers  and  Jewish 
officials  when  He  was  arrested  {v.  12).  This  was  to  prevent  escape  or 
rescue.  During  the  examination  he  would  be  set  free  as  possibly  in- 
nocent. After  the  examination  He  was  bound  again  as  presumably 
guilty,  or  as  before  to  prevent  escape. 

25.  And  Simon  Peter  stood  and  7uarmedhimsclf'\  Better,  Now  3Vw^m 
Peter  was  standing  and  warming  himself  {v.  18). 

They  said  therefore^  The  movement  in  taking  Jesus  from  Annas  to 
Caiaphas  once  more  attracted  attention  to  the  stranger  by  the  fire. 

Art  not  thou  also]  Rather,  Art  thou  also  (see  on  v.  17).  A  look  of 
sympathy  and  distress  on  S.  Peter's  face,  as  His  Master  appears  bound 
as  a  criminal,  and  perhaps  with  the  mark  of  the  IjIow  (v.  22)  on  His 
face,  provokes  the  exclamation.  Surety  thou  also  art  not  one  of  His 
disciples? 

26.  his  kinsman]  A  kinsman  of  him.  How  natural  that  an 
acquaintance  of  the  high-priest  {v.  15)  and  known  to  his  portress  (z'.  16) 
should  know  this  fact  also  as  well  as  Malchus'  name  {v.  10).  This 
confirms  the  ordinary  view  that  the  'other  disciple'  (z/.  15)  is  the 
Evangelist  himself.  This  third  accusation  and  denial  was,  as  S.  Luke 
tells  us,  about  an  hour  after  the  second;  so  that  our  Lord  must  have 
'turned  and  looked  upon  Peter'  either  from  a  room  looking  into  the 


27.']  S.   JOHN,   XVIII.  327 


Peter  cut  off,  saith,  Did  not  I  see  thee  in  the  garden  with 
him?     Peter  then  denied  again:  and  immediately //^^  cock  27 
crew. 

court,  or  as  He  was  being  led  to  receive  the  formal  sentence  of  the 
Sanhedrin  after  the  trial  before  Caiaphas,  not  as  He  was  being  taken 
from  Annas  to  Caiaphas. 

Did  not  I  see  thee]     '  I '  is  emphatic ;  '  with  my  own  eyes. ' 

27.  Peter  then  denied  againi  Again  therefore  {v.  3)  Pelef  denied; 
because  he  had  denied  before.  S.  John,  like  S.  Luke,  omits  the  oaths 
and  curses  (Mark  xiv.  71;  Matt.  xxvi.  73).  We  may  believe  that 
S.  Peter  himself  through  S.  Mark  was  the  first  to  include  this  aggrava- 
tion of  his  guilt  in  the  current  tradition. 

the  cock  cre%v\  Rather,  a  cock  crciv.  In  none  of  the  gospels  is  there 
the  definite  article  which  our  translation  inserts.  This  was  the  second 
crowing  (Mark  xiv.  72).  A  difficulty  has  been  made  here  because  the 
Talmud  says  that  fowls,  which  scratch  in  dunghills,  are  unclean.  But 
(i)  the  Talmud  is  inconsistent  on  this  point  with  itself;  (2)  not  all  Jews 
would  be  so  scrupulous  as  to  keep  no  fowls  in  Jerusalem ;  (3)  certainly 
the  Romans  would  care  nothing  about  such  scruples. 

Just  as  the  Evangelist  implies  (v.  11),  without  mentioning,  the  Agony 
in  the  garden,  so  he  implies  (xxi.  15),  without  mentioning,  the  repent- 
ance of  S.  Peter.  The  question  has  been  raised,  why  he  narrates 
S.  Peter's  fall,  which  had  been  thrice  told  already.  There  is  no  need  to 
seek  far-fetched  explanations,  as  that  "there  might  be  contained  in  it 
some  great  principle  or  prophetic  history,  and  perhaps  both  :  some  great 
principle  to  be  developed  in  the  future  history  of  the  Church,  or  of 
S.  Peter's  Church."  Rather,  it  is  part  of  S.  John's  own  experience 
which  falls  naturally  into  the  scope  and  plan  of  his  Gospel,  setting  forth 
on  the  one  side  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  on  the  other  the  glorification  of 
His  manhood  through  suffering.  Christ's  foreknowledge  of  the  fall  of 
His  chief  apostle  (xiii.  38)  illustrated  both :  it  was  evidence  of  His 
Divinity  (comp.  ii.  24,  25),  and  it  intensified  His  suffering.  S.  John, 
therefore,  gives  both  the  prophecy  and  the  fulfilment.  It  has  been 
notice^  that  it  is  "S.  Peter's  friend  S.  John,  who  seems  to  mention 
most  what  may  lessen  the  fault  of  his  brother  apostle;"  thai  servants 
and  officers  were  about  him;  that  in  the  second  case  he  was  pressed  by 
more  than  one;  and  that  on  the  last  occasion  a  kinsman  of  Malchus 
was  among  his  accusers,  which  may  greatly  have  increased  Peter's  terror. 
Moreover,  this  instance  of  human  frailty  in  one  so  exalted  (an  instance 
which  the  life  of  the  great  Exemplar  Himself  fc?///^  not  afford),  is  given 
us  with  fourfold  emphasis,  that  none  may  presume  and  none  despair. 

On  the  difficulties  connected  with  the  four  accounts  of  S.  Peter's 
denials  see  Appendix  B. 

28— XIX.  16.     The  Roman  or  Civil  Trial. 

As  already  stated,  S.  John  omits  both  the  examination  before  Caiaphas 
and  the  Sanhedrin  at  an  irregular  time  and  place,  at  midnight  and  at 
'the  Booths'  (Matt.  xxvi.  57 — 68:   Mark  xiv.   53 — 6-;),  and  also  the 


32S  S.   JOHN,   XVIII.  fv.  28. 


28 — XIX.  16.     l^he  Rojnan  or  Civil  Trial. 

28      Then   led    they  Jesus   from    Caiaphas  unto  the  hall   of 
judgment :  and  it  was  early;  and  they  themselves  went  not 

formal  meeting  of  the  Sanhedrin  after  daybreak  in  the  proper  place 
(Matt,  xxvii.  i ;  Mark  xv.  i;  Luke  xxii.  66 — 71),  at  which  Jesus  was 
sentenced  to  death.  He  proceeds  to  narrate  what  the  Synoptists  omit, 
the  conference  between  Pilate  and  the  Jews  {vv.  28 — 32)  and  two 
private  examinations  of  Jesus  by  Pilate  [yv.  33 — 38  and  xix.  8 — 11). 
Here  also  we  seem  to  have  the  evidence  of  an  eyewitness.  We  know 
that  S.  John  followed  his  Lord  into  the  high  priest's  palace  [v.  15),  and 
stood  by  the  Cross  (xix.  26);  it  is  therefore  probable  enough  that  he 
followed  Him  into  the  Procurator's  court. 

28.  Then  led  they]  Better,  They  led  therefore  {v.  3).  S.  John 
assumes  that  his  readers  know  the  result  of  Jesus  being  taken  to 
Caiaphas  (v.  24):  He  had  been  condemned  to  death;  and  now  His 
enemies  (there  is  no  need  to  name  them)  take  Him  to  the  Roman 
governor  to  get  the  sentence  executed. 

the  hall  of  judgment]  The  margin  is  better,  Pilate's  house,  i.  e.  the 
palace.  In  the  original  it  is  praito? ion,  the  Greek  form  of  praetoiiiim. 
Our  translators  have  varied  their  rendering  of  it  capriciously:  Matt, 
xxvii.  27,  'common  hall,'  with  'governor's  house'  in  the  margin; 
Mark  xv.  16,  'Praetorium;'  John  xviii.  33  and  xix.  9,  'judgment-hall.' 
Yet  the  meaning  must  be  the  same  in  all  these  passages.  Comp.  Acts 
xxiii.  35,  'judgment-hall;'  Phil.  i.  13,  'the  palace.'  The  meaning  of 
praetoriitm  varies  according  to  the  context.  The  word  is  of  military 
origin;  (i)  'the  general's  tent'  or  'head  quarters.'  Hence,  in  the 
provinces,  {2)  'the  governor's  residence,'  the  meaning  in  Acts  xxiii.  35: 
in  a  sort  of  metaphorical  sense,  (3)  a  'mansion'  or  'palace'  (Juvenal 
I.  75):  at  Rome.  (4)  'the  praetorian  guard,'  the  probable  meaning  in 
Phil.  i.  13.  Of  these  leading  significations  the  second  is  probably  right 
here  and  throughout  the  Gos])els;  the  official  residence  of  the  Procurator. 
Where  Pilate  resided  in  Jerusalem  is  not  quite  certain.  We  know  that 
'Herod's  Practorium,'  a  magnificent  building  on  the  western  hill  of 
Jerusalem,  was  used  by  Roman  governors  somewhat  later  (Phild,  Peg. 
ad  Gaium,  p.  1034).  But  it  is  perhaps  more  likely  that  Pilate  occupied 
part  of  the  fortress  Antonia,  on  the  supposed  site  of  which  a  chamber 
with  a  column  in  it  has  recently  been  discovered,  which  it  is  thought 
may  possibly  be  the  scene  of  the  scourging. 

S.  John's  narrative  alternates  between  the  outside  and  inside  of  the 
Praetorium.  Outside;  28 — 32;  38 — 40;  xix.  4 — 7;  12 — 16.  Inside; 
33—37;  xix-  1—3;  8— II. 

28 — 32.  Outside  the  Practorium;  the  Jews  claim  the  execution  of 
the  Sanhedrin's  sentence  of  death,  and  Pilate  refuses  it. 

early\  The  same  word,  prdi,  is  rendered  'morning'  ATatt.  x%'i.  3; 
Mark  i.  35,  xi.  20,  xiii.  35,  xv.  i  ;  the  last  passage  being  partly  parallel 
to  this.  In  Mark  xiii.  35  the  word  stands  for  the  fouith  watch  (see  on 
Mark  vi.  48),  which  lasted  from  3.0  to  6.0  a.  m.      A  Roman  court  might 


V.  29.]  S.   JOHN,   XVIII.  329 

into  the  judgment  hall,  lest  they  should  be  defiled;  but  that 
they   might   eat  the  passover.     Pilate  then  went  out  unto  29 

be  held  directly  after  sunrise;  and  as  Pilate  had  probably  been  informed 
that  an  important  case  was  to  be  brought  before  him,  delay  in  which 
might  cause  serious  disturbance,  there  is  nothing  improbable  in  his 
being  ready  to  open  his  court  between  4.0  and  5.0  a.m.  The  hierarchy 
were  in  a  difficulty.  Jesus  could  not  safely  be  arrested  by  daylight,  and 
the  Sanhedrin  could  not  legally  pronounce  sentence  of  death  by  night : 
hence  they  had  had  to  wait  till  dawn  to  condemn  Him.  Now  another 
regulation  hampers  ihem  :  a  day  must  intervene  between  sentence  and 
execution.  This  they  shuffled  out  of  by  going  at  once  to  Pilate.  Of 
course  if  he  undertook  the  execution,  he  must  fix  the  time;  and  their 
representations  would  secure  his  ordering  immediate  execution.  Thus 
they  shifted  the  breach  of  the  law  from  themselves  to  him. 

As  in  the  life  of  our  Lord  as  a  whole,  so  also  in  this  last  week  and 
last  day  of  it,  the  exact  sequence  and  time  of  the  events  cannot  be 
ascertained  with  certainty.  Chronology  is  not  what  the  Evangelists 
aim  at  giving  us.  For  a  tentative  arrangement  of  the  chief  events  of 
the  Passion  see  Appendix  C. 

they  themselves]  In  contrast  with  their  Victim,  whom  they  sent  in 
under  a  Roman  guard. 

lest  they  slumld]  Better,  that  they  nught  not,  omitting  'that  they' 
in  the  next  clause. 

be  defiled]  by  entering  a  house  not  properly  cleansed  of  leaven  (Ex. 
xii.  15). 

eat  the  passover]  It  is  quite  evident  that  S.  John  does  not  regard  the 
Last  Supper  as  a  Paschal  meal.  Comp.  xiii.  r,  29.  It  is  equally 
evident  that  the  synoptic  narratives  convey  the  impression  that  the  Last 
Supper  was  the  ordinary  Jewish  Passover  (Matt.  xxvi.  17,  18,  19;  Mark 
xiv.  14,  16;  Luke  xxii.  7,  8,  11,  13,  15).  Whatever  be  the  right 
solution  of  the  difficulty,  the  independence  of  the  author  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel  is  manifest.  Would  anyone  counterfeiting  an  Apostle  venture 
thus  to  contradict  what  seemed  to  have  such  strong  Apostolic  authority? 
Would  he  not  expect  that  a  glaring  discrepancy  on  so  important  a  point 
would  prove  fatal  to  his  pretensions?  Assume  that  S.  John  is  simply 
recording  his  own  vivid  recollections,  whether  or  no  we  suppose  him  to 
be  correcting  the  impression  produced  by  the  Synoptists,  and  this 
difficulty  at  any  rate  Is  avoided.  S.  John's  narrative  is  too  precise  and 
consistent  to  be  explained  away.  On  the  difficulty  as  regards  the 
Synoptists  see  Appendix  A;  also  Excursus  V  at  the  end  of  Dr  Farrar's 
S.  Luke. 

29.  Pilate  then]  Pilate  therefore  {v.  3).  Because  they  would  not 
enter,  he  went  out  to  them.  The  Evangelist  assumes  that  his  readers 
know  who  Pilate  is,  just  as  he  assumes  that  they  know  the  Twelve 
(vi.  67)  and  Mary  Magdalene  (xix.  25) ;  all  are  introduced  without  ex- 
planation. 

ivent  out]  The  verb  stands  first  in  the  Greek  for  emphasis.  The 
best  MS.  add  'outside'  to  make  it  still  more  emphatic;  ivent  out  there- 


330  vS.   JOHN,   XVIII.  [vv.  30—32. 

them,  and  said,  What  accusation  bring  you  against  this  man? 

30  They    answered    and   said   unto   him,    If  he   were   not   a 
malefactor,  we  would  not  have  delivered  him  up  unto  thee. 

31  Then  said  Pilate  unto  them,  Take  ye  him,  and  judge  him 
according  to  your  law.     The  Jews  therefore  said  unto  him, 

32  It  is  not  lawful  for  us  to  put  any  man  to  death:  that  the 

fore  Pilate  outside  unto  them  ;  as  if  attention  were  specialy  called  to  this 
Roman  concession  to  Jewish  reHgiousness. 

What  accusatioit]  Not  that  he  does  not  know,  but  in  accordance  with 
strict  procedure  he  demands  a  formal  indictment? 

30.  a  mahfacto7-\  Literally,  'doing  evil'  or  an  evil-doer;  not  the 
same  expression  as  Luke  xxiii.  32.  The  Jews  are  taken  aback  at 
Pilate's  evident  intention  of  trying  the  case  himself.  Tlieyhad  expected 
him  merely  to  carry  out  their  sentence,  and  had  not  come  provided  with 
any  definite  accusation.  Blasphemy,  for  which  they  had  condemned 
Him  (Matt.  xxvi.  65,  6(^),  might  be  no  crime  with  Pilate  (comp.  Acts 
xviii.  16).  Hence  the  vagueness  of  their  first  charge.  Later  on  (xix.  7) 
they  throw  in  the  charge  of  blasphemy;  but  they  rely  mainly  on  three 
distinct  charges,  which  being  political,  Pilate  must  hear;  (1)  seditious 
agitation,  (2)  forbidding  to  give  tribute  to  Caesar,  (3)  assuming  the  title, 
'King  of  the  Jews'  (Luke  xxiii.  3). 

31.  Then  said  Pilate]  Pilate  therefore  (v.  3)  said.  If  they  will 
not  make  a  specific  charge,  he  will  not  deal  with  the  case.  Pilate,  im- 
pressed probably  by  his  wife's  dream  (Matt,  xxvii.  19)  tries  in  various 
ways  to  avoid  sentencing  Jesus  to  death,  (i)  He  would  have  the  Jews 
deal  with  the  case  themselves;  (2)  he  sends  Jesus  to  Herod  ;  (3)  he  pro- 
poses to  release  Him  in  honour  of  the  Feast ;  (4)  he  will  scourge  Him 
and  let  Him  go.  Roman  governors  were  not  commonly  so  scrupulous, 
and  Pilate  was  not  above  the  average :  a  vague  superstitious  dread  was 
perhaps  his  strongest  motive.  Thrice  in  the  course  of  these  attempts 
does  he  pronounce  Jesus  innocent  (v.  39,  xix.  4,  6). 

Take  ye,  &c.]  Literally,  7a/(v /«>«  yourselves,  and  according  to  your 
law  judge  Hirn.  'Yourselves'  and  'your'  are  emphatic  and  slightly 
contemptuous.  The  '  therefore '  which  follows  is  wanting  in  most  of 
the  best  MSS. 

ft  is  not  lawful,  &c.]  These  words  are  to  be  taken  quite  literally, 
and  without  any  addition,  such  as  'at  the  Passover'  or  'by  crucifixion,' 
or  'for  high  treason.'  The  question  whether  the  Sanhedrin  had  or  had 
not  the  right  to  inflict  capital  punishment  at  this  time  is  a  vexed  one. 
On  the  one  hand  we  have  (1)  this  verse;  (2)  the  statement  of  the  Talmud 
that  40  years  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  the  Jews  lost  this 
power;  (3)  the  evidence  of  Josephus  {Ant.  xx.  ix.  i ;  comp.  xviii.  i.  i; 
XVI.  ii.  4,  and  vi.)  that  the  high  priest  could  not  summon  a  judicial 
court  of  the  Sanhedrin  without  the  Procurator's  leave;  (4)  the  analogy 
of  Roman  law.  To  this  it  is  replied  (Diillinger,  First  oqc  of  the  Church, 
Appendix  li.) ;  (1)  that  the  Jews  quibbled  in  oriler  to  cause  Jesus  to  be 
crucified  at  the  Feast  instead  of  slo'.icd  after  all  the  people  had  disjicrsed; 


V.  33-]  S.   JOHN,   XVIII.  331 

saying  of  Jesus  might  be  fulfilled,  which  he  spake,  signi- 
fying what  death  he  should  die.     Then  Pilate  entered  into  33 
the  judgment  hall  again,  and  called  Jesus,  and  said  unto 

and  Pilate  would  not  have  insulted  the  Jews  from  the  tribunal  by  telling 
them  to  put  Jesus  to  death,  if  they  had  no  power  to  do  so;  (2)  that  the 
Talmud^  is  in  error,  for  the  Roman  dominion  began  60  years  before  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem;  (3)  that  Josephus  (xx.  ix.  i)  shews  that  the 
Jews  had  this  power:  Ananus  is  accused  to  Albinus  not  for  putting 
people  to  death,  but  for  holding  a  court  without  leave :  had  the  former 
been  criminal  it  would  have  been  mentioned ;  (4)  that  the  analogy  of 
Roman  law  proves  nothing,  for  cities  and  countries  subject  to  Rome 
often  retained  their  autonomy  :  and  there  are  the  cases  of  Stephen,  those 
for  whose  death  S.  Paul  voted  (Acts  xxvi.  10),  and  the  Apostles,  whom 
the  Sanhedrin  wished  to  put  to  death  (Acts  v.  33);  and  Gamaliel  in  dis- 
suading the  council  never  hints  that  to  inflict  death  will  bring  trouble 
upon  themselves.  To  this  it  may  be  replied  again;  (r)  that  Pilate 
would  have  exposed  a  quibble  had  there  been  one,  and  his  dignity  as 
judge  was  evidently  not  above  shewing  ironical  contempt  for  the  plain- 
tiffs; (2)  that  the  Talmud  may  be  wrong  about  the  date  and  right  about 
the  fact;  possibly  it  is  right  about  both;  (3)  to  mention  the  holding  of  a 
court  by  Ananus  was  enough  to  secure  the  interference  of  Albinus,  and 
more  may  have  been  said  than  Josephus  reports ;  (4)  autonomy  in  the 
case  of  subject  states  was  the  exception ;  therefore  the  burden  of  proof 
rests  with  those  who  assert  it  of  the  Jews.  Stephen's  death  (if  judicial 
at  all)  and  the  other  cases  (comp.  John  v.  18,  vii.  i,  25,  viii.  37,  59; 
Acts  xxi.  31)  only  prove  that  the  Jews  sometimes  ventured  on  acts  of 
violence  of  which  the  Romans  took  little  notice.  Besides  we  do  not 
know  that  in  all  these  cases  the  Sanhedrin  proposed  to  do  more  than  to 
sentence  to  death,  trusting  to  the  Romans  to  execute  the  sentence,  as 
here.  Pilate's  whole  action,  and  his  express  statement  xix.  10,  seem  to 
imply  that  he  alone  has  the  power  to  inflict  death. 

32.  the  saying\     Ot  word,  xii.  32;  Matt.  xx.  19. 

7uhat  death]  Rather,  by  what  manner  of  death,  as  in  xii.  33  and 
xxi.  19.  So  in  x.  32  the  Greek  means  '  for  what  kind  of  a  work,'  not 
merely  'for  which  work.'  Comp.  Matt.  xxi.  23;  xxii.  36;  Luke  vi.  32, 
xxiv.  19.  Had  the  Sanhedrin  executed  Him  as  a  blasphemer  or  a  false 
prophet,  He  would  have  been  stoned.  The  Jews  had  other  forms  of 
capital  punishment,  but  crucifixion  was  not  among  them. 

33 — 37.  Inside  the  Praetorium ;  Jesus  is  privately  examined  by  Pilate 
and  makes  'a  good  confession  '  (i  Tim.  vi.  13). 

33.  Then  Pilate']  Pilate  therefore  [v.  3).  Because  of  the  impor- 
tunity of  the  Jews  Pilate  is  obhged  to  investigate  further;  and  being 
only  Procurator,  although  cicm  potestate,  has  no  Quaestor,  but  conducts 
the  examination  himself. 

called  Jems]  Probably  the  Roman  guards  had  already  brought  Him 
inside  the  Praetorium :  Pilate  now  calls  Him  before  the  judgment-seat. 


332  S.  JOHN,   XVIII.  [vv.  34—37. 


34  him,  Art  thou  the  King  of  the  Jews  ?  Jesus  answered  him, 
Sayest  thou  this  thing  of  thyself,  or  did  others  tell  //  thee  of 

35  me?  Pilate  answered,  Am  I  a  Jew?  Thine  own  nation  and 
the  chief  priests  have  delivered  thee  unto  me:  what  hast 

36  thou  done  ?  Jesus  answered,  My  kingdom  is  not  of  this 
world :  if  my  kingdom  were  of  this  world,  then  would  my 
servants  fight,  that  I  should  not  be  delivered  to  the  Jews: 

37  but  now  is  my  kingdom  not  from  hence.     Pilate  therefore 

The  conversation  implies  that  Jesus  had  not  heard  the  previous  conver- 
sation with  the  Jews. 

Art  thou  the  King  of  the  ye70s?\  In  all  four  Gospels  these  are  the 
first  words  of  Pilate  to  Jesus,  and  in  all  four  there  is  an  emphasis  on 
'Thou.'  The  pitiable  appearance  of  Jesus  was  in  such  contrast  to  the 
royal  title  that  Pilate  speaks  with  a  tone  of  surprise  (comp.  iv.  12).  The 
question  may  mean  either  'Dost  Thou  claim  to  be  King?'  or,  'Art 
Thou  the  so-called  King?'  The  royal  title  first  appears  in  the  mouth 
of  the  wise  men.  Matt.  ii.  r,  next  in  the  mouth  of  Pilate. 

34.  answered him'\  Omit  'him:'  the  introductions  to  vv.  34,  35, 
36  are  alike  in  form  and  are  solemn  in  their  brevity.  The  Synoptists 
give  merely  a  portion  of  tlie  reply  in  v.  37. 

tell  it  thee']  'It'  is  not  in  the  original  and  need  not  be  supplied.  Jesus 
claims  a  right  to  know  the  author  of  the  charge.  Moreover  the  mean- 
ing of  the  title,  and  therefore  the  truth  of  it,  would  depend  on  the 
person  who  used  it.  In  Pilate's  sense  He  was  not  King;  in  another 
sense  He  was. 

35.  Am  la  yezvF]  'Is  it  likely  that  I,  a  Roman  governor,  have  any 
interest  in  these  Jewish  questions?  ' 

have  delivered  thee  unto  me:  zvliat  hast  thoic  done?]  Better,  delivered 
Tliee  unlo  tne :  what  didst  Tliou  do  to  make  Thine  own  people  turn 
against  Thee? 

36.  yi/y  kingdom']  There  is  a  strong  emphasis  on  'My'  througliout 
the  verse;  'the  kingdom  that  is  Mine,  the  servants  that  are  Mine;' 
i.e.  those  that  are  truly  such  (see  on  xiv.  -27).  The  word  for  'sei^vants' 
here  is  the  same  as  is  rendered  'officers'  in  w.  3,  12,  iS,  22,  vii. 
32,  45,  46  (comp.  Matt.  v.  25),  and  no  doubt  contains  an  allusion  to 
the  officials  of  the  Jewish  hierarchy.  In  Luke  i.  2,  the  only  other  place 
in  the  Gospels  where  the  word  is  used  of  Christians,  it  is  rendered 
'ministers,'  as  also  in  i  Cor.  iv.  i,  the  only  place  where  the  word  occurs 
in  the  Epistles.     Comp.  Acts  xiii.  5. 

is  7iot  of  this  world]  Has  not  its  origin  or  root  there  so  as  to  draw  its 
power  from  thence.     Comp.  viii.  23,  x".  19,  xvii.  14,  16. 

if  my  kingdom]  In  the  original  the  order  is  impressively  reversed;  if 
of  this  world  were  My  kingdom.     For  the  construction  comp.  v.  46. 

fight]  Better,  be  striving  (comp.  Luke  xiii.  24;  i  Cor.  ix.  25).  For 
the  construction  comp.  v.  46,  viii.   19,  42,  ix.  41,  xv.  19. 

but  now]     The  meaning  of  'now'  is  clear  from  the  context  and  also 


V.  37-]  S.   JOHN,   XVIII.  333 

said  unto  him,  Art  thou  a  king  then?  Jesus  answered,  Thou 
sayest  that  I  am  a  king.  To  this  end  was  I  born,  and  for 
this  cause  came  I  into  the  world,  that  I  should  bear  witness 
unto  the  truth.     Every  one  that  is  of  the  truth  heareth  my 

from  viii.  40,  ix.  41,  xv.  22,  24,  'as  it  is,'  'as  the  case  really  stands.' 
It  does  not  mean  'My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world  now,  but  shall  be  so 
hereafter ; '  as  if  Christ  were  promising  a  millenium. 

37.  Ari  than  a  king  ^/wn]  The  Greek  for  'then'  (ptikmin)  occurs  here 
only  in  N.  T.  The  'Thou'  is  even  more  emphatic  than  in  v.  33.  The 
two  together  give  a  tone  of  scorn  to  the  question,  which  is  half  an  ex- 
clamation.    'So  then,  77zc2<  art  a  king ! '     Comp.  i.  21. 

Thou  sayest  that,  &c.]  This  may  be  rendered,  Thou  sayest  {ix\^y); 
because,  &c.  But  the  A.  V.  is  better :  Christ  leaves  the  title  and  ex- 
plains the  nature  of  His  kingdom — the  realm  of  truth. 

To  this  end. ..for  this  caiise\  The  Greek  for  both  is  the  same,  and 
should  be  rendered  in  the  same  way  in  English ;  to  this  end.  Both 
refer  to  what  precedes;  not  one  to  what  precedes  and  one  to  what 
follows.  To  be  a  king,  He  became  incarnate;  to  be  a  king,  He  entered 
the  world. 

ivas  I  born... came  /]  Better,  have  I  been  born. ..am  I  come.  Both 
verbs  are  perfects  and  express  not  merely  a  past  event  but  one  which 
continues  in  its  effects;  Christ  has  come  and  remains  in  the  world.  The 
pronoun  is  very  emphatic;  in  this  respect  Christ  stands  alone  among 
men.  The  verbs  point  to  His  previous  existence  with  the  Father,  al- 
though Pilate  would  not  see  this.  The  expression  'come  into  the  world' 
is  frequent  in  S.  John  (i.  9,  ix.  39,  xi.  27,  xvi.  28) :  as  applied  to  Christ 
it  includes  the  notion  of  His  mission  (iii.  17,  x.  36,  xii.  47,  49,  xvii.  18). 

that  I  shoulcT\     This  is  the  Divine  purpose  of  His  royal  power. 

bear  ivitness  unto  the  truth^  Not  merely  'witness  the  truth,'  i.  e.  give 
a  testimony  that  is  true,  but  bear  witness  to  the  objective  reality  of  the 
Truth  :  again,  not  merely  'bear  witness  of  i.e.  respecting  the  Truth  (i. 
7,  15,  ii.  25,  v.  31 — 39,  viii.  13 — 18,  &c.),  but  'bear  witness /t>,'  i.e.  in 
support  and  defence  of  the  Truth  (v.  33).  Both  these  expressions,  'wit- 
ness' and  'truth,'  have  been  seen  to  be  very  frequent  in  S.  John  (see 
especially  chaps,  i.  iii.  v.  viii.  passim).  We  have  them  combined  here, 
as  in  V.  33.  This  is  the  object  of  Christ's  sovereignty, — to  bear  witness 
to  the  Truth.  It  is  characteristic  of  the  Gospel  that  it  claims  to  be 
'the  Truth.'  "This  title  of  the  Gospel  is  not  found  in  the  Synoptists, 
Acts,  or  Apocalypse;  but  it  occurs  in  the  Catholic  Epistles  (James  i. 
18;  r  Pet.  i.  22 ;  2  Pet.  ii.  2)  and  in  S.  Paul  (2  Thess.  ii.  12;  2  Cor. 
xiii.  8;  Eph.  i.  13,  &c).  It  is  specially  characteristic  of  the  Gospel  and 
Epistles  of  S.  John."     Westcott,  Introduction  to  S.  John,  p.  xliv. 

that  is  of  the  truth']  That  has  his  root  in  it,  so  as  to  draw  the  power 
of  his  life  from  it.  Comp.  v.  36,  iii.  31,  viii.  47,  and  especially  i  John 
ii.  21,  iii.  19. 

"It  is  of  great  interest  to  compare  this  confession  before  Pilate  with 
the  corresponding  confession  before  the  high  priest  (Matt.  xxvi.  64). 


334  S.   JOHN,   XVIII.  [w.  38,  39. 

38  voice.     Pilate  saith  unto  him,  What  is  truth?     And  when 
he  had  said  this,  he  went  out  again  unto  the  Jews,  and 

39  saith  unto  them,  I  find  in  him  no  fault  at  all.        But  ye 
have  a  custom,  that  I  should  release  unto  you  one  at  the 

The  one  addressed  to  the  Jews  is  in  the  language  of  prophecy,  the  other 
addressed  to  a  Roman  appeals  to  the  universal  testimony  of  conscience. 
The  one  speaks  of  a  future  manifestation  of  glory,  the  other  of  a  present 

manifestation  of  truth It  is  obvious  how  completely  they  answer 

severally  to  the  circumstances  of  the  two  occasions."     Westcott,  in  loco. 

38.  What  is  truth .?]  Pilate  does  not  ask  about  'the  Truth,'  but 
truth  in  any  particular  case.  His  question  does  not  indicate  any  serious 
wish  to  know  what  truth  really  is,  nor  yet  the  despairing  scepticism  of  a 
baffled  thinker ;  nor,  on  the  other  hand,  is  it  uttered  in  a  light  spirit  of 
'jesting'  (as  Bacon  thought).  Rather  it  is  the  half-pitying,  half- 
impatient,  question  of  a  practical  man  of  the  world,  whose  experience  of 
life  has  convinced  him  that  truth  is  a  dream  of  enthusiasts,  and  that 
a  kingdom  in  which  truth  is  to  be  supreme  is  as  visionary  as  that  of  the 
Stoics.  He  has  heard  enough  to  convince  him  that  the  Accused  is  no 
dangerous  incendiary,  and  he  abruptly  brings  the  investigation  to  a  close 
with  a  question,  which  to  his  mind  cuts  at  the  root  of  the  Prisoner's 
aspirations.  Here  probably  we  must  insert  the  sending  to  Herod  Anti- 
pas,  who  had  come  from  Tiberias,  as  Pilate  from  Caesarea,  on  account 
of  the  Feast,  the  one  to  win  popularity,  the  other  to  keep  order  (Luke 
xxiii.  6 — 12). 

38—40.  Outside  the  Praetorium  ;  Pilate  pronounces  Him  innocent 
and  offers  to  release  Him  in  honour  of  the  feast  :  the  Jews  prefer 
Barabbas. 

38.  unto  the  ye^vs\  Apparently  this  means  the  mob  and  not  the 
hierarchy.  Pilate  hoped  that  only  a  minority  were  moving  against 
Jesus ;  by  an  appeal  to  the  majority  he  might  be  able  to  acquit  Him 
without  incurring  odium  P.y  pronouncing  Him  legally  innocent  he 
would  gain  this  majority ;  by  proposing  to  release  Him_  on  account  of 
the  Feast  ratlier  than  of  His  innocence  he  would  avoid  insulting  the 
Sanhedrin,  who  had  already  pronounced  Him  guilty.  From  S.  Mark 
(xv.  8,  11)  it  would  appear  that  soitie  of  the  multitude  hoped  to  deliver 
Jesus  'on  the  plea  of  the  Feast  and  took  the  initiative  in  reminding 
Pilate  of  the  custom,  but  were  controlled  by  the  priests  and  made  to 
clamour  for  Barabbas. 

I  find  in  him  no  fault  at  all\  Rather,  I  find  no  ground  of  accusa- 
tion in  him.  As  in  xix.  6,  the  pronoun  is  emphatic;  'I,  the  Roman 
judge,  in  contrast  to  you  Jewish  fanatics.'  The  word  here  and  xix.  4,  6 
rendered  'fault'  [aitia)  is  rendered  'accusation'  Matt,  xxvii.  37  and 
Mark  xv.  26,  and  'cause'  Acts  xiii.  28,  x.xviii.  18.  In  all  these  pas- 
sages it  seems  to  mean  'legal  ground  for  prosecution.' 

39.  ye  have  a  custom]  Nothing  is  known  of  this  custom  beyond 
what  is  told  us  in  the  Gospels,  Prisoners  were  sometimes  released  at 
Rome  at  certain  festivals,  and  it  would  be  quite  in  harmony  with  the 


w.  40.]  S.   JOHN,  XVIII.  335 

passover:  will  ye  therefore  that  I  release  unto  you  the  King 
of  the  Jews?   Then  cried  they  all  again,  saying.  Not  this  40 
man,  but  Barabbas.     Now  Barabbas  was  a  robber. 


conciliatory  policy  of  Rome  to  honour  native  festivals  in  this  way  in  the 
case  of  subject  nations.  In  Luke  xxiii.  17  the  custom  is  said  to  be  an 
obligation ;  '  of  necessity  he  must ;'  but  the  verse  is  of  very  doubtful 
genuineness. 

that  I  should^     'LiitrsXXy,  in  order  thut  I  should.     See  on  xv.  12. 

the  -King  of  the  yews]  Expressive  of  scornful  contempt.  Comp. 
xix.  15. 

40.  Then  cried  they  all  agaiti]  Better,  They  cried  out  therefore 
(v.  3)  again  all  of  them.  S.  John  has  not  mentioned  any  previous  shout 
of  the  multitude;  he  once  more  assumes  that  his  readers  know  the  chief 
facts.     See  on  xix.  6. 

Barabbas]  Or,  Bar-Abbas,  son  of  Abba  (father).  The  innocent  Son 
of  the  Father  is  rejected  for  the  bloodstained  son  of  a  father.  In 
Matt,  xxvii.  16  and  17  some  inferior  authorities  read  ' yesiis  Barabbas' 
as  his  name,  and  Pilate  asks  '  Which  do  ye  wish  that  I  release  to 
you,  Jesus  Barabbas,  or  Jesus  Who  is  called  Christ  ?'  The  reading  is 
remarkable,  but  it  is  supported  by  no  good  MS. 

Now  Barabbas  was  a  robber]  There  is  a  tragic  impressiveness  in  this 
brief  remark.  Comp.  'Jesus  wept'  (xi.  35),  and  'And  it  was  night' 
(xiii.  30).  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  'robber'  has  not  always  been  given 
as  the  translation  of  the  Greek  word  used  here  (Xtjcttjs  not  k-X^ttttjs). 
Thus  we  should  have  'denof  roW^j'  or  '  robbers'  cave'  (Matt.  xxi.  13);  'as 
against  a  robber^  (Matt.  xxvi.  55) ;  'two  robbers^  (Matt,  xxvii.  38,  44).  The 
'robber  '  is  the  bandit  or  brigand,  who  is  more  dangerous  to  persons  than 
to  property,  and  sometimes  combines  something  of  chivalry  with  his  vio- 
lence. In  the  case  of  Barabbas  we  know  from  S.  Mark  and  S.  Luke  that 
he  had  been  guilty  of  insurrection  and  consequent  bloodshed  rather  than 
of  stealing;  and  this  was  very  likely  the  case  also  with  the  two  robbers 
crucified  with  Jesus.  Thus  by  a  strange  irony  of  fate  the  hierarchy 
obtain  the  release  of  a  man  guilty  of  the  very  political  crime  with  which 
they  charged  Christ, — sedition.  The  people  no  doubt  had  some  sym- 
pathy with  the  insurrectionary  movement  of  Barabbas,  and  on  this  the 
priests  worked.  Barabbas  had  done,  just  what  Jesus  had  refused  to  do, 
take  the  lead  against  the  Romans.  "They  laid  information  against 
Jesus  before  the  Roman  government  as  a  dangerous  character;  their 
real  complaint  against  Him  was  precisely  this,  that  He  was  not  danger- 
ous. Pilate  executed  Him  on  the  ground  that  His  kingdom  was  of  this 
world  ;  the  Jews  procured  His  execution  precisely  l)ecause  it  was  not." 
Ecce  Homo,  p.  27. 


336  S.   JOHN,   XIX.  [vv.  1—3, 

Chap.  XIX. 

19  Then  Pilate  therefore  took  Jesus,  and  scourged  him.  And 
'  the  soldiers  platted  a  crown  of  thorns,  and  put  //  on  his  head, 
3  and  they  put  on  him  a  purple  robe,  and  said,  Hail,  King  of 

Chap.  XIX. 
1 — 3.     Inside  the  Praetorinm ;  the  scourging  and  mockery  by  the 
soldiers. 

1.  T/ien  Pilate  therefore^  Because  the  attempt  to  release  Him  in 
honour  of  the  Feast  had  failed,  Pilate  now  tries  whether  the  severe  and 
degrading  punishment  of  scourging  will  not  satisfy  the  Jews.  In 
Pilate's  hands  the  boasted  justice  of  Roman  Law  ends  in  the  policy 
"What  evil  did  He  do?  I  found  no  cause  of  death  in  Him:  I  will 
therefo?-e  chastise  Him  and  let  Him  go"  (Luke  xxiii.  •22).  Scourging 
was  part  of  Roman  capital  punishment,  and  had  we  only  the  first  two 
Gospels  we  might  suppose  that  the  scourging  was  inflicted  immediately 
before  the  crucifixion:  but  this  is  not  stated,  and  S.  John,  combined 
with  S.  Luke,  makes  it  clear  that  scourging  was  inflicted  as  a  separate 
punishment  in  the  hope  that  it  would  suffice.  The  supposition  of  a 
second  scourging  as  part  of  the  execution  is  unnecessary  and  improb- 
able. Pilate,  sick  of  the  bloody  work  and  angry  at  being  forced  to 
commit  a  judicial  murder,  would  not  have  allowed  it;  and  it  maybe 
doubted  whether  any  human  frame  could  have  survived  a  Roman 
scourging  twice  in  one  day.  One  infliction  was  sometimes  fatal ;  ille 
flagellis  ad  mortem  caesus,  Hor.  S.  1.  ii.  41.  Comp.  ^ horribile flagellum^ 
S.  I.  iii.  1 19. 

2.  And  the  soldiers']  Herod  and  his  troops  (Luke  xxiii.  11)  had  set 
an  example  which  the  Roman  soldiers  were  ready  enough  to  follow. 
Pilate  countenances  the  brutality  as  aiding  his  own  plan  of  satisfying 
Jewish  hatred  with  something  less  than  death.  The  soldiers  had  in- 
flicted the  scourging;  for  Pilate,  being  only  Procurator,  would  have  no 
lictors. 

a  crffivn  of  thorns']  The  context  seems  to  shew  that  this  was  in 
mockery  of  a  royal  crown  rather  than  of  a  victor's  wreath.  The  jilant 
is  supposed  to  be  the  thiirny  iicibk,  with  flexible  branches,  and  leaves 
like  ivy,  abundant  in  the  Jordan  valley  and  round  about  Jerusalem. 

a  purple  robe]  S.  Mark  has  'purple,'  S.  Matthew  'scarlet,'  S.  Luke 
is  silent.  '  Purple'  with  the  ancients  was  a  vague  term  for  bright  rich 
colour  and  would  be  used  of  crimson  as  well  as  of  violet.  The  robe  was 
a  military  chlamys,  or  paludamentiini,  perhaps  one  of  Pilate's  cast-off 
cloaks.  The  garment  in  which  Herod  had  mocked  Jesus  was  probably 
white.  Comp.  i  Mace.  viii.  14,  x.  20,  62.  The  scourging  and 
mockery  were  very  possibly  visible  to  the  Jews  outside. 

3.  And  said]  The  best  authorities  acid  a  graphic  touch  not  given 
by  the  Synoptisls ;  and  they  kept  coming  unto  Him  and  saying.  We 
see  each  soldier  coming  up  in  turn  to  ofTer  his  mock  homage. 

Hail,  King  of  the  Jc7vs]  Like  the  Procurator,  they  mock  the  Jews 
as  well  as  their  Victim. 


w.  4—6.]  S.   JOHN,   XIX.  337 

the  Jews  :   and  they  smote  him  with  their  hands.     Pilate  4 
therefore  went  forth  again,  and  saith  unto  them,  Behold,  I 
bring  him  forth  to  you,  that  ye  may  know  that  I  find  no 
fault  in  him.     Then  came  Jesus  forth,  wearing  the  crown  of  s 
thorns,  and  the  purple  robe.     And  Pi/afe  saith  unto  them, 
Behold   the   man.     When   the   chief  priests  therefore  and  6 
ofhcers  saw  him,  they  cried  out,  saying.  Crucify  Aim,  crucify 
/ii'm.     Pilate   saith   unto   them,  Take  ye  him,  and  crucify 

smofe  him  with  their  hands']  Literally,  gave  Him  blows,  but 
whether  with  a  rod,  as  the  root  of  the  word  implies,  or  with  the  hand, 
as  is  more  probable,  we  are  uncertain  (see  on  xviii.  22).  The  old 
Latin  version  adds  infaciem. 

4—7.  Outside  the  Praetoriuin ;  Pilate's  appeal,  '  Behold  the  man  ;' 
the  Jews'  rejoinder,  'He  made  Himself  Son  of  God.' 

4.  Pilate  therefore']  The  true  text  gives,  and  Pilate.  What  follows 
is  a  contimiance  rather  than  a  consequence  of  what  has  preceded. 

If}id  710  fault  in  him]  There  is  a  slight  change  from  xix.  38,  the 
emphasis  here  being  on  'crime'  instead  of  on  'I';  ground  of  accusa- 
tion I  find  none  in  Him. 

5.  Then  came  Jesus]  Better,  Jesus  therefore  came.  The  Evange- 
list repeats  the  details  oi  v.  2 ;  they  are  details  of  a  picture  deeply 
imprinted  on  his  memory.  Whether  or  no  he  went  into  the  Praetorium, 
he  no  doubt  witnessed  the  Ecce  Homo. 

wearing]  Not  simply  'having'  or  'bearing'  (fhorSn  not  pheron). 
The  crown  and  robe  are  now  His  pei;manent  dress. 

Behold  the  man  I]  In  pity  rather  than  contempt.  Pilate  appeals  to 
their  humanity :  surely  the  most  bitter  among  them  will  now  be  satisfied, 
or  at  least  the  more  compassionate  will  control  the  rest.  No  one  can 
think  that  this  Man  is  dangerous,  or  needs  further  punishment.  When 
this  appeal  fails,  Pilate's  pity  turns  to  bitterness  {v.  14). 

6.  and  officers]  Better  (as  in  xviii.  18),  and  the  officers.^  The 
leaders  take  the  initiative,  to  prevent  any  expression  of  compassion  on 
the  part  of  the  crowd.  The  sight  of  '  the  Man '  maddens  rather  than 
softens  them. 

cried  out]  The  verb  [kraugazo]  expresses  a  loud  cry,  and  (excepting 
Matt.  xii.  19;  Acts  xxii.  23)  occurs  only  in  this  Gospel  in  N.  T.  Comp. 
xi.  43,  xii.  13,  xviii.  40,  xix.  12,  15. 

Crucify  him]  Omit  the  pronoun,  which  is  not  in  the_  Greek.  The 
simple  imperative  better  expresses  the  cry  which  was  to  give  the  cue  to 
the  multitude.  According  to  all  four  Evangelists  the  demand  for  cruci- 
fixion was  not  made  at  first,  but  after  the  offer  to  release  Jesus  in 
honour  of  the  Feast. 

Take  ye  hitn]  Better,  Take  Him  yourselves,  as  in  xviii.  31.  We 
may  admit  that  it  ought  to  have  been  beneath  the  dignity  of  a  Roman 
judge  to  taunt  the  people  with  a  suggestion  which  he  knew  that  they 
dare  not  follow ;  but  there  is  nothing  so  improbable  in  it  as  to  compel 

S.  JOHN  22 


338  S.  JOHN,  XIX.  [w.  7— ii. 

7  him:  for  I  find  no  fault  in  him.  The  Jews  answered  him, 
We  have  a  law,  and  by  our  law  he  ought  to  die,  because  he 
made  himself  the  Son  of  God. 

8  When    Pilate   therefore   heard   that  saying,  he   was   the 

9  more  afraid;  and  went  again  into  the  judgment  hall,  and 
saith  unto  Jesus,  Whence  art  thou  ?    But  Jesus  gave  him  no 

10  answer.  Then  saith  Pilate  unto  him,  Speakest  thou  not 
unto  me?  knowest  thou  not  that  I  have  power  to  crucify 

11  thee,  and  have  power  to  release  thee?  Jesus  answered,  Thou 

us  to  believe  that  the  Jews  had  the  power  of  inflicting  capital  punishment 
(see  on  xviii.  31).  Pilate  is  goaded  into  an  exhibition  of  feeling  un- 
worthy of  his  office. 

for  IJifid]  As  in  xviii.  38,  the  'I'  is  emphatic;  'for  /  do  not  find 
in  Him  a  ground  of  accusation.' 

7.  i4^e  have  a  latv]  The  Jews  answer  Pilate's  taunt  by  a  plea 
hitherto  kept  in  the  background.  He  may  think  lightly  of  the  seditious 
conduct  of  Jesus,  but  as  a  Procurator  he  is  bound  by  Roman  precedent  to 
pay  respect  to  the  law  of  subject  nationalities.  He  has  challenged  them 
to  take  the  law  into  their  own  hands;  let  him  hear  what  their  law  is. 

by  our  law]  Rather,  according  to  the  law  ;  'of  us'  is  not  genuine. 
They  refer  to  Lev.  xxiv.  16. 

the  Son  of  God]  Omit  'the.'  Pilate  had  said,  'Behold  i\\Q  ManP 
The  Jews  retort,  '  He  made  Himself  Son  of  God.'  Comp.  v.  18,  x.  33. 
They  answer  his  appeal  to  their  compassion  by  an  appeal  to  his  fears. 

8 — 11.  Inside  the  Praetoruini ;  Christ's  origin  is  asked  and  not  told; 
the  origin  of  authority  is  told  unasked. 

8.  that  saying]     Better,  this  word  [logos),  the  charge  of  blasphemy. 
he  2vas  the  more  afraid]     The  message  from  his  wife  and  the  awe 

which  Christ's  presence  was  probably  inspiring  had  already  in  some 
degree  affected  him.  This  mysterious  claim  still  further  excites  his 
fears.  Was  it  the  offspring  of  a  divinity  that  he  had  so  infamously 
handled?     Comp.  Matt,  xxvii.  54. 

9.  judgment-hall]     See  on  xviii.  28. 

Whence  art  thou'?]  Pilate  tries  a  vague  question  which  might  apply 
to  Christ's  dwelling-place,  which  he  already  knew  (Luke  xxiii.  6), 
hoping  for  an  answer  as  to  His  origin.  Would  the  prisoner  assert  his 
mysterious  claim  to  him,  or  explain  it  ? 

no  answer]  Pilate  could  not  have  understood  the  answer ;  and  what 
had  it  to  do  with  the  merits  of  the  case?  Comp.  Matt,  xxvii.  12 — 14 
and  Christ's  own  precept.  Matt.  vii.  6. 

10.  Then  saith,  &c.]  Better,  Pilate  therefore  saith  to  Hitn,  To  me 
Speakest  thou  not?  Whatever  He  might  do  before  His  Jewish  persecu- 
tors, it  was  folly  to  refuse  an  answer  to  the  Roman  governor, 

power]  Or,  authority.  See  on  i.  12  and  comp.  v.  27,  x.  18, 
xvii,  2.  In  the  best  texts  'to  release'  is  placed  first,  'to  crucify' 
second. 


V.  12.]  S.   JOHN,   XIX.  339 

couldest  have  no  power  at  all  against  me,  except  it  were 
given  thee  from  above :  therefore  he  that  delivered  me  unto 
thee   hath  the  greater  sin.     And  from   thenceforth   Pilate  12 
sought  to  release  him  :   but  the  Jews  cried  out,  saying,  If 
thou  let  this  f7ian  go,  thou  art  not  Cesar's  friend  :   whoso- 

11.  Thou  cotddest]  Or,  wouldest.  This  is  Christ's  last  word  to 
Pilate ;  a  defence  of  the  supremacy  of  God,  and  a  protest  against  the 
claim  of  any  human  potentate  to  be  irresponsible. 

f?'om  above]  i.  e.  from  God.  This  even  Pilate  could  understand  : 
had  Jesus  said  'from  My  Father'  he  would  have  remained  uninstructed. 
The  point  is  not,  that  Pilate  is  an  instrument  ordained  for  the  carrying 
out  of  God's  purposes  (Acts  ii.  23) ;  he  was  such,  but  that  is  not  the 
meaning  here.  Rather,  that  the  possession  and  exercise  of  all  authority 
is  the  gift  of  God;  iii.  27;  Rom.  xiii.  i — 7  (see  notes  there).  To  in- 
terpret '  from  above '  of  the  higher  tribunal  of  the  Sanhedrin  is  quite 
inadequate.  Comp.  iii.  3,  7,  31;  James  i.  17,  iii.  15,  17,  where  the 
same  adverb,  anothen,  is  used :  see  notes  in  each  place. 

therefore]  Better,  for  tMs  cause  (xii,  18,  27);  comp.  i.  31,  v.  16,  18, 
vii.  22,  viii.  47. 

he  that  delivered  me  unto  thee]  Caiaphas,  the  representative  of  the 
Sanhedrin  and  of  the  nation.  The  expression  rendered  '  he  that  de- 
livered'  is  used  in  xiii.  ii,  xviii.  2,  5  of  Judas.  But  the  addition  'to 
thee '  shews  that  Judas  is  not  meant ;  Judas  had  not  betrayed  Jesus  to 
Pilate  but  to  the  Sanhedrin.  The  same  verb  is  used  of  the  Sanhedrin 
delivering  Him  to  Pilate,  xviii.  35. 

hath  the  greater  sin]  Because  he  had  the  opportunity  of  knowing 
Who  Jesus  was.  Once  more  we  have  the  expression,  peculiar  to  S. 
John,  'to  have  sin'  (ix.  41,  xv.  22,  24;  i  John  i.  8). 

12 — 16.  Outside  the  Praetorium;  the  power  from  above  controlled 
from  below  pronounces  public  sentence  against  the  Innocent. 

12.  And  from  thenceforth]  Or  (as  in  vi.  66),  Hereupon.  Result 
rather  than  time  seems  to  be  meant ;  but  the  Greek  (here  and  vi.  66  only 
in  N. T.)  may  mean  either.     Omit  'and.' 

sought]  Imperfect  tense,  of  continued  efforts.  Indirect  means,  such 
as  the  release  in  honour  of  the  Feast,  the  appeal  to  compassion,  and 
taunts  having  proved  unsuccessful,  Pilate  now  makes  more  direct  efforts 
to  release  Jesus.     What  these  were  the  Evangelist  does  not  tell  us. 

If  thou  let  this  man  go]  Better,  If  thou  release  this  man;  it  is  the 
same  verb  as  in  the  first  clause.  The  Jews  once  more  shift  their  tactics 
and  from  the  ecclesiastical  charge  [v.  7)  go  back  to  the  political,  which 
they  now  back  up  by  an  appeal  to  Pilate's  own  political  interests.  They 
know  their  man :  it  is  not  a  love  of  justice,  but  personal  feeling  which 
moves  him  to  seek  to  release  Jesus ;  and  they  will  overcome  one  personal 
feeling  by  another  still  stronger.  Pilate's  unexplained  interest  in  Jesus 
and  supercilious  contempt  for  His  accusers  must  give  way  before  a  fear 
for  his  own  position  and  possibly  even  his  life. 

Cesar^ s  friend]     Whether  or  no  there  was  any  such  title  of  honour 

22 — -a 


340  S.   JOHN,   XIX.  [vv.  13,  14. 

13  ever  maketh  himself  a  king  speaketh  against  Cesar.  When 
Pilate  therefore  heard  that  saying,  he  brought  Jesus  forth, 
and  sat  down  in  the  judgment  seat  in  a  place  that  is  called 

14  the  Pavement,  but  in  the  Hebrew,  Gabbatha.     And  it  was 

as  amicus  Cesaris,  like  our  'Queen's  Counsel,'  there  is  no  need  to  sup- 
pose that  any  formal  official  distinction  is  intended  here.  The  words 
probably  mean  no  more  than  'loyal  to  Cesar.' 

whosoever]     Literally,  every  one  who. 

maketh  himself]  Comp.  v.  7,  x,  33.  The  phrase  perhaps  implies 
action  as  well  as  words. 

speaketh  against  Caesar]  ipso  facto  declares  himself  a  rebel;  and  for  a 
Roman  governor  to  countenance  and  even  protect  such  a  person  would 
be  high  treason  {majestas).  The  Jews  perhaps  scarcely  knew  how 
powerful  their  weapon  was.  Pilate's  patron  Sejanus  (executed  A.  D.  31) 
was  losing  his  hold  over  Tiberius,  even  if  he  had  not  already  fallen. 
Pilate  had  already  thrice  nearly  driven  the  Jews  to  revolt,  and  his  cha- 
racter therefore  would  not  stand  high  with  an  Emperor  who  justly 
prided  himself  on  the  good  government  of  the  provinces.  Above  all, 
the  terrible  Lex  Majcstatis  was  by  this  time  worked  in  such  a  way  that 
prosecution  under  it  was  almost  certain  death. 

13.  that  saying]  The  better  reading  gives,  these  words.  Pilate's 
mind  seems  to  be  made  up  at  once. 

brought  yesus  forth]  Sentence  must  be  pronounced  in  public.  Thus 
we  find  that  Pilate,  in  giving  judgment  about  the  standards,  which  had 
been  brought  into  Jerusalem,  has  his  tribunal  in  the  great  circus  at 
Caesarea,  and  Florus  erects  his  in  front  of  the  palace  (Josephus,  B.  J. 
II.  ix.  3,  xiv.  8). 

sat  down]  The  Greek  verb  (kathizo)  may  be  either  transitive,  as  in 
I  Cor.  vi.  4;  Eph.  i.  20,  or  intransitive,  as  in  Matt.  xix.  28;  xxv.  31. 
If  it  is  transitive  here,  the  meaning  will  be,  'placed  him  on  a  seat,'  as 
an  illustration  of  his  mocking  exclamation,  'Behold  your  King!' — i.e. 
'There  He  sits  enthroned !  But  [viii.  2  ;]  xii.  14;  Rev,  iii.  21,  xx.  4, 
the  only  places  where  S.  John  uses  the  word,  and  Acts  xii.  21,  xxv.  6, 
1 7,  where  we  have  the  same  phrase  as  here,  are  against  the  transitive 
meaning  in  this  place. 

in  the  judgment  scat]  In  the  true  text  there  is  no  article,  which  may 
mean  that  it  was  not  the  usual  Bona  but  a  temporary  one.  Every 
where  else  in  N.  T.  'judgment  seat'  has  the  definite  article. 

Pavement]  Literally,  stone-paved.  Josephus  {Ant.  v.  v.  2)  says  that 
the  Temple-mount,  on  part  of  which  the  fortress  of  Antonia  stood,  was 
covered  with  a  tesselated  pavement. 

in  the  Hebrew,  Gabbatha]  Omit  'the,'  as  in  v.  20,  and  see  on  xx.  16. 
It  was,  we  may  conclude  "from  its  having  a  Hebrew  name,  a  fixed 
spot,  and  not  the  portable  mosaic  work  which  Roman  generals  some- 
times carried  about  with  them."  S.  p.  250.  The  fact  that  there  was 
a  fixed  pavement  supports  this  view;  but  Gabbatha  {  =  Gab  Baitha) 
means  'the  ridge  of  the  House'  i.e.  'the  Temple-mound,'  and  refers  to 
the  shape  of  the  ground  (like  a  back),  not  to  the  pavement  upon  it. 


V.  140  S.  JOHN,   XIX.  341 

the  preparation  of  the  passover,  and  about  the  sixth  hour : 

14.  the  preparation]  i.  e.  the  day  before  the  Passover,  the  'eve.'  See 
Appendix  A. 

and  about  the  sixth  hour'\  The  best  MSS.  have  'it  was'  for  'and;' 
it  was  about  the  sixth  hour.  In  two  abrupt  sentences  S.  John  calls 
special  attention  to  the  day  and  hour;  7iow  it  was  the  eve  of  the  Passover: 
it  was  about  the  sixth  hour.  It  is  difficult  to  beUeve  that  he  can  be 
utterly  mistaken  about  both.  The  question  of  the  day  is  discussed 
elsewhere  (Appendix  A) ;  the  question  as  to  the  hour  remains. 

We  have  seen  already  (i.  39,  iv.  6,  52,  xi.  9),  that  whatever  view  we 
may  take  of  the  balance  of  probability  in  each  case,  there  is  nothing  thus 
far  which  is  conclusively  in  favour  of  the  antecedently  improbable  view, 
that  S.  John  reckons  the  hours  of  the  day  as  we  do,  from  midnight  to 
noon  and  noon  to  midnight. 

The  modern  method  is  sometimes  spoken  of  as  the  Roman  method. 
This  is  misleading,  as  it  seems  to  imply  that  the  Romans  counted  their 
hours  as  we  do.  If  this  were  so,  it  would  not  surprise  us  so  much  to 
find  that  S.  John,  living  away  from  Palestine  and  in  the  caphal  of  a 
Roman  province,  had  adopted  the  Roman  reckoning.  But  the  Romans 
and  Greeks,  as  well  as  the  Jeivs,  counted  their  hours  jrom  sunrise.  Mar- 
tial, who  goes  through  the  day  hour  by  hour  (iv.  viii.),  places  the 
Roman  method  beyond  a  doubt.  The  difference  between  the  Romans 
and  the  Jews  was  not  as  to  the  mode  of  counting  the  houf-s,  but  as  to  the 
limits  of  each  individual  day.  The  Jews  placed  the  boundary  at  sunset, 
the  Romans  (as  we  do)  at  midnight.  (Comp.  Phny  Nat.  Hist.  11. 
Ixxvii.)  The  'this  day'  of  Pilate's  wife  (Matt,  xxvii.  19)  proves  no- 
thing; it  would  fit  either  the  Roman  or  the  Jewish  method;  and  some 
suppose  her  to  have  been  a  proselyte.  In  this  particular  S.  John  does 
seem  to  have  adopted  the  Roman  method;  for  (^xx.  19)  he  speaks  of 
the  evening  of  Easter  Day  as  'the  same  dz.y  at  evening'  (comp.  Luke 
xxiv.  29,  33).  This  must  be  admitted  as  against  the  explanation  that 
'yesterday'  in  iv.  54  was  spoken  before  midnight  and  refers  to  the  time 
before  sunset :  but  the  servants  may  have  met  their  master  after  mid- 
night. 

But  there  is  some  evidence  of  a  custom  of  reckoning  the  hours  from 
midnight  in  Asia  Minor.  Polycarp  was  martyred  'at  the  eighth  hour' 
(Mart.  Pol.  XXI.),  Pionius  at  'the  tenth  hour'  [Acta  Mart.  ^.  137); 
both  at  Smyrna.  Such  exhibitions  commonly  took  place  in  the  morning 
(Philo,  II.  529);  so  that  8.0  and  lo.o  A.M.  are  more  probable  than  2.0 
and  4.0  P.M. 

McClellan  adds  another  argument.  "  The  phraseology  of  our  present 
passage  is  unique  in  the  Gospels.  The  hour  is  mentioned  in  conjunction 
with  the  day.  To  cite  the  words  of  St  Augustine,  but  with  the  correct 
rendering  of  Paraskeue,  'S.  John  does  not  say,  It  was  about  the  sixth 
hour  of  the  day,  nor  merely,  It  was  about  the  sixth  hour,  but  //  was  the 
Ykiday  of  the  Passover ;  it  was  about  the  Sixth  hour.'  Hence  in  the 
straightforward  sense  of  the  words,  the  sixth  hour  that  he  means  is  the 
sixth  hour  of  the  Friday;  and  so  it  is  rendered  in  the  Thebaic  Version. 


342  S.  JOHN,   XIX.  [vv.  15,  16. 

15  and  he  saith  unto  the  Jews,  Behold  your  King.  But  they 
cried  out,  Away  with  him,  away  with  him,  crucify  him. 
Pilate  saith  unto  them,  Shall  I  crucify   your  King?    The 

16  chief  priests  answered,  We  have  no  king  but  Cesar.  Then 
delivered  he  him  therefore  unto  them  to  be  crucified. 

And  they  took  Jesus,  and  led  him  away. 


But  Fnday  in  S.  John  is  the  name  of  the  whole  Roman  civil  day,  and 
the  Roman  civil  days  are  reckoned  from  midnight  "  Neiv  Test.  I.  p.  742. 

This  solution  may  therefore  be  adopted,  not  as  certain,  but  as  less 
unsatisfactory  than  the  conjecture  of  a  false  reading  either  here  or  in 
Mark  xv.  25,  or  the  various  forced  interpretations  which  have  been 
given  of  S.  John's  words.  If,  however,  the  mode  of  reckoning  in  both 
Gospels  be  the  same,  the  preference  in  point  of  accuracy  must  be  given 
to  the  Evangelist  who  stood  by  tlie  cross. 

Behold  your  A'ing.]  Like  the  title  on  the  cross  and  unlike  the  "  Ecce 
Homo,''''  these  words  are  spoken  in  bitter  irony.  This  man  in  His  mock 
insignia  is  a  fit  sovereign  for  the  miseralile  Jews.  Perhaps  Pilate  would 
also  taunt  them  with  their  own  glorification  of  Him  on  Palm  Sunday. 

15.  But  they]  The  true  text  gives.  They  therefore,  with  the  pronoun 
of  opposition  {f/c.-iz/o/)  in  harmony  with  their  cry.  They  will  have  no- 
thing to  do  with  such  a  king. 

Shall  J]  Or,  must  /.  There  is  a  strong  emphasis  on  'King,'  which 
stands  first  in  the  original.  Pilate  begins  (xviii.  33)  and  ends  with  the 
same  idea,  the  one  dangerous  item  in  the  indictment,  the  claim  of  Jesus 
to  be  King  of  the  Jews. 

The  chie/  priests]  This  depth  of  degradation  was  reserved  for  them. 
"The  official  organs  of  the  theocracy  themselves  proclaim  that  they  have 
abandoned  the  faith  by  which  the  nation  had  lived."  Sooner  than 
acknowledge  that  Jesus  is  the  Messiah  they  proclaim  that  a  heathen 
Emperor  is  their  King.  And  their  baseness  is  at  once  followed  by 
Pilate's :  sooner  than  meet  a  dangerous  charge  he  condemns  the  inno- 
cent to  death. 

16.  Then  delivered  he,  &c.  ]  Better,  Then  therefore  delivered  he,  &c. 
In  none  of  the  Gospels  does  it  appear  that  Pilate  pronounced  sentence 
on  Jesus;  he  perhaps  purposely  avoided  doing  so.  But  in  delivering 
Him  over  to  the  priests  he  does  not  allow  them  to  act  for  themselves : 
'he  delivered  Him  to  them  that  He  might  be  crucified^  by  Roman 
soldiers;  not  tliat  they  might  crucify  Him  themselves. 

And  they  took]  The  best  authorities  give,  T'/^^^  therefore /^i>/{'.  The 
word  for  'took'  should  rather  be  rendered  received,  as  in  the  only  other 
places  in  which  it  occurs  in  this  Gospel,  i.  11,  xiv.  3.  It  means  to 
'accept  what  is  offered,  receive  from  the  hands  of  another.'  A  com- 
parison of  the  three  texts  is  instructive.  The  eternal  Son  is  given  by 
the  Father,  comes  to  his  own  inheritance,  and  His  own  people  received 
Him  not  (i.  11).  The  Incarnate  Son  is  given  up  by  Pilate  to  His  own 
people,  and  they  received  Him  to  crucify  Him  (xix.  16).     The  glorified 


w.  17,  18.]  S.   JOHN,   XIX.  343 

17 — 42.    The  Death  and  Burial. 

17 — 22.     TJie  Crucifixion  and  the  Title  on  the  Cross. 

And  he  bearing  his  cross  went  forth  into  a  place  called  17 
the  place  of  a  skull,  which  is  called  in  the  Hebrew  Golgotha  : 
where  they  crucified  him,  and  two  other  with  him,  on  either  18 

Son  comes  again  to  His  own  people,  to  receive  them  unto  Himself 
(xiv.  3). 

and  led  him  away\     These  words  are  of  very  doubtful  authority. 

17 — 42.    The  Death  and  Burial. 

For  what  is  peculiar  to  S.  John's  narrative  in  this  section  see  the 
introductory  note  to  chap,  xviii.  Besides  this,  the  title  on  the  cross,  the 
Jews'  criticism  of  it,  and  the  conduct  of  the  four  soldiers,  are  given  with 
more  exactness  by  S.  John  than  by  the  Synoptists. 

The  section  falls  into  four  double  parts  of  which  the  second  and 
fourth  contain  a  marked  dramatic  contrast,  such  as  S.  John  loves  to 
point  out : — 

(i)    The  Cmcifixion  and  the  title  on  the  cross  (17 — 22). 

(2)  The  four  enemies  and  the  four  friends  (23 — 27). 

(3)  The  two  words,  'I  thirst,'  'It  is  finished'  (28—30). 

(4)  The  hostile  and  the  frieitdly  petitions  (31 — 42). 

17—22.    The  Crucifixion  and  the  Title  on  the  Cross, 

17.  hearing  his  cross']  The  better  reading  gives,  bearing  the  cross 
for  Himself.  S.  John  omits  the  help  vi'hich  Simon  the  Cyrenian  was 
soon  compelled  to  render,  as  also  (vk^hat  seems  to  be  implied  by  Mark 
XV.  22)  that  at  last  they  were  obliged  to  carry  Jesus  Himself.  Comp. 
the  Lesson  for  Good  Friday  morning.  Gen.  xxii.,  especially  v.  6. 

went  forth]  "The  place  of  public  execution  appears  to  have  been 
situated  north  of  the  city.  It  was  outside  the  gate  (Heb.  xiii.  12)  and 
yet  'nigh  unto  the  city'  (v.  20).  In  the  Mishna  it  is  placed  outside  the 
city  by  a  reference  to  Lev.  xxiv.  14.  It  is  said  to  have  been  'two  men 
high'  (Sanh.  vi.  i).  The  Jews  still  point  out  the  site  at  the  cliff,  north 
of  the  Damascus  gate,  where  is  a  cave  now  called  'Jeremiah's  Grotto.' 
This  site  has  therefore  some  claim  to  be  considered  as  that  of  the  Cruci- 
fixion. It  was  witliin  200  yards  of  the  wall  of  Agrippa,  but  was  certainly 
outside  the  ancient  city.  It  was  also  close  to  the  gardens  and  the  tombs 
of  the  old  city,  which  stretch  northwards  from  the  cliff;  and  it  was  close 
to  the  main  north  road,  in  a  conspicuous  position,  such  as  might 
naturally  be  selected  for  a  place  of  public  execution."  Conder,  Hand- 
book to  the  Bible,  pp.  356,  7. 

of  a  skull]  Probably  on  account  of  its  shape.  It  would  be  contrary 
to  Jewish  law  to  leave  skulls  unburied ;  and  if  this  were  the  meaning  of 
the  name  we  should  expect  'of  skulls'  rather  than  'of  a  skull.' 

18.  two  other]     Robbers  or  bandits  (not  'thieves'),  as  S.  Matthew 


344  S.   JOHN,   XIX.  [w.  19—21. 

19  side  one,  and  Jesus  in  the  midst.  And  Pilate  wrote 
a  title,  and  put  //  on  the  cross.  And  the  writing  was, 
JESUS  OF  NAZARETH  THE  KING  OF  THE  JEWS. 

20  This  title  then  read  many  of  the  Jews  :  for  the  place  where 
Jesus  was  crucified  was  nigh  to  the  city:  and  it  was  written  in 

21  Hebrew,  and  Greek,  and  Latin.  Then  said  the  chief  priests 
of  the  Jews  to  Pilate,  Write  not,  The  King  of  the  Jews ; 


and  S.  Mark  call  them,  probably  guilty  of  the  same  crimes  as  Barabbas 
(see  on  xviii.  40).  Jesus  is  crucified  with  them  as  being  condemned 
under  a  similar  charge  of  sedition  and  treason. 

Jesus  in  the  midst]  Here  also  we  seem  to  have  a  tragic  contrast 
— the  Christ  between  two  criminals.  It  is  the  place  of  honour  mock- 
ingly given  to  Him  as  King. 

19.  n  title\  Better,  a  title  also.  It  was  common  to  put  on  the  cross 
the  name  and  crime  of  the  person  executed,  after  making  him  carry  it 
round  his  neck  to  the  place  of  execution.  S.  John  alone  tells  us  that 
Pilate  wrote  the  title  himself.  The  meaning  of  the  'also'  is  not  quite 
clear;  perhaps  it  looks  back  to  v.  16.  S.  John  uses  the  Latin  term, 
tilulus,  in  a  Greek  form,  titlos.  S.  Matthew  has  'His  indictment' 
(xxvii.  37);  S.  Mark,  'the  inscription  of  His  indictment'  (xv.  26); 
S.  Luke,  'an  inscription'  (xxiii.  38). 

the  ivriting  was\  Literally,  there  was  written  (see  on  ii.  1 7).  The 
other  three  give  the  inscription  thus; — S.  Matthew,  'This  is  jesus  the 
King  of  the  Jews;'  S.  Mark,  'The  King  of  the  Jews;'  S.  Luke,  'This 
is  the  King  of  the  Jews.' 

20.  nigh  to  the  cily\  Pictures  are  often  misleading  in  placing  the  city 
a  mile  or  two  in  the  background  of  the  Crucifixion.  S.  John's  exact 
topographical  knowledge  comes  out  again  here. 

in  Hcbre^v,  and  Greek,  and  Latin]  The  better  texts  give,  In  Hebrew 
and  in  Latin  and  in  Greek.  The  national  and  the  official  languages 
would  naturally  be  placed  before  Greek, — and  for  different  reasons 
either  Hebrew  or  Latin  might  be  placed  first.  In  Luke  xxiii.  38  the 
order  is  Greek,  Latin,  Hebrew;  but  the  clause  is  of  verj'  doubtful 
authority.  In  any  case  the  three  representative  languages  of  the  world 
at  that  time,  the  languages  of  religion,  of  empire,  and  of  intellect,  were 
employed.  Thus  did  they  'tell  it  out  among  the  heathen  that  the  Lord 
is  king,'  or  (according  to  a  remarkable  reading  of  the  LXX.  in  Ps.  xcvi. 
10)  'that  the  Lord  reigned  from  the  tree.'     (See  on  xx.  16.) 

21.  Then  said]  Better,  said  theiefOTe.  Now  that  they  have  wrung 
what  they  wanted  out  of  Pilate  they  see  that  in  granting  it  he  has  in- 
sulted them  publicly  before  the  thousands  present  at  the  Passover,  and 
in  a  way  not  easy  to  resent. 

the  chief  priests  of  the  Jeivs]  The  addition  '  of  the  Jews'  is  remarkable, 
and  it  occurs  nowhere  else  in  N.T.  It  probably  refers  to  the  title: 
these  'chief  priests  (y///f  yi^f'j-'  objected  to  Hi?  being  called  'the  King 
of  the  Jeios.'' 


w.  22— 24-]  S.   JOHN,   XIX.  345 

but  that  he  said,  I  am  King  of  the  Jews.     Pilate  answered,  22 
What  I  have  written  I  have  written. 

23 — 27.     The  four  Enemies  and  the  four  Friends. 
Then  the  soldiers,  when  they  had  crucified  Jesus,  took  his  23 
garments,  and  made  four  parts,  to  every  soldier  a  part ;   and 
also  his  coat :   now  the  coat  was  without  seam,  woven  from 
the  top  throughout.     They  said  therefore  among  themselves,  24 
Let  us  not  rent  it,  but  cast  lots  for  it,  whose  it  shall  be : 
that  the  scripture   might   be  fulfilled,  which  saith,    They 
parted  my  raiment  among  them,  and  for  my  vesture 

22.  Pilate  answered^  His  answer  illustrates  the  mixture  of  obstinacy 
and  relentlessness,  which  Philo  says  was  characteristic  of  him.  His 
own  interests  are  not  at  stake,  so  he  will  have  his  way :  where  he  had 
anything  to  fear  or  to  gain  he  could  be  supple  enough.  A  shrewd, 
practical  man  of  the  world,  with  all  a  Roman  official's  contemptuous 
impartiality  and  severity,  and  all  the  disbehef  in  truth  and  disinterested- 
ness which  the  age  had  taught  him,  he  seems  to  have  been  one  of  the 
many  whose  self-interest  is  stronger  than  their  convictions,  and  who  can 
walk  uprightly  when  to  do  so  is  easy,  but  fail  in  the  presence  of  danger 
and  difficulty. 

23—27.     The  four  Enemies  and  the  four  Friends. 

23.  Then  the  soldiers]  'S.tHer,  The  soldiers  IheveiforQ.  The  'there- 
fore' looks  back  to  v.  18. 

his  garments']  The  loose,  outer  garment,  or  toga,  with  the  girdle  and 
fastenings.  This  was  large  enough  to  be  worth  dividing,  and  in  some 
cases  was  the  only  garment  worn. 

four  parts]  A  mark  of  accurate  knowledge ;  a  quaternion  of  soldiers 
has  charge  of  the  prisoner,  as  in  Acts  xii.  4 ;  but  there  the  prisoner  has 
to  be  guarded  and  kept  alive,  so  four  quaternions  mount  guard  in  turn, 
one  for  each  watch.  The  clothes  of  executed  criminals  were  the  per- 
quisite of  the  soldiers  on  duty. 

liis  coat]  Better,  the  coat  or  shirt :  it  fitted  somewhat  close  to  the 
body,  reaching  from  the  neck  to  the  knees  or  ancles. 

withottt  seam]  Josephus  tells  us  that  that  of  the  high-priest  was 
seamless,  whereas  in  other  cases  this  garment  was  commonly  made  of 
two  pieces  {Ant.  iii.  vii.  4). 

24.  that  the  sciipture]  It  was  in  order  that  the  Divine  purpose, 
already  declared  by  the  Psalmist,  might  be  accomplished,  that  this  two- 
fold assignment  of  Christ's  garments  took  place.  S.  John  quotes  the 
LXX.  verbatim,  although  there  the  difference,  which  both  he  and  the 
original  Hebrew  mark  between  the  upper  and  under  garment,  is  obli- 
terated. It  is  from  this  passage  that  the  reference  to  Ps.  xxii.  18  has  been 
inserted  in  Matt,  xxvii.  35  ;  none  of  the  Synoptists  refer  to  the  Psalm.  _ 

my  raiment]  A  capricious  change  of  translation ;  the  same  word  is 
rendered  garments  in  v.  23. 


346  S.  JOHN,   XIX.  [vv.  25—27. 

they  did  cast  lots.     These  things  therefore  the   soldiers 
did. 

25  Now  there  stood  by  the  cross  of  Jesus  his  mother,  and 
his  mother's  sister,  Mary  the  wife  of  Cleophas,  and  Mary 

26  Magdalene.     When  Jesus  therefore  saw  his  mother,  and  the 
disciple   standing   by,  whom  he  loved,  he   saith   unto   his 

27  mother,  Woman,  behold  thy  son.     Then   saith   he  to  the 

25.  Now  there  stood]  Or,  But  there  were  standing.  By  two  small 
particles  (men  in  v.  23  and  de  here),  scarcely  translatable  in  English, 
S.  John  indicates  the  contrast  between  the  two  groups.  On  the  one 
hand,  the  four  plundering  soldiers  with  the  centurion;  on  the  other,  the 
four  ministering  women  with  the  beloved  disciple. 

his  mother's  sister,  Maryl  The  Greek,  like  the  English,  leaves  us  in 
doubt  whether  we  here  have  two  women  or  one,  whether  altogether  there 
are  four  women  or  three.  The  former  is  much  the  more  probable  alterna- 
tive, (i)  It  avoids  the  very  improbable  supposition  of  two  sisters  having 
the  same  name.  (2)  S.  John  is  fond  of  parallel  expressions;  'His 
mother  and  His  mother's  sister,  Mary  of  Clopas  and  Mary  Magdalene' 
are  two  pairs  set  one  against  the  other.  (3)  S.  Mark  (xv.  40)  mentions 
Mary  Magdalene,  Mary  the  mother  of  James  the  Less,  and  Salome. 
Mary  Magdalene  is  common  to  both  narratives,  'Mary  the  mother  of 
James  the  Less'  is  the  same  as  'Mary  of  Clopas:'  the  natural  inference 
is  that  Salome  is  the  same  as  'His  mother's  sister.'  If  this  is  correct, 
(4)  S.  John's  silence  about  the  name  of  '  His  mother's  sister'  is  explained  : 
she  was  his  own  mother,  and  he  is  habitually  reserved  about  all  closely 
connected  with  himself.  We  have  seen  already  that  he  never  mentions 
either  his  own  name,  or  his  brother's,  or  the  Virgin's.  (5)  The  very 
ancient  Peshito  or  Syriac  Version  adopts  this  view  by  inserting  'and' 
before  'Mary  the  (wife)  of  Clopas.' 

the  wife  of  Cleophas^  Rather,  the  tvife  of  Clopas.  The  Greek  is 
simply  'the  of  Clopas,'  and  'the  daughter  of  Clopas'  may  be  right,  or 
'the  mother,''  or  even  'the  sister:'  but  'wife'  is  more  probably  to  be 
supplied.  There  is  no  reason  for  identifying  Clopas  here  with  Cleopas 
in  Luke  xxiv.  18:  Clopas  is  y\ramaic,  Cleopas  is  Greek.  The  spelling 
Cleop/^as  is  a  mistake  derived  from  Latin  MSS.  All  Greek  authorities 
have  Cleopas.  If  'wife'  is  rightly  inserted,  and  she  is  the  mother  of 
James  the  Less,  Clopas  is  the  same  as  Alphaeus  (Matt.  x.  3 ;  comp. 
xxvii.  56).  It  is  said  that  Clopas  and  Alphaeus  may  be  different  forms 
of  the  same  Aramaic  name. 

Mary  Magdalene]  Introduced,  like  the  Twelve  (vi.  67)  and  Pilate 
(xviii.  29)  abruptly  and  without  explanation,  as  being  quite  familiar  to 
the  readers  of  the  Gospel.     See  on  Matt,  xxvii.  56  and  Luke  viii.  2. 

26.  zchom  he  loved]  See  on  xiii.  23.  The  expression  here  is  not  a 
mere  periphrasis  to  avoid  giving  the  name,  still  less  a  boastful  insertion: 
it  explains  why  Jesus  committed  the  two  to  one  another,  (See  Intro- 
duction, II.  iii.  3  b.) 

IVo/ua;/]     .See  on  ii.  4. 


V.  28.]  S.   JOHN,   XIX.  347 

disciple,  Behold   thy  mother.     And   from   that   hour   that 
disciple  took  her  unto  his  own  hottie. 

28 — 30.     The  two  words fro?n  the  Cross,  '/  Thirst^  '■It  is 

finished.^ 

After  this,  Jesus  knowing  that  all  things  were  now  accom-  28 
plished,  that  the  scripture  might  be  fulfilled,  saith,  I  thirst. 

behold  thy  son.'\  If,  as  has  just  been  maintained  (2nd  note  on  v.  25), 
S.  John  was  the  Virgin's  nephew,  and  if,  as  is  probable  (see  on  ii.  12), 
Christ's  'brethren'  were  the  sons  of  Joseph  by  a  former  marriage,  the 
fact  that  Christ  committed  His  mother  to  her  nephew  and  His  own 
beloved  disciple  rather  than  to  her  step-sons  requires  no  explanation. 
Even  if  His  'brethren'  were  the  sons  of  Joseph  and  Mary,  their  not 
believing  on  Him  (vii.  5)  would  sufficiently  accoimt  for  their  being  set 
aside;  and  we  have  no  evidence  that  they  beheved  until  after  the 
Resurrection  (Acts  i.  14). 

27.  from  that  hour']  Quite  literally,  as  soon  as  all  was  over  {v.  30) ; 
or  he  may  have  led  her  away  at  once  and  then  have  returned  (v.  35). 

imto  his  own  ho/iie]  Although  the  commendation  was  double,  each 
being  given  to  the  other,  yet  (as  was  natural)  S.  John  assumes  the  care 
of  Mary  rather  than  she  of  him.  This  shews  the  untenability  of  the 
view  that  not  only  S.  John,  but  in  him  all  the  Apostles,  were  committed 
by  Christ  to  the  guardianship  of  Mary.  We  have  had  the  Greek 
expression  for  'his  own  (home)'  twice  already  in  this  Gospel:  see  on 
i.  1 1  and  xvi.  32.  That  S.  John  was  known  to  the  high-priest  (xviii.  15) 
and  that  his  family  had  hired  servants  (Mark  i.  20)  would  seem  to  imply 
that  he  was  a  man  of  some  position  and  substance. 

28 — 30.     The  two  words  from  the  Cross,   'I  Thirst,'  'It  is 

FINISHED.' 

28.  After  t/iis']     See  on  v.  38. 
knowing]     Comp.  xiii.  r. 

were  now  accomplished]  Rather,  are  already  finished.  The  veiy 
same  word  is  used  here  as  in  v.  30,  and  this  identity  must  be  preserved 
in  translation. 

thai  the  scripture,  &c.]  Many  critics  make  this  depend  on  'are 
already  finished,'  in  order  to  avoid  the  apparent  contradiction  between 
all  things  being  already  finished  and  something  still  remaining  to  be 
accomplished.     But    this    construction    is    somewhat    awkward.      It    is 

better  to  connect  'that fulfilled'  with  'saith,'  especially  when  Ps. 

Ixix.  21  speaks  so  plainly  of  the  thirst.  The  apparent  contradiction 
almost  disappears  when  we  remember  that  the  thirst  had  been  felt 
sometime  before  it  was  expressed.  All  things  were  finished,  including 
the  thirst ;  but  Christ  alone  knew  this.  In  order  that  the  prophecy  might 
be  accomplished,  it  was  necessary  that  He  should  make  known  His 
thirst.  'Brought  to  its  due  end'  or  'made  perfect'  is  the  natural 
meaning  of  the  very  unusual  expression  translated  'fulfilled.' 


348  S.   JOHN,   XIX.  [vv.  29,  30. 

29  Now  there  was  set  a  vessel  full  of  vinegar :  and  they  filled  a 
spunge  with  vinegar,  and  put  //  upon  hyssop,  and  put  it  to 

30  his  mouth.  When  Jesus  therefore  had  received  the  vinegar, 
he  said,  It  is  finished  :  and  he  bowed  his  head,  and  gave  up 
the  ghost. 

^^.  No7v...vi7iegar\  Omit 'now.'  S.  John's  precise  knowledge  appears 
once  more  :  the  other  three  do  not  mention  the  vessel,  but  he  had  stood 
close  to  it.  The  'vinegar'  was  probably  the  sour  wine  or  posca  in  a 
large  jar '  set '  by  the  soldiers  for  their  own  use  while  on  guard.  Criminals 
sometimes  hved  for  many  hours,  even  a  day  or  two,  on  the  cross. 

and  they  filled,  &c.]  The  true  text  gives,  having  placed  therefore  a 
sponge  full  of  the  vinegar  upon  hyssop  they/w/  it  to  his  mouth.  The 
difference  between  the  two  verbs  rendered  'put'  is  very  graphic;  the 
one  exi)resses  the  placing  of  the  sponge  round  the  stalk  (comp.  Matt. 
xxi.  33,  xxvii.  28,  48),  the  other  the  offering  (xvi.  2)  and  applying 
(Mark  x.  13)  it  to  his  lips. 

hyssop\  The  plant  cannot  be  identified  with  certainty.  The  caper- 
plant,  which  is  as  likely  as  any,  has  stalks  which  run  to  two  or  three 
feet,  and  this  would  suffice.  It  is  not  probable  that  Christ's  feet  were 
on  a  level  with  the  spectators'  heads,  as  pictures  represent :  this  would 
have  involved  needless  trouble  and  expense.  Moreover  the  mockery  of 
the  soldiers  recorded  by  S.  Luke  (see  on  xxiii.  36)  is  more  intelligible  if 
we  suppose  that  they  could  almost  put  a  vessel  to  His  lips.  S.  John 
alone  mentions  the  hyssop ;  another  mark  of  exact  knowledge. 

put  it  to  his  month]  The  actors  and  their  motive  are  left  doubtful. 
Probably  soldiers,  but  possibly  Jews,  and  probably  in  compassion  rather 
than  mockery;  or  perhaps  in  compassion  under  cover  of  mockery  (comp. 
Mark  xv.  36). 

30.  received]  He  had  refused  the  stupefying  draught  (Matt,  xxvii, 
34;  Mark  xv.  23),  which  would  have  clouded  his  faculties:  He  accepts 
what  will  revive  them  for  the  effort  of  a  willing  surrender  of  His  life. 

//  is  finished]  Just  as  the  thirst  was  there  before  he  expressed  it,  so 
the  consciousness  that  His  work  was  finished  was  there  [v.  28)  before 
He  declared  it.  The  Messiah's  work  of  redemption  was  accomplished; 
His  Father's  commandment  had  been  obeyed;  types  and  prophecies 
had  been  fulfilled ;  His  hfe  had  been  lived,  and  His  teaching  completed; 
His  last  earthly  tie  had  been  severed  [mi.  16,  27) ;  and  the  end  had 
come.     The  final  'wages  of  sin'  alone  remained  to  be  paid. 

he  bowed  his  head]  Another  detail  peculiar  to  the  Evangelist  who 
witnessed  it. 

gave  itp  the  ghost]  The  two  apostles  mark  with  special  clearness  that 
the  Messiah's  death  was  entirely  voluntary.  S.  Matthew  says,  'He  let 
go  His  spirit'  (xxvii.  50);  S.  John,  'He  gave  up  His  spirit.'  None  of 
the  four  says  'He  died.'  The  other  two  have  'He  breathed  out;'  and 
S.  Luke  shews  clearly  that  the  surrender  of  life  was  a  willing  one  by 
giving  the  words  of  svirrendcr  '  Father  into  Thy  hands  I  commend  my 
spirit.'— 'No   one   takcth   it  from  Me,  but  I  lay  it  down  of  Myself 


V.  31.]  S.  JOHN,   XIX.  349 

31 — 42.     The  petition  of  the  Jeivs  and  the  petition  of  Joseph. 

The  Jews  therefore,  because  it  was  the  preparation,  that  31 
the  bodies  should  not  remain  upon  the  cross  on  the  sabbath 
day,  (for  that  sabbath  day  was  a  high  day,)  besought  Pilate 
that  their  legs  might  be  broken,  and  that  they  might  be 

It  was  the  one  thing  which  Christ  claimed  to  do  'of  Himself  (x.  18). 
Contrast  v.  30,  vii.  28,  viii.  28,  42. 

On  'the  seven  words  from  the  cross'  see  on  Luke  xxiii.  34;  Mark 
XV.  34 ;  Matt,  xxvii,  46.  Between  the  two  words  recorded  in  these 
verses  (28 — 30)  there  is  again  a  contrast.  'I  thirst'  is  an  expression  of 
suffering;  the  only  one  during  the  Passion.  'It  is  finished'  is  a  cry  of 
triumph;  and  the  'therefore'  in  v.  30  shews  how  the  expression  of 
suffering  led  on  to  the  cry  of  triumph.  S.  John  omits  the  'loud  voice' 
which  all  the  Synoptists  give  as  immediately  preceding  Christ's  death. 
It  proved  that  His  end  was  voluntary  and  not  the  necessary  result  of 
exhaustion. 

31 — 42.    The  petition  of  the  Jews  and  the  petition  of  Joseph. 

31.  As  in  xviii.  28,  the  Jews  shew  themselves  to  be  among  those 
'who  strain  out  a  gnat  and  swallow  a  camel.'  In  ihe  midst  of  deliberate 
judicial  murder  they  are  scrupulous  about  ceremonial  observances. 

The  Jews  iherefore\  The  'therefore,'  as  in  v.  23,  probably  does  not 
refer  to  what  immediately  precedes :  it  looks  back  to  vv.  20,  2  r.  The 
Jews  still  continue  their  relentless  hostility.  They  do  not  know  whether 
any  one  of  the  three  sufferers  is  dead  or  not ;  their  request  shews  that ; 
so  that  'therefore'  cannot  mean  in  consequence  of  Jesus'  death.  In 
order  to  save  the  Sabbath,  and  perhaps  also  to  inflict  still  further 
suffering,  they  ask  Pilate  for  this  terrible  addition  to  the  punishment  of 
crucifixion.  Certainly  the  lesson  'I  will  have  mercy  and  not  sacrifice,' 
of  which  Christ  had  twice  reminded  them,  and  once  in  connexion  with 
the  Sabbath  (Matt.  xii.  7,  ix.  13),  had  taken  no  hold  on  them. 

the  preparation^  The  eve  of  the  Sabbath ;  and  the  Sabbath  on  this 
occasion  coincided  with  the  15th  Nisan,  the  first  day  of  the  Passover. 
This  first  day  ranked  as  a  Sabbath  (Exod.  xii.  16;  Lev.  xxiii.  7);  so 
that  the  day  was  doubly  holy. 

that... high  day\     Literally,  the  day  of  that  Sabbath  was  great  (comp. 

vii.  37)- 

tegs  might  be  broken\  The  crurifragium,  like  crucifixion,  was  a 
punishment  commonly  reserved  for  slaves.  The  two  were  sometimes 
combined,  as  here.  Lactantius  (iv.  xxvi.)  says,  'His  executioners  did 
not  think  it  necessary  to  break  His  bones,  as  was  their  prevailing 
custom;'  which  seems  to  imply  that  to  Jewish  crucifixions  this  horror 
was  commonly  added,  perhaps  to  hasten  death.  For  even  without  a 
Sabbath  to  make  matters  more  urgent,  corpses  ought  to  be  removed 
before  night-fall  (Deut.  xxi.  23);  whereas  the  Roman  custom  was  to 
leave  them  to  putrefy  on  the  cross,  like  our  obsolete  custom  of  hanging 
in  chains. 


350  S.  JOHN,  XIX.  [w.  32—35. 

32  taken  away.     Then  came  the  soldiers,  and  brake  the  legs  of 
the  first,  and  of  the  other  which  was  crucified  with   him. 

33  But  when  they  came  to  Jesus,  and  saw  that  he  was  dead 

34  already,  they  brake  not  his  legs  :   but  one  of  the  soldiers 
with  a  spear  pierced  his  side,  and  forthwith  came  there  out 

35  blood  and  water.     And  he  that  saw  //  bare  record,  and  his 

32.  Then  came  the  soldiers]  The  soldiers  therefore  came,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  fresh  order  from  Pilate  which  the  Jews  would  bring.  Two 
probably  went  to  each  of  the  robbers. 

34.  pierced]  To  make  quite  sure  that  He  was  dead.  The  Greek 
word  is  not  the  same  as  that  used  in  z/.  37  ;  this  means  either  to  'prick' 
or  to  'stab,'  that  to  'pierce  deeply.' 

blood  and  water]  There  has  been  very  much  discussion  as  to  the 
physical  cause  of  Christ's  death  ;  and  those  who  investigate  this  try 
to  frame  an  hypothesis  which  will  at  the  same  time  account  for  the 
effusion  of  blood  and  water.  Two  or  three  such  hypotheses  have  been 
put  forward.  But  it  may  be  doubted  whether  they  are  not  altogether 
out  of  place.  It  has  been  seen  {v.  30)  how  the  Evangelists  insist  on  the 
fact  that  the  Lord's  death  was  a  voluntary  surrender  of  life,  not  a  result 
forced  upon  Him.  Of  course  it  may  be  that  the  voluntariness  consisted 
in  welcoming  causes  which  must  prove  fatal.  But  it  is  more  simple  to 
believe  that  He  delivered  up  His  life  before  natural  causes  became  fatal. 
'  No  one,'  neither  Jew  nor  Roman,  'took  it  from  Him  '  by  any  means 
whatever  :  'He  lays  it  down  of  Himself  (x.  18).  And  if  we  decline  to 
investigate  the  physical  cause  of  the  Lord's  death,  we  need  not  ask  for  a 
physical  explanation  of  what  is  recorded  here.  S.  John  assures  us  that 
he  saw  it  with  his  own  eyes,  and  he  records  it  that  we  'may  believe:' 
i.  e.  he  regards  it  as  a  '  sign '  that  the  corpse  was  no  ordinary  one,  but  a 
Body  that  even  in  death  was  Divine. 

We  can  scarcely  be  wrong  in  supposing  that  the  blood  and  water  are 
symbolical.  The  order  confirms  this.  Blood  symbolizes  the  work  of 
redemption  which  had  just  been  completed  by  His  death  ;  and  water 
symbolizes  the  'birth  from  above,'  with  its  cleansing  from  sin,  which 
was  the  result  of  His  death,  and  is  the  means  by  which  we  appropriate 
it.     Thus  the  two  great  Sacraments  are  represented. 

35.  And  he is  true]  Rather,  He  that  hath  seen  hath  home  wit- 
ness and  his  witness  is  trtie  {zovix^.  i.  19,  32,  34,  viii.  13,  14,  xii.  17). 
Besides  the  change  from  '  record '  to  witness,  for  the  sake  of  marking 
by  uniform  translation  S.  John's  fondness  for  this  verb  and  substantive, 
the  correction  from  '  saw  '  to  hath  seen  must  be  noted.  The  use  of  the 
perfect  rather  than  the  aorist  is  evidence  that  the  writer  himself  is  the 
person  who  saw.  If  he  were  appealing  to  the  witness  of  another  person 
he  would  almost  certainly  have  written,  as  the  A.  V.,  'he  that  j-a«/,' 
The  inference  that  the  author  is  the  person  who  saw  becomes  still  more 
clear  if  we  omit  the  centre  of  the  verse,  which  is  somewhat  parentheti- 
cal :  ^He  that  hath  seen  hath  borne  witness,  in  order  that  ye  all  also  may 
believe.^     The  natural  sense  of  this  statement  is  that  the  narrator  is 


w.  36,  37.]  S.   JOHN,   XIX.  351 

record  is  true  :   and  he  knoweth  that  he  saith  true,  that  ye 
might  believe.     For  these  things  were  done,  that  the  scrip-  36 
ture  should  be   fulfilled,  A   bone    of  him  shall  not  be 
broken.     And  again  another  scripture  saith,  They  shall  37 
look  on  him  whom  they  pierced. 

appealing  to  his  own  experience.     Thus  the  Apostolic  authorship  of  the 
Gospel  is  afijain  confirmed.     (See  Westcott,  Introduction,  p.  xxvii.) 

is  true]  Not  simply  truthful,  but  genuine,  perfect  :  it  fulfils  the  con- 
ditions of  sufficient  evidence.     (See  on  i.  9  and  comp.  viii.  16,  vii.  28.) 

sait/i  true]  Better,  saitA  things  that  are  true.  There  is  no  tauto- 
logy, as  in  the  A.  V.  S.  John  first  says  that  his  evidence  is  adequate  ; 
he  then  adds  that  the  contents  of  it  are  true.  Testimony  may  be  suffi- 
cient (e.  g.  of  a  competent  eyewitness)  but  false :  or  it  may  be  insufficient 
(e.g.  of  half-witted  child)  but  true.  S.  John  declares  that  his  testimony 
is  both  sufficient  and  true  ;  both  alcthinos  and  alethes. 

that  ye  niight]  Better,  that  ye  also  may  ;  ye  as  well  as  the  witness 
who  saw  for  himself. 

Why  does  S.  John  attest  thus  earnestly  the  trustworthiness  of  his  nar- 
rative at  this  particular  point  ?  Four  reasons  may  be  assigned.  This 
incident  proved  (i)  the  reality  of  Christ's  humaiiity  against  Docetic 
views;  and  these  verses  therefore  are  conclusive  evidence  against  the 
theory  that  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  the  work  of  a  Docetic  Gnostic  (see  on  iv. 
22)  :  (2)  the  reality  of  Christ's  Divinity,  against  Ebionite  views  ;  while 
His  human  form  was  no  mere  phantom,  but  flesh  and  blood,  yet  He 
was  not  therefore  a  mere  man,  but  the  Son  of  God  :  (3)  the  reality  of 
Christ's  death,  and  therefore  of  His  Resurrection,  against  Jewish  insinu- 
ations of  trickery  (comp.  Matt,  xxviii.  13 — 15):  (4)  the  clear  and  un- 
expected fulfilment  of  two  Messianic  prophecies. 

36.  were  done]  Better,  came  to  pass.  Note  that  S.  John  uses  the 
aorist  {iyiveTo),  where  S.  Matthew,  writing  nearer  to  the  events,  uses 
the  perfect  [■yiyovev).  '  Hath  come  to  pass '  implies  that  the  event  is  not 
very  remote:  Matt.  i.  22,  xxi.  4,  xxvi.  56.  The  'for'  depends  upon 
'believe.'  Belief  has  the  support  of  Scripture  ;  for  the  two  surprising 
events,  Christ's  escaping  the  crurifragium  and  yet  having  His  side 
pierced,  were  evidently  preordained  in  the  Divine  counsels. 

shall  not  be  broken]  Exod.  xii.  46.  Thus  he  who  at  the  opening  of 
this  Gospel  was  proclaimed  as  the  Lamb  of  God  (i.  29,  36),  at  the  close 
of  it  is  declared  to  be  the  true  Paschal  Lamb.  Once  more  we  have 
evidence  that  S.  John's  consistent  and  precise  view  is,  that  the  death  of 
Christ  coincided  with  the  killing  of  the  Paschal  Lamb.  And  this  seems 
also  to  have  been  S.  Paul's  view  (see  on  i  Cor.  v.  7). 

37.  They  shall  look]  All  present,  especially  the  Jews,  The  whole 
world  was  represented  there. 

pierced]  See  on  v.  34.  The  word  here  used  occurs  nowhere  else  in 
N.  T.  excepting  Rev.  i.  7,  and  forms  a  connexion  worth  noting  between 
the  Gospel  and  the  Apocalypse  (see  on  xi.  44,  xv.  20,  and  xx.  16);  all 
the  more  so  because  S.  John  here  agrees  with  the  present  Masoretic 


352  S.  JOHN,  XIX.  [vv.  38,  39- 

38  And  after  this  Joseph  of  Arimathea,  being  a  disciple  of 
Jesus,  but  secretly  for  fear  of  the  Jews,  besought  Pilate  that 
he  might  take  away  the  body  of  Jesus :  and  Pilate  gave  Aim 
leave.     He  came  therefore,  and  took   the   body  of  Jesus. 

39  And  there  came  also  Nicodemus,  which  at  the  first  came  to 
Jesus  by  night,  and  brought  a  mixture  of  myrrh  and  aloes, 


Hebrew  text  and  in  every  word  differs  from  the  Greek  of  the  LXX. 
The  Greek  softens  down  '  pierced  through '  (which  seemed  a  strange 
expression  to  use  of  men's  treatment  of  Jehovah)  into  'insulted.'  See 
on  vi.  45,  xii.  13,  15,  where  there  is  further  evidence  of  the  Evangelist 
having  independent  knowledge  of  Hebrew,  and  therefore  being  a  Jew 
of  Palestine. 

38.  And  after  this]  More  literally,  But  after  these  things.  The 
'  but '  marks  a  contrast  between  the  hostile  petition  of  the  Jews  and  the 
friendly  petition  of  Joseph.  '  These  things  '  as  distinct  from  '  this  '  will 
shew  that  no  one  event  is  singled  out  with  which  what  follows  is  con- 
nected :  the  sequence  is  indefinite.  Comp.  iii.  22,  vi.  14.  '  After //4w ' 
in  V.  28  is  right :  there  the  sequence  is  direct  and  definite.  Comp. 
ii.  12,  xi.  7,  ir. 

Joseph  of  Arimathea']  See  notes  on  Matt,  xxvii.  57;  Mark  xv.  43; 
Luke  xxiii.  50.  The  Synoptists  tell  us  that  he  was  rich,  a  member  of 
the  Sanhedrin,  a  good  and  just  man  who  had  not  consented  to  the  San- 
hedrin's  counsel  and  crime,  one  who  (like  Simon  and  Anna)  waited  for 
the  kingdom  of  God,  and  had  become  a  disciple  of  Christ. 

secretly  for  far  of  the  Je^us]  This  forms  a  coincidence  with  S.  Mark, 
who  says  of  him  (xv.  43)  that  'having  suvunoncd  courage  he  went  in 
unto  Pilate,'  implying  that  like  Nicodemus  he  was  naturally  timid. 
Joseph  probably  went  to  Pilate  as  soon  as  he  knew  that  Jesus  was  dead  : 
the  vague  '  after  these  things  '  need  not  mean  that  he  did  not  act  till 
after  the  piercing  of  the  side. 

took  the  body]  As  the  friends  of  the  Baptist  (Matt.  xiv.  12)  and  of 
S.  Stephen  (Acts  viii.  1)  did  in  each  case. 

39.  Nicodeiinis]  Another  coincidence.  Nicodemus  also  was  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Sanhedrin  (iii.  i),  and  his  acquaintance  with  Joseph  is  thus 
explained.  And  it  is  S.  Mark  who  tells  us  that  Joseph  was  one  of  the 
Sanhedrin,  S.  John  who  brings  him  in  contact  with  Nicodemus.  It 
would  seem  as  if  Joseph's  unusual  courage  had  inspired  Nicodemus  also. 
We  are  not  told  whether  or  no  Nicodemus  had 'consented  to  the  counsel 
and  deed  of  them.' 

at  the  first]  Either  the  first  time  that  he  came  to  Jesus,  in  contrast 
to  other  occasions ;  or  simply  at  the  beginning  of  Christ's  ministr}'. 
Comp.  x.  40). 

myrrh  and  aloes]  Myrrh-resin  and  pounded  aloe-wood,  both  aromatic 
substances:  'AH  thy  garments  are  myrrh  and  aloes'  (Ps.  xlv.  8).  Comp. 
Matt.  ii.  II.  Aloes  are  not  mentioned  elsewhere  in  N.  T.  For  'mix- 
ture '  [inigma)  the  two  best  MSS.  read  roll  [eligma),  and  ihe  purpose  of 


vv.  40— 42.]  S.   JOHN,   XIX.  353 

about  an  hundred  pound  weight.     Then  took  they  the  body  40 
of  Jesus,  and  wound  it  in  hnen  clothes  with  the  spices,  as 
the  manner  of  the  Jews   is  to  bury.     Now   in   the    place  41 
where   he  was  crucified  there  was  a  garden ;   and  in  the 
garden  a  new  sepulchre,  wherein  was  never  man  yet  laid. 
There  laid  they  Jesus  therefore  because  of  the  Jews'  prepa-  42 
ration  day;  for  the  sepulchre  was  nigh  at  hand. 

this  large  quantity  was  probably  to  cover  the  Body  entirely.     Comp. 
1  Chron.  xvi.  14. 

abotit  an  himdred p<nmd\  1-200  ounces.  There  is  nothing  incredible 
in  the  amount.  It  is  a  rich  man's  proof  of  devotion,  and  possibly  of  re- 
morse for  a  timidity  in  the  past  which  now  seemed  irremediable  ;  his 
courage  had  come  too  late. 

40.  'J lien  took  they]     They  took  therefore. 

wound  it,  &c.]  Or,  bound  //  in  linen  clotlis.  The  '  cloths  '  seem  to 
refer  to  the  bandages  which  kept  the  whole  together  rather  than  the 
large  '  linen  sheet '  mentioned  by  the  other  Evangelists,  which  Joseph 
had  bought  on  purpose  (Mark  xv.  46).  The  word  here  used  for  '  linen 
cloths  '  occurs  also  in  Luke  xxiv.  12  :  see  note  there. 

the  manner  of  the  yei.vs\  As  distinct  from  the  manner  of  the  Egyp- 
tians, whose  three  methods  of  embalming  are  elaborately  described  by 
Herodotus  (11.  bcxxvi.  ff.).  The  Egyptians  in  all  cases  removed  part 
of  the  intestines  and  steeped  the  body  in  nitre. 

to  bury]  The  Greek  verb  is  rare  in  Scripture;  in  N.  T.  only  Matt. 
xxvi.  12.  The  cognate  substantive  occurs  xii.  7;  Mark  xiv.  8.  In 
Gen.  1.  2  it  is  used  by  the  LXX.  for  the  embalming  of  Jacob. 

41.  there  was  a  garden"]  Contrast  xviii.  i.  S.  John  alone  tells  of 
the  garden,  which  probably  belonged  to  Joseph,  for  S.  Matthew  tells  us 
that  the  sepulchre  was  his. 

a  new  sepulchre]  S.  Matthew  also  states  that  it  was  new,  and  S. 
Luke  that  no  one  had  ever  yet  been  laid  in  it.  S.  John  states  this  fact 
in  both  ways  with  great  emphasis.  Not  even  in  its  contact  with  the 
grave  did  'His  flesh  see  corruption.' 

S.  John  omits  what  all  the  others  note,  that  the  sepulchre  was  hewn 
in  the  rock. 

42.  the  yews'  preparation  day]  Perhaps  another  slight  indication 
that  the  Gospel  was  written  outside  Palestine.  Or  the  addition  'of  the 
Jews'  may  point  to  the  time  when  there  was  already  a  Christian  'prepa- 
ration-day.'    See  notes  on  'the  Passover  of  the  ye'Ms'  (ii.  13;  xi.  55). 

It  would  seem  as  if  the  burial  was  hastily  and  temporarily  performed. 
They  probably  intended  after  the  Sabbath  to  make  a  more  solemn  and 
complete  burial  elsewhere. 

was  nigh  at  hand]  Perhaps  this  fact  suggested  to  Joseph  the  thought 
of  going  to  Pilate.     He  had  a  sepulchre  of  his  own  close  to  Golgotha. 


S.JOHN  23 


354  S.   JOHN,   XX. 


CHAP.  XX. 

We  enter  now  upon  the  third  and  last  part  of  the  second  main  division 
of  the  Gospel.  The  Evangelist  having  set  before  us  the  inner  Glori- 
fication OF  Christ  in  His  last  Discourses  (xiii. — xvii.),  and  His 
OUTER  Glorification  in  His  Passion  and  Death  (xviii,  xix.),  now 
gives  us  his  record  of  THE  RESURRECTION  and  threefold  Manifes- 
tation OF  Christ  (xx.). 

The  chapter  falls  naturally  into  five  sections,  i.  The  first  Evidence 
of  the  Resurrection  (i — lo).  2.  The  Manifestation  to  Mary  Magdalene 
(11 — 18).  3.  The  Manifestation  to  the  Ten  aiid others  [\g — 23).  4. 
The  Alanifestation  to  S.  Thomas  and  others  {2^ — 29).  5.  The  Conclu- 
sion and  Purpose  of  the  Gospel  (30,  31). 

S.  John's  Gospel  preserves  its  character  to  the  end.  Like  the  rest  of 
his  narrative,  the  account  of  the  Resurrection  is  not  intended  as  a  com- 
plete record ; — it  is  avowedly  the  very  reverse  of  complete  {v.  30) ; — but 
a  series  of  typical  scenes  selected  as  embodiments  of  spiritual  truth. 
Here  also,  as  in  the  rest  of  the  narrative,  we  have  individual  characters 
marked  with  singular  distinctness.  The  traits  which  distinguisli  S. 
Peter,  S.  John,  S.  Thomas,  and  the  Magdalene  in  this  chapter  are  both 
clear  in  themselves  and  completely  in  harmony  with  what  is  told  of  the 
four  elsewhere. 

Of  the  incidents  omitted  by  S.  John  a  good  many  are  given  in  the 
other  Gospels  or  by  S.  Paul :  (S.  Matthew  and  S.  Mark)  the  angel's 
message  to  the  two  Marys  and  Salome;  (6".  Afatthr^v  and  [S.  A/arh]) 
the  farewell  charge  and  promise;  {S.  Litle  and  [S.  Afari])  the  manifes- 
tation to  two  disciples  not  Apostles;  {S.  Alatthew)  the  earthquake, 
angel's  descent  to  remove  the  stone,  soldiers'  terror  and  report  to  the 
priests,  device  of  the  Sanhedrin,  manifestation  on  the  mountain  in  Gali- 
lee (comp.  I  Cor.  xv.  6) ;  {[^.  AIark'\)  the  reproach  for  unbelief;  {S. 
Lnke)  the  manifestation  to  S.  Peter  (comp.  i  Cor.  xv.  5),  conversation 
on  the  road  to  Emmaus,  proof  that  He  is  not  a  spirit  (xxiv.  38,  39),  mani- 
festation before  the  Ascension  (50,  51;  comp.  Acts  i.  6—9);  (S.  Paul) 
manifestations  to  the  Twelve,  to  S.  James,  and  to  S.  Paul  himself  ( i 
Cor.  XV.  6,  7,  8). 

To  these  incidents  S.  John  adds,  besides  the  contents  of  chap,  xxi, 
the  gift  of  the  power  of  absolution,  and  the  manifestation  on  the  second 
Lord's  Day,  when  S.  Thomas  was  present. 

It  may  be  freely  admitted  that  the  difficulty  of  harmonizing  the  diffe- 
rent accounts  of  the  Resurrection  is  very  great.  As  so  often  in  the 
Gospel  narrative,  wc  have  not  the  knowledge  required  for  piecing  to- 
gether the  fragmentary  accounts  that  have  been  granted  to  us.  To  this 
extent  it  may  be  allowed  that  the  evidence  for  the  Resurrection  is  not 
what  we  should  antecedently  have  desired. 

But  it  is  no  paradox  to  say  that  for  this  very  reason,  as  well  as  for  other 
reasons,  the  evidence  is  sufficient.  Impostors  would  have  made  the  evi- 
dence more  harmonious.  The  difficulty  arises  from  independent  wit- 
nesses telling  their  own  tale,  not  caring  in  their  consciousness  of  its 
truth  to  make  it  clearly  agree  with  what  had  been  told  elsewhere.  The 
writer   of  the    Fourth    CK)spel  must  have  known  of  some,   if  not  all, 


vv.  I,  2.]  S.   JOHN,  XX.  355 

I — lo.     The  first  Evidence  of  the  Resurrection. 

The  first  day  of  the  week  cometh  Mary  Magdalene  early,  20 
when  it  was  yet  dark,  unto  the  sepulchre,  and  seeth   the 
stone  taken  away  from  the  sepulchre.     Then  she  runneth,  2 
and  cometh  to  Simon  Peter,  and  to  the  other  disciple,  whom 
Jesus  loved,  and  saith  unto  them,  They  have  taken  away  the 

of  the  Synoptic  accounts;  but  he  writes  freely  and  firmly  from  his  own 
independent  experience  and  information.  All  the  Gospels  agree  in  the 
following  veiy  important  particulars ; 

1.  The  Resurrection  itself  is  left  undescribed. 

2.  The  manifestations  were  granted  to  disciples  only,  but  to  disci- 
ples wholly  unexpectant  of  a  Resurrection. 

3.  They  were  received  with  doubt  and  hesitation  at  first. 

4.  Mere  reports  were  rejected. 

5.  The  manifestations  were  granted  to  all  kinds  of  witnesses,  both 
male  and  female,  both  individuals  and  companies. 

6.  The  result  was  a  conviction,  which  nothing  ever  shook,  that  'the 
Lord  had  risen  indeed'  and  been  present  with  them. 

All  four  accounts  also  agree  in  some  of  the  details; 

1.  The  evidence  begins  with  the  visit  of  women  to  the  sepulchre  in 
the  early  morning. 

2.  The  first  sign  was  the  removal  of  the  stone. 

3.  Angels  were  seen  before  the  Lord  was  seen. 
(See  Westcott,  Speaker's  Cotntnentary,  11.  pp.  287,  8.) 

1 — 10.     The  first  Evidence  of  the  Resurrection. 

1.  The  first  dayi\  Better,  But  on  the  first  day;  literally,  'day  one.' 
We  have  the  same  expression  Luke  xxiv.  i. 

the  stone  taken  away]  All  four  Gospels  note  the  displacement  of  the 
stone;  S.  Mark  alone  notes  the  placing  of  it  and  S.  Matthew  the  sealing. 
The  words  'taken  away  from'  should  rather  be  lifted  out  of:  the  Synop- 
tists  all  speak  of  'rot/ing  away'  the  stone. 

2.  Then  she  mnneth]  She  runneth  therefore,  concluding  that  the 
body  must  be  gone. 

Simon  Peter]  His  fall  was  probably  known  and  his  deep  repentance 
also :  he  is  still  chief  of  the  Apostles,  and  as  such  the  one  consulted  first. 

and  to  the  other]  The  repetition  of  'to'  implies  that  the  two  Apostles 
were  not  lodging  together,  although  v.  3  implies  that  they  were  close  to 
one  another. 

whom  Jesus  loved]  Perhaps  the  expression  is  meant  to  apply  to 
Simon  Peter  also;  'the  other  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved.'  This  becomes 
probable  when  we  notice  that  the  word  for  'loved'  is  not  that  used  of  S. 
John  in  xix.  26,  xxi.  7,  20  [agapdn),  but  the  more  general  word  {phi- 
lein).     See  on  xi.  5. 

They  have  taken]  She  does  not  attempt  to  determine  who,  whether 
friends  or  foes. 

23-2 


356  S.   JOHN,   XX.  [w.  3-9- 

Lord  out  of  the  sepulchre,  and  we  know  not  where  they 
shave  laid  him.     Peter  therefore  went  forth,  and  that  other 

4  disciple,  and    came  to  the  sepulchre.     So   they   ran    both 
together:  and  the  other  disciple  did  outrun  Peter,  and  came 

5  first  to  the  sepulchre.     And  he  stooping  down,  and  looking 

6  in,  saw  the  linen  clothes  lying  ;  yet  went  he  not  in.     Then 
cometh    Simon    Peter   following   him,  and   went   into   the 

7  sepulchre,  and  seeth  the  linen  clothes  lie,  and  the  napkin, 
that  was  about  his  head,  not  lying  with  the  linen  clothes, 

8  but  wrapped  together  in  a  place  by  itself.     Then  went  in 
also  tJiat  other  disciple,  which  came  first  to  the  sepulchre, 

9  and  he  saw,  and  believed.     For  as  yet  they  knew  not  the 

we  know  noi\  This  possibly  implies  that  other  women  had  been 
with  her,  as  stated  by  the  Synoptists.  If  so,  she  may  have  outstripped 
them  in  going  to  the  garden. 

3.  and  that. ..sepulchre\  Better,  and  tbe  other  disciple,  and  they  were 
coining  towards  the  sepulchre. 

4.  So  they  rati]     More  exactly,  But  they  began  to  run. 

did  outrun]  Literally,  ran  on  more  quickly  than,  as  being  much  the 
younger  man.  Would  a  writer  of  the  second  century  have  thought  of 
this  in  inventing  a  narrative? 

5.  stooping  down,  and  looking  in]  In  the  Greek  this  is  expressed  in 
a  single  word,  which  occurs  again  v.  11  and  Luke  xxiv.  12,  in  a  literal 
sense,  of 'bending  down  to  look  carefully  at;'  and  in  a  figurative  sense  in 
I  Pet.  i.  12  and  James  i.  25  (see  notes  in  both  places).  In  Ecclus.  xiv. 
23  it  is  used  of  the  earnest  searcher  after  wisdom,  in  xxi.  23  of  the  rude 
prying  of  a  fool. 

saw]     Better,  seeth,  at  a  glance  (blepci). 

6.  Then  cometh,  &c.]  IJetter,  Sijiion  Peter  therefore  also  cometh; 
because  S.  John  has  remained  standing  there  in  awe  and  meditation. 
S.  Peter  with  his  natural  impulsiveness  goes  in  at  once.  Both  Apostles 
act  characteristically. 

seeth]  Or,  beholdeth  {theorei).  He  takes  a  complete  survey,  and 
hence  sees  the  'napkin,'  which  S.  John  in  his  short  look  had  not 
observed. 

7.  the  napkin]     See  on  xi.  44  :  the  same  word  is  used  here. 

about  his  head]     Literally,  upon  His  head :  there  is  no  need  to  men- 
tion His  name.     The  writer  is  absorbed  in  Ins  subject. 
in  a  place  by  itself]     Literally,  apart  into  one  place. 

8.  Ihcn that  other]     Better,  Therefore  went  in  also  the  other. 

He  is  encouraged  by  his  older  companion.  Note  how  all  the  details 
tell  of  the  eye-witness  :  he  remembers  even  that  the  napkin  was  folded. 
Contrast  the  want  of  detail  in  Luke  xxiv.  12. 

and  believed]  More  difhculty  has  perhaps  been  made  about  this  than  is 
necessary.      'Believed  what?'  is  asked.      That  Jesus  was  risen.     The 


vv.  10-13.]  S.   JOHN,   XX.  357 

scripture,  that  he  must  rise  again  from  the  dead.     Then  the  10 
disciples  went  away  again  unto  their  own  home. 

II — 18.     The  Manifestatmi  to  Mary  Magdalene. 

But  Mary  stood  without  at  the  sepulchre  weeping  :   and  n 
as   she   wept,    she    stooped    down,    and   looked   into    the 
sepulchre,  and  seeth  two  angels  in  white  sitting,   the  one  12 
at   the   head,  and  the  other  at  the  feet,   where  the  body 
of  Jesus  had  lain.     And  they  say  unto  her,  Woman,  why  13 

whole  context  implies  if,  and  comp.  v.  25.  The  careful  arrangement 
of  the  grave-cloths  proved  that  tlie  body  had  not  been  taken  away  in 
haste  as  by  a  foe  :  and  friends  would  scarcely  have  removed  them  at  all. 
It  is  thoroughly  natural  that  S.  John  speaks  only  of  himself,  saying 
nothing  of  S.  Peter.  He  is  full  of  the  impression  which  the  empty  and 
orderly  tomb  made  upon  his  own  mind.  S.  Luke  (xxiv.  12)  speaks  only 
of  S.  Peter's  wonder,  neither  affirming  nor  denying  his  belief. 

9.  they  knew  not  the  scripture']  S.  John's  belief  in  the  Resurrection 
was  as  yet  based  only  on  what  he  had  seen  in  the  sepulchre.  He  had 
nothing  derived  from  prophecy  to  help  him.  The  candour  of  the  Evan- 
gelists is  again  shewn  very  strongly  in  the  simple  avowal  that  the  love 
of  Apostles  failed  to  grasp  and  remember  what  the  enmity  of  the  priests 
understood  and  treasured  up.  Even  with  Christ  to  expound  Scripture 
to  them,  the  prophecies  about  His  Passion  and  Resurrection  had  re- 
mained a  sealed  book  to  them  (comp.  Luke  xxiv.  25 — 27). 

he  mitst]  Comp.  iii.  14,  xii.  34;  Matt.  xvi.  21,  xxvi.  54;  Mark  viii. 
31;  Luke  ix.  22,  xvii.  25,  xxii.  37,  xxiv.  7,  26,  44.  The  Divine  deter- 
mination meets  us  throughout  Christ's  life  on  earth,  and  is  pointed  out 
with  increasing  frequency  towards  the  close  of  it.     Comp.  Eph.  iii.  i  r. 

10.  77ien  the  disciples']  The  disciples  therefore ;  because  nothing 
more  could  be  done  at  the  sepulchre. 

11 — 18.     The  Manifestation  to  Mary  Magdalene. 

11.  But  Maiy]  She  had  returned  to  the  sepulchre  after  the  hurry- 
ing Apostles.  Mark  xvi.  9  states  definitely,  what  we  gather  from  this 
section,  that  the  risen  Lord's  first  appearance  was  to  Maiy  Magdalene  : 
the  details  of  the  meeting  are  given  by  S.  John  alone. 

stood]     Or,  continued  standing,  after  the  other  two  had  gone. 
stooped  down,  and  looked]     See  on  z*.  5. 

12.  seeth]     Or,  beholdeth,  as  in  v.  6,  a  long  contemplative  gaze. 
tivo  angels]     This  is  the  only  place  where  angels  appear  in  S.  John's 

narrative.     Comp.  i.  51,  xii.  29,  [v.  4]. 

in  white]  In  the  Greek  'white'  is  plural,  'garments'  being  under- 
stood, as  in  Rev.  iii.  4  :  in  Rev.  iii.  5,  iS,  iv.  4  'garments'  is  expressed. 
Omit  'the'  before  'one'  and  for  'the  other  '  read  'one;'  one  at  the  head 
and  one  at  the  feet. 

13.  Woman]     See  on  ii.  4,  xix.  26. 


358  S.  JOHN,   XX.  [w.  14-16. 

weepest  thou  ?     She  saith  unto  them,  Because  they  have 
taken  away  my  Lord,   and  I   know  not  where  they  have 
,4  laid  him.     And  when  she  had  thus  said,  she  turned  her- 
self back,  and  saw  Jesus  standing,   and  knew  not  that  it 

15  was  Jesus.  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  Woman,  why  weepest 
thou  ?  whom  seekest  thou  ?  She,  supposing  him  to  be  the 
gardener,  saith  unto  him,  Sir,  if  thou  have  borne  him  hence, 
tell  me  where  thou  hast  laid  him,  and  I  will  take  him  away. 

16  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  Mary.     She  turned  herself,  and  saith 


my  Lord,  and  I  know  not\  In  v.  2  it  was  '  i/ie  Lord  and  we  know 
not.'  In  speaking  to  Apostles  she  includes  other  believers;  in  speaking 
to  strangers  she  represents  the  relationship  and  the  loss  as  personal. 
These  words  express  the  burden  of  her  thoughts  since  she  first  saw  that 
the  stone  had  been  removed.  We  may  reasonably  suppose  that  the 
Evangelist  obtained  his  information  from  Mary  Magdalene  herself. 
"The  extreme  simplicity  of  the  narrative,  it  may  be  added,  reflects 
something  of  the  solemn  majesty  of  the  scene.  The  sentences  follow 
without  any  connecting  particles  till  v.  19.     (Comp.  c.  xv.)"     Westcott 

in  loco. 

14.  And  when]  Omit  'and.'  Perhaps  she  becomes  m  some  way 
conscious  of  another  Presence. 

saw]     Better,  belioldeth,  as  in  vv.  6,  12. 

knew  not]  Christ's  Risen  Body  is  so  changed  as  not  to  be  recognised 
at  once  even  by  those  who  had  known  Him  well.  It  has  new  powers 
and  a  new  majesty.  Comp.  xxi.  4;  Luke  xxiv.  16,  37;  Matt,  xxviii.  17; 
[Mark  xvi.  12]. 

15.  the  gardener]     Because  he  was  there  at  that  early  hour. 

if  thou  have  borne  him  hence]  The  omission  of  the  name  is  very  life- 
like :  she  is  so  full  of  her  loss  that  she  assumes  that  others  must  know 
all  about  it.  'Thou'  is  emphatic;  'Thou  and  not,  as  I  fear,  some 
enemy.' 

I  will  take  him  away^  In  her  loving  devotion  she  docs  not  measure 
her  strength.  Note  that  throughout  it  is  'the  Lord'  (;:'.  2),  'my  Lord  ' 
(v.  13),  '  Him  '  thrice  {v.  15),  never  '  His  body'  or  '  the  corpse.'  His 
lifeless  form  is  to  her  still  Himself. 

16.  Maryf]  The  term  of  general  address,  'Woman,'  awoke  no 
echo  in  her  heart ;  the  sign  of  personal  knowledge  and  sympathy  comes 
home  to  her  at  once.    Thus  '  He  calleth  His  own  sheep  by  name'  (x.  3). 

saith  unto  him]  We  must  add  with  the  best  authorities,  in  Hebrew. 
The  insertion  is  of  importance  as  indicating  the  language  spoken  be- 
tween Christ  and  His  disciples.  S.  John  thinks  it  well  to  remind  Greek 
readers  that  Greek  was  not  the  language  used.  Comp.  Acts  xxii.  2, 
xxvi.  14.  The  expression  here  used  {Hebrdisti)  occurs  only  in  this  Go- 
spel (v.  2,  xix.  13,  17,  20)  and  in  Revelation  (ix.  11,  xvi.  16).  See  on 
xix.  37 


vv.  17,  18.]  S.   JOHN,   XX.  359 

unto  him,  Rabboni ;  which  is  to  say,  Master.     Jesus  saith  17 
unto  her,  Touch  me  not ;   for  I  am  not  yet  ascended  to  my 
Father:  iDut  go  to  my  brethren,  and  say  unto  them,  I  ascend 
unto  my  Father,  and  your  Father;  and  to  my  God,  and  your 
God.     Mary  Magdalene  came  and  told  the  disciples  that  18 

Rabboni^  More  exactly,  Rabbunl.  This  precise  form  occurs  also  in 
Mark  x.  51,  but  has  been  obliterated  in  the  A.  V.  It  is  said  to  be 
Galilean,  and  if  so  natural  in  a  woman  of  Magdala.  Would  any  but  a 
Jew  of  Palestine  have  preserved  this  detail  ? 

Master\  Or,  Teacher.  Its  literal  meaning  is  '  my  Master,' but  the 
pronominal  portion  of  the  word  had  lost  almost  all  meaning.  S.  John's 
translation  shews  that  as  yet  her  belief  is  very  imperfect  :  she  uses 
a  mere  human  title. 

17.  Touch  me  not,  for,  &c.]  This  is  a  passage  of  well-known  difficulty. 
At  first  sight  the  reason  given  for  refraining  from  touching  would  seem 
to  be  more  suitable  to  a  permission  to  touch.  It  is  perhaps  needless  to 
enquire  whether  the  '  for '  refers  to  the  whole  of  what  follows  or  only  to 
the  first  sentence,  'I  am  not  yet  ascended  to  the  Father?'  In  either 
case  the  meaning  would  be,  that  the  Ascension  has  not  yet  taken  place, 
although  it  soon  will  do  so,  whereas  Mary's  action  assumes  that  it  has 
taken  place.  If 'for'  refers  to  the  first  clause  only,  then  the  emphasis 
is  thrown  on  Mary's  mistake ;  if  '  for '  refers  to  the  whole  of  what 
is  said,  then  the  emphasis  is  thrown  on  the  promise  that  what  Mary 
craves  shall  be  granted  in  a  higher  way  to  both  her  and  others  very  soon. 
The  translation  '  touch  Me  not '  is  inadequate  and  gives  a  false  im- 
pression. The  vtrb  {haptesthai)  dues  not  mean  to  'touch'  and  'handle' 
with  a  view  to  seeing  whether  His  body  was  real ;  this  Christ  not  only 
allowed  but  enjoined  {v.  27  ;  Luke  xxiv.  39;  comp.  i  John  i.  i) :  rather 
it  means  to  '  hold  on  to '  and  'cling  to.'  Moreover  it  is  the  present  (not 
aorist)  imperative ;  and  the  full  meaning  will  therefore  be,  '  Do  not 
continue  holding  Me'  ox  %\m-^\j,  hold  Me  not.  The  old  and  often  in- 
terrupted earthly  intercourse  is  over  ;  the  new  and  continuous  intercourse 
with  the  Ascended  Lord  has  not  yet  begun  :  but  that  Presence  willbe 
granted  soon,  and  there  will  be  no  need  of  straining  eyes  and  clinging 
hands  to  realize  it.  (For  a  large  collection  of  various  interpretations  see 
Meyer.) 

to  my  Father}  The  better  reading  gives,  to  the  Father;  with  this  'My 
brethren '  immediately  following  agrees  better.  The  general  relation- 
ship applying  both  to  Him  and  them,  is  stated  first,  and  then  pointedly 
distinguished  in  its  application  to  Him  and  to  them. 

I ascend\  Or,  I  am  ascending.  The  change  has  already  begim. 
7ny  God]  The  risen  and  glorified  Redeemer  is  still  perfect  man. 
Comp.  Rev.  iii.  1-2.  Thus  also  S.  Paul  and  S.  Peter  speak  of  'the  God 
and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.'  Comp.  Eph.  i.  3  ;  2  Cor.  xi.  31 ; 
I  Peter  i.  3;  and  see  on  Rom.  xv.  6;  2  Cor.  i.  3,  where  the  expression 
is  blurred  in  the  A.  V. 

18.  came  and  told]  Better,  cometh  and  telleth;  literally,  comcth 
telling  instead  of  the  more  usual  'having  come  telleth.' 


36o  S.  JOHN,   XX.  [v.  19. 

she  had  seen  the  Lord,  and  that  he  had  spoken  these  things 
unto  her. 

19 — 23.     The  Manifestation  to  the  Ten  and  others. 

■9      Then  the  same  day  at  evening,  being  the  first  day  of  the 
week,  when  the  doors  were  shut  where  the  disciples  were 

Thus  as  Mary's  love  seems  to  have  been  the  first  to  manifest  itself 
(v.  i),  so  the  first  Manifestation  of  the  Risen  Lord  is  granted  to  her.  It 
confirms  our  trust  in  the  Gospel  narratives  to  find  this  stated.  A  writer 
of  a  fictitious  account  would  almost  certainly  have  represented  the  first 
appearance  as  being  to  the  Virgin,  or  to  S.  Peter,  the  chief  of  the 
Apostles,  or  to  S.  John,  the  beloved  disciple,  or  to  the  chosen  three. 
But  these  are  all  passed  over,  and  this  honour  is  given  to  her,  who  had 
once  been  possessed  by  seven  devils,  to  Mary  of  Magdala,  'for  she  loved 
much.'  A  late  and  worthless  tradition  does  assign  the  first  appearance 
to  the  Virgin ;  but  so  completely  has  Christ's  earthly  relationship  to  her 
been  severed  (xix.  26,  27),  that  henceforth  she  appears  only  among  the 
other  believers  (Acts  i,  14). 

19 — 23.    The  Manifestation  to  the  Ten  and  others. 

19.  The7t  the  same  day,  &c.]  Rather,  When  therefore  it  was  even- 
ing on  that  day,  the  first  day  of  the  week.  Note  the  great  precision 
of  the  expression.     'That  day,'  that  memorable  day,  the  'day  of  days.' 

Oh !    day  of  days !    shall  hearts  set  free 

No  minstrel  rapture  find  for  thee? 

Thou  art  the  Sun  of  other  days. 

They  shine  by  giving  back  thy  rays. 

Keble,  Clu-istian  Year,  Easter  Day. 
Comp.  i.  39,  V.  9,  xi.  49,  xviii.  13,  where  'that'  has  a  similar  meaning. 
Evidently  the  hour  is  late;  the  disciples  have  returned  from  Emniaus 
(Luke  xxiv.  ■23),  and  it  was  evening  when  they  left  Emmaus.  At  least  it 
must  be  long  after  sunset,  when  the  second  day  of  the  week,  according 
to  the  Jewish  reckoning,  would  begin.  And  S.  John  speaks  of  it  as  still 
part  of  the  first  day.  This  is  a  point  in  favour  of  S.  John's  using  the 
modern  method  in  counting  the  hours:  it  has  a  special  bearing  on  the 
explanation  of  'the  seventh  hour'  in  iv.  52.  See  notes  there  and  on 
xix.  14. 

7vhen  the  doors  were  shui'\  This  is  mentioned  both  here  and  v.  26  to 
shew  that  the  appearance  was  miraculous.  Afier  the  Resurrection 
Christ's  human  form,  though  slill  real  and  corporeal,  is  not  subject  to 
the  ordinary  conditions  of  material  bodies.  Before  the  Resurrection  He 
was  visible,  unless  lie  willed  it  otherwise;  after  the  Resurrection  it 
would  seem  that  He  was  invisible,  unless  He  willed  it  otherwise.  Comp. 
Luke  xxiv.  31. 

where  the  disciples  iverel  The  best  authorities  all  omit  'assembled.' 
S.  Luke  says  more  definitely,  '  the  eleven  and  they  that  were  with  them' 


vv.  20,  21.]  S.   JOHN,   XX.  361 

assembled  for  fear  of  the  JeAvs,  came  Jesus  and  stood  in  the 
midst,  and  saith  unto  them,  Peace  be  unto  you.     And  when  2 
he  had  so  said,  he  shewed  unto  them  his  hands  and  his  side. 
Then   were   the   disciples  glad,  when   they  saw  the  Lord. 
Then  said  Jesus  to  them  again,  Peace  be  unto  you :   as  my  2 

(xxiv.  33);  'the  eleven'  meaning  the  Apostolic  company,  although  one 
was  absent.  It  was  natural  that  the  small  community  of  believers  should 
be  gathered  together,  not  merely  for  mutual  protection  and  comfort,  but 
to  discuss  the  reported  appearances  to  the  women  and  to  S.  Peter. 

for  fear  of  the  ye%us\  Literally,  because  of  the  (prevailing)  fear  of  the 
JrMs  (comp.  vii.  1 3).  It  was  not  certain  that  the  Sanhedrin  would  rest 
content  with  having  put  Jesus  to  death;  all  the  less  so  as  rumours  of  His 
being  alive  again  were  spreading. 

came  JesusX  It  is  futile  to  discuss  how ;  that  the  doors  were  miracu- 
lously opened,  as  in  S.  Peter's  release  from  prison,  is  neither  stated  nor 
implied. 

Peace  be  unto  yon'\  The  ordinary  greeting  intensified.  _  His  last  word 
to  them  in  their  sorrow  before  His  Passion  (xvi.  33),  His  first  word  to 
them  in  their  terror  (Luke  xxiv.  37)  at  His  return,  is  'Peace.'  Possibly 
the  place  was  the  same,  the  large  upper  room  where  they  had  last  been 
all  together. 

20.  his  hands  and  his  side\  S.  Luke  (xxiv.  40),  who  does  not  men- 
tion the  piercing  of  the  side,  says  'His  hands  and  His  feet,'  and  adds 
that  He  told  them  to  'handle'  Him,  the  very  word  used  in  i  John  i.  i. 

Then  were  the  disciples^  The  disciples  therefore  -were.  Their  sorrow 
is  turned  into  joy  (xvi.  20),  joy  which  at  first  made  them  doubt  its  reality 
(Luke  xxiv.  41). 

when  they  saw  the  Lord]  Till  then  they  had  seen  a  form,  but  like 
Mary  of  Magdala  and  the  two  at  Emmaus,  knew  not  whose  it  was. 

21.  Then  said  Jesus']  Jesus  therefore  said;  because  now  they  were 
ready  to  receive  it.  Their  alarm  was  dispelled  and  they  knew  that  He 
was  the  Lord.     He  repeats  His  message  of  'Peace.' 

as  my  Father,  &c.]  Better,  As  the  Father  hath  sent  Me.  Christ's 
mission  is  sometimes  spoken  of  in  the  aorist  tense,  as  having  taken  place 
at  a  definite  point  in  history  (iii.  17,  34,  v.  38,  vi.  29,  57,  vii.  29,  viii. 
42,  X.  36,  xi.  42,  xvii.  3,  8,  18,  21,  23,  25),  in  which  case  the  fact  of  the 
Incarnation  is  the  prominent  idea.  Sometimes,  though  much  less  often, 
it  is  spoken  of,  as  here,  in  the  peifcct  tense,  as  a  fact  which  continues  in 
its  results  (v.  36;  i  John  iv.  9,  14),  in  which  case  the  present  and 
permanent  effects  of  the  mission  are  the  prominent  idea.  Christ's 
mission  is  henceforth  to  be  carried  on  by  His  disciples. 

The  Greek  for  'send'  is  not  the  same  in  both  clauses;  in  the  first, 
'hath  sent,'  it  is  apostelleiti ;  in  the  second,  'send,'  it  is  pempein. 
The  latter  is  the  most  general  word  for  'send,'  implying  no  special  rela- 
tion between  sender  and  sent ;  the  former  adds  the  notion  of  a  delegated 
authority  constituting  the  person  sent  the  envoy  or  representative  of  the 
sender.     Both  verbs  are  used  both  of  the  mission  of  Christ  and  of  the 


362  S.   JOHN,   XX.  [vv.  22,  23. 

22  Father  hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you.     And  when  he 
had  said  this,  he  breathed  on  t/ie7u,  and  saith  unto  them, 

23  Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost :   whose  soever  sins  ye  remit, 

mission  of  the  disciples.  Apostelldn  is  used  of  the  mission  of  Christ  in 
all  the  passages  quoted  above :  it  is  used  of  the  mission  of  the  disciples, 
iv.  38,  xvii.  18.  (Comp.  i.  6,  19,  24,  iii.  28,  v.  33,  vii.  32,  xi.  3.)  Pempein 
is  used  of  Christ's  mission  only  in  the  aorist  participle  (iv.  34,  v.  23,  24, 
30.  37,  vi.  38,  39,  40,  44,  vii.  16,  18,  28,  33,  viii.  16,  18,  26,  29,  ix.  4; 
and  in  all  the  passages  in  chaps,  xii — xvi.);  the  aorist  participle  of 
apostellein  is  not  used  by  S.  John,  although  the  S}Tioptists  use  it  in  this 
very  sense  (Matt.  x.  40;  Mark  ix.  37;  Luke  ix.  48,  x.  16).  Pempein  is 
used  of  disciples  here  and  in  xiii.  20  (of  the  Spirit,  xiv.  26,  xvi.  7). 

"The  general  result... seems  to  be,  that  in  this  charge  the  Lord  pre- 
sents His  ovk'n  Mission  as  the  one  abiding  Mission  of  the  Father;  this 
He  fulfils  through  His  Church.  His  disciples  receive  no  new  commis- 
sion, but  carry  out  His."     Westcott  in  loco. 

send  I  you]  Or,  am  I  sending  ji'ij?^ ;  their  mission  has  already  begun 
(comp.  V.  x-],  xvii.  9);  and  the  first  and  main  part  of  it  was  to  be  the 
proclamation  of  the  truth  just  brought  home  to  themselves— the  Resur- 
rection (Acts  i.  22,  ii.  24,  iv.  2,  33,  &c.). 

22.  he  breathed  on  tlietn'\  The  very  same  Greek  verb  (here  only  in 
N.T.)  is  used  by  the  LXX.  in  Gen.  ii.  7  (Wisdom  xv.  11)  of  breathing 
life  into  Adam.  This  Gospel  of  the  new  Creation  looks  back  at  its  close, 
as  at  its  beginning  (i.  i),  to  the  first  Creation. 

We  are  probably  to  regard  the  breath  here  not  merely  as  the  emblem 
of  the  Spirit  (iii.  8),  but  as  the  means  by  which  the  Spirit  was  imparted 
tothem.  _  'Receive  ye,'  combined  with  the  action  of  breathing,  imphes 
this.  This  is  all  the  more  clear  in  the  Greek,  because  pneuma  means 
both  'breath'  and  'spirit,' a  point  which  cannot  be  preserved  in  English; 
but  at  least  _' Spirit '  is  better  than  'Ghost.'  We  have  here,  therefore, 
an  anticipation  and  earnest  of  Pentecost;  just  as  Christ's  bodily  return 
from  the  grave  and  temporary  manifestation  to  them  was  an  anticipa- 
tion of  His  spiritual  return  and  abiding  Presence  with  them  'even  unto 
the  end  of  the  world.' 

Receive  ye]  Or,  take^r,  implying  that  the  recipient  may  welcome  or 
reject  the  gift :  he  is  not  a  mere  passive  receptacle.  It  is  the  very  word 
used  for  'Pake'  (Matt,  xxvi.  26;  Mark  xiv.  22;  Luke  xxii.  17)  in  the 
account  of  the  institution  of  the  Eucharist ;  which  somewhat  confirms  the 
view  that  here,  as  there,  there  is  an  outward  sign  and  vehicle  of  an  in- 
ward spiritual  grace.  The  expression  still  more  plainly  implies  that 
some  gift  was  offered  and  bestowed  then  and  there :  it  is  an  unnatural 
wresting  of  plain  language  to  make  'Take  ye'  a  mere  promise.  There 
was  therefore  a  Paschal  as  distinct  from  a  Pentecostal  gift  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  the  one  preparatory  to  the  other.  It  should  be  noticed  that 
'Holy  Ghost'  is  without  the  definite  article  in  the  Greek,  and  this  seems 
to  imply  that  the  gift  is  not  made  in  all  its  fulness.  See  on  xiv.  26, 
where  both  substantive  and  adjective  have  the  article. 

23.  Whose  soever  sins,  &c.]     This  power  accompanies  the  gift  of  the 


vv.  24,25-]  S.   JOHN,   XX.  363 

they  are  remitted  unto  them ;  ajid  whose  soever  si?is  ye 
retain,  they  are  retained. 

24 — 29.     The  Manifestatio?i  to  S.  Thomas  and  others. 
But  Thomas,  one  of  the  twelve,  called  Didymus,  was  not  24 
with  them  when  Jesus  came.     The  other  disciples  therefore  25 

Spirit  just  conferred.  It  must  be  noticed  (i)  that  it  is  given  to  the  whole 
company  present ;  not  to  the  Apostles  alone.  Of  the  Apostles  one  was 
absent,  and  there  were  others  who  were  not  Apostles  present :  no  hint  is 
given  that  this  power  is  confined  to  the  Ten.  The  commission  therefore 
iji  the  fii'st  instance  is  to  the  Christian  community  as  a  whole,  not  to  the 
Ministry  alone. 

It  follows  from  this  (2)  that  the  power  being  conferred  on  the  com- 
munity and  never  revoked,  the  power  continues  so  long  as  the  com- 
munity continues.  While  the  Christian  Church  lasts  it  has  the  power 
of  remitting  and  retaining  along  with  the  power  of  spiritual  discernment 
which  is  part  of  the  gift  of  the  Spirit.  That  is,  it  has  the  power  to 
declare  the  conditions  on  which  forgiveness  is  granted  and  the  fact  that 
it  has  or  has  not  been  granted. 

It  should  be  noted  (3)  that  the  expression  throughout  is  plural  on  both 
sides.  As  it  is  the  community  rather  than  individuals  that  is  invested 
with  the  power,  so  it  is  classes  of  men  rather  than  individuals  on 
whom  it  is  exercised.  (7<?(^i' deals  with  mankind  not  in  the  mass  but  with 
personal  love  and  knowledge  soul  by  soul.  His  Church  in  fulfilling  its 
mission  from  Him,  while  keeping  this  ideal  in  view,  is  compelled  for 
the  most  part  to  minister  to  men  in  groups  and  classes.  The  plural 
here  seems  to  indicate  not  what  must  always  or  ought  to  be  the  case, 
but  what  generally  is. 

are  remitted. ..are  retained^  Both  verbs  are  perfects,  though  there  is 
some  doubt  about  the  reading  as  regards  the  former.  The  force  of  the 
perfect  is — 'are  ipso  facto  remitted' — 'are  ipso  facto  retained.'  When 
the  community  under  the  guidance  of  the  Spirit  has  spoken,  the  result  is 
complete. 

retain^  i.e.  'hold  fast,'  so  that  they  do  not  depart  from  the  sinner. 
The  word  occurs  here  only  in  this  Gospel.  In  Revelation  it  is  used  of 
'holding  fast  doctrine,'  &c.  (ii.   14,  15,  25,  iii.   n;  comp.  2  Thess.  ii. 

24 — 29.    The  Manifestation  to  S.  Thomas  and  others. 
Pecuhar  to  S.  John. 

24.      Thomas^     See  on  xi.  16. 

the  twelve']     See  on  vi.  67. 

was  not  with  the»i\  His  melancholy  temperament  might  dispose  him 
to  solitude  and  to  put  no  trust  in  the  rumours  of  Christ's  Resurrection  if 
they  reached  him  on  Easter  Day.  And  afterwards  his  despondency  is 
too  great  to  be  removed  by  the  testimony  even  of  eye-witnesses.  The 
test  which  he  selects  has  various  points  of  contact  with  the  surroundings. 


3^U  S.   JOHN,    XX.  [vv.  26-28. 

said  unto  him,  We  have  seen  the  Lord.  But  he  said  unto 
them.  Except  I  shall  see  in  his  hands  the  print  of  the  nails, 
and  put  my  finger  into  the  print  of  the  nails,  and  thrust  my 

26  hand  into  his  side,  I  will  not  believe.  And  after  eight  days 
again  his  disciples  were  within,  and  Thomas  with  them :  then 
came  Jesus,  the  doors  being  shut,  and  stood  in  the  midst, 

27  and  said,  Peace  be  unto  you.  Then  saith  he  to  Thomas, 
Reach  hither  thy  finger,  and  behold  my  hands ;  and  reach 
hither  thy  hand,  and  thrust  //  into  my  side  :   and  be  not 

28  faithless,  but  believing.     And   Thomas  answered  and  said 

The  wounds  had  been  the  cause  of  his  despair ;  it  is  they  that  must 
reassure  him.  The  print  of  them  would  prove  beyond  all  doubt  that  it 
was  indeed  His  Lord  that  had  returned  to  him.  Moreover,  the  Ten  had 
no  doubt  told  him  of  their  own  terror  and  hesitation,  and  how  Jesus  had 
invited  them  to  'handle  Him  and  see'  in  order  to  convince  themselves. 
This  would  suggest  a  similar  mode  of  proof  to  S.  Thomas. 

25.  print... put... print... thrust^  The  A.V.  preserves  the  emphatic 
repetition  of  'print'  but  obliterates  the  similar  repetition  of  'put.'  The 
verb  {ballein)  rendered  'thrust'  here  and  in  &.  27  is  the  same  as  that 
rendered  'put.'  Its  literal  meaning  is  'throw'  or  'cast;'  but  in  late 
Greek  its  meaning  becomes  more  vague  and  general;  'place,  lay,  put.' 
Comp.  v.  7,  xiii.  1,  xviii.  11,  Here  put  would  be  better  in  all  three 
places. 

/  will  not  believe]  Or,  /  will  in  no  wise  believe ;  the  negative  is  in 
the  strongest  form.     Comp.  iv.  48,  vi.  37,  &c. 

26.  after  eight  days]  Including  both  extremes,  according  to  the 
Jewish  method.  This  is  therefore  the  Sunday  following  Easter  Day. 
We  are  not  to  understand  that  the  disciples  had  not  met  together  during 
the  interval,  but  that  there  is  no  appearance  of  Jesus  to  record.  The 
first  step  is  here  taken  towards  establishing  'the  Lord's  Uay'  as  the 
Christian  weekly  festival.  The  Passover  is  over,  so  that  the  meeting  of 
the  disciples  has  nothing  to  do  with  that. 

again... within]  Implying  that  the  place  is  the  same.  No  liint  is 
given  as  to  the  lime  of  day. 

then  came  Jesjn;]  Ijcttcr,  in  the  simplicity  of  the  original,  Jesus 
cometli. 

27.  saith,  &c.]  He  at  once  shews  to  S.  Thomas  that  He  knows  the 
test  that  he  had  demanded. 

behold]  Better,  see;  it  is  the  same  word  as  S.  Thomas  used  in 
V.  25. 

be  not]  Rather,  become  not.  The  demand  for  this  proof  did  not 
make  S.  Thomas  faithless,  but  it  placed  liim  in  peril  of  becoming  so. 
'P'aithlcss'  and  'believing'  are  verbal  as  well  as  actual  contradictories  in 
the  Greek.  'P'aithless'  and  'faithful,'  'unbelieving  and  'believing' 
would  in  this  respect  be  better;  but  it  is  best  to  leave  it  as  in  the  .\.V. 

28.  And  Thoiitasansivered]     Omit  'and.'     This  answer  and  Christ's 


29-]  S.   JOHN,  XX.  365 


unto  him,  My  Lord  and  my  God.     Jesus  saith  unto  him,  29 
Thomas,  because   thou  hast  seen  me,  thou  hast  beheved : 
blessed  are  they  that  have  not  seen,  and  yet  have  beheved. 

comment,  'because  thou  hast  seen,^  seem  to  shew  that  S.  Thomas  did 
not  use  the  test  which  he  had  demanded.  In  accordance  with  his 
desponding  temperament  he  had  underrated  the  possibiHties  of  being 
convinced. 

My  Lord  and  my  God]  Most  unnatural  is  the  Unitarian  view,  that 
these  words  are  an  expression  of  astonishment  addressed  io  God.  Against 
this  are  (i)  the  plain  and  conclusive  'said  uti/o  ///'m;'  (2)  the  words 
'my  Lord,'  which  manifestly  are  addressed  to  Christ  (comp.  v.  13); 
(3)  the  fact  that  this  confession  of  faith  forms  a  climax  and  conclusion  to 
the  whole  Gospel.  The  words  are  riglitly  considered  as  an  impassioned 
declaration  on  the  part  of  a  devoted  but  (in  the  belter  sense  of  the  term) 
sceptical  Apostle  of  his  conviction,  not  merely  that  his  Risen  Lord 
stood  before  him,  but  that  this  Lord  was  also  his  God.  And  it  must  be 
noted  that  Christ  does  not  correct  His  Apostle  for  this  avowal,  any 
more  than  He  corrected  the  Jews  for  supposing  that  He  claimed  to  be 
'equal  with  God'  (v.  18,  19);  on  the  contrary  He  accepts  and  approves 
this  confession  of  belief  in  His  Divinity. 

29.  Thomas,  because,  &c.]  'Thomas'  must  be  omitted  on  overwhelm- 
ing evidence,  although  the  addition  of  the  name  seems  natural  here  as  in 
xiv.  9.  'Thou  hast  believed'  is  half  exclamation,  half  question  (comp. 
xvi.  31). 

blessed  are  they  that  have  not  seen]  Rather,  Blessed  are  they  that  saw 
not.  There  must  have  been  some  disciples  who  beheved  in  the  Resur- 
rection merely  on  the  evidence  of  others.  Jesus  had  not  appeared  to 
every  one  of  His  followers. 

This  last  great  declaration  of  blessedness  is  a  Beatitude  which  is  the 
special  property  of  the  countless  number  of  believers  who  have  never 
seen  Christ  in  the  flesh.  Just  as  it  is  possible  for  every  Christian  to  be- 
come equal  in  blessedness  to  Christ's  Mother  and  brethren  by  obedience 
(Matt.  xii.  49,  50),  so  it  is  possible  for  them  to  transcend  the  blessed- 
ness of  Apostles  by  faith.  All  the  Apostles,  like  S.  Thomas,  had  seen 
before  they  believed :  even  S.  John's  faith  did  not  shew  itself  until  he 
had  had  evidence  (z/.  8).  S.  Thomas  had  the  opportunity  of  believing 
without  seeing,  but  rejected  it.  The  same  opportunity  is  granted  to  all 
believers  now. 

Thus  this  wonderful  Gospel  begins  and  ends  with  the  same  article  of 
faith.  'The  Word  was  God,'— 'the  Word  became  flesh,'  is  the  Evan- 
gelist's solemn  confession  of  a  belief  which  had  been  proved  and 
deepened  by  the  experience  of  more  than  half  a  century.  From  this  he 
starts,  and  patiently  traces  out  for  us  the  main  points  in  the  evidence 
out  of  which  that  belief  had  grown.  This  done,  he  shews  us  the  power 
of  the  evidence  over  one  needlessly  wary  of  being  influenced  by  in- 
sufficient testimony.  The  result  is  the  instantaneous  confession,  at  once 
the  result  of  questioning  and  the  victory  over  it,  'My  Lord  and  my 
God.' 


366  S.   JOHN,  XX.  [vv.  30,  31. 

30,  31.     The  Conclusion  and  Purpose  of  the  Gospel. 

30  And  many  other  signs  truly  did  Jesus  in  the  presence  of 

31  his  disciples,  which  are  not  written  in  this  book :  but 
these  are  written,  that  ye  might  believe  that  Jesus  is  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God ;  and  that  believing  ye  might  have 
life  through  his  name. 

30,  31.    The  Conclusion  and  Purpose  of  the  Gospel. 

30.  And  many  other  signs  truly]  The  Greek  cannot  be  exactly 
rendered  without  awkwardness :  Therefore  (as  might  be  expected  from 
what  has  been  written  here)  many  and  otha-  si\''ns.  The  context  shews 
that  'signs'  must  not  be  limited  to  proofs  of  the  Resurrection:  S.  John 
is  glancing  back  over  his  whole  work — 'this  book  ;'  and  the  'signs'  here, 
as  elsewhere  in  this  Gospel,  are  miracles  generally.  Comp.  especially 
xii.  37.  The  expression  'many  and  other'  points  the  same  way;  many 
in  number  and  different  in  kind  from  those  related.  The  signs  of  the 
Resurrection  from  the  nature  of  the  case  were  all  similar  in  kind. 

31.  dut  these  are  •written]  On  the  one  hand  there  were  many  un- 
recorded; but  on  the  other  hand  some  have  been  recorded.  Note 
in  the  Greek  the  men  and  the  de  and  comp.  xix.  23,  25.  It  was  not 
S.  John's  purpose  to  write  a  complete  'Life  of  Christ;'  it  was  not  his 
purpose  to  write  a  'Life'  at  all.  Rather  he  would  narrate  just  those 
facts  respecting  Jesus  which  would  produce  a  saving  faith  in  Him  as 
the  Messiah  and  the  Son  of  God.  S.  John's  work  is  'a  Gospel  and  not 
a  biography.' 

that  ye  might  believe]     That  ye  may  believe. 

that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  &c.]  That  those  who  read  this  record  may 
be  convinced  of  two  things,  — identical  in  the  Divine  counsels,  identical 
in  fact,  but  separate  in  the  thoughts  of  men,  —  (i)  that  Jesiis,  the  well- 
known  Teacher  and  true  man,  is  the  Christ,  the  long  looked  for  Messiah 
and  Deliverer  of  Israel,  the  fulfiller  of  type  and  prophecy;  (2)  that  He 
is  also  the  Son  of  God,  the  Divine  Word  and  true  God.  Were  He  not 
the  latter  He  could  not  be  the  former,  although  men  have  failed  to  see 
this.  Some  had  been  looking  for  a  mere  Prophet  and  Wonder-worker, 
— a  second  Moses  or  a  second  Elijah;  others  had  been  looking  for  an 
earthly  King  and  Conqueror, — a  second  David  or  a  second  Solomon. 
These  views  were  all  far  short  of  the  truth,  and  too  often  obscured  and 
hindered  the  truth.  Jesus,  the  Lord's  Anointed,  must  be  and  is  not 
only  very  man  but  very  God.     Comp.  i  John  iv.  14,  15. 

ye  7night  have  life]  Ye  may  have  life.  The  tmth  is  worth  having  for 
its  own  sake :  but  in  this  case  to  possess  the  truth  is  to  possess  eternal 
life.  Comp.  i  John  v.  13.  Note  once  more  that  eternal  life  is  not  a 
a  prize  to  be  won  hereafter;  in  believing  these  great  truths  we  have 
eternal  life  already  (see  on  v.  24). 

through  his  name]  Rather,  in  His  name  (see  on  i.  12).  Thus  the 
conclusion  of  the  Gospel  is  an  echo  of  the  beginning  (i.  4,  12).  Comp. 
Acts  iv.  10;  I  Cor.  vi.  11. 


V.  I.]  S.  JOHN,  XXI.  367 

Chap.  XXI.     The  Epilogue  or  Appendix. 

I — 14.     The  Alatiifestation  to  the  Seven  and  the  Miraculous 
Dratight  of  Fishes. 

After  these  things  Jesus   shewed  himself  again   to   the  21 

It  is  quite  manifest  that  this  was  in  the  first  instance  intended  as  the 
end  of  the  Gospel.  The  conflict  between  belief  and  unbelief  recorded 
in  it  reach  a  climax  in  the  confession  of  S.  Thomas  and  the  Beatitude 
which  follows  :  the  work  appears  to  be  complete ;  and  the  Evangelist 
abruptly  but  deliberately  brings  it  to  a  close.  What  follows  is  an  after- 
thought, added  by  S.  John's  own  hand,  as  the  style  and  language 
sufficiently  indicate,  but  not  part  of  the  original  plan.  There  is  nothing 
to  shew  how  long  an  interval  elapsed  before  the  addition  was  made,  nor 
whether  the  Gospel  was  ever  published  without  it.  The  absence  of 
evidence  as  to  this  latter  point  favours  the  view  that  the  Gospel  was  not 
given  to  the  world  until  after  the  appendix  was  written. 

Sixteen  distinct  marks  tending  to  shew  that  chap.  xxi.  is  by  S.  John 
are  pointed  out  in  the  notes  and  counted  up  by  figures  in  square  brackets, 
thus  [i].  Besides  these  points  it  should  be  noticed  that  S.  John's  cha- 
racteristic 'therefore'  occurs  seven  times  {vv.  5,  6,  7,  9,  15,  2x,  23)  in 
twenty-three  verses. 

Chap.  XXI.    The  Epilogue  or  Appendix. 

This  Epilogue  to  a  certain  extent  balances  the  Prologue,  the  main 
body  of  the  Gospel  in  two  great  divisions  lying  in  between  them ;  but 
with  this  difference,  that  the  Prologue  is  part  of  the  original  plan  of  the 
Gospel,  whereas  the  Epilogue  is  not.  It  is  evident  that  when  the 
Evangelist  wrote  xx.  30,  he  had  no  intention  of  narrating  any  more 
'signs.'  The  reason  for  adding  this  appendix  can  be  conjectured  with 
something  like  certainty :  the  Evangelist  wished  to  give  a  full  and  exact 
account  of  Christ's  words  respecting  himself,  about  which  there  had  been 
serious  misunderstanding.  In  order  to  make  the  meaning  of  Christ's 
saying  as  clear  as  possible,  S.  John  narrates  in  detail  the  circumstances 
which  led  to  its  being  spoken. 

The  whole  of  the  chapter  is  peculiar  to  S.  John's  Gospel.  It  falls 
into  four  parts,  i.  The  Manifestation  to  the  Seven  and  the  Miraculous 
Draught  of  Fishes  (i — 14).  2.  The  Commission  to  S.  Peter  and  Pre- 
diction as  to  his  Death  (15 — 19).  3.  The  misunderstood  Saying  respecting 
the  Evangelist  [t.0 — 23).     4.    Concluding  Notes  [2^,  2^). 

1 — 14.     The  Manifestation  to  the  Seven  and  the 
Miraculous  Draught  of  Fishes. 

1.  After  these  things^  This  vague  expression  (see  on  v.  i,  vi.  i, 
xix.  38)  suits  an  afterthought  which  has  no  direct  connexion  with  what 
immediately  precedes. 

shewed  himself^  Better,  manifested  Himself.  The  rendering  of  this 
verb  {phanerotin),  which  is  one  of  S.  John's  favourite  words  [i],  should 


368  S.  JOHN,  XXI.  [vv.  2— 4. 

disciples  at  the  sea  of  Tiberias ;   and  on  this  wise  shewed  he 

2  himself.  There  were  together  Simon  Peter,  and  Thomas 
called  Didymus,  and  Nathanael  of  Cana  in  Galilee,  and  the 

3  sons  of  Zebedee,  and  two  other  of  his  disciples.  Simon  Peter 
saith  unto  them,  I  go  a  fishing.  They  say  unto  him,  We 
also  go  with  thee.    They  went  forth,  and  entered  into  a  ship 

4  immediately ;    and   that  night  they  caught   nothing.     But 

be  kept  uniform,  especially  here,  ii.  11,  vii.  4,  xvii.  6,  where  the  active 
voice  is  used.  Comp.  i.  31,  iii.  21,  ix.  3,  xxi.  14;  i  John  i.  2,  ii.  19, 
28,  iii.  2,  5,  8,  iv.  9.  In  the  other  Gospels  the  word  occurs  only  Mark 
iv.  22;  [xvi.  12,  14],  in  all  cases  in  the  passive  form. 

agniit\  This  (as  v.  14  shews)  points  back  to  the  manifestation  to  S. 
Thomas  and  the  rest  (xx.  26). 

sea  of  Tiberias]  See  on  vi.  i.  S.  John  alone  uses  this  name  [2].  The 
return  of  the  disciples  from  Jerusalem  to  Galilee  is  commanded  Matt, 
xxviii.  7;  Mark  xvi.  7.  They  returned  to  Jerusalem  soon,  and  remained 
there  from  the  Ascension  to  Pentecost  (Acts  i.  4).  S.  Matthew  notices 
only  the  appearances  in  Galilee,  S.  Luke  [and  S.  Mark]  only  those  in 
Jerusalem.     S.  John  gives  some  of  both  groups. 

on  this  wise  shelved  he]  Better,  He  manifested  on  this  wise.  This 
repetition  is  S.  John's  style  [3]. 

2.  There  were  together'\  Probably  all  seven  belonged  to  the  neigh- 
bourhood; we  know  this  of  four  of  them. 

Tho?nas'\  See  on  xi.  16,  xiv.  5,  xx.  24.  All  particulars  about  him 
are  given  by  S.  John  [4]. 

NathanaeT\  See  on  i.  45:  the  descriptive  addition  'of  Cana  of 
Galilee'  occurs  here  only.     S.  John  alone  mentions  Nathanael  [5]. 

the  sons  of  Zehedee'\  If  one  of  the  sons  of  Zebedee  were  not  the  writer, 
they  would  have  been  placed  first  after  S.  Peter,  instead  of  last  of  those 
named  [6].  The  omission  of  their  names  also  is  in  harmony  with  S. 
John's  reserve  about  all  closely  connected  with  himself  [7]. 

two  other\  Some  conjecture  Andrew  and  Philip;  but  if  so,  why  are 
the  names  not  given?  More  probably  these  nameless  disciples  are  not 
Apostles. 

3.  Simon  Peter]  As  so  often,  he  takes  the  lead.  In  the  interval  of 
waiting  for  definite  instructions  the  disciples  have  returned  to  their  usual 
etnployment.  Once  more  we  have  precise  and  vivid  details,  as  of  an 
eye-witness. 

IVe  also  g6\     Rather,  we  also  come. 

went  forth]  From  the  town  or  village,  probably  Capernaum  or 
Bethsaida. 

into  a  ship]  Better,  into  Va.Q  ships,  'Immediately'  must  be  omitted 
on  decisive  evidence. 

that  night]  Better,  In  that  night.  'That'  perhaps  indicates  that 
failure  was  exceptional;  or  it  may  mean  'that  memorable  night'  (comp. 
xix.  31 ;  XX.  19).     Niglit  was  the  best  lime  for  fishing  (Luke  v.  5). 

they  caught  nothing]     Failure  at  first  is  the  common  lot  of  Christ's 


vv.  5—7.]  S.   JOHN,   XXI.  3<>9 

when  the  morning  was  now  come,  Jesus  stood  on  the  shore  : 
but  the  disciples  knew  not  that  it  was  Jesus.     Then  Jesus  5 
saith  unto  them,  Children,  have  ye   any  meat?   They  an- 
swered him,  No.     And  he  said  unto  them.  Cast  the  net  on  6 
the  right  side  of  the  ship,  and  ye   shall   find.     They  cast 
therefore,  and  now  they  were  not  able  to  draw  it  for  the 
multitude  of  fishes.     Therefore  that  disciple  whom   Jesus  7 
loved  saith  unto  Peter,  It  is  the  Lord.     Now  when  Simon 
Peter  heard  that  it  was  the  Lord,  he  girt  his  fisher's  coat 

fishers.  His  Presence  again  causing  success  after  failure  might  bring 
home  to  them  the  lesson  that  apart  from  Him  they  could  do  nothing 
(xv.  5). 

The  word  here  used  for  'catch'  does  not  occur  in  the  Synoptists,  but 
besides  v.  10  is  found  six  times  in  this  Gospel  (vii.  30,  32,  44,  viii.  ?o, 
X.  39,  xi.  57),  and  once  in  Revelation  (xix.  20)  [8].  Elsewhere  only 
Acts  iii.  7,  xii.  4;  1  Cor.  xi.  32. 

4.  morning  luas  now  come]  The  better  reading  gives,  dawn  was  now 
breaking. 

stood  on  the  shore]  Literally,  stood  on  to  the  beach,  i.  e.  He  came  and 
stood  on  the  beach. 

hut]  Nevertheless,  or  howbelt  [nwiitoi,  a  particle  rare  in  N.T.  out- 
side this  Gospel);  implying  that  this  was  surprising.  Comp.  iv.  27, 
vii.  13,  xii.  42,  XX.  5. 

knew  not]     See  on  xx.  14. 

5.  Then  yesus]  Jesus  therefore ;  because  they  did  not  recognise 
Him. 

Children]  Perhaps  a  mere  term  of  friendly  address  (paidia)  ;  not  the 
affectionate  term  used  xiii.  33  (teknid).  Paidia  occurs  i  John  ii.  14,  18; 
teknia  occurs  i  John  ii.  i,  12,  28,  iii.  7,  18,  iv.  4,  v.  21. 

meat]  The  Greek  word  {prosphagion)  occurs  here  only.  It  appears 
to  mean  something  eaten  with  bread,  especially  fish.  Perhaps  we  should 
translate,  Have  ye  any  fish? 

6.  They  cast  therefore]  Perhaps  they  thought  the  stranger  saw  fish 
on  the  right  side.  Fish  are  at  times  seen  "in  dense  masses"  in  the 
lake. 

7.  Therefore  that  disciple]  The  characteristics  of  the  two  Apostles 
are  again  most  delicately  yet  clearly  given  (comp.  xx.  2 — 9).  S.  John  is 
the  first  to  apprehend;  S.  Peter  the  first  to  act  [9]. 

Now  when  Simon  Peter  heard]    Simon  Peter  therefore  having  heard. 

fisher's  coat]  The  Greek  word  (ependntes)  occurs  here  only.  It  was 
his  upper  garment,  which  he  gathered  round  him  "with  instinctive 
reverence  for  the  presence  of  his  Master"  (Westcott).  'Naked'  need 
not  mean  more  than  '  stripped'  of  the  upper  garment.  "No  one  but  an 
eye-witness  would  have  thought  of  the  touch  in  v.  7,  which  exactly  in- 
verts the  natural  action  of  one  about  to  swim,  and  yet  is  quite  accounted 
for  by  the  circumstances."     S.  p-  267. 

S.  JOHN  24 


370  S.  JOHN,   XXI.  [vv.  8— II. 

unto  him,  (for  he  was  naked,)  and  did  cast  himself  into  the 

8  sea.     And  the   other   disciples  came  in  a  little  ship  ;   (for 
they  were  not  far  from  land,  but  as  it  were  two  hundred 

9  cubits,)  dragging  the  net  with  fishes.     As  soon  then  as  they 
were  come  to  land,  they  saw  a  fire  of  coals  there,  and  fish 

10  laid  thereon,  and  bread.     Jesus  saith  unto  them.  Bring  of 

11  the  fish  which  ye  have  now  caught     Simon  Peter  went  up, 

cast  himself '\  with  his  habitual  impulsiveness. 

8.  in  a  little  ship\  Rather,  in  tlio  boat,  whether  'the  ship'  oiv.  3 
or  a  smaller  boat  attached  to  it,  we  cannot  determine, 

tzvo  hundred  cubits']    About  100  yards. 

9.  As  soon  as. .  .they  saw\    Better,  When  therefore. .  .they  see. 

a  fire  of  coals]  See  on  xviii.  18 :  the  word  occurs  only  there  and  here 
in  N.  T.  [10].     'There'  is  hterally  laid. 

fish  laid  thereon,  and  bread]  Or  possibly,  Z.  fish  laid  thereon  and  9. 
loaf.  But  the  singulars  may  be  collectives  as  in  the  A.  V.  The  word 
for  fish  {opsarion)  is  similar  in  meaning,  though  not  in  derivation,  to 
the  one  used  in  v.  5.  (Seeon  vi.  9.)  In  z'.  11  yet  another  word  is  used 
{ichthus),  which  means  'fish'  generally,  whether  for  eating  or  not. 

10.  fish]     The  same  word  as  in  v.  9,  but  in  the  plural. 
caught]     See  on  v.  3. 

11.  went  up]  Better,  with  the  best  texts,  ivent  up  therefore:  the 
meaning  probably  is  'went  on  board'  the  vessel,  now  in  shallow  water. 
The  details  in  this  verse  are  strong  evidence  of  the  writer  having  been 
an  eye-witness:  he  had  helped  to  count  these  'great  fishes 'and  gives  the 
number,  not  because  there  is  anything  mystical  in  it,  but  because  he  re- 
members it. 

The  points  of  contrast  between  this  Draught  of  Fishes  and  the  similar 
miracle  at  the  beginning  of  Christ's  ministry  are  so  numerous  and  so 
striking,  that  it  is  difficult  to  resist  the  conclusion  that  the  spiritual 
meaning,  which  from  very  early  times  has  been  deduced  from  them,  is 
divinely  intended.  Symbolical  interpretations  of  Scripture  are  of  three 
kinds:  (i)  Fanciful  and  illegitimate.  These  are  simply  misleading: 
tliey  force  into  plain  statements  meanings  wholly  unreal  if  not  false;  as 
when  the  153  fishes  are  made  to  symbolize  Gentiles,  Jews,  and  the 
Trinity.  (2)  Fanciful  but  legitimate.  These  are  harmless,  and  may  be 
edifying:  they  use  a  plain  statement  to  inculcate  a  spiritual  lesson, 
although  there  is  no  evidence  that  such  lesson  is  intended.  (3)  Legiti- 
mate and  divinely  intended.  In  these  cases  the  spiritual  meaning  is 
either  pointed  out  for  us  in  Scripture  (Luke  v.  10),  or  is  so  strikingly  in 
harmony  with  the  narrative,  that  it  seems  reasonable  to  accept  it  as 
purposely  included  in  it.  Of  course  it  requires  both  spiritual  and  intel- 
lectual power  to  determine  in  any  given  case  to  which  class  a  particular 
interpretation  belongs;  but  in  the  present  instance  we  may  safely  assign 
the  symbolism  to  the  third  class. 

The  main  points  are  these.  The  two  Miraculous  Draughts  represent 
the  Church  Militant  and  the  Church  Triumphant.     The  one  gathers 


vv.  12-15.]  S.  JOHN,  XXI.  371 

and  drew  the  net  to  land  full  of  great  fishes,  an  hundred  and 
fifty  and  three  :   and  for  all  there  were  so  many,  yet  was  not 
the  net  broken.     Jesus   saith  unto  them.  Come  and  dine,  n 
And  none  of  the  disciples  durst  ask  him,  Who  art  thou  ? 
knowing   that  it   was  the  Lord.     Jesus  then  cometh,  and  13 
taketh  bread,  and  giveth  them,  and  fish  likewise.     This  is  14 
now  the  third  time  that  Jesus  shewed  himself  to  his  disciples, 
after  that  he  was  risen  from  the  dead. 

15 — 19.     The  Commission  to  S.  Peter  and  Prediction  as  to 

his  death. 

So  when  they  had  dined,  Jesus  saith  to   Simon   Peter,  15 

together  an  untold  multitude  of  both  good  and  bad  in  the  troubled  waters 
of  this  world.  Its  net  is  rent  with  schisms  and  its  Ark  seems  like  to 
sink.  The  other  gathers  a  definite  number  of  elect,  and  though  they  be 
many  contains  them  all,  taking  them  not  on  the  stormy  ocean  but  on 
the  eternal  shore  of  peace. 

12.  Co7ne  and  dine]  The  meal  indicated  is  not  the  principal  meal 
of  the  day  [deipnoji)  which  was  taken  in  the  afternoon,  but  the  morning 
meal  [aristojt)  or  breakfast.     See  on  Luke  xi.  37. 

And  nojte]  Omit  'and.'  There  is  a  solemn  simplicity  in  the  narra- 
tive. The  sentences  from  v.  10  to  v.  14  have  no  connecting  particles: 
comp.  chap.  xv.  and  xx.  13 — 19. 

tione  durst  ask... knowing]  A  mixture  of  perplexity,  awe,  and  convic- 
tion. They  are  convinced  that  He  is  the  Lord,  yet  feel  that  He  is 
changed,  and  reverence  restrains  them  from  curious  questions.  Comp. 
Matt.  ii.  8,  x.  ir.  The  writer  knows  the  inmost  feelings  of  Apostles 
(comp.  ii.  II,  17,  22,  iv.  27,  33,  vi.  21,  ix.  2,  xx.  20)  [11]. 

13.  yesus  theft  Cometh]  Omit 'then.'  They  are  afraid  to  approach, 
so  He  comes  to  them.  'Bread'  and  'fish'  are  in  the  singular,  as  in  v.  9, 
but  with  the  definite  article,  which  points  back  to  z'.  9;  'the  bread'  and 
'the  fish'  which  had  been  mentioned  before.  Of  course  this  is  not  the 
fisli  that  had  just  been  caught,  and  nothing  is  told  us  as  to  how  it  was 
provided.     The  food  is  a  gift  from  the  Lord  to  His  disciples. 

14.  This  is  now  the  third  time]  We  have  a  similar  construction  2 
Pet.  iii.  I.  The  two  previous  manifestations  are  probably  those  related 
XX.  19 — 23,  26 — 29:  but  we  have  not  sufficient  knowledge  to  arrange 
the  different  appearances  in  chronological  order.   See  on  Luke  xxiv.  49. 

shewed  himself]     Manifested  Himself:  see  on  z^.  i. 

15 — 19.    The  Commission  to  S.  Peter  and  Prediction  as  to 

his  death. 

15.  dined]     See  on  z;.  12. 

saith  to  Simon  Peter.,  Simon,  son  ofyonas]  For  'Jonas'  read  Jobn 
here  and  in  vv.  16,  17,  as  in  i.  42.     Note  that  the  writer  himself  calls 

24 2 


372  S.   JOHN,   XXI.  [v.  15. 

Simon,  son  of  Jonas,  lovest  thou  me  more  than  these  ?  He 
saith  unto  him,  Yea,  Lord ;  thou  knowest  that  I  love  thee. 

him  Simon  Peter,  but  represents  the  Lord  as  calling  him  'Simon  son  of 
John.'  This  is  not  only  in  harmony  with  the  rest  of  this  Gospel,  but  with 
the  Gospels  as  a  whole.  Although  Jesus  gave  Simon  the  name  of  Peter, 
yet,  with  one  remarkable  exception  (see  on  Luke  xxii.  34),  He  never 
addresses  him  as  Peter,  but  always  as  Simon.  Matt.  xvi.  17,  xvii.  25 ; 
Mark  xiv.  37;  Luke  xxii.  31.  The  Synoptists  generally  call  him  Simon, 
sometimes  adding  his  surname.  S.  John  always  gives  both  names, 
excepting  in  i.  41,  where  the  surname  just  about  to  be  given  would  be 
obviously  out  of  place.  Contrast  in  this  chapter  vv.  2,  3,  7,  11  with 
16,  17.  Should  we  find  this  minute  difference  observed,  if  the  writer 
were  any  other  than  S.  John?  [12]  This  being  the  general  usage  of 
our  Lord,  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  His  calling  him  Simon 
rather  than  Peter  on  this  occasion  is  a  reproach,  as  implying  that  by 
denying  his  Master  he  had  forfeited  the  name  of  Peter.  That  S.  John 
should  add  the  surname  with  much  greater  frequency  than  the  Synop- 
tists is  natural.  At  the  time  when  S.  John  wrote  the  surname  had 
become  the  more  familiar  of  the  two.  S.  Paul  never  calls  him  Simon, 
but  uses  the  Aramaic  form  of  the  surname,  Cephas. 

lovest  thou  me]  The  word  for  'love'  here  and  in  the  question  in  z:  16 
is  agapdn  (see  on  xi.  5).  S.  Peter  in  all  three  answers  uses  philein, 
and  our  Lord  uses  philein  in  the  third  question  [v.  17).  The  change  is 
not  accidental;  and  once  more  we  have  evidence  of  the  accuracy  of  the 
writer:  he  preserves  distinctions  which  were  actually  made.  S.  Peter's 
preference  {or  philein  is  doubly  intelligible:  (i)  it  is  the  less  exalted 
word ;  he  is  sure  of  the  natural  affection  which  it  expresses ;  he  will  say 
nothing  about  the  higher  love  implied  in  agapdn;  (2)  it  is  the  warmer 
word;  there  is  a  calm  discrimination  implied  in  rtf^rt/(?«  which  to  him 
seems  cold.  In  the  third  question  Christ  takes  him  at  his  own  standard; 
he  adopts  S.  Peter's  own  word,  and  thus  presses  the  question  more 
home. 

more  than  these"]  'More  than  these,  thy  companions,  love  Me.'  The 
A.  V.  is  ambiguous,  and  so  also  is  the  Greek,  but  there  cannot  be  much 
doubt  as  to  the  meaning:  'more  than  thou  lovest  these  things'  gives  a 
very  inadequate  signification  to  the  question.  At  this  stage  in  S.  Peter's 
career  Christ  would  not  be  likely  to  ask  him  whether  he  preferred  his 
boat  and  nets  to  Himself.  S.  Peter  had  professed  to  be  ready  to  die  for 
His  Master  (xiii.  37)  and  had  declared  that  though  a// the  rest  might 
deny  Him,  he  would  never  do  so  (Matt.  xxvi.  33).  Jesus  recalls  this 
i)oast  by  asking  him  whether  he  noiv  professes  to  have  more  loyalty  and 
devotion  than  the  rest. 

Yea,  Lord;  thou  kno7t>est]  "We  have  once  more  an  exquisite  touch 
of  psychology.  It  is  Peter's  modesty  that  speaks,  and  his  sense  of  shame 
at  his  own  short-comings... He  has  nothing  to  appeal  to,  and  yet  he  is 
conscious  that  his  affection  is  not  unreal  or  insincere,  and  He  trusts  to 
Him  who  searches  the  hearts."  S.  pp.  268,  9.  Not  only  does  he  change 
the  word  for  'love'  from  agapdn  io philein,  but  he  says  nothing  about 


w.  i6,  17.]  S.  JOHN,  XXI.  373 

He  saith  unto  him,  Feed  my  lambs.  He  saith  to  him  again  16 
the  second  time,  Simon,  son  of  Jonas,  lovest  thou  me  ?  He 
saith  unto  him,  Yea,  Lord  ;  thou  knowest  that  I  love  thee. 
He  saith  unto  him,  Feed  my  sheep.  He  saith  unto  him  the  17 
third  time,  Simon,  son  of  Jonas,  lovest  thou  me?  Peter  was 
grieved  because  he  said  unto  him  the  third  time,  Lovest  thou 
me  ?   And  he  said  unto  him,  Lord,  thou  knowest  all  things ; 

'more  than  these :'  he  will  not  venture  anymore  to  compare  himself 
with  others.  Moreover  he  makes  no  professions  as  to  the  future;  ex- 
perience has  taught  him  that  the  present  is  all  that  he  can  be  sure  of. 
The  'Thou'  in  'Thou  knowest'  is  emphatic.  This  time  he  will  trust 
the  Lord's  knowledge  of  him  rather  than  his  own  estimate  of  himself. 
Can  all  these  delicate  touches  be  artistic  fictions? 

Feed  my  lambs]  Not  only  is  he  not  degraded  on  account  of  his  fall, 
he  receives  a  fresh  charge  and  commission.  The  work  of  the  fisher 
gives  place  to  that  of  the  shepherd  :  the  souls  that  have  been  brought 
together  and  won  need  to  be  fed  and  tended.  And  this  S.  Peter  must 
do. 

16.  lovest  thou  me?]  Jesus  drops  the  'more  than  these,'  which  the 
humbled  Apostle  had  shrunk  from  answering,  but  retains  His  own  word 
for  'love.'     S.  Peter  answers  exactly  as  before. 

Feed  my  slieep]  Better,  Tend,  or  shepherd,  My  sheep.  The  word  ren- 
dered 'feed'  vxvv.  15  and  17  (i^ijj'yJ't.v'w)  means 'supply  with  food.'  Comp. 
Matt.  viii.  30,  33;  Mark  v.  11,  14;  Luke  viii.  32,  34;  xv.  15  (the  only 
other  passages  where  the  word  occurs  in  N.  T.)  of  the  feeding  of  the 
herd  of  swine.  The  word  used  here  (poimainein)  means  rather  'be 
shepherd  to.'  It  is  used  literally  Luke  xvii,  7 ;  i  Cor.  ix.  7 ;  and 
figuratively  Matt.  ii.  6;  Acts  xx.  •28;  i  Pet.  v.  2.  Comp.  Jude  12; 
Rev.  ii.  27,  vii.  17,  xii.  5,  xix.  15.  Tending  implies  more  of  guidance 
and  government  than  feeding  does.  The  lambs,  which  can  go  no  dis- 
tance, scarcely  require  guidance,  their  chief  need  is  food.  The  sheep 
require  both. 

17.  the  third  time']  He  had  denied  thrice,  and  must  thrice  affirm 
his  love.  This  time  Jesus  makes  a  further  concession :  He  not  only 
ceases  to  urge  the  'more  than  these,'  but  He  adopts  S.  Peter's  own 
word,  philein.  The  Apostle  had  rejected  Christ's  standard  and  taken 
one  of  his  own,  about  which  he  could  be  more  sure;  and  Christ  now 
questions  the  Apostle's  own  standard.  This  is  why  'Peter  was  grieved' 
so  much ;  not  merely  at  the  threefold  question  recalling  his  threefold 
denial,  not  merely  at  his  devotion  being  questioned  more  than  once, 
but  that  the  humble  form  of  love  which  he  had  professed,  and  that  with- 
out boastful  comparison  with  others,  and  without  rash  i^romises  about 
the  future,  should  seem  to  be  doubted  by  his  Lord. 

thou  knowest  all  things ;  thou  knowest]  Once  more  we  have  two  words 
for  'know'  in  the  original  and  only  one  in  the  A.  V.  (Comp.  vii.  27, 
viii.  55,  xiii.  7,  xiv.  7.)  The  first  'knowest'  (oidas)  refers  to  Christ's 
supernatural  intuition,  as  in  vv.  15,  16 :  the  second  'knowest'  {ginSsheis\ 


374  S.   JOHN,   XXI.  [v.  i8. 

thou  knowest  that  I  love  thee.  Jesus  saith  unto  him,  Feed 
i8  my  sheep.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  thee.  When  thou  wast 
young,  thou  girdest  thyself,  and  walkedst  whither  thou 
wouldest :  but  when  thou  shalt  be  old,  thou  shalt  stretch 
forth  thy  hands,  and  another  shall  gird  thee,  and  carry  thee 

to  His  experience  and  discernment;  Thou  recognisest, perceivest,  seest, 
that  I  love  Thee.     See  on  ii.  24,  25. 

Feed  my  sheep]  It  is  doubtful  whether  we  have  or  have  not  precisely 
the  same  word  for  'sheep'  here  as  in  v.  16.  The  Greek  word  here 
according  to  the  best  authorities  is  undoubtedly  a  diminutive  (probatia, 
not  probata);  in  v.  16  the  evidence  is  pretty  evenly  balanced  between 
probatia  zi\di  probata  ('little  sheep'  and  'sheep').  One  is  tempted  to 
adopt  S.  Ambrose's  order  in  vv.  15,  16,  17 — 'lambs,'  'little  sheep,' 
'sheep'  (agnos,  oviculas,  oves),  which  seems  also  to  have  been  the  read- 
ing of  the  old  Syriac:  but  the  balance  of  evidence  is  against  it.  But 
without  counting  the  possible  difference  between  'little  sheep'  and 
'sheep,'  there  are  three  important  distinctions  obliterated  in  the  A.  V., 
— the  two  words  rendered  'love,'  the  two  rendered  'feed,'  and  the  two 
rendered  'know.' 

S.  Peter  seems  to  recall  this  charge  in  his  First  Epistle  (v.  ■2,  3),  a 
passage  which  in  the  plainest  terms  condemns  the  policy  of  those  who 
on  the  strength  of  this  charge  have  claimed  to  rule  as  his  successors  over 
the  whole  of  Christ's  flock. 

18,  19.  This  high  charge  will  involve  suffering  and  even  death.  In 
spite  of  his  boastfulness  and  consequent  fall  the  honour  which  he  once 
too  rashly  claimed  (xiii.  37)  will  after  all  be  granted  to  him. 

18.  Verily,  verily]  This  peculiarity  of  S.  John's  Gospel  (see  on  i. 
55)  is  preserved  in  the  appendix  to  it  [i?,]. 

■wast  young]  Literally,  wast  younger  than  thou  art  now.  He  was 
now  between  youth  and  age. 

stretch  forth  thy  hands]     For  help. 

shall  gird  thee]     As  a  criminal. 

whither  thou  wouldest  7iot]  To  death.  Tliis  does  not  mean  that  at 
the  last  S.  Peter  will  be  unwilling  to  die  for  his  Lord,  but  that  death, 
and  especially  a  criminal's  death,  is  what  men  naturally  shrink  from. 

The  common  interpretation  that  'stretch  forth  thy  hands'  refers  to  the 
attitude  in  crucifixion,  and  'gird  thee'  to  binding  to  the  cross,  is  pre- 
carious, on  account  of  the  order  of  the  clauses,  the  taking  to  execu- 
tion being  mentioned  after  the  execution.  But  it  is  not  impossible;  for 
the  order  of  this  group  of  clauses  may  be  determined  by  the  previous 
group,  and  the  order  in  the  previous  group  is  the  natural  one.  The 
girding  naturally  precedes  the  walking  in  the  first  half;  therefore  'gird' 
precedes  'carry'  in  the  second  half,  and  'stretch  forth  thy  hands'  is  con- 
nected with  'gird'  rather  than  'carry'  and  therefore  is  coupled  with 
'gird.'  Or  again  'carry  thee  &c.'  may  possibly  refer  to  the  setting  up 
of  the  cross  after  the  sufferer  v/as  bound  to  it;  in  this  way  all  runs 
smoothly. 


vv.  19—21.]  S.  JOHN,   XXL  375 

whither  thou  wouldest  not.     This  spake  he,  signifying  by  19 
what   death   he  should  glorify   God.     And   when  he   had 
spoken  this,  he  saith  unto  him,  Follow  me. 

20 — 23.    The  Misunderstood  Saying  respecting  the  Evangelist. 

Then  Peter,  turning  about,  seeth  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  20 
loved  following ;  which  also  leaned  on  his  breast  at  supper, 
and  said.  Lord,  which  is  he  that  betrayeth  thee  ?     Peter  21 
seeing  him  saith  to  Jesus,  Lord,  and  what  shall  this  man 

19.  This  spake  he\    Now  this  He  spake. 

signifying  by  what  death]  Signifying  by  what  manner  of  death. 
This  comment  is  quite  in  S.  John's  style  (comp.  xii.  33,  xviii.  32)  [14]. 
It  will  depend  on  the  interpretation  of  v.  18  whether  we  understand 
this  to  mean  crucifixion  or  simply  martyrdom.  That  S.  Peter  was 
crucified  at  Rome  rests  on  sufficient  evidence,  beginning  with  TertuUian 
(Scorp.  XV.),  and  that  he  requested  to  be  crucified  head  downwards  is 
stated  by  Eusebius  {H.  E.  iii.  i.  2)  on  the  authority  of  Origen. 

he  should  glorify']     Literally,  he  shall  glorify. 

Follow  me]  Perhaps  the  literal  meaning  is  not  altogether  to  be  ex- 
cluded; and  it  appears  from  S.  Peter's  'turning  about'  (v.  20),  that  he 
understood  the  words  literally  and  began  to  follow.  But  no  doubt  this 
command  here,  as  elsewhere  in  the  Gospels,  is  to  be  understood  figura- 
tively, the  precise  shade  of  meaning  being  determined  by  the  context. 
Comp.  i.  43;  Matt.  viii.  22,  ix.  9,  xix.  21.  In  the  present  case  there  is 
probably  a  reference  to  xiii.  36,  37;  and  the  'following'  includes  follow- 
ing to  a  martyr's  death,  and  possibly  the  precise  death  of  crucifixion. 

20—23.  The  Misunderstood  Saying  respecting  the  Evangelist. 

20.  Peter,  turyiing about,  seeth]  Omit  'then.'  The  graphic  details 
are  those  of  an  eyewitness. 

leaned]  Better,  leaned  back.  The  allusion  is  to  the  momentary 
change  of  posture  (xiii.  25)  in  order  to  ask  who  was  the  traitor,  not  to 
the  position  which  he  occupied  next  our  Lord  throughout  the  meal  (xiii. 

23). 

21.  Peter  seeing  him]  Peter  therefore  seeing  him.  Once  more  we 
see  the  intimacy  between  these  two  Apostles.  When  S.  Peter  is  told 
to  follow,  S.  John  does  so  also  unbidden;  and  S.  Peter  having  received 
his  own  commission  asks  about  that  of  his  friend.  Comp.  xviii.  15, 
XX.  I  [15]. 

and  what  shall  this  man  do?]  Literally,  but  this  man,  what?  Not 
so  much  'what  shall  he  do?'  as  'what  about  him?'  What  is  the  lot  in 
store  for  him.  The  question  indicates  the  natural  wish  to  know  the 
future  of  a  friend,  all  the  more  natural  after  having  been  told  something 
about  his  own  future.  Hence  the  '  therefore '  at  the  beginning  of  the 
verse.    As  usual,  S.  Peter  acts  on  the  first  impulse. 


376  S.   JOHN,   XXI.  [w.  22,  23. 

22  do  ?    Jesus  saith  unto  him,  If  I  will  that  he  tarry  till  I  come, 

23  what  is  that  to  thee  ?  follow  thou  me.  Then  went  this 
saying  abroad  among  the  brethren,  that  that  disciple  should 
not  die :  yet  Jesus  said  not  unto  him,  He  shall  not  die ; 
but,  If  I  will  that  he  tarry  till  I  come,  what  is  that  to  thee  ? 

22.  1/ Iwill'l  Christ  died  and  rose  again  that  He  might  become  the 
Lord  and  Master  both  of  the  dead  and  the  living  (Rom.  xiv.  9).  He 
speaks  here  in  full  consciousness  of  this  sovereignty.  For  the  use  of  'I 
will'  by  Christ  comp.  xvii.  24;  Matt.  viii.  3  and  parallels,  xxvi.  39. 
While  the  'I  will'  asserts  the  Divine  authority,  the  'if  keeps  the  deci- 
sion secret. 

that  he  tarry']  Better, /'/^(^/ /5(f  abide ;  it  is  S.  John's  favourite  word 
which  we  have  had  so  often  (i.  32,  33,  39,  40,  ii.  12,  iii.  36,  iv.  40,  &c., 
and  twelve  times  in  chap,  xv.)  [16].  S.  Peter's  lot  was  to  suffer,  S. 
fohn's  to  wait.  For  'abide'  in  the  sense  of  remain  in  life  comp.  xii.  34; 
Phil.  i.  25;  I  Cor.  xv.  6. 

till  I  come\  Literally,  7vhile  I  am  coming.  The  words  express  rather 
the  interval  of  waiting  than  the  endoi'x'i.  Comp.  ix.  4;  Mark  vi.  45. 
This  at  once  seems  to  shew  that  it  is  unnecessary  to  enquire  whether 
Pentecost,  or  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  or  the  apocalyptic  visions 
recorded  in  the  Revelation,  or  a  natural  death,  or  the  Second  Advent, 
is  meant  by  Christ's  'coming'  in  this  verse.  He  is  not  giving  an  answer 
but  refusing  one.  The  reply  is  purposely  hypothetical  and  perhaps  pur- 
posely indefinite.  But  inasmuch  as  the  longer  the  interval  covered  by 
the  words,  the  greater  tlie  indefiniteness,  the  Second  Advent  is  to  be 
preferred  as  an  interpretation,  if  a  distinct  meaning  is  given  to  the 
'coming.' 

■ivhat  is  that  to  thee?]  The  words  are  evidently  a  rebuke.  There  is  a 
sense  in  which  'Am  I  my  brother's  keeper?'  is  a  safeguard  against  curi- 
osity and  presumption  rather  than  a  shirking  of  responsibility. 

follow  thoit  me]  'Thou'  is  emphatic,  contrasting  with  the  preceding 
'lie,'  which  is  emphatic  also. 

23.  Then  went  this  saying]     This  saying  therefore  7vent. 

abroad  among]  U\i&\a.\\y,  forth  itnto:  comp.  Matt.  ix.  26;  Mark  i. 
28;  Rom.  X.  18. 

the  brethren]  This  phrase,  common  in  the  Acts  (ix.  30,  xi.  r,  29,  xv, 
I,  3,  22,  23,  &c.),  is  not  used  elsewhere  in  the  Gospels  for  believers 
generally;  but  we  see  the  way  prepared  for  it  in  the  Lord's  words  to  tlie 
disciples  (Matt,  xxiii.  8),  to  S.  Peter  (Luke  xxii.  32),  and  to  Maiy 
Magdalene  (xx.  17). 

should  not  die]  Literally,  doth  not  die;  so  also  'shall  not  die'  in  the 
next  clause.  The  mistake  points  to  a  time  when  Christians  generally 
expected  that  the  Second  Advent  would  take  pkice  in  their  own  time; 
and  the  correction  of  the  mistake  points  to  a  time  when  the  Apostle 
was  still  living.  If  this  chapter  was  added  by  another  hand  after  the 
Apostle's  death  it  would  have  been  natural  to  mention  his  death,  as  the 
simplest  and  most  complete  answer  to  the  misunderstanding.  The 
cautious  character  of  the  answer  given,  merely  pointing  out  the  hypo- 


V.  24]  S.  JOHN,  XXI.  377 

24,  25.     Concluding  Notes. 

This  is  the  disciple  which  testifieth  of  these  thijigs,  and  24 
wrote  these  things:  and  we  know  that  his  testimony  is  true. 

thetical  form  of  Christ's  language,  without  pretending  to  explain  it, 
shews  that  the  question  had  not  yet  been  solved  in  fact.  Thus  we  are 
once  more  forced  back  within  the  Umits  of  the  first  century  for  the  date 
of  this  Gospel. 

24,  25.     Concluding  Notes. 

Again  the  question  of  authorship  confronts  us.  Are  these  last  two 
verses  by  the  writer  of  the  rest  of  the  chapter?  Are  they  both  by  the 
same  hand?  The  external  evidence,  as  in  the  case  of  the  preceding 
verses,  is  in  favour  of  their  being  both  by  the  same  hand,  and  that  the 
writer  of  the  first  twenty-three  verses,  and  therefore  S.  John.  No  MS. 
or  version  is  extant  without  v.  24,  and  all  except  the  Sinaitic,  have  v. 
25  also;  nor  is  there  any  evidence  that  a  copy  was  ever  in  existence 
lacking  either  this  last  chapter  or  v.  24. 

The  internal  evidence  is  the  other  way.  The  natural  impression  pro- 
duced by  z/.  24  is  that  it  is  not  the  writer  of  the  Gospel  who  here  bears 
witness  to  his  own  work,  but  a  plurality  of  persons  who  testify  to  the 
trustworthiness  of  the  Evangelist's  narrative.  So  that  we  possibly  have 
in  this  verse  a  note  added  by  the  Ephesian  elders  before  the  publication 
of  the  Gospel.  The  change  to  the  singular  in  v.  25  would  seem  to  imply 
that  this  verse  is  an  addition  by  a  third  hand  of  a  remark  which  the 
writer  may  have  heard  from  S.  John. 

But  the  internal  evidence  is  not  conclusive,  and  the  impression  natu- 
rally produced  by  the  wording  of  the  verses  need  not  be  the  right  one. 
The  aged  Apostle  in  bringing  his  work  a  second  time  (xx.  30,  31)  to  a 
conclusion  may  have  included  that  inmost  circle  of  disciples  (to  whom 
he  had  frequently  told  his  narrative  by  word  of  mouth)  among  those  who 
were  able  to  guarantee  his  accuracy.  With  a  glance  of  affectionate  con- 
fidence round  the  group  of  devoted  hearers,  he  adds  their  testimony  to 
his  own,  and  gives  them  a  share  in  bearing  witness  to  the  truth  of  the 
Gospel. 

24.  which  testijicth]  Better,  7vhich  beareth  witness.  "Whether 
'these  things'  refers  to  the  whole  Gospel,  or  only  to  the  contents  of 
chap.  xxi.  cannot  be  determined. 

■W7-ote'\  Note  the  change  from  present  to  aorist.  The  witness  still 
continues  at  the  present  time;  the  writing  took  place  once  for  all  in  the 
past. 

■we  knaiv]  Because  S.  John  uses  the  singular,  'he  knoweth,'  in  xix. 
35,  it  does  not  follow  that  he  would  not  use  the  plural  here.  It  would 
have  been  out  of  place  in  the  middle  of  his  narrative  to  add  the  testi- 
mony of  the  Ephesian  elders  to  his  own  as  to  details  which  he  saw  with 
his  own  eyes  at  the  foot  of  the  cross.  But  it  is  not  unnatural  that  at  the 
close  of  his  Gospel  he  should  claim  them  as  joint  witnesses  to  the  fide- 
lity with  which  he  has  committed  to  writing  this  last  instalment  of 


378  S.   JOHN,  XXI.  [v.  25. 

25  And  there  are  also  many  other  things  which  Jesus  did,  the 
which,  if  they  should  be  written  every  one,  I  suppose  that 
even  the  world  itself  could  not  contain  the  books  that 
should  be  written.     Amen. 

evangelical  and  apostolic  traditions.  Comp.  r  John  v.  18,  19,  ■20,  15, 
iii.  14,  i.  I ;  3  John  12. 

25.     every  one]     Literally,  one  by  one. 

I  suppose]  The  Greek  word  (oiiiiai)  occurs  nowhere  else  in  N.  T. 
excepting  Phil.  i.  17;  James  i.  7.  The  use  of  the  first  person  singular 
is  very  unlike  S.  John. 

If  this  verse  is  an  addition  by  an  unknown  hand  it  appears  to  be 
almost  contemporary.  The  wording  seems  to  imply  that  it  would  still 
be  possible  to  write  a  great  deal :  additional  materials  still  abound. 

could  not  contain]  The  bold  hyperbole  (which  may  be  S.  John's, 
though  added  by  another  hand)  expresses  the  yearnings  of  Christendom 
throughout  all  ages.  The  attempts  which  cencuiy  after  century  con- 
tinue to  be  made  to  write  the  'Life  of  Christ'  seem  to  prove  that  even 
the  fragments  that  have  come  down  to  us  of  that  'Life'  have  been  found 
in  their  manysidedness  and  profundity  to  be  practically  inexhaustible. 
After  all  that  the  piety  and  learning  of  eighteen  hundred  years  have 
accomplished.  Christians  remain  still  unsatisfied,  still  unconvinced  that 
the  most  has  been  made  of  the  very  fragmentary  account  of  scarcely  a 
tenth  portion  of  the  Lord's  life  on  earth.  What  would  be  needed  to 
make  even  this  tenth  complete?  What,  therefore,  to  complete  the 
whole? 

Aiiun]    The  addition  of  a  copyist. 


APPENDICES. 

A.     THE  DAY  OF  THE  CRUCIFIXION. 

It  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  if  we  had  only  the  Fourth  Gospel  no 
question  would  have  arisen  as  to  the  date  of  the  Last  Supper  and  of  the 
Crucifixion.  S.  John's  statements  are  as  usual  so  clear  and  precise,  and 
at  the  same  time  so  entirely  consistent,  that  obscurity  arises  only  when 
attempts  are  made  to  force  his  plain  language  into  harmony  with  the 
statements  of  the  Synoptists  which  appear  to  contradict  his. 

S.  John's  gives  five  distinct  intimations  of  the  date. 

1.  'Now  before  the  Feast  of  the  Passover'  (xiii.  i);  a  phrase  which 
gives  a  date  to  the  feet-washing  and  farewell  discourses  at  the  Last 
Supper. 

2.  'Buy  those  things  that  we  have  need  oifor  the  FeasV  (xiii.  29); 
which  again  shews  that  the  Last  Supper  was  not  the  Passover. 

3.  'They  themselves  went  not  into  the  palace,  that  they  might  not 
be  defiled,  but  might  eat  the  Passover''  (xviii.  28);  which  proves  that 
'early'  on  the  day  of  the  crucifixion  the  Jews  who  delivered  our  Lord 
to  Pilate  had  not  yet  eaten  the  Passover. 

4.  'It  was  the  preparation  of  the  Passover;  it  was  about  the  sixth 
hour.  And  he  saith  to  the  Jews,  Behold  your  King'  (xix.  14);  which 
shews  that  the  Jews  had  not  postponed  eating  the  Passover  because  of 
urgent  business :  the  Passover  had  not  yet  begun. 

5.  'The  Jews  therefore,  because  it  was  the  preparation,  that  the 
bodies  should  not  remain  upon  the  cross  on  the  Sabbath  day,  (for  that 
Sabbath  day  was  an  high  day)  asked  Pilate  &c.'  (xix.  31).  Here  'the 
preparation '  [paraskeue)  may  mean  either  the  preparation  for  the  Sab- 
bath, i.e.  Friday,  or  the  preparation  for  the  Passover,  i.e.  Nisan  14.  But 
the  statement  that  the  Sabbath  was  a  'high  day'  most  naturally  means 
that  the  Sabbath  in  that  week  coincided  with  the  first  day  of  the  Feast: 
so  that  the  day  was  'the  preparation'  for  both  the  Sabbath  and  the 
Feast. 

From  these  passages  it  is  evident  that  S.  John  places  the  Crucifixion 
on  the  preparation  or  eve  of  the  Passover,  i.e.  on  Nisan  14,  on  the  after- 
noon ofwliich  the  Paschal  Lamb  was  slain;  and  that  he  makes  the  Pass- 
over begin  at  sunset  that  same  day.  Consequently  our  Lord  was  in  the 
grave  before  the  Passover  began,  and  the  Last  Supper  cannot  have  been 
the  Paschal  meal. 

Moreover  these  statements  fall  in  very  well  with  the  almost  universal 
view  that  the  Crucifixion  took  place  on  a  Friday,  on  the  evening  of 
which  the  Passover  as  well  as  the  Sabbath  began. 

It  is  from  the  Synoptists  that  we  inevitably  derive  the  impression  that 
the  Last  Supper  was  the  Paschal  meal  (Matt.  xxvi.  2,  17,  18,  19;  Mark 
xiv.  I4 — 16;  Luke  xxii.  7,  11,  13,  15).  Whatever  method  of  explana- 
tion be  adopted,  it  is  the  impression  derived  from  the  Synoptists  that 
must  be  modified,  not  that  derived  from  S.  John.  Their  statements 
refer  rather  to  the  nature  of  the  Last  Supper,  his  cover  the  whole  field 
from  the  Supper  to  the  taking  down  from  the  cross,  giving  clear  marks 
of  tinte  all  along.  No  doubt  they  are  correct  in  stating  that  the  Last 
Supper  had  in  some  sense  the  character  of  a  Paschal  meal ;  but  it  is  quite 


38o  APPENDICES. 


evident  from  S.  John  that  the  Last  Supper  was  not  the  Passover  in  the 
ordmary  Jewish  sense.  When  the  Sabbath  gave  place  to  the  Lord's 
Day  the  day  was  deliberately  changed  in  order  to  mark  the  change  of 
associations :  a  similar  change  for  similar  reasons  may  have  been  adopted 
when  the  Eucharist  supplanted  the  Passover.  The  fact  that  the  whole 
Church  for  eight  centuries  always  used  leavened  bread  at  the  Eucharist, 
and  that  the  Eastern  Church  continues  to  do  so  to  this  day,  may  point 
to  a  tradition  that  the  meal  at  which  the  Eucharist  was  instituted  was 
not  the  Paschal  meal.  Moreover  Jews,  to  whom  the  Gospel  was  to  be 
preached  first,  might  have  found  a  serious  stumbling-block  in  the  fact 
that  He  who  was  proclaimed  as  the  Paschal  Lamb  partook  of  the 
Paschal  Feast  and  was  slain  afterwards.  Whereas  S.  John  makes  it 
clear  to  them,  that  on  the  very  day  and  at  the  very  hour  when  the 
Paschal  lambs  had  to  be  slain,  the  True  Lamb  was  sacrificed  on  the 
Cross.  (See  note  on  Matt.  xxvi.  17  and  Excursus  V.  in  Dr  Farrar's  S. 
Luke. ) 

B.     S.  PETER'S  DENIALS. 

The  difficulties  which  attend  all  attempts  at  forming  a  Harmony  of  the 
Gospels  are  commonly  supposed  to  reach  something  like  a  climax  here. 
Very  few  events  are  narrated  at  such  length  by  all  four  Evangelists;  and 
in  no  case  is  the  narrative  so  carefully  divided  by  them  into  distinct 
portions  as  in  the  case  of  S.  Peter's  threefold  denial  of  his  Master. 
Here  therefore  we  have  an  exceptionally  good  opportunity  of  comparing 
the  Evangelists  with  one  another  piece  by  piece;  and  the  result  is  sup- 
posed to  be  damaging  to  them.  A  careful  comparison  of  the  four  ac- 
counts \vill  establish  one  fact  beyond  the  reach  of  reasonable  dispute; — 
that,  whatever  may  be  the  relation  between  the  narratives  of  S.  Matthew 
and  S.  Mark,  those  of  S.  Luke  and  S.  John  are  independent  both  of  the 
first  two  Gospels  and  of  one  another.  So  that  we  have  at  least  three 
independent  accounts. 

It  would  be  an  instructive  exercise  for  the  student  to  do  for  himself 
what  Canon  Westcott  has  done  for  him  (Additional  Note  on  John  xviii  : 
comp.  Alford  on  Matt.  xxvi.  69),  and  tabulate  the  four  accounts,  com- 
paring not  merely  verse  with  verse  but  clause  with  clause. 

His  first  impression  of  great  discrepancy  between  the  accounts  will 
convince  him  of  the  independence  of  at  least  three  of  them.  And  a 
further  consideration  will  probably  lead  him  to  see  that  this  independ- 
ence and  consequent  difference  are  the  result  of  fearless  truthfulness. 
Each  Evangelist,  conscious  of  his  own  fidelity,  tells  the  stoiy  in  his  own 
way  without  caring  to  correct  his  account  by  that  of  others.  In  the 
midst  of  the  differences  of  details  there  is  quite  enough  substantial 
agreement  to  lead  us  to  the  conclusion  that  each  narrative  would  be 
found  to  be  accurate  if  we  were  acquainted  with  all  the  circumstances. 
All  four  Evangelists  tell  us  that  Ihree  denials  iva-e  f»\'dictcd  [^Wa.  xxvi. 
34;  Mark  xiv.  30;  Luke  xxii.  34;Johnxiii.  38)  and  all  four  ^w^ ///;w 
denials  (Matt.  xxvi.  70,  72,  74;  Mark  xiv.  68,  70,  71;  Luke  xxii.  57, 
58,  60;  John  xviii.  17,  25,  27). 

The  apparent  discrepancy  ivith  regard  to  t lie  prediction  is  that  S.  Luke 
and  S.  John  place  it  during  the  Supper,  S.  Mark  and  S.  Matthew  durinf^ 


APPENDICES.  3S1 


the  walk  to  Gethsemane.  But  the  words  of  the  first  two  Evangelists  do 
not  quite  necessarily  mean  that  the  prediction  was  made  precisely  where 
they  mention  it.  Yet,  if  the  more  natural  conclusion  be  adopted  that 
they  do  mean  to  place  the  prediction  on  the  road  to  Gethsemane ;  then, 
either  the  prediction  was  repeated,  or  they  have  placed  it  out  of  the 
actual  chronological  sequence.  As  already  remarked  elsewhere,  chro- 
nology is  not  what  the  Evangelists  care  to  give  us. 

The  nujnerous  differences  of  detail  with  regaj-d  to  the  three  denials, 
especially  the  second  and  third,  will  sink  into  very  small  proportions  if 
we  consider  that  the  attack  of  the  maid  which  provoked  the  first  denial, 
about  which  the  four  accounts  are  very  harmonious,  led  to  a  series  of 
attacks  gathered  into  two  groups,  with  intervals  during  which  S.  Peter 
was  left  unmolested.  Each  Evangelist  gives  us  salient  points  in  these 
groups  of  attacks  and  denials.  As  to  the  particular  words  put  into  the 
mouth  of  S.  Peter  and  his  assailants,  it  is  quite  unnecessary  to  suppose 
that  they  are  intended  to  give  us  more  than  the  substance  of  what  was 
said  (see  Introductory  Note  to  chap.  iii.).  Let  us  remember  S.  Augus- 
tine's wise  and  moderate  words  respecting  the  differences  of  detail  in 
the  narratives  of  the  storm  on  the  lake.  "There  is  no  need  to  enquire 
which  of  these  exclamations  was  really  uttered.  For  whether  they 
uttered  some  one  of  these  three,  or  other  words  which  none  of  the 
Evangelists  have  recorded,  yet  conveying  the  same  sense,  what  does  it 
matterV     De  Cons.  Ev.  11.  xxiv.  55. 

C.     ORDER  OF  THE  CHIEF  EVENTS  OF  THE  PASSION. 

This  part  of  the  Gospel  narrative  is  like  the  main  portion  of  it  in  this, 
that  the  exact  sequence  of  events  cannot  in  all  cases  be  determined  with 
certainty,  and  that  the  precise  date  of  events  can  in  no  case  be  deter- 
mined with  certainty.  But  for  the  sake  of  clearness  of  view  it  is  well 
to  have  a  tentative  scheme;  bearing  in  mind  that,  like  a  plan  drawn 
from  description  instead  of  from  sight,  while  it  helps  us  to  understand 
and  realise  the  description,  it  must  be  defective  and  may  here  and  there 
be  misleading. 

.0  P.M. 

The  Last  Supper  and  Last  Discourses. 

The  Agony. 

The  Betrayal. 

Conveyance  to  the  high-priest's  house. 

Examination  before  Annas. 

Examination  before  Caiaphas  at  an  informal  meeting 

of  the  Sanhedrin. 
Condemnation   to   death  at  a  formal   meeting  of  the 

Sanhedrin. 
First  E.xamination  before  Pilate. 
Examination  before  Herod. 
Second  Examination  before  Pilate. 
The  scourging  and  first  mockery  by  Pilate's  soldiers. 
6.30  A.M.         Pilate  gives  sentence  of  Crucifixion. 
Second  mockery  by  Pilate's  soldiers. 
9  A.M.         The  Crucifixion. 

First  Word.     '  Father,  forgive  tkem,  &c.' 
Second  —      '  IVotftan,  behold  thy  son.' 

'  Behold,  thy  mother.' 
Third     —      '  2'o  day  thou  s/uilt  lie,  &c.' 


Thursday  after  6.0  P.M. 
(Nisan  14) 

II   P.M. 

Midnight 
Friday                   i  a.m. 

2  A.M. 

3  A.M. 

4.30  AM. 

5  A.M. 

5  30  A.M. 

'6  A.M. 

382  APPENDICES. 


Friday  Noon  to  3  P.M.         The  Darkness. 

Fourth  Word.      '  My  God,  My  God,  &c." 
Fiflh         —  '/thirst: 

Si,\th        —  '  1 1  is  finished: 

3  I'.M.         Seventh  —  '  Father,  into  Thy  Jtands,   &c' 

The  Centurion's  Confession. 
The  Piercing  of  the  side. 
3  to  5  P.M.         Slaughter  of  the  Paschal  lamb^. 

5  p.  M.         The  Burial. 

6  P.M.         The  Sabbath  begins. 
(Nisan  15)  The  Passover. 

Saturday  The  Great  Day  of  the  Feast 

Jesus  in  the  Grave. 


D.     ON   SOME   POINTS   OF   GEOGRAPHY. 

It  seems  to  be  quite  certain  that  the  attractive  reconciliation  of  the 
two  readings,  B-rfdavlcf.  and  Bijda^ap^,  derived  from  Lieutenant  Gender's 
conjectures,  and  suggested  in  the  note  on  i.  28,  must  be  abandoned. 
And,  \v'hat  is  of  much  more  serious  moment,  it  is  becoming  clear  that 
Lieutenant  Conder's  identifications,  when  they  depend  upon  philologi- 
cal theories,  must  be  received  with  the  utmost  caution.  It  is  true  that 
the  Arabs  call  Batanaea,  the  Baravala  of  Josephus,  Bathania;  changing 
the  Aramaic  't',  corresponding  to  the  Hebrew  'sh'  in  Bashan,  to  'th', 
by  a  well-known  phonetic  relation  between  these  three  dialects.  But 
a  Jewish  writer  would  not  adopt  a  pure  Arabic  form,  which  is  there- 
fore impossible  in  a  Gospel  written  by  a  Jew.  And  even  if  this  point 
could  be  conceded  there  would  remain  the  further  improbability  that 
the  Arabic  'a'  in  Bathaniya  should  be  represented  by  7;  in  Btj^oWo. 
Bethania  is  a  compound  of  Beth,  and  some  place  on  the  Jordan.  It 
might  possibly  mean  '  boat-house' ;  and  this  would  coincide  pretty 
closely  with  Bethabara,  which  means  'ford-house'  or  'ferry-house'. 

In  any  map  of  Jerusalem  there  must  of  necessity  be  either  serious 
omissions,  or  insertions  which  are  more  or  less  conjectural.  In  the 
present  map  the  traditional  name  of  Zion  has  been  retained  for  the 
Western  Hill,  and  also  the  name  of  Hippicus  for  the  great  Herodian 
tower  which  still  stands  close  to  the  Jaffa  Gate.  Recent  measurements, 
however,  have  shewn  that  of  the  three  Herodian  towers,  Hippicus, 
Phasael,  and  Mariamne,  the  existing  tower,  often  called  the  Tower  of 
David,  may  be  Phasael  ratlier  than  Hippicus.  The  name.  Tower  of 
David,  is  mediaeval,  and  is  a  perpetuation  of  the  error  of  Josephus, 
who  supposed  that  the  fortress  of  David  belonged  to  the  Upper  City, 
and  that  the  Western  Hill  had  always  been  part  of  Jerusalem. 

Again,  the  position  of  the  Acra  is  much  disputed.  In  the  map  it 
is  not  intended  to  affirm  the  special  conjecture  of  Warren  and  Conder, 
but  merely  to  retain,  until  something  better  is  fully  established,  their 
present  view.  There  is,  however,  good  reason  for  doubting  its  cor- 
rectness. On  this  and  other  topographical  questions  see  the  very 
interesting  article  on  Jerusalem  in  the  Encycl.  Britan.  (xiii.  p.  641)  by 
Professor  Robertson  Smith,  to  whom  the  writer  of  this  Appendix  is 
much  indebted. 


INDICES. 


I.     GENERAL. 


AbraTiam's  seed,  supposed  privileges  of, 
67,  187,  189 

adultery,  the  woman  taken  in,  176 — 180; 
the  paragraph  part  of  the  Gospel  narra- 
tive, but  not  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  175 

Aenon,  100 

Ah:tophel,  318 

allegories  in  S.  John,  210,  286 

Alogi,  rejection  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  by 
the,  20,  21 

analysis  of  the  Gospel,  55 — 58 

Andrew,  character  of,  79,  140,  251 

angels,  82 

Annas,  his  office  and  influence,  322; 
examination  of  Jesus  by  him  peculiar 
to  S.  John,  323 

Apocalypse,  relation  of  the  Fourth  Gospel 
to,  30 

/\pocryphal  Gospels,  miracles  of  the 
Child  Jesus  in,  86 

Apostles'  defects  stated  without  reserve, 
91,  114,  115,  250,  263,  276,  357 

Apostolic  Fathers,  assumed  silence  of,  as 
to  the  Fourth  Gospel,  18,  19 

appearances  after  the  resurrection,  354, 367 

Arianism  condemned,  127,  222 

Arimathea,  Joseph  of,  coincidence  be- 
tween S.  John  and  S.  Mark  as  to  his 
character  and  connexion  with  Nico- 
demus,  352 

attempts  to  arrest  Jesus,  169,  173,  241, 

248,  319  .       ,. 

ascension,  implied  but  not  narrated  by 
S.  John,  156,  359,  97 

Augustine  quoted,  125,  146 

authenticity,  of  the  Gospel,  by  whom  dis- 
puted, 18,  21  ;  external  evidence  for, 
20,  21  ;  internal  evidence  for,  22 — 30, 
50 ;  internal  evidence  against,  30 — 32, 
47—49;  of  the  Appendix,  367,  377 

baptism.  Christian,  referred  to  in  the  dis- 
course with  Nicodemus,  25:  of  Jesus, 
100,  105  ;  of  John,  100 

Baptist,  his  connexion  with  the  Evan- 
gelist, 12,  77  ;  argument  from  the 
Evanglist's  calling  him  simply  'John,' 
29,  64 ;  crisis  in  his  ministry,  71 ;  he  is 
a  voice  crying  in  the  wilderness,  73 


Barabhas,  335 

Barnabas,  epistle  of,  its  evidence  to  the 
Fourth  Gospel,  19 

Bartholomew,  reasons  for  identifying 
with  Nathanael,  80 

barley  loaves,  140 

Basilides,  19,  65 

baskets,  different  kinds  of  at  the  feed- 
ing of  5000  and  the  feeding;  of  4000, 141 

Bethabra,  false  reading  for  Bethany,  74 

Bethany,  two  places  of  this  name,  74, 
228,  233 

Bethesda,  122 

Bethsaida,  two  places  of  this  name,  80, 138 

betrayal,  318 

blasphemy,  the  Lord  accused  of,  127,  196, 
222 

blind,  man  born,  healed,  199;  his  pro- 
gressive faith,  201 ;  his  confession  of 
faith,  207 

brethren  of  the  Lord,  various  theories 
respecting,  87 ;  cannot  be  the  sons  of 
Alphaeus,  162 

bridegroom,  figure  of  the  Messiah,  102 

Caesar,  speak  against,  340 

Caesarea,  Pilate's  residence,  334 

Caiaphas,  hisoffice,  242;  his  prophecy,  243 

Calvary  or  Golgotha,  343 

Cana,  two  places  of  this  name,  83 ;  nature 

of  the  miracle  at  Cana  of  Galilee,  85 
Capernaum,  the  modern  Tell  H Am,  87, 

156;  argument  from  the  mention  of  a 

visit  to,  87 
capital  punishment,   whether  allowed  to 

the  Jews  by  the  Romans,  178,  330 
centurion's    servant    diKerent    from   the 

nobleman's  son,  120 
Cerinthus,  the  Fourth  Gospel  attributed 

to,  21 
characteristics  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  38 

—46,  63,  64,  65,  155;  of  S.  John,  16,  46 
chief  priests,  mostly  Sadducees,  169,  241 ; 

their  baseness,  342 
chronology  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  inde- 
finite, 47,  137,  160,  218 
Church,  first  beginning  of  the,  77  ;  powers 

granted  to,  362 


384 


INDEX   I. 


circumcision  prior  to  the  Sabbath,  i66 

cleansing  of  the  Temple  in  S.  John  dis- 
tinct from  that  in  the  Synoptists,  89 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  20,  33 

Clementine  homilies,  198,  214 

cloths,  353,  356 

Clopas  or  Alphaeus,  346 

codices,  the  principal,  containing  the 
Gospel,  51,  52 

coincidences,  between  S.  Paul  and  S. 
John,  66,  280  ;  between  the  Synoptists 
and  S.  John,  50 

commandment,  Christ's  new,  271,  290 

cocks,  not  excluded  from  Jerusalem,  327 

cross,  size  of  the,  348 ;  title  on,  344 

crown  of  thorns,  336 

cup  of  suffering,  coincidence  respecting, 
322 

date  of  the  Gospel,  33 

darkness,  in  a  metaphorical  sense,  pecu- 
liar to  S.  John,  63 

David,  Christ's  descent  from,  173 

death,  punishment  of,  whether  allowed  to 
the  Jews,  178,  330 

Dedication,  Feast  of,  219 

denials,  S.  Peter's,  326 ;  why  narrated 
by  S.John,  327  ;  difficulties  respecting, 
380 

destruction  of  Jerusalem,  S.  John  wrote 
after  the,  234 

devil,  personal  existence  of  the,  191 ;  in- 
fluence on  Judas,  262 

devil,  nr  demon,  Christ  accused  of  being 
possessed  by  a,  166, 193,  194,  218 

disciples' imperfections,  86,  91,  114,  115, 
156,  250,  357  ,     ^         , 

discourses  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  con- 
trasted with  those  in  the  Synoptic 
Gospels,  48,  91 

discourses  of  Christ,  with  Nicodemus, 
91;  on  the  Source  of  life,  126;  on  the 
Support  of  life,  146;  at  the  Feast  of 
Tabernacles,  163  ;  at  the  Feast  of  the 
Dedication,  219;  at  the  last  Passover, 
261 — 3x6 

Divinity  claimed  by  Jesus,  1S6,  192,  196, 
222,  285,  289 

Docetism  excluded  from  the  Fourth  Gos- 
pel, 144.  35' 

door  of  the  fold,  alIej;ory  of,  210,  213. 

dove  visible  at  the  baptism,  75 

F.cce  homo  quoted,  335 

Elijah,  argument  from  the  Baptist's  denial 

that  he  is,  73 
Ephesus,  the  abode  of  S.  John,  ia  ;  the 

place  where  he  wrote  his  Gospel,  32  ; 

the  elders  of,  32,  377 
Ephraim,  city  called,  244 
Epilogue,  an  afterthought,  367 
Epistle,  first  of  S.  John;  relation  to  the 

Gospel,  19,  50,  2S0 


eternal  life  already  possessed  by  be- 
lievers, 104,  ii'g,  153,  i55>  308 

Eucharist,  implied  in  the  discourse  on 
the  Bread  of  Life,  146;  why  omitted 
by  S.  John,  266  ;  symbolized  at  the 
crucifixion,  350 

Evangelists,  concurrence  of  all  four,  50, 

137.  317.  355.  38'       . 
evenings,  the  two  Jewish,  143 
excommunication,  Jewish,  174,  203,  206 

faith,  the  text  of  a  child  of  God,  66 
false  readings,  67,  74,  loi,  159, 196,  335>  34^ 
feast,  the  unnamed  in  v.  i,  probably  not 

a  Passover,  122 
feasts,  Jevt-ish,  S.  John  groups  his  narra- 
tive round,  88 
five  thousand,  feeding  of  the,  137 
forger  of  a  gospel  confronted  by  insuper- 
able difficulties,  23 
fragments,  argument  from  the  command 

to  gather  up,  141 
funeral  customs  among  the  Jews,  234,  353 

Gabbatha,   not  a   mosaic  pavement  but 

the  temple-mound,  340 
Galileans,  characteristics  of,  10;  ill  repute 

of.  Si,  173,  175 
Galilee,  mixed  population  in,  11 ;  prophets 

from,  175;  ministry  in,  160 
gapsinS.  John's  narrative,  47, 136, 160, 218 
garments,  262 

Gentiles  seek  Christ,  251,  252 
Gerizim,  temple  on,  in 
Gethsemane,   anticipation  of  the  agony 

in,  253 
Gnostic  demonology,  191,  192 
Gnostics,  the  witness  of,  to  the  Fourth 

Gospel,  22 
Gnosticism,    excluded   from   the  Fourth 

Gospel,  22,  112,  223,  351 
Golgotha,  343 

Gospel,  not  a  Life  of  Christ,  34 
grace  before  meat,  140 
grave,  233,  239 

Greek  names  among  the  Apostles,  251 
Greeks  desiring  to  see  Jesus,  251 
guards  at  the  Cross,  345 

Hebrew,  evidence  that  the  author  of  the 
Fourth  Gospel  knew,  152,  249,  266,  352 

Herod  Antipas,  118 

high-priest,  supposed  to  have  prophetical 
gifts,  243  ;  doubt  as  to  who  is  meant  by 
the  title,  323,  324 

Holy  Ghost,  283 

hyssop,  348 

Ignatian  epistles,  their  evidence  to  tlic 

Fourth  Gospel,  19,  108 
interpolations,  123,  175,  196 
Ircnaeus,  evidence  to  the  Fourth  Gospel, 

20 ;    to    the    duration   of    the    Lord's 

ministry,  47,  196 


INDEX   I. 


3S5 


Jacob's  well,  107,  109 
James,  brother  of  S.  John,  9 ;  not  men- 
tioned by  the  Evangelist,  79,  346 
Jerome,  on  the  brethren  of  the  Lord,  87  ; 
on  Sychar,  107  ;  on  the  paragraph  of 
the  woman  taken  in  aduUcry,   175  ;  on 
the  Lord's  writing  on  the  ground,  179 
Jerusalem,    destroyed    before    S.    John 
wrote,  234 ;  his  minute  knowledge  of,  26 
Jesus  : 

(i)    The  Ministry. 

Baptist's  testimony  to  Him,  74 ;  dis- 
ciples' testimony  to  Him,  77  ;  turns 
water  into  wine  at  Cana,  83  ;  pays  a 
brief  visit  to  Capernaum,  17  ;  cleanses 
the  Temple,  88 ;  discourses  with 
Nicodemus,  92  ;  converts  many 
Samaritans,  105  ;  heals  the  royal 
official's  son,  n8;  heals  a  paralytic 
at  Bethesda,  121  ;  reasons  with  the 
Jews  about  the  Sun  as  the  Source  of 
life,  126  ;  feeds  five  thousand,  137 ; 
who  would  make  Him  a  king,  142  ; 
walks  on  the  water,  143 ;  reasons  with 
the  Jews  about  the  Son  as  the  Sup- 
port of  life,  145;  with  the  Twelve 
about  desertion  of  Him,  158;  with 
His  brethren  about  manifesting  Him- 
self, 160  ;  with  the  Jews  at  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles,  163;  is  marked  for 
arrest,  173  ;  [rescues  the  woman 
taken  in  adultery,  176;]  charges  the 
Jews  with  seeking  to  kill  Him,  188; 
claims  to  be  God,  196;  heals  the 
man  born  blind,  197 ;  delivers  the 
allegories  of  the  Fold  and  of  the 
Good  Shepherd,  210;  reasons  with 
the  Jews  at  the  Feast  of  the  Dedica- 
tion, 219;  retires  into  Peraea,  225; 
raises  Lazarus  from  the  dead,  227 ; 
is  marked  for  death  by  Caiaphas, 
243;  is  anointed  by  Mary  of  Bethany, 
246;  enters  Jerusalem  in  triumph, 
249 ;  is  sought  for  by  Gentile  prose- 
lytes, C51  ;  retires  from  public  teach- 
__ing,  257 

(ii)  The  Issues  of  the  Ministry. 
washes  His  disciples'  feet,  261 ;  points 
out  the  traitor,  267;  delivers  His 
farewell  discourses  to  the  eleven, 
270  ;  foretells  Peter's  denials,  272  ; 
answers  Thomas,  27s  ;  Philip,  276  ; 
Judas  not  Lscariot,  282  ;  delivers  the 
allegory  of  the  Vine,  286;  promises  to 
send  the  Paraclete  and  to  return,  295  ; 
prays  for  Himself,  His  disciples,  and 
His  Church,  307 ;  is  arrested  in  the 
garden,  318  ;  examined  before  Annas, 
322;  denied  by  Peter,  326;  examined 
by  Pilate,  328;  mocked,  sentenced, 
and  crucified,  336;  dies  and  is  buried, 
347 ;  manifests  Himself  after  His 
resurrection    to   Mary    Magdalene, 

S.  JOHN 


357 ;  to  the  ten  Apostles,  360;  to 
Thomas,  363  ;  to  seven  disciples  at 
the  sea  of  Tiberias,  367  ;  gives  Peter 
his  last  commission  and  foretells  his 
death ;  rebukes  his  curiosity  about 
the  Evangelist,  375 

Jewish  elements  in  the  Fourth  Gospel, 
25—27 

Jews,  hostility  of,  to  Christianity,  49  ; 
S.  John's  view  of  them,  72 

John,  the  son  of  Zebedee  ;  his  parentage, 
9;  nationality,  10;  connexion  with  the 
Baptist,  12,  77;  fiery  zeal,  ij,  15;  gives 
a  home  to  the  Blessed  Virgm,  14,  347 ; 
life  at  Ephesus,  14 ;  traditions  about 
him,  15,  16;  chief  characteristics,  16,  17; 
probably  the  unnamed  disciple  in  i.  35, 
77;  and  in  xviii.  15,  323;  mode  of  reck- 
oning time,  78,107,119,  34T 

John,  the  Baptist;  the  Evangelist's  man- 
ner of  naming  him,  29,  64;  not  the 
Light  but  the  Lamp,  64,  132;  his  wit- 
ness to  the  Messiah,  68,  74,  75,  77,  loi  ; 
the  friend  of  the  Bridegroom,  102 ;  his 
baptism,  loo,  105 

John,  the  father  of  Peter,  79,  371 

Jordan,  ford  of,  at  Bethany,  74 ;  the  coun- 
try beyond, 225 

Joseph,  husband  of  the  Virgin,  83 

Joseph  of  Arimathea ;  his  character  and 
connexion  with  Nicodemus,  352 

Judas  lscariot ;  his  name  and  character, 
159;  murmurs  at  Mary  of  Bethany,  247; 
receives  the  sop  and  is  entered  by 
Satan,  269;  helps  to  arrest  Jesus,  318 

Judas,  not  lscariot,  282 

Judas  of  Galilee,  rising  of,  11 

Justin  Martyr's  evidence  to  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  19,  73,  94,  197 

Keble  quoted,  360 

Kedron,  the  ravine  of  the,  318 

kingdom,  nature  of  Christ's,  332 

Last  Day,  151 

Last  Supper,  not  a  Passover,  379 

Lazarus,  raising  of,  objections  to  the,  226  ; 

identifications  of,  228 
Levites,  argument  from  the  mention  of,  72 
Liddon  quoted,  96 
Life,  63,  275 
Light,  63,  64,  180 
Lightfoot  quoted,  19,  69,  268,  280 
Lord,  149,  179,  207 
Love,  the  Fourth  Gospel  the  Gospel  of, 

17,  51,  209,  261,  270,  271,  290 

Magdalene ;  see  Mary 

Majestas,  Pilate's  fear  of  being  accused 

of,  340 
Malchus,  322 
Manasseh,  founder  of  the  rival  worship 

on  Gerizim,  in 
Marcion'srejectionoftheFourthGospel,2o 


386 


INDEX    I. 


marriage,  Christ  gives  his  sanction  to,  87; 
symbolical  ofHisrelationtoHis  Church, 
102 

Martha,  probably  older  than  Mary  and 
Lazarus,  229,  234;  coincidence  between 
S.  John  and  S.  Luke  respecting  her, 
234;  her  progressive  faith,  235 

Mary  Magdalene,  introduced  as  a  person 
well  known,  346;  visits  the  sepulchre, 
355  ;  manifestation  to  her,  357  ;  nature 
of  the  rebuke  to  her,  359 

Mary,  the  wife  of  Clopas.  probably  iden- 
tical with  the  mother  of  James  the  less, 

346 

Mary,  sister  of  Lazarus,  not  identical 
with  the  prostitute  of  Luke  vii.,  nor 
with  Mary  Magdalene,  228;  coinci- 
dence between  S.  John  and  S.  Luke 
respecting  her,  234;  her  devotion,  246  ; 
argument  from  the  praise  bestowed  on 
her,  248 

Mary,  the  Blessed  Virgin,  rebuked  by 
Christ  at  Cana,  84;  her  relationship  to 
His  brethren,  87;  to  S.  John,  10,  346, 
347 ;  no  special  manifestation  to  her 
after  the  Resurrection,  360 

Messiah,  Jewish  ideas  respecting  well- 
known  to  the  Evangelist,  73,  82,  83, 
142;  Samaritan,  106,  113 

Meyer  quoted,  103,  159.  268 

ministry,  duration  of  Christ's,  47,  48 

miracles  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  symboli- 
cal, 40;  spontaneous,  123 

mission  of  Jesus  distinct  from  that  of  His 
disciples,  198,  361 ;  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
279,  283,  294 

money,  88,  139 

Moses,  contrasted  with  Christ,  149,  205: 
testifies  to  Christ,  80,  136;  and  against 
the  Jews,  1-6,  166;  the  giver,  neither 
of  the  Law,  69  ;  nor  of  the  manna,  149 

Mount  Gerizim,  temple  upon,  m 

Mount  of  Olives  not  mentioned  by  S. 
John,  176 

muhitude,  fickleness  of  the,  91,  142,  158, 
160,  186,  256 

Nathanael,  reasons  for  identifying  with 
Bartholomew,  80;  his  character,  81 

Nazarene,  320 

Nazareth,  evil  report  of,  81 

Neapolis,  or  Sychera,  107 

New  Commandment,  271,  290 

Newman,  Cardinal,  quoted,  93 

Nicodemus,  mentioned  by  S.  John  only, 
93;  his  character,  93;  coincidence  be- 
tween S.  John  and  S.  Mark  in  con- 
nexion with  him,  252 

nobleman's  son  distinct  from  the  centu- 
rion's servant,  120 

Olives,  Mount  of,  see  Mount 
orally,  the   Fourth  Gospel   delivered   at 
first,  33,  51 


Papias,  19 

parables  not  found  in  the  Fourth  Gospel, 

210 
Paraclete,   threefold  office  of  the,   297; 

mission  of,  see  Mission 
parallelism  in  the  Fourth  Gospel,  45,  62, 

72,  184 
paralytic  at  Bethesda,  123 
Passion,  prominent  thoughts  in  S.  John's 
narrative  of  the,  317;   probable  order 
of  the  events  of  the,  381 
Passover,   customs  at  the,  267,  268,  269, 
322;  the  first,  88;  the  second,  138;  the 
last,  245 ;  the  Last  Supper  not  the  Pass- 
over, 379 
Paul,  coincidences  between  S.  John  and 

S.,  66,  280  _  _ 
Pentecost  anticipated,  362 
Peter,  brought  to  Jesus  by  his  brother 
Andrew,  79;   named  by  Jesus,  79;  his 
impetuosity,  264,  272,  321,  356,  370;  his 
denials,  324,  326,  380;  his  repentance 
implied  but  not  recorded  by  S.  John, 
327 ;   his    visit   to    the    sepulchre,   356 ; 
commission  to  him  and   prediction   of 
his  death,  371 
Pharisees,   the  only  sect   mentioned  by 

S.  John,  73 
Philip,  called  by  Jesus,  80;  consulted  by 
Jesus,  139;  rebuked  by  Jesus,  276;  his 
character,  276 
Philo,  contrasted  with  S.  John,  61,  67 
Pilate,  introduced  in  the  narrative  as  well 
known,   329 ;    his  residence,   328 ;  tries 
to  avoid  putting  Jesus  to  dea  h,  330; 
his  famous  question,  334 ;  his  conflicting 
fears,  338,  340;   his  character,  345 
Polycarp's  evidence  to  the  First  Epistle, 
19;  fallacious  argument  from  his  con- 
troversy with  Anicetus,  32 
Praetorium.  328 

prayer  of  the  Great  High  Priest,  336 
priests,  72  ;  mostly  Sadducees,  yet  com- 
bine   with    the    Pharisees,    169,    241, 
319 
procession  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  294 
Procurator,  Pilate   as,  conducts  the  ex- 
amination, 331 
prophecies  fulfilled  in  Christ,  89,  249,  345, 

351 
punctuation,  differences  of,  65,  166,  230, 

253,  270,  278 
purification,  ceremonial,  84,  244 
Purim,  Feast  of,  122 
purple  robe,  336 

purpose,  constructions  implying,  frequent 
in  S.  John,  115,  118,  148,  153,  195,  232, 
243,  296,  297 
purpose  of  the  Gospel,  34,  366 

readings,  differences  of,  67,  70,  104,  141. 

151,  154,  162,  163,   189,  199,  206,  212, 

220,  266,  311,  318,  326 
remission  of  sins  by  the  Church,  363 


INDEX   I. 


387 


reserve,  a  characteristic  of  S.  John,  77, 

79.  84,  346        _ 
resurrection,  spiritual, 129 ;  of  the  wicked, 

130;   of  Christ,  355 ;   Jewish  belief  as 

to,  235 
robber  or  bandit,  211,  335;  S.  John  and 

the  robber,  15 

Sabbath,  of  later  origin  than  Circum- 
cision, 166:  Christ's  attitude  towards, 
127;  miracles  wrought  on,  201 

Sadducees,  not  mentioned  by  S.  John,  73 ; 
combine  with  the  Pharisees,  169,  241 

Salome,  mother  of  S.  John,  9;  probably 
sister  of  the  Virgin,  346 

Samaria,  106 

Samaritan,  Jesus  taunted  with  being  a,  193 

Samaritans,  relations  of,  to  the  Jews,  108, 
113;  origin,  109;  readiness  to  believe 
in  Jesus,  116,  117 

Samaritan  Messiah,  106,  113 

Samaritan  woman,  historical  character  of 
the  narrative  of,  106;  her  progressive 
faith.  III ;  the  revelation  vouchsafed  to 
her,  114 

Samaritan  religion,  iii,  112 

Sanhedrin,  169,  174,  178,  327;  in  a  diffi- 
culty respecting  the  execution  of  Jesus, 

329 

Satan,  personal  existence  of,  191 ;  in- 
fluence on  Judas,  262 

scourging,  Pilate'sobject  in  inflicting,  336 

Sebaste,  or  Samaria,  107 

sepulchre,  233,  339 

serpent,  argument  from  the  mention  of,  97 

signs,  86 

Siloam,  pouring  of  water  from,  171 ;  iden- 
tified with  Birket  Silwdn,  200 

Simon,  S.  John's  usage  in  employing  this 
name  for  S.  Peter,  372 

Solomon's  porch,  219 

Son  of  Man,  use  of  the  phrase  in  the 
Gospels,  82;  in  O.  T.,  83;  its  applica- 
tion to  the  Messiah,  83 

spiral  movement  in  the  Prologue,  71 

style  of  S.  John,  42 — 46,  63,  64,  133 

superscription,  344 

Supper,  the  Last,  261 

Sychar,  107 

symbolical  interpretations  of  Scripture,37o 

symbolism  in  the  Fourth  Gospel,  40,  41 

synagogue  at  Capernaum,  156 

Synoptic  Gospels,  relation  of  to  the  Fourth, 
46—50,  77,  gt 

Tabernacles,  Feast  of,  i6i ;  ceremonies 
at,  171,  180 

table,  mode  of  reclining  at,  267 

Talmud  quoted,  140;  declares  fowls  un- 
clean, 327;  declares  that  the  Jews  had 
lost  the  power  to  inflict  capital  punish- 
ment, 330 

Targums,  61 

Tatian,  63,  64 


Temple,  traiSc  in  the,  88;  Christ's  public 
teaching  in,  164,  [177,]  183,  196;  Solo- 
mon's porch  in,  219 

Tertullian,  defender  of  a  false  reading, 
67;  witness  to  an  early  various  read- 
ing, 206;  gives  the  true  'Note  of  the 
Church',  272 

Thaddaeus,  or  Judas,  282 

Theophilus  of  Antioch;  his  evidence  to 
the  Fourth  Gospel,  20 

Thomas,  name  and  character  of,  232, 
27s,  363;  compared  with  Philip,  276; 
nature  of  his  scepticism,  364,  365 

thorns,  crown  of,  336 

Tiberias,  not  mentioned  by  the  Synop- 
tists,  T38;  a  centre  of  education,  11; 
sea  of,  137,  368 ;  the  boats  of  known  to 
_S.  John,  144 

Tiberius,  chronology  of  his  reign  in  con- 
nexion with  Christ's  ministry,  48; 
Pilate's  fear  of  him,  340 

title  on  the  Cross,  344 

tombs,  233,  339 

tragic  brevity  in  S.  John,  270 

tragic  tone  in  S.  John,  64,  99,  103 

transfiguration,  not  recorded  by  S.  John, 
21 ;  not  alluded  to  in  v.  37,  133 

transmigration  of  souls,  198 

treasury,  183 

Trench  quoted,  232 

Truth,  Jesus  is  the,  275 ;  the  Gospel  is 
the,  333 

trials,  ecclesiastical  and  civil,  of  Jesus, 
322—342 

triumphal  entry,  249 

Twelve,  the,  spoken  of  as  well-known,  158 

typical  characters  in  the  Fourth  Gospel, 
39.  121 _ 

typical  miracles,  40,  370 

Uncial  manuscripts,  table  of,  51,  52 

versions,  table  of  principal,  52 
vine,  allegory  of  the,  286 
vinegar,  348 

voice  of  one  crying,  &c.,  73 
voice  from  heaven,  254 

washing  the  disciples'  feet,  263 

water,  the  living,  log 

water,  Christ  walking  on  the,  143 

Way,  Jesus  is  the,  275 

Westcott   quoted,  30,  42,    50,    146,    214, 

.307.  316,  317,  333,  362,  369 
wilderness,  244 
wine,  water  turned  into,  85 ;  objections 

to  the  miracle,  86 
woman  ofSamaria;see  Samaritan  woman, 
woman  taken  in  adultery;  see  adultery, 
women   minister  to   Christ,   10;   at   the 

cross,  346 ;  visit  the  sepulchre,  354 
words  from  the  cross,  382 

Zebedee,  9 


388 


INDEX   II. 


II.     WORDS   AND    PHRASES   EXPLAINED. 


abide,  76 

Advocate,  279 

Aenon,  100 

after  these  things,  121,  352, 

367 
all  flesh,  308 
allegory,  212 
ask,  235,  279,  302 
arm  of  the  Lord,  257 
bag  or  box,  247 
band,  319 
Barabbas,  335 
basket,  141 
bear,  247 
beginning,  60 
believe  on,  65 
Bethesda,  122 
born  again,  94 
branch,  286 
breathe,  96,  362 
brethren,  376 
Caesar's  friend,  339 
Caiaphas,  242 
captain,  322 
changers  of  money,  88 
children  of  God,  66 
children  of  light,  256 
cloke,  293 
Comforter,  279 
comfortless,  281 
convey  oneself  away,  125 
convince,  99,  192,  29S 
crurifraghim,  349 
darkness,  63 
demon,  193 
Didymus,  232 
dispersion,  170 
division  or  schism,  173 
do  the  truth,  99 
door,  211 
early,  528 
eternal  life,  98 
fault,  334 

feast  of  the  Jews,  138,  160 
feed,  373 
firkin,  85 
fish,  140 

fisher's  coat,  369 
fornication,  190 
friend  of  the   Bridegroom, 

102 
fulness,  69 


Gentiles,  171,  251 

give  His  life,  215 

give  glory  to  God,  204 

glory,  68 

Golgotha,  343 

Good  Shepherd,  215 

grace,  68 

grave,  233 

Greeks,  171,  251 

groan,  237 

hall  of  judgment,  328 

hard,  156 

Hebrew,  122 

Hellenes,  251 

Hosanna,  249 

hour,  84,  252 

Iscariot,  159 

Jewry,  160 

Jews,  72 

judge,  y8,  i8r 

keep,  293,  309 

Lamb  of  God,  75 

lamp,  132 

last  day  of  the  feast,  171 

life,  63 

light,  63,  64 

living  water,  109 

Logos,  60 

Lord,  149,  179,  207 

love,  229,  372 

manifest,  367 

mansions,  274 

master,  96,  236 

Messias,  79 

murderer,  191 

name,  66 

napVin,  240 

Nathanael,  80 

new,  271 

nobleman,  118 

now,  305 

ointment  of  spikenard,  2i6 

offended,  296 

only-begotten,  68,  70,  98 

only  God,  the,  135 

ordain,  291 

palace,  323 

parable,  212 

Paraclete,  279 

Passover  of  the  Jews,  88 

pennyworth,  139,  247 

power,  66,  218 


pray,  279 

preparation,  349,  3^3 

prince  of  this  world,  254 

proceed,  294 

prophet,  a.  64,  93,  no,  202 

prophet,  the,  73,  142,  173 

proverb,  303 

purge,  287 

put,  364 

Rabbi,  78,  96,  115 

Rabboni,  359 

reprove,  99,  298 

righteousness,  298 

robber,  211,  335 

ruler  of  the  feast,  85 

ruler  of  the  Jews,  93,  258 

ruler  of  this  world,  254 

sanctify,  312,  313 

sayings,  136 

schism,  173 

scripture,  223 

seal,  148 

send,  361 

sepulchre,  233 

signs,  86 

Siloam,  200 

sir,  149,  179,  207 

sleep,  231 

Son  of  Man,  82 

son  of  man,  130 

son  of  perdition,  311 

sop,  268 

speech,  117,  190 

spirit,  95 

Sychar,  107 

tabernacled,  63 

temple,  90 

tempt,  177 

Thomas,  232 

true,  6s,  351 

verily,  verily,  82 

voice,  95 

way,  27s 

wash,  264 

wind,  95 

without  sin,  178 

word,  190,  194 

Word,  the,  60 

word  of  God,  223 

words,  136 

works,  128 

world,  65 


Cambridge:  ikinted  kv  c.  j.  ci.av,  ma.  and  so.ns,  at  the  university  press. 


THE    CAMBRIDGE     BIBLE    FOR 
SCHOOLS    AND    COLLEGES. 

General  Editor,  J.  J.  S.  Perowne, 
Bishop  of  Worcester. 

*'//  is  difficult  to  commend  too  highly  this  cxcelle7it  serus." — Guardian. 

' '  The  modesty  of  the  getieral  title  of  this  series  has,  rue  believe,  led 
many  to  misunderstand  its  character  and  underrate  its  value.  The  books 
are  well  suited  for  study  in  the  upper  forms  of  our  best  schools,  but  not 
the  less  are  they  adapted  to  the  ivants  of  all  Bible  students  who  are  not 
specialists.  We  doubt,  indeed,  'whether  any  of  the  numerous  popular 
commentaries  recently  issued  in  this  country  will  be  found  more  service- 
able for  general  use." — Academy. 

"  One  of  the  most  popular  and  useful  literaiy  enterprises  of  the 
nineteenth  century." — Baptist  Magazine. 

"  Of  great  value.  The  whole  series  of  comments  for  schools  is  highly 
esteemed  by  students  capable  of  forming  a  judgment.  The  books  are 
scholarly  -without  being  pretentious :  and  information  is  so  given  as  to  be 
easily  understood.'''' — Sword  and  Trowel. 

"  The  value  of  the  work  as  an  aid  to  Biblical  study,  net  ?nerely  in 
schools  but  among  people  of  all  classes  who  are  desirous  to  have  intelligent 
knowledge  of  the  Scriptures,  cannot  easily  be  over-estimated." — The 
Scotsman. 


The  Book  of  Judges.  J.  J.  Lias,  M.A.  "  His  introduction  is  clear 
and  concise,  full  of  the  information  which  young  students  require,  and 
indicating  the  lines  on  which  the  various  problems  suggested  by  the 
Book  of  Judges  may  be  solved." — Baptist  Magazine. 

1  Samuel,  by  A.  F.  Kikkpatrick.  "Remembering  the  interest 
with  which  we  read  the  Books  of  the  Kingdom  when  they  were  appointed 
as  a  subject  for  school  work  in  our  boyhood,  we  have  looked  with  some 
eagerness  into  Mr  Kirkpatrick's  volume,  which  contains  the  first  instal- 
ment of  them.  We  are  struck  with  the  great  improvement  in  character, 
and  variety  in  the  materials,  with  which  schools  are  now  supplied.  A 
clear  map  inserted  in  each  volume,  notes  suiting  the  convenience  of  the 
scholar  and  the  difficulty  of  the  passage,  and  not  merely  dictated  by  the 
fancy  of  the  commentator,  were  luxuries  which  a  quarter  of  a  centur}' 
ago  the  Biblical  student  could  not  buy." — Church  Quarterly  Review. 

"To  the  valuable  series  of  Scriptural  expositions  and  elementary 
commentaries  which  is  being  issued  at  the  Cambridge  University  Press, 
under  the  title  'The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools,'  has  been  added 
The  First  Book  of  Samuel  by  the  Rev.  A.  F.  Kirkpatrick.  Like 
other  volumes  of  the  series,  it  contains  a  carefully  written  historical  and 
critical  introduction,  while  the  text  is  profusely  illustrated  and  explained 
by  notes." — The  Scotsman. 

20,000 

8/1/91 


2      CAMBRIDGE  BIBLE  FOR  SCHOOLS  &   COLLEGES. 


II.  Samuel.  A.  F.  Kirkpatrick,  M.A.  "Small  as  this  work  is 
in  mere  dimensions,  it  is  every  way  the  best  on  its  subject  and  for  its 
purpose  that  we  know  of.  The  opening  sections  at  once  prove  the 
thorough  competence  of  the  writer  for  dealing  with  questions  of  criti- 
cism in  an  earnest,  faithful  and  devout  spirit ;  and  the  appendices  discuss 
a  few  special  difficulties  with  a  full  knowledge  of  the  data,  and  a  judicial 
reserve,  which  contrast  most  favourably  with  the  superficial  dogmatism 
which  has  too  often  made  the  exegesis  of  the  Old  Testament  a  field  for 
the  play  of  unlimited  paradox  and  the  ostentation  of  personal  infalli- 
bility. The  notes  are  always  clear  and  suggestive;  never  trifling  or 
irrelevant;  and  they  everywhere  demonstrate  the  great  difference  in 
value  between  the  work  of  a  commentator  who  is  also  a  Hebraist,  and 
that  of  one  who  has  to  depend  for  his  Hebrew  upon  secondhand 
sources. " — Academy. 

"The  Rev.  A.  F.  Kirkpatrick  has  now  completed  his  commentary 
on  the  two  books  of  Samuel.  This  second  volume,  like  the  first,  is 
furnished  with  a  scholarly  and  carefully  prepared  critical  and  historical 
introduction,  and  the  notes  supply  everything  necessary  to  enable  the 
merely  English  scholar — so  far  as  is  possible  for  one  ignorant  of  the 
original  language — to  gather  up  the  precise  meaning  of  the  text.  Even 
Hebrew  scholars  may  consult  this  small  volume  with  profit." — Scotsman. 

I.  Kings  and  Ephesians.  "With  great  heartiness  we  commend 
these  most  valuable  little  commentaries.  We  had  rather  purchase 
these  than  nine  out  of  ten  of  the  big  blown  up  expositions.  Quality  is 
far  better  than  quantity,  and  we  have  it  here."— .S'ww^  and  Trmvd. 

I.  Kings.  "This  is  really  admirably  well  done,  and  from  first  to 
last  there  is  nothing  but  commendation  to  give  to  such  honest  work." — 
Bookseller. 

II.  Kings.  "The  Introduction  is  scholarly  and  wholly  admirable, 
while  the  notes  must  be  of  incalculable  value  to  students." — Glasgcnv 
Herald. 

"It  is  equipped  with  a  valuable  introduction  and  commentarj',  and 
makes  an  admirable  text  book  for  Bible-classes." — Scotsmati. 

"It  would  be  difficult  to  find  a  commentary  better  suited  for  general 
use. " — A  cade 7)1  y. 

The  Book  of  Job.  "Able  and  scholarly  as  the  Introduction  is,  it  is 
far  surpassed  by  the  detailed  exegesis  of  the  book.  In  this  Dr  Davidson's 
strength  is  at  its  greatest.  His  linguistic  knowledge,  his  artistic  habit, 
his  scientific  insight,  and  his  literary  power  have  full  scope  when  he 
comes  to  exegesis. . .  .The  book  is  worthy  of  the  reputation  of  Dr  Davidson ; 
it  represents  the  results  of  many  years  of  labour,  and  it  will  greatly  help 
to  the  right  understanding  of  one  of  the  greatest  works  in  the  literature 
of  the  world." — The  Spcc/ato?-. 

"  In  the  course  of  a  long  introduction,  Dr  Davidson  has  presented 
us  with  a  very  able  and  very  interesting  criticism  of  tiiis  wonderful 
book.  Its  contents  the  nature  of  its  composition,  its  idea  and  purpose, 
its  integrity,  and  its  age  are  all  exhaustively  treated  or....We  have  not 
space  to  examine  fully  the  text  and  notes  before  us,  but  we  can,  and  do 
heartily,  recommend  the  book,  not  only  for  the  upper  forms  in  schools, 
but  to  Bible  students  and  teachers  generally.  As  we  wrote  of  a  previous 
volume  in  the  same  series,  this  one  leaves  nothing  to  be  desired.  The 
notes  are  full  and  suggestive,  without  being  too  long,  and,  in  itself,  the 


OPINIONS  OF  THE  PRESS. 


introduction  forms  a  valuable  addition  to  modern  Bible  literature." — The 
Educational  Times. 

"Already  we  have  frequently  called  attention  to  this  exceedingly 
valuable  work  as  its  volumes  have  successively  appeared.  But  we  have 
never  done  so  with  greater  pleasure,  very  seldom  with  so  great  pleasure, 
as  we  now  refer  to  the  last  published  volume,  that  on  the  Book  of  Job, 
by  Dr  Davidson,  of  Edinburgh.. ..We  cordially  commend  the  volume  to 
all  our  readers.  The  least  instructed  will  understand  and  enjoy  it ; 
and  mature  scholars  will  learn  from  it." — Methodist  Recorder. 

Job — Hosea.  "  It  is  difficult  to  commend  too  highly  this  excellent 
series,  the  volumes  of  which  are  now  becoming  numerous.  The  two 
books  before  us,  small  as  they  are  in  size,  comprise  almost  everything 
that  the  young  student  can  reasonably  expect  to  find  in  the  way  of  helps 
towards  such  general  knowledge  of  their  subjects  as  may  be  gained 
without  an  attempt  to  grapple  with  the  Hebrew ;  and  even  the  learned 
scholar  can  hardly  read  without  interest  and  benefit  the  very  able  intro- 
ductory matter  which  both  these  commentators  have  prefixed  to  their 
volumes.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  these  works  have  brought 
within  the  reach  of  the  ordinary  reader  resources  which  were  until 
lately  quite  unknown  for  understanding  some  of  the  most  difficult  and 
obscure  portions  of  Old  Testament  literature." — Guardian. 

Ecclesiastes ;  or,  tlie  Preaclier. — "Of  the  Notes,  it  is  sufficient  to 
say  that  they  are  in  every  respect  worthy  of  Dr  Plumptre's  high  repu- 
tation as  a  scholar  and  a  critic,  being  at  once  learned,  sensible,  and 
practical.  .  .  .  An  appendix,  in  which  it  is  clearly  proved  that  the 
author  of  Ecclesiastes  anticipated  Shakspeare  and  Tennyson  in  some 
of  their  finest  thoughts  and  reflections,  will  be  read  with  interest  by 
students  both  of  Hebrew  and  of  English  literature.  Commentaries  are 
seldom  attractive  reading.  This  little  volume  is  a  notable  exception." — 
The  Scotsman. 

"In  short,  this  little  book  is  of  far  greater  value  than  most  of  the 
larger  and  more  elaborate  commentaries  on  this  Scripture.  Indispens- 
able to  the  scholar,  it  will  render  real  and  large  help  to  all  who  have  to 
expound  the  dramatic  utterances  of  The  Preacber  whether  in  the  Church 
or  in  the  School." — 7 he  Expositor. 

"The  ' z^m/ biography '  of  the  author  is  one  of  the  most  exquisite 
and  fascinating  pieces  of  writing  we  have  met  with,  and,  granting  its 
starting-point,  throws  wonderful  light  on  many  problems  connected  with 
the  book.  The  notes  illustrating  the  text  are  full  of  delicate  criticism, 
fine  glowing  insight,  and  apt  historical  allusion.  An  abler  volume 
than  Professor  Plumptre's  we  could  not  desire." — Baptist  Magazine. 

Jeremiali,  by  A.  W.  Streane.  "The  arrangement  of  the  book  is 
well  treated  on  pp.  xxx.,  396,  and  the  question  of  Baruch's  relations 
with  its  composition  on  pp.  xxvii.,  xxxiv. ,  317.  The  illustrations  from 
English  literature,  history,  monuments,  works  on  botany,  topography, 
etc.,  are  good  and  plentiful,  as  indeed  they  are  in  other  volumes  of  this 
series." — Church  Quarterly  Reviexv,  April,  1881. 

"Mr  Streane's  Jeremiali  consists  of  a  series  of  admirable  and  well- 
nigh  exhaustive  notes  on  the  text,  with  introduction  and  appendices, 
drawing  the  life,  times,  and  character  of  the  prophet,  the  style,  contents, 
and  arrangement  of  his  prophecies,  the  traditions  relating  to  Jeremiah, 


4      CAMBRIDGE   BIBLE   FOR   SCHOOLS   &   COLLEGES. 

meant  as  a  type  of  Christ  (a  most  remarkable  chapter),  and  other 
prophecies  relating  to  Jeremiah." — I'hi  English  Churcktna?i  and  Clerical 
yotirnal. 

Obadlah  and  Jonah.  "  This  number  of  the  admirable  series  of 
Scriptural  expositions  issued  by  the  Syndics  of  the  Cambridge  Uni- 
versity Press  is  well  up  to  the  mark.  The  numerous  notes  are 
excellent.  No  difficulty  is  shirked,  and  much  light  is  thrown  on  the 
contents  both  of  Obadiah  and  Jonah.  Scholars  and  students  of  to-day 
are  to  be  congratulated  on  having  so  large  an  amount  of  information  on 
Biblical  subjects,  so  clearly  and  ably  put  together,  placed  within  their 
reach  in  such  small  bulk.  To  all  Biblical  students  the  series  will  be 
acceptable,  and  for  the  use  of  Sabbath-school  teachers  will  prove 
invaluable." — North  British  Daily  A  fail. 

"It  is  a  very  useful  and  sensible  exposition  of  these  two  Minor 
Prophets,  and  deals  very  thoroughly  and  honestly  with  the  immense 
difficulties  of  the  later-named  of  the  two,  from  the  orthodox  point  of 
view." — Expositor. 

"  Haggai  and  Zechariah.  This  interesting  little  volume  is  of  great 
value.  It  is  one  of  the  best  books  in  that  well-known  series  of 
scholarly  and  popular  commentaries,  'the  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools 
and  Colleges '  of  which  Dean  Perowne  is  the  General  Editor.  In  the 
expositions  of  Archdeacon  Perowne  we  are  always  sure  to  notice 
learning,  ability,  judgment  and  reverence  ....  The  notes  are  terse 
and  pointed,  but  full  and  reliable." — Churchman. 

MalacM.  "  Archdeacon  Perowne  has  already  edited  Jonah  and 
Zechariah  for  this  series.  Malachi  presents  comparatively  few  difficulties 
and  the  Editor's  treatment  leaves  nothing  to  be  desired.  His  introduction 
is  clear  and  scholarly  and  his  commentary  sufficient.  We  may  instance 
the  notes  on  ii.  15  and  iv.  2  as  examples  of  careful  arrangement, 
clear  exposition  and  graceful  expression." — Academy,  Aug.  2,  1890. 

"  Tlie  Gospel  according  to  St  Matthew,  by  the  Rev.  A.  Carr.  The 
introduction  is  able,  scholarly,  and  eminently  practical,  as  it  bears 
on  the  authorship  and  contents  of  the  Gospel,  and  the  original  form 
in  which  it  is  supposed  to  have  been  written.  It  is  well  illustrated  by 
two  excellent  maps  of  the  Holy  Land  and  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee." — 
English  Churchman. 

"St  Matthew,  edited  by  A.  Carr,  M.A.  The  Book  of  Joshua, 
edited  by  G.  F.  Maclear,  D.D,  The  General  Epistle  of  St  James, 
edited  by  E.  H.  Plumptre,  D.D.  The  introductions  and  notes  are 
scholarly,  and  generally  such  as  young  readers  need  and  can  appre- 
ciate. The  maps  in  both  Joshua  and  Matthew  are  very  good,  and  all 
matters  of  editing  are  faultless.  Professor  Plumjitre's  notes  on  'The 
Epistle  of  St  James'  are  models  of  terse,  exact,  and  elegant  renderings 
of  the  original,  which  is  too  often  obscured  in  the  authorised  version." — 
Nonconformist. 

"St  Mark,  with  Notes  by  the  Rev.  G.  F.  Macleak,  D.D.  Into 
this  small  volume  Dr  Maclear,  besides  a  clear  and  able  Introduc- 
tion to  the  Gospel,  and  the  text  of  St  Mark,  has  compressed  many 
hundreds  of  valuable  and  helpful  notes.  In  short,  he  has  given  us 
a  capital  manual  of  the  kind  required — containing  all  that  is  needed  to 
illustrate  the  text,  i.  e.  all  that  can  be  drawn  Irom  the  history,  geography, 


OPINIONS   OF   THE   PRESS. 


customs,  and  manners  of  the  time.  But  as  a  handbook,  giving  in  a 
clear  and  succinct  form  the  information  which  a  lad  requires  in  order 

to  stand  an  examination  in  the  Gospel,  it  is  admirable I  can  very 

heartily  commend  it,  not  only  to  the  senior  boys  and  girls  in  our  High 
Schools,  but  also  to  Sunday-school  teachers,  who  may  get  from  it  the 
very  kind  of  knowledge  they  often  find  it  hardest  to  get. " — Expositor. 

"  With  the  help  of  a  book  like  this,  an  intelligent  teacher  may  make 
'Divinity'  as  interesting  a  lesson  as  any  in  the  school  course.  The 
notes  are  of  a  kind  that  will  be,  for  the  most  part,  intelligible  to  boys 
of  the  lower  forms  of  our  public  schools ;  but  they  may  be  read  with 
greater  profit  by  the  fifth  and  sixth,  in  conjunction  with  the  original 
text." — The  Academy. 

"St  Luke.  Canon  Farrar  has  supplied  students  of  the  Gospel 
with  an  admirable  manual  in  this  volume.  It  has  all  that  copious 
variety  of  illustration,  ingenuity  of  suggestion,  and  general  soundness  of 
interpretation  which  readers  are  accustomed  to  expect  from  the  learned 
and  eloquent  editor.  Any  one  who  has  been  accustomed  to  associate 
the  idea  of  'dryness'  with  a  commentary,  should  go  to  Canon  Farrar's 
St  Luke  for  a  more  correct  impression.  He  will  find  that  a  commen- 
tary may  be  made  interesting  in  the  highest  degree,  and  that  without 
losing  anything  of  its  solid  value.  .  .  .  But,  so  to  speak,  it  is  too  good 
for  some  of  the  readers  for  whom  it  is  intended." — The  Spectator. 

"Canon  Fakrar's  contribution  to  The  Cambridge  School  Bible 
is  one  of  the  most  valuable  yet  made.  His  annotations  on  The  Gospel 
according  to  St  Luke,  while  they  display  a  scholarship  at  least  as  sound, 
and  an  erudition  at  least  as  wide  and  varied  as  those  of  the  editors  of 
St  Matthew  and  St  Mark,  are  rendered  telling  and  attractive  by  a 
more  lively  imagination,  a  keener  intellectual  and  spiritual  insight,  a 
more  incisive  and  picturesque  style.  His  3"/ Zz//^^  is  worthy  to  be  ranked 
with  Professor  Plumptre's  St  jfames,  than  which  no  higher  commend- 
ation can  well  be  given." — The  Expositor. 

"St  Luke.  Edited  by  Canon  Farrar,  D.D.  We  have  received  with 
pleasure  this  edition  of  the  Gospel  by  St  Luke,  by  Canon  Farrar.  It  is 
another  instalment  of  the  best  school  commentary  of  the  Bible  we  pos- 
sess. Of  the  expository  part  of  the  work  we  cannot  speak  too  highly. 
It  is  admirable  in  every  way,  and  contains  just  the  sort  of  informa- 
tion needed  for  Students  of  the  English  text  unable  to  make  use  of  the 
original  Greek  for  themselves." — The  A^onconformist  and  Independent. 

"As  a  handbook  to  the  third  gospel,  this  small  work  is  invaluable. 
The  author  has  compressed  into  little  space  a  vast  mass  of  scholarly  in- 
formation. .  .  The  notes  are  pithy,  vigorous,  and  suggestive,  abounding 
in  pertinent  illustrations  from  general  literature,  and  aiding  the  youngest 
reader  to  an  intelligent  appreciation  of  the  text.  A  finer  contribution  to 
'The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools'  has  not  yet  been  made." — Baptist 
Magazine. 

"We  were  quite  prepared  to  find  in  Canon  Farrar's  St  Luke  a 
masterpiece  of  Biblical  criticism  and  comment,  and  we  are  not  dis- 
appointed by  our  examination  of  the  volume  before  us.  It  reflects  very 
faithfully  the  learning  and  critical  insight  of  the  Canon's  greatest  works, 
his  'Life  of  Christ'  and  his  'Life  of  St  Paul',  but  differs  widely  from 
both  in  the  terseness  and  condensation  of  its  style.  What  Canon  Farrar 
has  evidently  aimed  at  is  to  place  before  students  as  much  imormation 


6     CAMBRIDGE  BIBLE   FOR  SCHOOLS   &   COLLEGES. 

as  possible  within  the  limits  of  the  smallest  possible  space,  and 
in  this  aim  he  has  hit  the  mark  to  perfection." — The  Examiner. 

The  Gospel  according  to  St  John.  ' '  Of  the  notes  we  can  say  with 
confidence  that  they  are  useful,  necessary,  learned,  and  brief.  To 
Divinity  students,  to  teachers,  and  for  private  use,  this  compact 
Commentary  will  be  found  a  valuable  aid  to  the  better  understanding 
of  the  Sacred  Text." — School  Guardian. 

"  The  new  volume  of  the  '  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools ' — the 
Gospel  according  to  St  Jolin,  by  the  Rev.  A.  Plummer — shows  as 
careful  and  thorough  work  as  either  of  its  predecessors.  The  intro- 
duction concisely  yet  fully  describes  the  life  of  St  John,  the  authenticity 
of  the  Gospel,  its  characteristics,  its  relation  to  the  Synoptic  Gospels, 
and  to  the  Apostle's  First  Epistle,  and  the  usual  subjects  referred  to  in 
an  'introduction'." — The  Christian  Church. 

"The  notes  are  extremely  scholarly  and  valuable,  and  in  most  cases 
exhaustive,  bringing  to  the  elucidation  of  the  text  all  that  is  best  in 
commentaries,  ancient  and  modern." — The  English  Churchman  and 
Clerical  yournal. 

"(i)  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  By  J.  Rawson  Lumby,  D.D. 
(2)  The  oecond  Epistle  of  the  Corinthians,  edited  by  Professor  Lias. 
The  introduction  is  pithy,  and  contains  a  mass  of  carefully-selected 
information  on  the  authorship  of  the  Acts,  its  designs,  and  its  sources. 

The  Second  Epistle  of  the  Corinthians  is  a  manual  beyond  all  praise, 

for  the  excellence  of  its  pithy  and  pointed  annotations,  its  analysis  of  the 
contents,  and  the  fulness  and  value  of  its  introduction." — Examiner. 

"The  concluding  portion  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  under  the  very 
competent  editorship  of  Dr  LuMBY,  is  a  valuable  addition  to  our 
school-books  on  that  subject.  Detailed  criticism  is  impossible  within 
the  space  at  our  command,  but  we  may  say  that  the  ample  notes  touch 
with  much  exactness  the  very  points  on  which  most  readers  of  the  text 
desire  information.  Due  reference  is  made,  where  necessary,  to  the 
Revised  Version  ;  the  maps  are  excellent ;  and  we  do  not  know  of  any 
other  volume  where  so  nuich  help  is  given  to  the  complete  understand- 
ing of  one  of  the  most  important  and,  in  many  respects,  difficult  books 
of  the  New  Testament." — School  Guardian. 

"The  Rev.  H.  C.  G.  Moule,  M.A.,  has  made  a  valuable  addition 
to  The  C'AMRRinoE  Bible  for  Schools  in  his  brief  commentary  on 
the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  The  'Notes'  are  very  good,  and  lean, 
as  the  notes  of  a  School  Bible  should,  to  the  most  commonly  ac- 
cepted and  orthodox  view  of  the  inspired  author's  meaning  ;  while  the 
Introduction,  and  especially  the  Sketch  of  the  Life  of  St  Paul,  is  a  model 
of  condensation.  It  is  as  lively  and  pleasant  to  read  as  if  two  or  three 
facts  had  not  been  crowded  into  well-nigh  every  sentence." — Expositor. 

"The  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  It  is  seldom  we  have  met  with  a 
work  so  remarkable  for  the  compression  and  condensation  of  all  that 
is  valuable  in  the  smallest  possible  space  as  in  the  volume  before  us. 
Within  its  limited  pages  we  have  '  a  sketch  of  the  Life  of  St  Paul,' 
we  have  further  a  critical  account  of  the  date  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  of  its  language,  and  of  its  genuineness.  The  notes  are 
numerous,  full  of  matter,  to  the  point,  and  leave  no  real  difficulty 
or  obscurity  unexplained." — Tlie  Examiner. 


OPINIONS   OF   THE   PRESS. 


' '  The  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  Edited  by  Professor  Lias. 
Every  fresh  instalment  of  this  annotated  edition  of  the  Bible  for  Schools 
confirms  the  favourable  opinion  we  formed  of  its  value  from  the  exami- 
nation of  its  first  number.  The  origin  and  plan  of  the  Epistle  are 
discussed  with  its  character  and  genuineness." — The  Nonconformist. 

"The  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  By  Professor  Lias.  The 
General  Epistles  of  St  Peter  and  St  Jude.  By  E.  H.  Plumptre,  D.D. 
We  welcome  these  additions  to  the  valuable  series  of  the  Cambridge 
Bible.  We  have  nothing  to  add  to  the  commendation  which  we 
have  from  the  first  publication  given  to  this  edition  of  the  Bible.  It  is 
enough  to  say  that  Professor  Lias  has  completed  his  work  on  the  two 
Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  in  the  same  admirable  manner  as  at  first. 
Dr  Plumptre  has  also  completed  the  Catholic  Epistles." — NoncoJtformist . 

The  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians.  By  Rev.  H.  C.  G.  Moule,  M.A. 
"  It  seems  to  us  the  model  of  a  School  and  College  Commentary — 
comprehensive,  but  not  cumbersome;  scholarly,  but  not  pedantic." — 
Baptist  Magazijte. 

The  Epistle  to  the  PhiUppians.  "There  are  few  series  more  valued 
by  theological  students  than  '  The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools  and 
Colleges,'  and  there  will  be  no  number  of  it  more  esteemed  than  that 
by  Mr  H.  C.  G.  Moule  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippiaiis.''' — Record. 

"  Another  capital  volume  of  'The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools  and 
Colleges.'  The  notes  are  a  model  of  scholarly,  lucid,  and  compact 
criticism."— Z>a//w/  Magazine. 

Hebrews.  "  Like  his  (Canon  Farrar's)  commentary  on  Luke  it 
possesses  all  the  best  characteristics  of  his  writing.  It  is  a  work  not 
only  of  an  accomplished  scholar,  but  of  a  skilled  teacher." — Baptist 
Magazine. 

•'  We  heartily  commend  this  volume  of  this  excellent  work." — 
Sunday  School  Chronicle. 

"The  General  Epistle  of  St  James,  by  Professor  Plumptre,  D.D. 
Nevertheless  it  is,  so  far  as  I  know,  by  far  the  best  exposition  of  the 
Epistle  of  St  James  in  the  English  language.  Not  Schoolboys  or 
Students  going  in  for  an  examination  alone,  but  Ministers  and  Preachers 
of  the  Word,  may  get  more  real  help  from  it  than  from  the  most  costly 
and  elaborate  commentaries." — Expositor. 

The  Epistles  of  St  John.  By  the  Rev.  A.  Plummer,  M.A.,  D.D. 
"This  forms  an  admirable  companion  to  the  'Commentary  on  the 
Gospel  according  to  St  John,'  which  was  reviewed  in  The  Churchman 
as  soon  as  it  appeared.  Dr  Plummer  has  some  of  the  highest  qualifica- 
tions for  such  a  task  ;  and  these  two  volumes,  their  size  being  considered, 
will  bear  comparison  with  the  best  Commentaries  of  the  time." — The 
Churchman. 

"  Dr  Plummer's  edition  of  the  Epistles  of  St  John  is  worthy  of  its 
companions  in  the  'Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools'  Series.  The 
subject,  though  not  apparently  extensive,  is  really  one  not  easy  to 
treat,  and  requiring  to  be  treated  at  length,  owing  to  the  constant 
reference  to  obscure  heresies  in  the  Johannine  writings.  Dr  Plummer 
has  done  his  exegetical  task  well." — The  Saturday  Jievieiu. 


THE  CAMBRIDGE  GREEK  TESTAMENT 

FOR   SCHOOLS   AND    COLLEGES 

•witli  a  Revised  Text,  based  on  the  most  recent  critical  authorities,  and 

English  Notes,  prepared  under  the  direction  of  the  General  Editor, 

The  Bishop  of  Worcester. 

"  Has  achieved  an  excellence  which  puts  it  above  criticism.'''' — Expositor. 

St  Matthew.  "  Copious  illustrations,  gathered  from  a  great  variety 
of  sources,  make  his  notes  a  very  valuable  aid  to  the  student.  They 
are  indeed  remarkably  interesting,  while  all  explanations  on  meanings, 
applications,  and  the  like  are  distinguished  by  their  lucidity  and  good 
sense."— /"a//  Mall  Gazette. 

St  Mark.  "The  Cambridge  Greek  Testament  of  which  Dr  Maclear's 
edition  of  the  Gospel  according  to  St  Mark  is  a  volume,  certainly 
supplies  a  want.  Without  pretending  to  compete  with  the  leading 
commentaries,  or  to  embody  very  much  original  research,  it  forms  a 
most  satisfactory  introduction  to  the  study  of  the  New  Testament  in 
the  original.... Dr  Maclear's  introduction  contains  all  that  is  known  of 
St  Mark's  life;  an  account  of  the  circumstances  in  which  the  Gospel 
was  composed,  with  an  estimate  of  the  influence  of  St  Peter's  teaching 
upon  St  Mark  ;  an  excellent  sketch  of  the  special  characteristics  of  this 
Gospel ;  an  analysis,  and  a  chapter  on  the  text  of  the  New  Testament 
generally. " — Saturday  Review. 

St  Luke.      "Of   this   second   series   we   have   a  new  volume  by 

Archdeacon  Farrar  on  St  Luke,  completing  the  four  Gospels It 

gives  us  in  clear  and  beautiful  language  the  best  results  of  modern 
scholarship.  We  have  a  most  attractive  Ititrodtiction.  Then  follows 
a  sort  of  composite  Greek  text,  representing  fairly  and  in  very  beautiful 
type  the  consensus  of  modern  textual  critics.  At  the  beginning  of  the 
exposition  of  each  chapter  of  the  Gospel  are  a  few  short  critical  notes 
giving  the  manuscript  evidence  for  such  various  readings  as  seem  to 
deserve  mention.  The  expository  notes  are  short,  but  clear  and  helpful. 
For  young  students  and  those  who  are  not  disposed  to  buy  or  to  study 
the  much  more  costly  work  of  Godet,  this  seems  to  us  to  be  the  best 
book  on  the  Greek  Text  of  the  Third  Go?,-^e.\." — Alethodist  Recorder. 

St  John.  "  We  take  this  opportunity  of  recommending  to  ministers 
on  probation,  the  very  excellent  volume  of  the  same  series  on  this  part 
of  the  New  Testament.  We  hope  that  most  or  all  of  our  young  ministers 
will  prefer  to  study  the  volume  in  the  Cambridge  Greek  Testament  for 
Schools." — Methodist  Recorder. 

The  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  "Professor  Lumby  has  performed  his 
laborious  task  well,  and  supplied  us  with  a  commentary  the  fulness  and 
freshness  of  which  Bible  students  will  not  be  slow  to  appreciate.  The 
volume  is  enriched  with  the  usual  copious  indexes  and  four  coloured 
maps." — Glasgow  Herald. 

I.  Corinthians.  "^Ir  Lias  is  no  novice  in  New  Testament  exposi- 
tion, and  the  present  series  of  essays  and  notes  is  an  able  and  helpful 
addition  to  the  existing  books." — Guardian. 

The  Epistles  of  St  John.  "In  the  very  useful  and  well  annotated 
scries  of  the  Cambridge  Greek  Testament  the  volume  on  the  Epistles 
of  St  John  must  hold  a  high  position ...  The  notes  are  brief,  well 
informed  and  intelligent." — Scotsman. 

CAMBRIDGE:    PUINTF.D    BY   C.   J     CLAY,    M.A.    AND    SONS,  AT   THE   UNIVERSITY   PRESS. 


CAMBRIDGE  UNIVERSITY  PRESS. 


THE    PITT   PRESS   SERIES. 


,,     Many  of  the  books  irt  this  list  can  be  had  in  tzuo  volumes,    Text 
and  Notes  separately. 

I.     GREEK. 
Aristophanes.    Aves— Plutus— Ran».     By  W.    C.   Green, 

M.A.,  late  Assistant  Master  at  Rugby  School.     3.r.  6</.  each, 

Aristotle.     Outlines   of  the   Philosophy   of.      By  Edwin 

Wallace,  M.A.,  LL.U.     Third  Edition,  Enlarged.     4^.  M. 

Euripides.    Heracleidae.    By  E.  A.  Beck,  M.A.    3^.  6^. 

Hercules  Furens.     By  A.   Gray,   M.A.,   and  J.   T. 

Hutchinson,  M.A.     New  Edit.     is. 

Hippolytus.     l')y  W.  S.  Hadley,   M.A.     is. 

Iphlgeneia  in  Au'lis.  By  C.  E.  S.  Headlam,  B.A.  is.  6d. 

Herodotus,  Book  V.    By  E.  S.  Shuckburgh,  M.A.    y. 
Book  VI.     By  the  same  Editor.     4^. 

Books  VIII.,  IX.     Bv  the  same  Editor.     4^-.  each. 

Book  Vni.    Ch.  1—90.    Book  IX.    Ch.  1—89.    By 

the  same  Editor.     3^.  Sit.  each. 

Homer.    Odyssey,  Books  IX.,  X.    By  G.  M.  Edwards,  M.A. 

2s.  6d.  each.     Book  XXI.     Bv  the  same  Editor.     2s. 

•     Iliad.     Book  XXII.     By  tiie  same  Editor.     2s. 

Book  XXIII.  By  the  same  Editor,    {.w-ariy  ready. 

Lucian.    Somnium  Charon  Piscator  et  De  Luctu.    By  W.  E. 

Heitland,  M.A.,  Fellow  of  St  John's  College,  Cambridge.     3J.  6d. 

Menippus  and  Timon.    By  E.  C.  Mackie,  M.A. 

Platonis  Apologia  Socratis.    By  J.  Adam,  M.A.    3^.  6d. " 

Crito.     By  the  same  Editor.    2s.  bd. 

Euthyphro.     By  the  same  Editor,     -zs.  6d. 

Plutarch.    Lives  of  the  Gracchi.    By  Rev.  H.  A.  Holden, 

M.A.,LL.D.     6s. 

Life  of  Nicias.     By  the  same  Editor.     5.y. 

Life  of  Sulla.     By  the  same  Editor.     6j-. 

Life  of  Timoleon.    By  the  same  Editor.     6s. 

Sophocles.     Oedipus  Tyrannus.     School  Edition.     By  R.  C. 

Jei'.i',,  Litt.D.,  LL.D.     43-.  6d. 

Thucydides.    Book  VIL    By  Rev.  H.  A.  Holden,  M.A.,  LL.D. 

[Nearly  ready. 

Xenopiioa.   Agesilaus.    By  H.  Hailstone,  M.A.    2s.  bd. 

Anabasis.     By  A.  Pretor,  ALA.      Two  vols.     7s.  GJ. 

Books  I.  III.  IV.  and  V.     By  the  same.     2s.  each. 

Books  II.  VI.  and  VII.     By  the  same.     2s.  bd.  each. 

Xenophon.    Cyropaedeia.    Books  I.  IL    By  Rev.  H.  A.  Hol- 

OEN,  MA.,  LL.D.     2  vols.     6.?. 

Books  III.  IV.  and  V.    By  the  same  Editor.    5^-. 

Books  VI.  VII.  VIII.    By  the  same  Editor.    5^. 

London:    Cambridge    Warehouse,  Ave  Maria  Lane, 

50/12/90 


PUBLICATIONS  OF 


II.     LATIN. 
Beda's  Ecclesiastical  History,  Books  III.,  IV.    By  J.  E.  B. 

Mayor,  M.A.,  and  J.  R.  Lumby,  D.D.     Revised  Edition,     ts.  dd, 

Books  I.  II.     By  the  same  Editors.  [/«  the  Press. 

Caesar.    De  Bello  Gallico,  Comment.  I.    By  A.  G.  Peskett, 

M.A.,  Fellow  of  Magdalene  College,  Cambridge.  \s.  6J.  Comment.  II. 
III.  2j.  Comment.  I.  II.  III.  3^.  Comment.  IV.  and  V.  is.fxi.  Comment. 
VII.    IS.    Comment  VI.  and  Comment.  VIII.     is.  6d.  each. 

De  Bello  Civili,  Comment.  I.    By  the  same  Editor,    ^s. 

Cicero.    De  Amicitia.— De  Senectute.    By  J.  S.  Reid,  Litt.D., 

Fellow  of  Gonville  and  Caius  College.     3.?.  6d.  each. 

In  Gaium  Verrem  Actio  Prima.     By   H.   Cowie, 

M.A.     I  J.  ed. 

In  Q.  Caecilium  Divinatio  et  in  C.  Verrem  Actio. 

By  W.  E.  Heitlanu,  M.A.,  and  H.  Cowie,  M.A.     3^. 

Philippica  Secunda.   By  A.  G.  Peskett,  M.A.  3.^.  6d. 

Oratio  pro  Archia  Poeta.    By  J.  S.  Reid,  Litt.D.     2s. 

Pro  L.  Cornelio  Balbo  Oratio.     By  the  same.    is.  6d. 

Oratio  pro  Tito  Annio  Milone.     By  John  .Smyth 


PuRTON,  B.D.     2.r.  6d. 

Oratio  pro  L.  Murena.  By  W.  E.  Heitland,  M.A.  y. 

ProCn.PlancioOratio.by  H.A.  HoLDENjLL.D.  j\s.6d. 

Pro  P.  Cornelio  Sulla.    By  J.  S.  Reid,  Litt.D.    y.  6d. 

Somnium  Scipionis.     By  W.  D.  Pearman,  M.A.  2s. 


Horace.    Epistles,  Book  I.    By  E.  S.  Shuckburgh,  M.A., 

late  Fellow  of  Emmanuel  College,     zs.  6d. 

Livy.    Book  IV.    By  H.  M.  Stephenson,  M.A.    2s.  6d. 

BookV.    By  L.  Whiblev,  M.A.     2s.  6d. 

Books  XXI.,  XXII.     By  M.  S.  Dimsdale,  M.A.,  Eel- 

low  of  King's  College.     2S.  dd.  each. 

Book  XXVII.  By  Rev.  H.  M.  Stephenson,  M.A.  2s.  6d. 


Lucan.    Pharsaliae  Liber  Primus.    By  W.   E.   Heitland, 

M.A.,  and  C.  E.  Haski.ns,  M.A.     is.  (sd. 

Lucretius,  Book  V.    By  J.  D.  Duff,  RLA.    2s. 

Ovidii  Nasonis  Fastorum  Liber  VI.    By  A.  Sidgwick,  M.A., 

Tutor  of  Corpus  Christi  College,  Oxford.     \s.  6d. 

Quintus  Curtius.   A  Portion  of  the  History  (Alexander  in  India). 

By  W.  E.  Heitland,  M.A.,  and  T.  E.  Raven,  B.  A.    With  Two  Maps.    y.  6d. 

Vergili  Maronis  Aeneidos  Libri  I. — XII.    By  A.  Sidgwick, 

M.A.     IS.  6d.  each. 

Bucolica.     By  the  same  Editor,     is.  6d. 

Georgicon  Libri  I.  II.     By  the  same  Editor.    2s. 

Libri  III.  IV.     By  the  same  Editor.     2s. 

The  Complete  Works.     By  the  same  Editor.    Two  vols. 


Vol.  I.  containing  the  Introduction  and  Text.  3^.  6d.    Vol.  II.  The  Notes.  4^.  6ii. 


London:    Cainbridge   Warehouse,  Ave  Maria  Lane. 


THE   CAMBRIDGE    UNIVERSITY  PRESS.         3 

III.     FRENCH. 

Corneille.    La  Suite  du  Menteur.    A  Comedy  in  Five  Acts. 

By  the  late  G.  Masson,  B.A.     2J. 

De  Bonnechose.     Lazare  Hoche.     By    C.   Colbeck,   M.A. 

Revised  Edition.     Four  Maps.     2.3. 

D'Harleville.  Le  Vieux  C^libataire.  By  G.  Masson,  B.A.  is. 
De    Lamartine.     Jeanne    D'Arc.     By   Rev.   A.  C.  Clapin, 

M.A.     New  edition  revised,  by  A.  R.  Rdpes,  M.A.     is.  6ii. 

De    Vigny.     La    Canne  de  Jonc.     By  Rev.   H.  A.   Bull, 

M.A.,  late  Master  at  Wellington  College.     2.5. 

Erckmann-Chatrian.    La  Guerre.    By  Rev.  A.  C.  Clapin, 

M.A.    ^s. 

La  Baronne  de  Stael-Holstein.  Le  Directoire.  (Considera- 
tions siir  la  Revolution  Francjaise.  Troisiime  et  quatiienie  parties.)  Revised 
and  enlarged.     By  G.  Masson,  B.A.,  and  G.  \V.  Pkothero,  ALA.     2s. 

Dix  Annies  d'Exil.    Livre  IL   Chapitres  1—8. 

By  the  same  Editors.     New  Edition,  enlarged,     -zs. 

Lemercier.    Fredegonde  et  Brunehaut.    A  Tragedy  in  Five 

Acts.     By  GuSTAVE  IMasson,  B.A.     2S. 

Moliere.    Le    Bourgeois    Gentiriomme,   Comedie-Ballet    en 

Cinq  Actes.     (1670.)     By  Rev.  A.  C.  Clai'in,  INLA.     Revised  Edition,     is.td. 

L'Ecole  des  Femmes.    By  G.  Saintsbury,  M.A.   2s.  6d. 

Les  Prdcieuses  Ridicules.    By  E.  G.  W.  Braunholtz, 

M.A.,  Ph.D.     -zs. 

Abridged  Edition,     is. 


Piron.    La  Metromanie.  A  Comedy.   By  G.  Masson,  B.A.  2s. 

Eacine.    Les  Plaideurs.    By  E.  G.  W.  Braunholtz,  M.A.  2s. 
Abridged  Edition,     is. 

Sainte-Beuve.     M.   Daru    (Causeries    du    Lundi,    Vol.    IX.) 

By  G.  Masson.  B.A.     is. 

Saintine.    Picciola.    By  Rev.  A.  C.  Clapin,  M.A.    2^-. 
Scribe  and  Legouvd.    Bataille  de  Dames.     By  Rev.  H.  A. 

Bull,  M.A.    is. 

Scribe.    Le  Verre  d'Eau.    By  C.  Colbeck,  M.A.    2s. 
Sedaine.     Le  Philosophe  sans  le  savoir.     By  Rev.  H.  A. 

Bull,  M.A.     2.?. 

Thierry.    Lettres  sur  I'histoire  de  France  (XIIL— XXIV.). 

By  G.  Masson,  B.A.,  and  G.  W.  Prothero,  M.A.     2s.  6a'. 

R^cits  des  Temps  Mdrovingiens  I— III.    By  Gustave 

Masson,  B.A.  Univ.  Gallic,  and  A.  R.  Roi'es,  M.A.     With  Map.     3,?. 

Villemain.    Lascaris  ou  Les  Grecs  du  XVe  Siecle,  Nouvella 

Historique.     By  G.  Masson,  B.  A.     is. 

Voltaire.    Histoire  du  Siecle  de  Louis  XIV.    Chaps.  I.— 

XIII.     By  G.  Masson,  B.A.,  and  G.  W.  Prothero,  M.A.     is.  6d.     Part  II. 
Chaps.  XIV.— XXIV.     is.  td.     Part  III.     Chaps.  XXV.  to  end.     2.?.  bd. 

Xavier  de  Maistre.    La  Jeune  Siberienne.    Le  L^preux  de 

la  Cite  D'Aoste.     By  G.  Masson,  B.A.     i.s.  (>d. 


London:    Cambridge   Warehouse,  Ave  Maria  Lane. 


PUBLICATIONS  OF 


IV.     GERMAN. 

Ballads  on  German  History.    By  W.  Wagner,  Ph.D.    2^. 
Benedix.     Doctor  Wespe.     Lustspiel  in  funf  Aufziigen.    By 

Kakl  Hermann  Kreul,  M.A.,  Ph.D.     35. 

Freytag.    Der  Staat  Friedrichs  des  Grossen.    By  Wilhelm 

Wagner,  Ph.D      is. 

German  Dactylic  Poetry.    By  Wilhelm  Wagner,  Ph.D.    3^. 
Goethe's  Knabenjahre.  (1749— 1759.)    By  W.  Wagner,  Ph.D. 

New  edition  revised  and  enhirged,  by  J.  W.  CAKi'.\TKLL,  M.A.     is. 

Hermann  und   Dorothea.    By   Wilhelm   Wagner, 

Ph.D.     New  edition  revised,  by  J.  W.  Cartmell,  M.A.     -^s.  (>d. 

Gutzkow.     Zopf  und  Schwert.     Lustspiel  in  fiinf  Aufziigen. 

liy  H.  J.  Woi  STENHOLME,  B.A.  (Lond.).     3.?.  6rf. 

Ilinff.    Das  Bild  des  Kaisers.     By  Karl  Hermann  Breul, 

M.A.,  Pli.D.,  University  Lecturer  in  German.     3.J. 

Das  Wirthshaus  im  Spessart.    By  A.  Schlottmann, 


PhD.     y.  U. 

Die  Karavane.    By  A.  Schlottmann,  Ph.D.    y.  6d. 

Immermann.    Der  Oberhof,    A  Tale  of  Westphalian  Life,  by 

Wilhelm  Wagnek,  Ph.D.     3^. 

Kohlrausch.  Das  Jahr  1813.  By  Wilhelm  W.vgner,  Ph.D.  2s. 
Lessins  and  Gellert.    Selected  Fables.    By  Karl  Hermann 

P.KKUL,  M.A.,  I'h.D.     3j. 

Mendelssohn's  Letters.   Selections  from.   By  J.  Sime,  M.A.  3.i-. 
Raumer,    Der  erste  Kreuzzug  (1095— 1099I     By  Wilhelm 

W.-^GNER,  Ph.D.       IS  °     \         7J  J-y,  J 

Riehl.    Culturgeschichtliche  Novellen.    By  H.  J.  Wolsten- 

HOL.ME,  B.A.  (Lond.).     3^-.  6d. 

Schiller.    Wilhelm  TeU.    By  Karl  Hermann  Breul,  M.A., 

Ph.D.     2S.  6J.  '  ' 


Abridged  Edition,     i.e.  6d. 
Uhland.    Ernst,  Herzog  von  Schwaben.    By  II.  J.  Wolsten- 

noL.ME,  B.A.     3.y.  6d. 


V.     ENGLISH. 


Ancient  Philosophy  from  Thales  to  Cicero,  A  Sketch  of.    By 

JosKj'H  li,   .M.wui;,  M.A.     3i-.  6d. 

An  Apologie  for  Poetrie  by  Sir  Philip  Sidney.    By  E.  S. 

Shuckdurgh,  M.A.    The  Te.\t  is  a  revision  of  that  of  the  first  edition  of  1595.    y. 

Bacon's  History  of  the  Reign   of  King  Henry  VII.     By 

the  Rev.  Professor  LuMuv,  D. D.     3^. 

Cowley's  Essays.     By  the  Rev.  Professor  Lu.mby,  D.D.     4^. 


London:    Cambridge    Warehouse,  Ave  Maria  Lane. 


THE  CAMBRIDGE    UNIVERSITY  PRESS.         5 
Milton's  Comus  and  Arcades.      By  A.  W.  Verity,   MA., 

bonietime  Scholar  of  Trinity  College.     3.?. 

More's  History  of  King  Richard  III.    By  J.  Rawson  Lumby, 

D.D.     3jf.  6d. 

More's  Utopia.     By  Rev.  Prof.  Luisiby,  D.D.     y.  6d. 

The  Two  Noble  Kinsmen.     By   the   Rev.    Professor   Skeat, 

Litt.D.     3J.  (xi. 

VI.     EDUCATIONAL  SCIENCE. 

Comenius,  John  Amos,  Bishop  of  the  Moravians.     His  Life 

and  Educational  Works,  by  S.   S.    Laurie,  A.M.,   F.R.S.E.     3J.  (,d. 

Education,  Three  Lectures  on  the  Practice  of.  I.  On  Mark- 
ing, by  h.  w.  eve,  m. a.  II.  On  Stimulus,  byA.  SiDGWiCK,  M.A.  III.  On 
the  Teaching  of  Latin  Verse  Composition,  by  E.  A.  Abbott,  D.D.     is. 

Stimulus.     A   Lecture  delivered   for  the   Teachers'   Training 

Syndicate,  May,  1882,  byA.  Sidgwick,  M.A.     i^. 

Locke  on  Education.    By  the  Rev.  R.  H.  Quick,  M.A.    y.  6d. 
Milton's  Tractate  on  Education.    A  facsimile  reprint  from 

the  Edition  of  1673.     By  O.  Brownmng,  M.A.     is. 

Modern  Languages,  Lectures  on  the  Teaching  of.    By  C. 

COLBECK,  M.A.      IS. 

Teacher,  General  Aims  of  the,  and  Form  Management.    Two 

Lectures  delivered  in  the  University  of  Cambridge  in  the  Lent  Term,  1883,  by 
F.  W.  Farrar,  D.D.,  and  R.  B.  Poole,  B.D.     is.  6ci. 

Teaching,  Theory  and  Practice  of.    By  the  Rev.  E.  Thring, 

M.A.,  late  Head  Master  of  Uppingham  School.     New  Edition.     4s.  6d. 


British  India,  a  Short  History  of.    By  E.  S.  Carlos,  M.A., 

late  Head  Master  of  Exeter  Grammar  School,     is. 

Geography,   Elementary   CommerciaL      A  Sketch  of  the  Com- 
modities and  the  Countries  of  the  World.    By  H.  R.  Mill,  D.Sc,  F.R.S.E.    is. 

Geography,  an  Atlas  of  Commercial.     (A  Companion  to  the 

above.)    By  J.  G.  Bartholomew,  F.R.G.S.     With  an  Introduction  by  Hugh 
Robert  Mill,  D.Sc.    3^. 


VII.     MATHEMATICS. 

Euclid's  Elements  of  Geometry.    Books  I.  and  II.    By  H.  M. 

Taylor,  IVI.A.,  Fellow  and  late  Tutor  of  Trinity  College,  Cambridge,     is.  dd. 

Books  III.  and  IV.   By  the  same  Editor.    \s.  6d. 

Books  I. — IV.,  in  one  Volume,     y. 

Elementary  Algebra  (with  Answers   to   the  Examples).     By 

W.  W.  Rouse  Ball,  M.A.    4^.  6d.  r       ,  j 

Elements  of  Statics.     By  S.  L.  Loney,  M.A.     y. 
Elements  of  Dynamics.    By  the  same  Editor.         ^Nearly  ready. 
Other  Volumes  are  in  preparation. 

London:    Cambridge   Warehouse,  Ave  Maria  Lane. 


PUBLICATIONS  OF 


%\)t   Cambiiliflt   astljlt  for 
)cl)ools  anU  CoUescs. 

General  Editor  :  J.  J.  S.  PEROWNE,  D.D., 
Bishop  of  Worcester. 

"//  is  difficult  to  cotii/iiejid  too  highly  this  excellent  series. — Guardian. 

"  The  modesty  of  the  general  title  of  this  series  has,  7ve  Mieve,  led 
many  to  misunderstand  its  character  and  underrate  its  value.  The  books 
are  ^veil  suited  for  study  in  the  upper  forms  of  our  best  schools,  but  not 
the  less  are  they  adapted  to  the  wants  of  all  Bible  students  who  are  not 
specialists.  We  doubt,  indeed,  whether  any  of  the  numerous  popular 
commentaries  recently  issued  in  this  country  zuill  be  found  tnore  ser- 
viceabJe  for  general  use.'' — Academy. 

N'ow  Ready.     Cloth,  Extra  Fcap.  Zvo.     With  Maps. 

Book  of  Joshua.    By  Rev.  G.  F.  Maclear,  D.D.    is.  6d. 

Book  of  Judges.    By  Rev.  J.  J.  Lias,  M.A.     3^.  6d. 

First  Book  of  Samuel.  ByRev.Prof.  Kirkpatrick,B.D.  3^.6^. 

Second  Book  of  Samuel.    By  the  same  Editor,     y.  6d. 

First  Book  of  Kings.     By  Rev.  Prof.  Lumby,  D.D.     y.  6d. 

Second  Book  of  Kings.     By  Rev.  Prof.  LuiMBV,  D.D.     y.  6d. 

Book  of  Job.     By  Rev.  A.  B.  Davidson,  D.D.     5^. 

Book  of  Ecclesiastes.  By  Very  Rev.  E.  H.  Plumptre,  D.D.  5j-. 

Book  of  Jeremiah.     By  Rev.  A.  W.  Streane,  M.A.    4^.  6d. 

Book  of  Hosea.    By  Rev.  T.  K.  Cheyne,  M.A.,  D.D.    y. 

Books  of  Obadiah  &  Jonah,   By  Archdeacon  Perowne.  2s.  6d. 

Book  of  Micah.    By  Rev.  T.  K.  Cheyne,  M.A.,  D.D.     \s.  6d. 

Haggai,  Zechariah  &  Malachi.   By  Arch.  Perowne.    y.  6d. 

Book  of  Malachi.     By  Archdeacon  Perowne.     is. 

Gospel  according  to  St  Matthew.  ByRev.A.CARR,M.A.  2s.  6d. 

Gospel  according  to  St  Mark.     Bv  Rev.    G.   F.   Maclear, 

D.D.     2s.6d 

Gospel  according  to  St  Luke.  By  Arch.  Farrar,  D.D.  4J-.  6d. 
Gospel  according  to  St  John.  By  Rev.  A.  Plummer,  D.D.  4^.6^. 
Acts  of  the  Apostles.  Pay  Rev.  Prof.  Lumry,  D.D.  4s.  6d. 
Epistle  to  the  Romans.  By  Rev.  H.  C.  G.  Moule,  M.A.  3s.  6d. 
First  Corinthians.  By  Rev.  J.  J.  Lias,  M.A.  With  Map.  2s. 
Second  Corinthians.  By  Rev.  J.  J.  Lias,  M.A.  With  Map.  2s. 
Epistle  to  the  Galatians.  By  Rev.  E.  H.  Perowne,  D.D.  is.  6d. 

London:    Cambridge   Warehouse,  Ave  Alaria  Lane. 


THE   CAMBRIDGE   UNIVERSITY  PRESS.         7 

Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  ByRev.  H.C.G.Moule,  M.A.  is.M. 
Epistle  to  the  Philippians.     By  the  same  Editor,     is.  6d. 
Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians.  By  Rev.  G.  G.  Findlay,  M.A.  2s. 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.    By  Arch.  Farrar,  D.D.    y.  6d. 
General  Epistle  of  St  James.    By  Very  Rev.  E.  H.  Pi.umptre, 

D.D.     IS.  (>d. 

Epistles  of  St  Peter  and  St  Jude.    By  Very   Rev.  E.  H. 

Plumptre,  D.D.     2.y.  6d. 

Epistles  of  St  John.    By  Rev.  A.  Plummer,  M.A.,  D.D.    y.  6d. 
Book  of  Revelation.     By  Rev.  W.  H.  Simcox,  M.A.     y. 

Preparing. 
Book  of  Genesis.    By  the  Bishop  of  Worcester. 
Books  of  Exodus,   Numbers  and  Deuteronomy.    By  Rev. 

C.  D.  GiNSBURG,  LL.D. 

Books  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.     By  Rev.  Prof.  Ryle,  M.A. 
Book  of  Psalms.     Part  I.     By  Rev.  Prof.  KiRKPATRiCK,  B.D. 
Book  of  Isaiah.     By  Prof.  W.  Robertson  Smith,  M.A. 
Book  of  Ezekiel.    By  Rev.  A.  B.  Davidson,  D.D. 
Epistles  to  the  Colossians  and  Philemon.    By  Rev.  H.  C.  G. 

MouLE,  M.A. 

Epistles  to  Timothy  &  Titus.  By  Rev.  A.  E.  Humphreys,  M.A. 


Cf)e  Smaller  Camliritise  ^ible  for  ^rboolg* 

Ttee  Smaller  Cambridge  Eible  for  Schools  zuill  form  an  entirely 
new  series  of  commentaries  on  some  selected  books  of  the  Bible.  It  is  expected 
that  they  will  be  prepared  for  the  most  part  by  the  Editors  of  the  larger 
series  {The  Canibridge  Bible  for  Schools  and  Colleges).  The  vohtines 
■will  be  issued  at  a  low  price,  atid  will  be  suitable  to  the  requiremetits  of 
preparatory  and  elementary  schools. 

Now  ready. 

First  and  Second  Books  of  Samuel.     By  Rev.  Prof.  Kirk- 

PATRiCK,  B.D.     \s.  each. 

First  Book  of  Kings.     By  Rev.  Prof.  Lumdy,  D.D,     \s. 
Gospel  according  to  St  Matthew.   By  Rev.  A.  Carr,  M.A.   \s. 
Gospel  according  to  St  Mark.  By  Rev.G.F.  Maclear,D.D.  \s. 
Gospel  according  to  St  Luke.    By  Archdeacon  Farrar.   \s. 
Acts  of  the  Apostles.     By  Rev.  Prof.  Lumby,  D.D.     i.y. 

Nearly  ready. 
Second  Book  of  Kings.     By  Rev.  Prof.  Lumby,  D.D. 
Gospel  according  to  St  John.     By  Rev.  A.  Plummer,  D.D. 


Lo?idon ;    Cambridge   Warehouse^  Ave  Maria  Lane. 


8    PUBLICATIONS  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY  PRESS. 

%\)t  Camlintrge  (gitrfe  C^eitament  for 
^d)ool£i  antr  Colkgrs!, 

with  a  Revised  Text,  based  on  the  most  recent  critical  authorities,  and 
English  Notes,  prepared  under  the  direction  of  the 

General  Editor,  J.  J.  S.  PEROWNE,  D.D., 
Bishop  of  Worcester. 

Gospel  according  to  St  Matthew.    By  Rev.  A.  Carr,  M.A. 

With  4  Maps.     4J.  6ii. 

Gospel  according  to  St  Mark.    By  Rev.  G.  F.  Maclear,  D.D. 

With  3  Maps.     4^.  dd. 

Gospel    according    to    St  Luke.     By  Archdeacon  Farrar. 

With  4  Maps.     6s. 

Gospel  according  to  St  John.    By  Rev.  A.  Plummer,  D.D. 

With  4  Maps.     6s. 

Acts    of   the    Apostles.     By   Rev.    Professor   Lumby,   D.D. 

With  4  Maps.     6s. 

First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.   By  Rev.  J.  J.  Lias,  M.A.  y. 
Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.     By  Rev.  J.  J.  Lias,  M.A. 

[/«  the  Press. 

Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.   By  Archdeacon  Farrar,  D.D.   3^.  6d. 
Epistle  of  St  James.     By  Very  Rev.  E.  H.  Plumptre,  D.D. 

{Preparing. 

Epistles  of  St  John.    By  Rev.  A.  Plummer,  M.A.,  D.D.    4J-. 


2out)on:    C.   J.  CLAY  and  SONS, 

CAMBRIDGE   WAREHOUSE,   AVE   MARL\   LANE. 

(ElaSBoto:    263,   ARGYLE  STREET. 

Crambrilige:    DEIGHTON,   BELL  AND  CO. 

leipjia:    F.  A.  BROCKHAUS. 

Jliciu  ^ork :    MACMILLAN   AND  CO. 


CAMBRIDGE:   PRINTED  BV  C.    J.    CLAY,    M.A.    AND  SONS,   AT   THE   UNIVERSITY   PRESS. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  TORONTO 
LIBRARY 


Do    not 


Acme  Library  Card  Pocket 

Under  Pat.  "Ref.  Index  File." 
Made  by  LIBEAKT  BUEEAU,  Boston 


ODi 
cX)i 
Mi 

'— ^  CD 

CD  :o 

w 

o>d 

P5     CD 

3    M 

H*   O 

P-  o 

Oq    O 

CD    hi 

P^ 

croq 

M 

CD    c+ 
O 

Hj 

O    Cfi 

w  * 


O 

o 

M 
fa 

o 
o 

l-J 

CD 

oq 

CD 


o 

J3 


c_ 

=  § 

-r    ^. 

o 

■t,- 
o 

Ci     CD 

I  ^^ 

ct)    o 
m 

M   . 

>i 
(D 
p. 


:a    O 
O 


•Id 


o   D 
0  p 


CD     cr 
H-    CD 

* 
t-3 


sy'\/\