The Gospel According to St. John; commentaries on Hebrews and 1–3 John

There are three readings of considerable interest in ch. iii. which require to be noticed in some detail, as they involve important principles of textual criticism. They are the omission of the words

(i) Of these v. 15 is the simplest case, and may be taken first.

Syr. P. and Hcl., (Arm.), (£th.). (y) Chr., Theodt., Victorin. The same words occur in v. 16, where they are omitted by no early authority except OldSyr. The consideration of this evidence shews that i. The only ancient (ante-Nicene) evidence for the words is that of some old Latin texts (represented among the Greek MSS. by 69).

a. The words were adopted by the Antiochene school in the fourth century, and thence passed into the current Greek text.

3. The origin of the insertion is obvious; while there was no cause for omission.

In connexion with this omission, it must be observed that the primary authorities are gix-atly divided as to the preposition and pronoun which precede. We find etj avrov

The common phrase TTIOT. els avrov evidently could not have given rise to these variations, and it can only be regarded as an early correction. Of the other readings ('v ayr<5 is at once the best attested, and by its difficulty explains the tendency to change.

In A the words u>v tv TO> owa> have been written over an erasure, and it is supposed that the original reading was o tv rat oui/w. The o by the first hand is unaltered.

(Orig. int.), Novat., Hil., Lcfr. Here it will be seen that the ancient MSS. are on the side of omission, and the ancient versions on the side of retention. But it is obvious that an interpretative gloss in a version is easier of explanation than an omission in a copy of the original text. Such glosses are found not unfrequently in the old Latin and old Syriac copies (e.g. iii. 6, 8), though they are commonly corrected in the revised Latin and Syriac texts of the 4th (jth) cent. (Vulg., Pesh.). In this case however the words are contained in the Syrian Greek text (A), and so, even if they were a gloss, they would be left undisturbed (comp. i». aj). And the omission of the words by N, which is the Greek correlative of the old Lat. and old Syr., greatly detracts from their weight here. In regard to the Patristic evidence, the constant usage of Cyril balances the quotations of Dionysius and Didymus. On the whole, therefore, there seems to be no reason for deserting the Greek authorities, which have been found unquestionably right in (i); the words being thus regarded as a very early (and cent.) insertion. There was no motive for omission; and the thought which they convey is given in i. 18.

(3) The third case, -w. 31, 32, is of a different kind. Of the words in question /cat is omitted by overwhelming authority, and may be set aside at once.

The authorities for omission represent the most ancient element (Old Lat., Old Syr., with K and D) of the authorities for the insertion of the disputed words in (a). It appears, however, from an examination of all the cases of omission by this group (e.g.

iv. 9), that its weight is far greater for omission than for the addition or the substitution of words. In this case the motive (i) for the repetition of e-navat Trdvriov (<rriv, and then (a) for the addition of nai, is sufficiently clear. The words therefore cannot but be regarded with great suspicion; and the sense certainly does not lose by their absence. On the contrary, the opposition of o a>v CK TTJS yfjs fK rrjs yrjs XaXet to o eVc TOV ovpavov fp\o-

HEN therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,

2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)

3 He left Judaea, and departed again into Galilee.

This section consists of three parts. The opening verses (i — 3) form the historical transition from the notice of the teaching in Judaea (iii. 22 ff.). This is followed by the detailed account of the Lord's conversation with the Samaritan woman (4 — 38), and by a summary of His intercourse with the people

The whole section is peculiar to St John, and bears evident traces of being the record of an eye-witness. Other notices of the Lord's dealing with Samaritans are found Luke ix. j a ff., xvii. 16. Gomp. Luke x. 33.

CHAP. IV. 1—3. The Lord changes the scene of His ministry that He may avoid a premature collision with the Pharisaic party. Gomp. vii. i, x. 39 f.

These verses serve as a transition passage. The Lord left Judaea, as He had left Jerusalem, and went again to Galilee, there to carry on His prophet's work.

1. When therefore the Lord knew..."] The word therefore carries back the reader to the narrative, iii. aa ff. The action which roused controversy was necessarily notorious. Nothing implies that the knowledge of the Lord was supernatural (see ii. 24, note). It could not but be that as Christ's work spread, He should become acquainted with the thoughts which it revealed outside the circle of His disciples.

the Pharisees'} It they heard of the success of Christ's teaching, and the word perhaps implies that they continued to observe the new Prophet who had appeared at Jerusalem, there could be no doubt how they would regard Him. It is worthy of notice that St John never notices (by name) the Sadducees or the Herodians. The Pharisees were the true representatives of the unbelieving nation.

The direct form of the sentence reproduces the message which was brought to them: Jesus [whose name they knew] IB making and baptizing more disciples than John.

than John] had done, as by this time he was probably thrown into prison. Though John had more points of contact with the Pharisees than Christ, coming as he did in the <wqy of righteousness, even he had excited their apprehensions. Gf. Matt. xxi. 32.

2. Though (And yet, KaiToiyi) Jesus..."] The words are a correction of the report which has been just quoted. Comp. iii. a 6. Christ did not personally baptize (comp. iii. aa) because this Judaic baptism was simply a symbolic act, the work of the servant and not of the Lord. The sacrament of baptism presupposes the Death and Resurrection ot Christ. This is very well set forth by Tertullian, 'de Bapt.' 11.

3. He left] The original word is a very remarkable one (/caraXeiVw might have been expected, Matt. iv. 13, Heb. xi. a 7); and there is no exact parallel in the New Test, to this usage (yet compare ch. xvi. 28). The general idea which it conveys seems to be that of leaving anything to itself, to its own

"sTlul.3' the parcel of ground a that Jacob gave his journey, sat thus on the well:

wishes, ways, fate; of withdrawing whatever controlling power was exercised before. Christ had claimed Jerusalem as the seat of His royal power, and Judaea as His kingdom. That claim He now in one sense gave up.

again} The reference is to i. 43. There was a danger of confusing these two visits to Galilee in the S)moptic accounts. St John therefore sharply distinguishes them.

into Galilee} Where His preaching would excite less hostility on the part of the religious heads of the people, while they would also have less power there.

The record of the conversation consists of two main parts, (i) the account of the conversation itself (4 — 26), and (2) the account of its issues (27—38), both immediately (27— 30), and in its spiritual lessons (31 — 38).

The whole passage forms a striking contrast and complement to iii. i — 21. The woman, the Samaritan, the sinner, is placed over against the Rabbi, the ruler of the Jews, the Pharisee. The nature of worship takes the place of the necessity of the new birth; yet so that either truth leads up to the other. The new birth is the condition for entrance into the Kingdom: true worship flows from Christ's gift.

There is at the same time a remarkable similarity of method in Christ's teaching in the two cases. Immediate circumstances, the wind and the water, furnished present parables, through which deeper thoughts were suggested, fitted to call out the powers and feelings of a sympathetic listener.

4 — 26. The order of thought in the conversation is perfectly natural. A simple request raises the question of the difference of Jew and Samaritan (4 — 9). The thought of this difference gives occasion to the suggestion of a unity springing from a gift of love greater than that of "a cup of cold water" (v. 10). How can such a gift be conceived of? how can a poor wayfarer provide it (v. n f.)? The answer lies in the description of its working (vv. 13 f.). Then follows the personal petition (v. 15), followed by the personal conviction (w. 16 ff.), and confession (v. 19). This leads to the expression of a central religious difficulty (-v. 20), which Christ resolves (21—24). Hereupon the word of ' faith (v. 25) is crowned by the self-revelation of Christ (i;. 26). /)

4. must needs'] i.e. this was the natural route from Jerusalem to Galilee. Josephus ('Antiq.' xx. 5. i) speaks of it as that usually adopted by Galilaean pilgrims; and in one place uses the same phrase as St John: "Those who wish to go away quickly [from Galilee to Jerusalem] must needs (?Se() go through Samaria, for in this way it is possible to reach Jerusalem from Galilee in three days" (' Vita,' § 52). Sometimes travellers went on the other side of Jordan. Comp. Luke ix. 52 f. This "passing through" gave occasion fora prophetic revelation of the future extension of the Gospel (comp. Acts i. 8), and stands in no opposition to the special charge to the Apostles, Matt. x. 5.

called Sychar, as xi. 54; Matt. ii. 23. The term " city " is used widely, as in the passages quoted, and does not imply any considerable size, but rather one of the " little walled villages with which every eminence is crowned."

Sjrchar"] This name has been commonly regarded as an intentional corruption of Sichem (Acts vii. 1 6, Shechem, Neapo/is, Nablous) as signifying either "drunken-town" (Isai. xxviii, i, ~>3£') or "lying-town" (Hab. ii. 18, ^\?$)- But the earlier writers (e.g. Euseb. 4 Onom.' s. v.) distinguish Shechem and Sychar; and the latter is said to lie "in front of Neapolis." Moreover a place Sychar ("O1D \>V,~Q1D, KID ID) is mentioned several times in the Talmud; and it is scarcely possible that so famous a place as Shechem would be referred to as Sychar is referred to here. There is at present a village, ''Askar, which corresponds admirably with the required site. The name appears in a transitional form in a Samaritan Chronicle of the i2th cent, as Iskar (Conder, in ' Palestine Exploration Report,' 1877, P- 15°)- Compare Delitzsch 'Ztschr. f. Luth. Theol.' 1856, pp. 240 ff, who has collected the Talmudic passages.

the parcel of ground (^captov, Vulg. pratdium, comp. Matt. xxvi. 36)... Joseph'} Comp. Gen. xxxiii. 19, xlviii. 22 (xxxiv. 25); Josh. xxiv. 32. The blessing of Jacob treated the purchase which he had made, and the warlike act of his sons in the district, as a pledge of the future conquests of the sons of Joseph, to

maria to draw water: Jesus saith unto her, Give me to drink.

8 (For his disciples were gone away unto the city to buy meat.)

9 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

whom he gives the region as a portion The LXX. play upon the word and introduce Shechem (StKtjuu) as the substantial (not literal) rendering. In recognition of the promise the bones of Joseph were deposited at Shechem on the occupation of Palestine (Josh. xxiv. 32; Acts vii. 15, 1 6).

6. Jacob's well] Jacob's spring. The word " spring " (71-17717, rV) Vulg. fans') is used here (twice) and in v. 14. Comp. James iii. n (j3pv«); Rev. vii. 17, xxi. 6, and well ($p«ap, "1N2, puteus) in w. n, 12. Comp. Rev. ix. i, 2. Both names are still given to the well, Am Takub and Bir-el-Yakub. The labour of constructing the well in the neighbourhood of abundant natural springs, shews that it was the work of a "stranger in the land." Comp. Gen. xxvi. 19. Lieut. Anderson, who descended to the bottom in May, 1866, found it then seventy-five feet deep and quite dry. "It is," he says, "lined throughout with rough masonry, as it is dug in alluvial soil " (Warren's ' Recovery of Jerusalem,' pp. 464 f.). The well is now being carefully examined and restored under the direction of the Palestine Exploration Society ('Report,' 1877, p. 72).

1 manhood. He alone preserves the word " I thirst" in the account of the Passion, xix. 28.

thus] The word may mean (i) either " thus wearied as He was," or (2) simply, just as He was, without preparation or further thought. In the former sense it would have been natural that the adverb should precede the verb (OVTCDS eW?e£eTo) as in Acts vii. 8, xx. u, xxvii. 17.

on the well] by the spring (eVi, ch. v. 2).

and it was... the sixth hour] The clause stands by itself: It was... The time indicated is probably six in the evening. The night would not close so rapidly as to make the subsequent description (v. 35) impossible. Compare Additional Note on ch. xix.

7. a woman of Samaria] A woman, and as such lightly regarded by the popular doctors (comp. i). 27): a Samaritan, and as such

I chosen people. Yet more, the woman was not only an alien, but also poor; for to draw water was no longer, as in patriarchal times the work of women of station.

Give me to dr'mk~\ The request must be taken in its literal and obvious meaning (>v. 6); but at the same time to ask was in this case to give. The Teacher first met His hearer on the common ground of simple humanity, and conceded to her the privilege of conferring a favour.

8. For his disciples'] If they had been present they could have supplied the want. "Something to draw with" (v. n), a "bucket" of skin, often found by the well sides, would form naturally part of the equipment of the little travelling party. This seems to be a better explanation of the reason than to suppose that the absence of the disciples gave the opportunity for the conversation.

•were gone away] Perhaps St John remained with Christ. The narrative is more like that of an eye-witness than a secondary account derived from the woman, or even from the Lord Himself. Yet it may be urged that •v. 33 naturally suggests that the Lord had been left alone.

meat] i.e. food, as commonly (Matt. iii. 4, vi. 25, £c.), but here only in the New Testament in the plural. Eggs, fruit, and the like might be purchased from Samaritans, as they could not contract defilement. Compare Lightfoot on -v. 4. The later rules however were stricter. "To eat the bread of a Samaritan" it was said "was as eating the flesh of swine."

9. Then saith the 'woman of Samaria... ~\ The Samaritan woman therefore saith... The form in this verse (»;' y. 77 2a/xapems) is different from that in -v. 7 (y. eVc rfjs 2.). The stress is laid on character as implied in national descent and not on mere local connexion.

The strangeness of the request startles the woman; "What further," she seems to ask, "lies behind this request?" The original is perfectly symmetrical (thou which art a Jew...of me which am a Samaritan woman...*). There is force also in the distinct addition of the word woman (yvvo.iK.6s). That the request was made not only of a Samaritan but of a woman completed the wonder of the questioner.

thou, being a Jew} Some peculiarity of dress or dialect or accent would shew this (comp. Mark xiv. 70).

for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans'] for Jews...with Samaritans. These words, which are omitted by an important group of ancient authorities, are, if genuine,

the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.

her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.

ii The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living water?

an explanatory note of the Evangelist. In this relation the present form (have no dealings) is remarkable. The origin of the hostility of the two peoples, which lasts to the present day, may be traced to the Assyrian colonisation of the land of Israel (2 K. xvii. 24). From this followed the antagonism of the Samaritans to the Jews at the Return (Ezra iv., Neh. vi., which led to the erection of a rival temple on Mount Gerizim. Comp. Ecclus. L 25, 26. 'Diet, of Bible,' HI. p. 1117.

have... dealings'] The original word (ayy- Xptavrai, Vulg. coutuntur) suggests the relations of familiar intercourse and not of business. Offices of kindness were not expected between Jews and Samaritans. The spirit of religious bitterness still lingers on the spot. "On asking drink from a woman [near Nablous] who was filling her pitcher, we were angrily and churlishly refused: — 'The Christian dogs might get it for themselves'" (Tristram, 'Land of Israel,' p. 134, ed. 3).

10. If tbou knewest (hadst known) the gift of God...'] The words are, as commonly in St John s Gospel, an answer to the essential idea of the foregoing question. The woman had sought an explanation of the marvel that a Jew should ask a favour of a Samaritan woman. This however, as she dimly guessed, was only a part of the new mystery. The frank appeal to a human charity deeper than religious antagonism did indeed indicate a possibility of union greater than hope. Had she known what God had now done for men, and who that Jewish Teacher was whom she saw, she would herself have boldly asked of Him a favour far greater than He had asked of her, and would have received it at once: she would have become the petitioner, and not have wondered at the petition: her present difficulty would have been solved by her apprehension of the new revelation which had been made not to Jew or Samaritan but to man. Had she known the gift of God, the gift of His Son (iii. 16) in which was included all that man could want, she would have felt that needs of which she was partly conscious (v. 25) could at length be satisfied. Had she known who it was that said to her, Give me to drink, she would have laid open her prayer to Him without reserve or doubt, assured of His sympathy and help.

It carries with it something of the idea of bounty, honour, privilege; and is used of the gift of the Spirit (Acts ii. 38, viii. 20, x. 45, xi. 17), and of the gift of redemption in Christ (Rom. v. 15; a Cor. ix. 15), manifested in various ways (Eph. iii. 7, iv. 7; Hebr. vi. 4). This usage shews that there is here a general reference to the blessings given to men in the revelation of the Son, and not a simple description of what was given to the woman in the fact of her interview with Christ. "The gift of God" is all that is freely offered in the Son.

living water] ' that is perennial, springing from an unfailing source (Gen. xxvi. 19), ever flowing fresh (Lev. xiv. 5). The request which Christ had made furnished the idea of a parable; the bodily want whereby He suffered suggested an image of the spiritual blessing which He was ready to bestow.

The Jews were already familiar with the application of the phrase (living water) to the. quickening energies which proceed from God (Zech. xiv. 8; Jer. ii. 13, xvii. 13. Comp. v. 14, note), though it may be doubtful how far the prophetic language would be known to Samaritans, Here the words indicate that which on the divine side answers to the spiritual thirst, the aspirations of men for fellowship with God. This under various aspects may be regarded as the Revelation of the Truth, or the gift of the Holy Spirit, individually or socially, or whatever, according to varying circumstances, leads to that > eternal life (v. 14) which consists in the Y knowledge of God and His Son Jesus Christ V(*vii. 3). /]

11, 12. The woman's answer is in spirit exactly like the first. Her thoughts reach forward to some truth which she feels to be as yet far from her. How can she conceive of the gift? The well of Jacob is, in one sense, a well of "living water," yet it cannot be that which supplies the Speaker with His gift, for "the well is deep," and He has "nothing to draw with." He offers in word that for which He asks. How again can she conceive of Him who speaks to her? He is wearied and thirsty, and yet professes to command resources which were sealed to the patriarchs.

11. the well is deep] The well is at present partially choked up with rubbish. See v. 6, note. In Maundrell's time (March,

12 Art thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle?

her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again:

14 But whosoever drinketh of the 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 springing up into everlasting

1697), it was 105 feet deep and had fifteen feet of water in it. Dr Tristram found in it only "wet mud" in December ('Land of Israel,' p. 143, ed. 3), but towards the end of February it was "full of water" (id. p. 401). that living water] Simply tlxe living water, whereof thou speakest.

12. Art thou~\ The pronoun is emphatic: "Art thou, a poor, wearied traveller, of more commanding power than the patriarch who gained by labour what he gave us?"

our father Jacob'] The Samaritans claimed descent from Joseph as representing the ancient tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh. (Joseph. 'Ant.' XI. 8. 6.)

gave us] left, that is, to his descendants as a precious heritage. The tradition is independent of the Old Testament.

cattle] The original word (0pe'/z/iara, Vulg. pecora) may mean slaves, but the sense given in A. V. is more natural. The well was sufficient for large wants. The word occurs here only in the New Testament, and is not found in LXX.

13, 14. The words of Christ carry on the parable of the tenth verse, and in doing so. still answer the thought and not the words of the woman. They imply that she had felt rightly that it was some other water than that for which Christ asked which He was waiting to give: that one greater than Jacob was there. The water which the patriarch had drunk and given satisfied a want for the moment: the living water satisfied a want for ever, and in such a way that a fresh and spontaneous source supplied each recurrent need of refreshment.

The mode in which the new thought is developed corresponds exactly with vi. 49 f.

13. Whosoever] More exactly, Every one that... The form of expression is contrasted with the hypothetical whosoever in v. 14. "With this change of form follows also a change of tense (6 irivu>v= habitual; 3? ai> 7ri»/ = once for all).

14. that I shall give] The pronoun in the first case is emphatic and carries the answer to the contrast which the woman had drawn between Jacob and Christ. The gift, consequent in its realisation upon the fulfilment of Christ's work, is still future shall never...] The phrase (ov /w;...(Is rov at<5i/a) is a very remarkable one, and recurs viii. 51, 53, x. 28, xi. »6, xiii. 8. Elsewhere it is found in the New Testament in i Cor. viii. 13, where the translation "I will eat no flesh while the world standeth" expresses the literal force of the words.

thirst] in the sense of feeling the pain ot an unsatisfied want, Rev. vii. 16. But the divine life and the divine wisdom bring no satiety, Ecclus. xxiv. 21.

shall be... a well of water...everlasting life] shall become...a spring of water... eternal life. 1 1 shall not serve for the moment only, but shall also preserve power to satisfy 'all future wants if it be appropriated by the receiver. The communication of the divine energy, as a gift of life, necessarily manifests itself in life. The blessing welcomed proves a spring of blessing, which rises towards and issues in eternal life- for this is as the infinite ocean in which all divine gifts find their end' and consummation. The life comes from the' Source of life and ascends to Him again.

The image is developed in three stages. Christ's gift is as a spring of water, of water leaping up in rich abundance, and that not perishing or lost but going forth to the noblest fulfilment.

springing up into] The original word (dX- Xo/i€i/ov eiy) describes the " leaping" of a thing of life, and not the mere "gushing up" of a fountain.

There is a Jewish saying that "when the Prophets speak of water they mean the Law" (Wlinsche, ad Ioc.~). The Incarnate Word was what the Scribes wished to make the Scriptures. Compare also ' Aboth,' I. 4; iz.

15. The relation of the persons is now chang- ' ed. A greater want supersedes the less. The woman is no longer able to follow the thoughts which lie before her in their mysterious depth; but at least she can ask for the gift which has already been assured to her (v. 10). She seeks a favour in turn before she has granted that which was sought of her. Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw. The gift appeared to her to have two virtues, corresponding to the twofold description just given of it. It would satisfy her own personal wants: and it would also, as being a source of blessing no less than

Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw.

1 6 Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither.

1 7 The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband:

1 8 For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly.

19 The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet.

20 Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in * Jeru- * D««- '*• salem is the place where men ought s*

a blessing, enable her to satisfy the wants of those to whom she had to minister.

come hither] The original word according to the best authorities (8i/pxo>/*at) gives the idea of "come all the way hither" across the intervening plain.

16. Jesus (He) saith... The apparently abrupt transition seems to be suggested by the last words of v. 15. In those the speaker passed beyond herself. She confessed by implication that even the greatest gift was not complete unless it was shared by those to whom she was bound. If they thirsted, though she might not thirst, her toilsome labour must be fulfilled still. According to this interpretation Christ again reads her thought; and bids her summon him to whom it was her duty to minister. The gift was for him also; and the command was at the same time a test of the woman's awakening faith.

17. / have no husband] The words are half sad, half apologetic, as of one who shrinks from the trial conscious of weakness, and who seeks further assurance of power before rendering complete obedience. The command might disprove the knowledge and claims of the mysterious Teacher. The exact form of the Lord's answer suggests that a pause for a brief space followed. Jesus said (salth) to her, Thou saidst ivell, I have no husband... in that thou hast said truly. The plea had been left, as it were, to be solemnly pondered (Thou saldst, not Thou hast said), and the transposition of the words in the repetition of it, by which the emphasis is thrown in the original on husband which lay before on I have not, at once reveals how the thoughts of the woman were laid bare.

well said} It is possible that there is something of a sad irony in the words, as there is in Matt vii. 9; a Cor. xi. 4.

18. Jive husbands] Though the facilities for divorce are said to have been fewer among the Samaritans than among the Jews, there is no reason to suppose that the woman's former marriages were illegally dissolved. That which was true in her statement pointed the rebuke. Her present position, though dishonourable, was not expressly forbidden by the Mosaic Law.

The singular details which are given of the woman's life have led many commentators to regard her as offering in her personal history a figure of the religious history of her people, which had been united to and separated from "five gods" (Jos. 'Antt.' ix. 14. 3; ^ K. xvii. 29 ff.), and was at last irregularly serving the true God.

in that saidst thou truly] this thou hast said truly. The form is different from that used in v. 17

19. I perceive] The word (0fa>p<5) marks contemplation, continued progressive vision, not immediate perception. See ii. 23. We cannot tell in what way the Lord's words were more significant to the woman than to us (see i. 48, 49), but they evidently bore with them to her a complete conviction that her whole life was open to the eyes of the speaker a prophet] The emphasis lies on the title and not on the pronoun (on npo^rr^s ft <nJ). The first thought in the Samaritan's mind is that the connexion of man with God has been authoritatively restored; and if so, then, she argues, it may be that discrepancies as to local worship will be solved.

20. Our fathers... and ye say...] To the student of the law the exclusive establishment of worship at Jerusalem must have been a great difficulty. To a Samaritan no question could appear more worthy of a prophet's decision than the settlement of the religious centre of the world. Thus the difficulty which is proposed is not a diversion, but the natural thought of one brought face to face with an interpreter of the divine will.

Our fathers] that is, either simply our ancestors from the time of the erection of the Samaritan Temple after the Return, or, more probably, the patriarchs. See below. The Samaritan Temple was destroyed by John Hyrhanus c. B.C. 129 (Jos. 'Antt' xm. 9.

in this mountain] pointing to Mount Gerizim, at the foot of which the well lies. According to the Samaritan tradition it was on this mountain that Abraham prepared the

21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.

22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

sacrifice of Isaac, and here also that he met Melchisedek. In Deut. xxvii. is f. Gerizim is mentioned as the site on which the six tribes stood who were to pronounce the blessings for the observance of the law. And in the Samaritan Pentateuch, Gerizim and not Ebal is the mountain on which the altar was erected, Deut. xxvii. 4.

A striking passage is quoted from 'Bereshith R.' § 32, by Lightfoot and Wtlnsche:

"R. Jochanan, going to Jerusalem to pray, passed by [Gerizim]. A certain Samaritan seeing him asked him, Whither goest thou? I am, saith he, going to Jerusalem to pray. To whom the Samaritan, Were it not better for thee to pray in this holy mountain than in that cursed house? " Compare ' Bereshith R.' §81.

and ye say...] ye (t5/*ely), on your side... The whole problem is stated in its simplest form. The two facts are placed side by side (and, not tut), traditional practice, Jewish teaching.

21. The rival claims of Gerizim and Jerusalem are not determined by the Lord, for they vanish in the revelation of a universal religion.

Woman, believe me] The true form of the original (n-iorfve /*oi) marks the present beginning of faith, which is to grow to something riper. Compare x. 38, xii. 36, xiv. i, ii. On the other hand, the single act of faith is marked (Tri'oreuo-oi/) in Acts xvi. 31. In the two parallel narratives, Mark v. 36, Luke viii. 50 (iriajtvcrov), the two forms are used: that which is general and continuous in the first passage is concentrated into a special act in the second by the addition of, "and she shall be saved." In the present connexion the unique phrase (believe me) corresponds to the familiar "Verily, verily," as introducing a great truth. Comp. Mai. i. n.

the (rather an) hour cometb~\ This consummation was still future. The temple still claimed the reverent homage of believers (ii. 1 6). Contrast v. 23.

the hour] There is a divine order in accordance with which each part of the whole scheme of salvation is duly fulfilled. Comp. v. 25, 38, xvi. 2, 4, 25, 32. So Christ had " His hour," ii. 4, note.

neither... nor yet (nor) at Jerusalem"] The two centres of worship are spoken of in the same terms (ovre...ovTe) in the prospect of the future.

'worship the Father] The word worship was used indefinitely in *v. 20: here it finds its true complement. The object of worship determines its conditions. He who is known as the Father finds His home where His children are. This absolute use of the title, " the Father," is characteristic of St John, and almost peculiar to him. Other examples are found, Matt. xi. 27 and parallels; Acts i. 4, 7; Rom. vi. 4; Eph. ii. 18. See Additional Note. The revelation of God as the Father sums up the new tidings of the Gospel. In this place the title stands in a significant relation to the boast of a special descent (our fathers, v. 20).

22. Ye (emphatic) worship ye know not what (that which ye know not) (Vulg. adoratis quod nescitisj] Your worship, that is, is directed to One with whose character, as He has revealed Himself through the prophets and in the history of His people, you are really unacquainted. You know whom to worship, but you do not know Him. __By confining your faith to the law you condemn •„ / yourselves to ignorance of the God of Israel'. ^C We Jews, on the other hand (the pronoun again is emphatic), worship that which we know; for the promised salvation is of the Jews.. The power of Judaism lay in the fact that it was not simple deism, but the gradual preparation for the Incarnation. The Jew therefore knew that which he worshipped, so far as the will, and in that the nature, of God was gradually unfolded before him. Contrast viii. 54- ye...we...~] The sharp contrast between Samaritans and Jews which runs through the narrative (w. 9, 20, ye say), and the pointed reference to "the Jews" which follows, fix beyond all reasonable doubt the interpretation of the pronouns.

what...'] not Him whom... The abstract form suggests the notion of God, so far as His attributes and purposes were made known, rather than of God as a Person, revealed to men at last in the Son: xiv. 9. Compare Acts xvii. 23 (o ovv).

salvation] Rather, the promised and expected salvation (?J o-eonjpia) to be realised in the mission of Messiah. So Acts iv. 12. Compare Acts xiii. 26. See also Rev. vii. 10, xii. 10, xix. i.

is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

24 'God is a Spirit: and they that'200'- worship him must worship him in *7 spirit and in truth.

23. But...] The old differences of more and less perfect knowledge were to be done away.

the (rather an) hour comet b, and now is] The presence of Christ among men brought with it this result at once, though local worship (a-. 21) was not yet abolished. Compare v. 25 as contrasted with v. 28. In each case the subtle contrast between the immediate and ultimate issues which are pointed to is most significant and characteristic of the exact circumstances to which the words belong. See also xvi. 25, 32.

the true worshippers] The original term " true" (oAqdiPof) describes that which is not only truly but also completely what it professes to be. Thus it is used In connexion with those material objects under which Christ represents Himself. See i. 9, vi. 32, vii. a8, viii. 16, xv. i, note, xvii. 3, xix. 35. The popular sense of the word "ideal" — fulfilling the complete conception — comes near to this usage.

in spirit and (om. in) truth] The words describe the characteristics of worship in one complex phrase (eV rrvt vfiari KOI dXij&ta) and not in two co-ordinate phrases. Worship involves an expression of feeling and a conception of the object towards whom the feeling is entertained. The expression is here described as made in spirit: the conception as formed in truth. Judaismfepeaking generally) was a worship of the lettei' and not of spirit (to take examples from the time): Samaritanism was a worship of falsehood and not of truth. By the Incarnation men are enabled to have immediate communion with God, and thus a wor- _ship in spirit has become possible: at the same time the Son is a complete manifestation of God for men, and thus a worship in truth \ has been placed within their reach. These two characteristics answer to the higher sense of the second and third commandments, the former of which tends to a spiritual service, and the latter to a devout regard for the " name " of God, that is, for every revelation of His Person or attributes or action.

spirit'] In biblical language, that part of man's nature which holds, or is capable of holding, intercourse with the eternal order is the spirit (i Thess. v. 23). The spirit in man responds to the Spirit of God. Comp. vi. 63. The sphere of worship was therefore now to be that highest region where the divine and human meet, and not, as in an earlier period truth] Worship is necessarily limited by the idea of the being worshipped. A true idea of God is essential to a right service of Him. Comp. Hebr. viii. 5, x. i.

for] The phrase in the original (*al yap, Vulg. nam ef) is remarkable. It alleges a reason which is assumed to be conclusive from the nature of the case: for the Father also on His part, which is expressed fairly by for in fact, for indeed. Comp. Matt. viii. 9 and parallel, xxvi. 73 and parallels; Mark x. 45; Luke vi. 32 ff., xi. 4, xxii. 37; Acts xix. 40; Rom. xi. i, and not unfrequently in St Paul.

seeketh~\ There is a real correspondence between the true worshipper and God. Comp. i. 43 (Jindeth), note. The true (d\rjdiv6s) worshipper answers to the true (aXrjdivos) God (xvii. 3).

24. God is a Spirit] God is Spirit, absolutely free from all limitations of space and time. The nature and not the personality of God is described, just as in the phrases, God is light (i John i. 5), or God is love (i John iv. 8). This premiss is drawn from a true interpretation of the old revelation (Isai. xxxi. 3), but the conclusion which follows belongs to the new. The declaration in its majestic simplicity is unique; though St John implies in the two other revelations of God's being which he has given (//. cc.) the truth which is declared by it.

•worship him in spirit and in truth"] More exactly, worship In spirit and truth ' (v. 23).

25. The woman's answer to the declaration made to her helps us to understand why it was made. She had acknowledged the Lord as a prophet, but she felt that such truths could be affirmed only by one who was more than a prophet, and for such a one she looked. In her hope Messiah was the perfect lawgiver and not the conqueror. Truth and not dominion was the blessing she connected with His mission. The confession, like the revelation by which it was followed, is unique in the gospels.

/ know] Compare iii. *, lue know. The object and the ground of knowledge are characteristically different.

which is called Christ] The words may be part of the speech of the woman, in which case they imply that the Greek title was that which was popularly current (cf. v. 29). At

know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.

26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.

27 11 And upon this came his disciples, and marvelled that he talked with the woman: yet no man said, What seekest thou? or, Why talkest thou with her?

28 The woman then left her waterpot, and went her way into the city, and saith to the men,

29 Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?

31 II In the mean while his disciples prayed him, saying, Master, eat.

least, the different form in which the interpretation is given in i. 41 must be noticed. This exact form (o Xryouei/os ^pioroy) is used as part of a title elsewhere, xi. 16, xx. 24, xxi. a (cf. Luke xxii. i).

For the Samaritan conceptions of Messiah see ' Introd. to Study of the Gospels,' pp.

when he is come~\ when He comes. The pronoun (tutivos) is emphatic, and fixes the attention on Messiah as contrasted with, and standing apart from, all other teachers.

be will tell us all things] More exactly, He twill announce all things unto us. The word (dvayyeXci, Vulg. adnunciabif) is used of the fresh and authoritative message of the Advocate, xvi. 13 ff. The teaching so given would be absolute and complete.

26. The woman was prepared to welcome Messiah in His prophetic dignity, and in this He makes Himself known to her. Compare ix. 35 ff. In each case the revelation answers to the faith of the recipient. With these acknowledgments prompted by grace contrast the acknowledgment yielded to legal authority, Matt. xxvi. 63, 64.

I that speak] Or rather, I that talk (o XoXwf): the word suggests the notion of free, familiar conversation, which is brought out in the next verse. It was by this intercourse of loving and searching sympathy, that Christ revealed Himself as the hope of men. Comp. ix. 37,

27 — 30. The conversation being ended, its immediate effects are noticed. The disciples reverently wonder. The woman is filled with a hope beyond hope. Her countrymen are moved by her enthusiasm. The whole picture is full of life.

27. And... came and marvelled... ~\ And... came; and they marvelled. The change of tense, which marks the pause of wonder, requires the insertion of the pronoun.

talked with the woman] was talking with a woman, against the custom of the doctors by whom it was said that "a man should not salute a woman in a public place, not even his own wife," and that it was "better that the words of the law should be burnt than delivered to women." Compare 'A both' i. 5

(Taylor); and Buxtorf, 'Lex. Rabb.'p. 1146; and contrast Gal. iii. 28. One of the thanksgivings in the daily service of the Synagogue is: " Blessed art Thou, O Lord... Who hast not made me a woman."

A double question arose in the minds of the disciples. Could their master require a service from a woman? or could He wish to commune with her as a teacher? Yet they were content to wait. In due time He would remove their doubts. Even thus early they had learnt to abide His time.

28. The woman then left...went her way...] So the woman left... went away... This time the woman's answer is in action. The Lord had set aside His own want: she set aside her own purpose. But she shewed that her absence was to be but for a brief space by "leaving her water-pot." And meanwhile the message which she bore to the city was for all, for the men, the inhabitants generally, and not for her "husband" only.

29. The Samaritan woman, like the first disciples (i. 41, 45), at once tells what she has found, and with the same appeal Come, see (i. 46).

all things that ever I did (that I did)~\ The words here and ^.39 are more definite in their reference than A. V.; and the truth ot the exaggerated phrase lies in the effect which Christ's words had upon the woman's conscience (i8ff.). She was convinced that He knew all, and in the revelation which He had made, she seemed to feel that He had told her all, because He had by that called up all before her eyes.

is not this the Christ?] The original words cannot be so rendered. The form of the woman's question (JJLJTI ovros...] Vulg. numquid...?\ suggests the great conclusion as something even beyond hope: Can this be the Christ? Is it possible to believe that the highest blessing has suddenly been given to us? The form of the sentence grammatically suggests a negative answer (v. 33), but hope bursts through it. Compare Matt. xii. 23. The same phrase occurs Matt. xxvi. 22, 25; John viii. 22, xviii. 35; James iii. n, &c.

32 But he said unto them, I have meat to eat that ye know not of.

33 Therefore said the disciples one to another, Hath any man brought him ought to eat?

34 Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work.

35 Say not ye, There are yet four months, and then cometh harvest?

came unto] The tense of the original (tjp- VOITO, comp. c. xx. 3) is vividly descriptive. The villagers started on their journey, and are seen, as it were, pursuing it Comp. v. 35. They went out of the city and came on their way towards him (Vulg. cxierunt et veniebant).

31 — 38. The deeper lessons of the incident are unfolded when the Lord was left alone with His disciples. Their natural and loving request leads Him to point to wants more truly imperious than those of the body, thus carrying on the teaching of the act and word just given to and by the woman (31 — 34)- The actual, unexpected, condition of the Samaritans, is used to illustrate the urgency and the fruitfulness of the work to which the apostles were called.

31. h'u disciples'] the disciples. The love of the disciples overpowered their wonder. They strive to satisfy the wants of their Master and not their own curiosity (v. 47).

Master} The original preserves the Hebrew form Rabbi (comp. i. 38) which has been translated here and in ix. a, xi. 8. Elsewhere Rabbi has been rightly kept in this Gospel.

32. meat to eat that ye (emphatic) know not of} that ye know not; that is meat of which ye know not the virtue and power. Comp. v. aa. For the image, see vi. a7.

34. to do... and to finish..."} The exact form of the expression (<Va TT.) emphasizes the end and not the process, not the doing... and finishing but that I may do... and finish. Comp. vi. 29, xv. 8, xvii. 3; i John iii. n, v. 3. The distinction in tenses between the two verbs (TTOKB, reXftwo-w) which is found in the common texts is not supported by the best authorities.

34 ff. The train of thought in these verses appears to be this. "My true food lies in working for the fulfilment of my Father's will, and the partial accomplishment of this end is even now before my eyes. You, as you traverse these corn plains, anticipate without doubt the coming harvest. And the labour of the sower is a parable of all spiritual labour. The issue of that labour is not less certain than the issue of this. Nay, further: the spiritual harvest of which that natural harvest is a figure is even now ready for the sickle. In this sense, the reaper already has his reward and the sower through him. For the work of these two is essentially separate. In spiritual labour the homely proverb is fulfilled: He who reaps sows not what he reaps, he who sows reaps not what he sows. Still the joy of the reaper crowns the toil of the sower; and these first-fruits of Samaria, the firstfruits of a spiritual harvest, crown my joy." Comp. Matt. ix. 37, 38.

Say not ye (vfJLfli)... harvest] These words have been understood in two ways, either (i) as a proverbial saying, marking roughly the interval between some familiar date (seedtime) and harvest; or (2) as a description of the actual state of things at the time, so that when the words were spoken there were four months to the harvest. The emphatic "ye" (say not ye), which appears to indicate men's clear calculation of natural events, favours the first interpretation; but the form of the sentence (there are yet...) and the period named, which is less than the interval between seedtime and harvest, favour the second. If this latter view be adopted we have an approximate date for the narrative. The harvest began about the middle of April, and lasted to the end of May (Tristram, 'The Land of Israel,' PP- 583 f.). The conversation therefore might be placed about the end of January (or early in February). By this time the fields would be already green. Dr Tristram found the wheat and barley near Jerusalem, sown just after Christmas, four inches high on February aoth (/. r. p. 399). But on this supposition it would follow from this passage, compared with ii. 13 and iv. 3, that the Lord must have continued about ten months in Judasa, a supposition which seems to be inconsistent with iv. 45. See Additional Note on v. i.

Lift up your eyes} Comp. Isai. xlix. 18. This prophetic passage offers a striking parallel in thought and language.

behold, I say unto you, Lift up your " Matt. 9. eyes, and look on the fields; ^for they are white already to harvest.

36 And he that reapeth receiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life eternal: that both he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together.

37 And herein is that saying true, One soweth, and another reapeth.

38 I sent you to reap that whereon ye bestowed no labour: other men la-

39 fl And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on him for the saying of the woman, which testified, He told me all that ever I did.

40 So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he would tarry with them: and he abode there two days.

41 And many more believed because of his own word;

the fields} At the present time the plain at the foot of Gerizim is fertile corn-land (Stanley, <S. and P.' 233 ff.). The detail has the truth of life in it. The disciples saw the promise of rich crops: but Christ saw the spiritual harvest of which the fields were the image (Matt. xiii. 3 ff., &c.), even now come in its first-fruits, as the people from the city approached.

for] Rather, that. Look on (i. 38) the fields, and observe that... The woman, we may suppose, with the Samaritans (v. 30), was seen returning to the well.

35. 36. The punctuation and reading at the end of verse 35 are uncertain, but it seems best to omit already at the close of it, and to substitute it for and at the beginning of *v. 36: Already he that reapeth... The harvest was strangely anticipated in this first welcome of the word beyond the limits of Judaism.

36. receive th wages...that both (omit) he...~] There is even now work for him to do, which has an immediate reward, and he gathereth fruit which shall not perish or be consumed, but endure unto life eternal. Com p. •v. 14, vi. a;, xii. 35. There in that higher order the sower shall " see of his travail " and be glad: the forerunner who has long passed away shall meet him who has received the harvest of his earlier work and share his joy. The application seems to be to lawgiver and priest and prophet, and all who "went before" Christ's coming in old times and even now go before Him. Christ Himself stands as the Lord of the Harvest (v. 38) and not here as the Sower.

37. And herein is that saying...] For herein is the saying... "I say this," so the words imply, " to prepare you by the lesson of your immediate success for future disappointment, for in this spiritual sowing and harvesting the common proverb finds its complete, ideal, fulfilment (a\r)6ivoi): one soweth and another reapeth."

herein] i.e. in the fact that you are reaping already (i>. 36) what others sowed. And the principle was to find application in their labours also.

38. / sent you...ye bestowed no labour (ye have not laboured)...] The words probably point to the successful labours of the Apostles in Judaea (v. a). At the same time their whole mission was included in their call.

other men laboured (have laboured)... into their labours (labour)] The reference, as in the case of the sower, is to all who had in any manner prepared the way for Christ. He was, as has been said, like Joshua, who brought His Own people to "a land for which they did not labour " (Josh. xxiv. 13); and it is possible that the words may contain a reference to that passage of the Old Testament. The " you " is emphatic throughout. The word "laboured" is the same as that used for "wearied" in <v. 6 (KOTTIUV). The result is identified with the effort (labour, that which you have not (wrought by your labour, o ov KfKvrr., Vulg. quod non laborastis). Comp. Ecclus. xiv. 15.

39 — 42. The ready faith of the woman was found also among her countrymen. As she had looked for a religious teacher in the Christ, they acknowledged in Him "the Saviour of the world."

39. believed... for the saying] Rather, because of the word (v. 41), the narrative (8ta TOV Xoyov), and not the simple statement only, of the woman as (or while) she (earnestly, constantly, and not once for all) testified (rijs yvvaiKos (j-aprvpovcnji)...

40. So when... were come (came)...] Their belief went thus far, that they wished to hear more of His teaching.

41. many more] The phrase is comparative, far more (in reference to *v. 39), and not positive (7roXX£ TrXei'our). This isolated notice is an instructive illustration of our frag-

42 And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and

43 1T Now after two days he departed thence, and went into Galilee.

rv, nv,aiu mm uurscives, ana 44 for e Jesus nimselt testified, that '& now that this is indeed the Christ, a prophet hath no honour in his own 57'

42. Now <Wf believe... heard him ourselves] More exactly, No longer Is It because of thy speech that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves. The order is remarkable. The word speech (talking, XaXid) corresponds with talk in w. 26, 27. It occurs elsewhere in New Testament only ch. viii. 43; Matt. xxvi. 73 (Mark xiv. 70). It does not appear that the Samaritans asked for signs like the Jews (comp. v, 48), or that any outward miracles were wrought among them.

the Christ, the Saviour of the world] The words the Christ must be omitted, in accordance with an overwhelming concurrence of ancient authorities. The simple title, the Saviour of the world (Vulg. Salvator mundi), is found once again in i John iv. 14; and it is a significant fact that this magnificent conception of the work of Christ was first expressed by a Samaritan, for whom the hope of a Deliverer had not been shaped to suit national ambition. So at last faith rose to the level of the promise, v. 21. The "salvation" (v. 22) sprang from the Jews, and was recognised by Samaritans.

This notice of Christ's Galilaean work consists of a general account of the welcome which He found (w. 43 — 45), followed by the narrative of a second "sign" (w. 46 — 54).

It seems probable that the earlier part of the Synoptic narratives (Mark i. 14 — ii. 14 and parallels) must be placed in the interval which extended from iv. 43 — v. i. So far there are no signs of the special hostility which seems to have been called out by the healing on the Sabbath wrought on the next visit to Jerusalem.

The contents of the section are peculiar to St John. It has indeed been questioned whether "the healing of the nobleman's son" is not identical with " the healing of the centurion's servant," recorded by St Matthew (viii. 5 ff.) and St Luke (vii. 2 ff.). Both miracles were wrought at Capernaum, and wrought in the same manner, at a distance. But in all other respects the incidents are characteristically unlike, as to

(2) Time. Here immediately after the return to Galilee, there after some time had elapsed.

(3) Persons. Here the subject was a son, there a slave: here the petitioner was probably a Jew, there a heathen soldier.

(4) Character. Here the faith of the father, as interpreted by the Lord, is weak; there the faith of the centurion is exceptionally strong.

(5) Manner. Here the request is granted in a way opposed to the prayer, there in accordance with it: here the Lord refuses to go, there He offers to go to the sufferer.

The two miracles are in fact complementary. In the one, weak faith is disciplined and confirmed: in the other, strong faith is rewarded and glorified. The fame of the former miracle may easily have encouraged the centurion to appeal to the Lord in his distress.

In one other case the Lord is recorded to have exercised His power at a distance, Matt. xv. 22 and parallels.

43. Now after two days he departed thence, and went...] After the two days (mentioned in v. 40) he went forth («.'£j;A0e»>) thence into Galilee.

44. Jesus himself] The testimony of Christ was the same as the testimony of the Apostles after the fall of Jerusalem.

testified... country] The general meaning of this clause depends upon the sense given to bis own country. This has been understood to be (i) Galilee generally, (2) Nazareth, (3) Lower Galilee, in which Nazareth was situated, as distinguished from Upper Galilee, in which was Capernaum, (4) Judaea. Against the first three lies the fatal objection, that it seems impossible that St John should speak of Galilee in this connexion as Christ's "own country" (j I8ia irarpiy. Compare vii. 41, 42). Both by fact and by the current inter- 1 pretation of prophecy, Judaea alone could receive that title (comp. Orig. 'Tom.' xm. 54). Moreover, Judasa is naturally suggested by the circumstances. The Lord had not been received with due honour at Jerusalem. His Messianic claim had not been welcomed. He did not trust Himself to the Jews there. He was forced to retire. If many followed Him, they were not the representatives of the people, and their faith reposed on miracles. No apostle was a Jew in this narrower sense. Nothing then can be more appropriate than to mark this outward failure of the appeal to Judaea by an application of the common proverb (comp. Matt, xxiii. 3 7; Luke xiii. 34),

45 Then when he was come into Galilee, the Galilaeans received him, having seen all the things that he did at Jerusalem at the feast: for they also went unto the feast.

46 So Jesus came again into Cana /chap. a. i. Of Galilee, Avhere he made the water \9*'cour' wine. And there was a certain "nobleman, whose son was sick at Capernaum.

47 When he heard that Jesus was come out of Judaea 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 death.

48 Then said Jesus unto him, Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.

49 The nobleman saith unto him, Sir, come down ere my child die.

followed by the notice of the ready welcome given to Christ by Galilasans (v. 45).

If this interpretation of "his own country" be accepted, it will be enough simply to notice the other interpretations which have found favour. Thus the words have been supposed to mean, (i) Jesus departed into Upper Galilee (or Capernaum), for He testified that a prophet hath no honour in his own country (Lower Galilee or Nazareth). (2) Jesus departed into Galilee, ennobled by the fame which He had gained in Jerusalem, and which He could not have gained in Galilee, for He testified that a prophet hath no honour in his own country, and therefore must win it in some strange place. (3) Jesus departed into Galilee to meet what He knew would be a hopeless conflict; or to seek there rest from labour.

It may be noticed that the emphatic epithet own distinguishes the phrase used here from that found in Matt. xiii. 54, 57 (where "own" is inserted by some copies) and in Luke iv. 23, 24. The addition indicates the special force which the Evangelist attached to the words.

45. Then when he was come..."] So when He came... The issue justified the proverb. In Galilee, which was not Messiah's country, not even in popular estimation a prophet's home (vii. 52), Jesus found a ready reception. His works at Jerusalem, which had produced no permanent effect upon the spot, impressed the Galilasans more deeply; and it is not unlikely that Galilaean pilgrims formed the greater part of "the many" who "believed on His name " at the Passover (ii. 23).

they also -went...] and therefore if in one sense they were strangers yet they were not religious aliens.

46. So Jesus came again..."] He came therefore again... In consequence of the welcome 'which He received He went on to Cana, where He had first " manifested forth His glory" (ii. n).

nobleman] Rather, officer In the service of the king, i.e. Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee, who was popularly known as ' ' king: " Matt. xiv. 9. The word (fiaa&iKos) is used by Josephus (e.g. <B. J.' j. 13 (ii). j) for any

47. fluent] Literally, went away (<iTrf)\- dev, Vulg. abiit). The word emphasizes the thought that the father left his son for the time.

he was at the point of death] The Vulgate rendering is worthy of notice: incipiebat mori. Comp. Acts xxvii. 33. Contrast xii. 33, esset moriturus.

48. Then said Jesus...] Jesus therefore said... The Lord read the character of the petitioner even through a petition which might seem to shew faith.

signs and wonders] The two words (o~r)- fifia Kai re'para) are combined Matt, xxiv. 24; Mark xiii. 22; Acts (ii. 19), ii. 22, 43, iv. 30, v. 12, vi. 8, vii. 36, viii. 13, xiv. 3, xv. 12; Rom. xv. 19; 2 Cor. xii. 12; (2 Thess. ii. 9); Hebr. ii. 4. They severally mark the two chief aspects of miracles: the spiritual aspect, whereby they suggest some deeper truth than meets the eye, of which they are in some sense symbols and pledges; and the external aspect, whereby their strangeness arrests attention. "Sign" and "work" (see v. 20) are the characteristic words for miracles in St John. The word here translated " wonders" is never used ', by itself in the New Testament.

ye will not believe] ye will in no wise believe. The plural (ye) marks the nobleman as the representative of a class, to whom miracles were the necessary support of a faith which was not reluctant but feeble. The negative phrase (ou uf/ Trurrfvo-rjTf) does not express the simple fact, but in some degree connects it with the state of things of which it is the result: "There is no likelihood — no possibility— that ye should believe." Perhaps however the phrase is better taken as an interrogation: Will ye in no wise believe? Comp. ch. xviii. ii; (Rev. xv. 4). Luke xviii. 7 (ov '

50 Jesus saith unto him, Go thy way; thy son liveth. And the man believed the word that Jesus had spoken unto him, and he went his way.

5 1 And as he was now going down, his servants met him, and told him^ saying, Thy son liveth.

52 Then inquired he of them the hour when he began to amend. And

they said unto him, Yesterday at the seventh hour the fever left him.

53 So the father knew that it was at the same hour, in the which Jesus said unto him, Thy son liveth: and himself believed, and his whole house.

54 This is again the second miracle that Jesus did, when he was come out of Judasa into Galilee.

The temper of the Galilaeans is placed in sharp contrast with that of the Samaritans.

49. Sir, come down...'] The faith, however imperfect, which springs out of fatherly love is unshaken. It clings to what it can grasp. Compare Mark ix. 24, which offers a complete spiritual parallel.

50. Go thy <way; thy son liveth] The assurance thus given is the final test, and it is sustained. So far the father endured without seeing. The crisis of life and death was present; hence it is enough to say "liveth" (v. 51) and not "is healed." Comp. Mark v. a.i.

51. met him, and told Aim, saying, Thy son liveth'] met him, saying that his boy (irats) liveth. Here only (according to the true reading) St John uses the oblique form ("that his boy liveth"), and not as in A. V., the direct ("Thy son liveth").

52. Then inquired he... And they said...'] He inquired therefore...So they said (tlirav ovv)...

be began to amend] The original phrase is remarkable (KoptyoTtpov (<r\tv, Vulg. melius habuerit), and appears to have been used in familiar conversation, as we might say "he begins to do nicely," or "bravely." The closest parallel is in Arrian: "When the doctor comes in you must not be afraid as to what he will say; nor if he says ' You are doing bravely' (KO^ODS <x«r), must 7°u give way to excessive joy" ('Dissert. EpicL'iii. 10. 1.3; comp. Dissert. II. 18. 14).

Testerday at the seventh hour...] i.e. 7 p.m. See note on ch. xix. Such a phrase could scarcely be used of one o'clock in the afternoon in the evening of the same natural day.

at the seventh hour] The original expresses duration of time (Spav i^o^v, "in the seventh hour") and not a point of time.

53. believed] that Jesus was the Christ. Comp. iii. 15 note. The belief in v. 50 is simply belief in the specific promise.

54. This is again the second miracle...when be <was come...'] More closely: This did Jesus again as a second sign having come (after He came)... The point lies in the relation of the two miracles as marking two visits to Cana, separated by a visit to Jerusalem. The form of the phrase corresponds with that in ii. n.

In looking back over this section (ii. 13 — iv. 54), the signs of harmonious progress in the development of the Lord's work are obvious. At first He stands before men with words and deeds of power, and they interpret and misinterpret His character, yet so that He cannot enter upon His kingdom by the way of a universal welcome from the ancient theocracy (ii. 13 — 25). Then follows the beginning of the direct revelation of a divine presence, which is shewn at once to have a larger significance than for Israel. Christ sets Himself forth in two representative scenes as satisfying the hope of men, yet otherwise than they had expected (iii., iv.}. He acknowledges that He is the Messiah in the sense of the woman of Samaria; but the higher teaching which He addressed to Nicodemus is veiled in riddles. At the same time a new confession is added to those of the first chapter (i. 51, note). The Samaritans acknowledge Christ to be "the Saviour of the world" (iv. 42, note).

ADDITIONAL NOTE on CHAP. iv. 21.

Very much of the exact force of St John's record of the Lord's words appears to depend upon the different conceptions of the two forms under which the Fatherhood of God is described. God is spoken of 'as "the Father" and as "my Father." Generally it may be said that the former title expresses the original relation of Gpd to being and specially to humanity, in virtue of man's creation in the divine image, and the latter more particularly the relation of the Father to the Son Incarnate, and so indirectly to man in virtue of the Incarnation. The former suggests those thoughts, which spring from the consideration of the absolute moral connexion of man with God: the latter, those which spring from what is made known to us through revelation of the connexion of the Incarnate Son with God and with man. "The Father" corresponds, under this aspect, with the group of ideas gathered up in the Lord's titles, "the Son," "the Son of man:" and "my Father" with those which are gathered up in the title "the Son of God," "the Christ."

The two forms are not unfrequently used in close succession. Thus for example, we read:

v. 43. I have come in the name of my Father.

v. 45. Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father.

The coming of Christ was a new revelation: the accusation of the unbelieving lies already in the primal constitution of things.

vi. 27. Which the Son of man will give you, for him the Father sealed, even vi. 32. My Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.

In the one place the Lord appears as satisfying the wants of humanity: in the other, the new dispensation is contrasted with the old.

x. 17. Therefore doth the Father love me, because I lay down my life.

The one statement rests on the conception of true self-sacrifice: the other deals with the mission of Christ.

Other instructive examples will be found: viii. 1 8 f., x. 29 ff., 36 ft., xiv. 6 — 10, xv. 8 — 10, 15 f., 23 — 26. In many cases it will be seen that the absolute conception of Fatherhood is that on which the main teaching of a passage really depends: iv. ai ff., vi. 45 f., xvi. 23 ff., and to such pregnant sentences as x. 30, xx. 21, the title "the Father" gives a singular depth of meaning. Of the two phrases the Father is by far the more common, and yet in many places my Father has been substituted for it in the later texts, to express a more obvious sense: vi. 65, viii. 28, 38, x. 29, 32, xv. 10, xvi. 10.

It may be added that St John never uses the phrase "our Father," which is not unfrequent in St Paul, nor yet the phrase "your Father," except xx. 17. Nor does he use iruTijp without the article by itself (comp. 2 John 3) of God, except (of course) in the vocative case; xi. 41, xii. 27 f., xvii. i, 5, (n), 21, 24, (25). Comp. i. 14, note.

THE CONFLICT (v. i — xii. jo). Up to the present time the Lord has offered Himself to typical representatives of the whole Jewish race at Jerusalem, in Judaea, in Samaria, and in Galilee, in such a way as to satisfy the elements of true faith. Now the conflict begins which issues in the Passion. Step by step faith and unbelief are called out in a parallel development. The works and words of Christ become a power for the revelation of men's thoughts. The main scene of this saddest of all conceivable tragedies is Jerusalem. The crises of its development are the national Festivals. And the whole controversy is gathered round three miracles.

The sixth chapter is a Galilaean episode, marking the crisis of faith and unbelief outside Judaea proper.

The unity of the record is marked by the symptoms of the earlier conflict which appear

With the exception of parts of ch. vi. the contents of this division of the Gospel are peculiar to St John.

The narrative falls into two parts: THE PRELUDE (v., vi.), and THE GREAT CON- TROVERSY (vii. — xii.).

The Prelude consists of two decisive incidents with their immediate consequences; one at Jerusalem (ch. v.), the other in Galilee (ch. vi.). In the first we have Christ's revelation of Himself in answer to false views of His relation to God (v. 18); in the other, His revelation of Himself in answer to false views of His work for men (vi. 15, 26). In the first case the revelation is indirect (" the Son; " compare w. 24, 30, 31 ff.); in the second case the revelation is predominantly direct (" I am," yet see w. 40, 53).

• Lev. 23. A FTER "this there was a feast of Deut.i6.i. _/-\ the Jews; and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.

the sheep J market a pool, which is 'Or, gate, called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches.

in the circle of the disciples (vi. 66), and the foreshadowing of the end (vi. 70 f.).

The record of the healing (vv. 2 — 90), and of the immediate sequel to it (w. 9 b — 18), is followed by a long discourse addressed by "the Lord" to " the Jews," in answer to their charge that " He spake of God as His own Father, as His Father in a sense wholly unique (rranjp Wtor)." This discourse consists of two main divisions.

(a) The nature and prerogatives of the Son (vv. 19 — 29).

(/3) The witness to the Son, and the ground of unbelief (vv. 31 — 47).

v. 30 serves as a connecting link between the two parts.

The contents of these two sections form the foundation of all the later teaching in the Gospel.

The discourse appears to have been addressed to a small (official) gathering: perhaps to the Sanhedrin, and certainly not to the multitude (comp. vv. 33, 39). Perhaps there is a reference to it in vii. 26 (tywcrai>).

The healing of the impotent man was a work wrought by the Lord spontaneously. He chose both the object of it and the occasion. The malady of the sufferer was not urgent in such a sense that the cure could not have been delayed. The cure therefore was not wrought on a Sabbath although it was a Sabbath, but because it was Sabbath, with the view of bringing out a deeper truth (comp. vii. 21 ff.).

a feast] The evidence for the identification of this unnamed feast is very slight. The tradition of the early Greek Church identified it with Pentecost Most modern commentators suppose it to be the Feast of Purim (March), from a comparison of iv. 35 and vi. 4. But see Additional Note.

went up to Jerusalem] If the feast were that of Purim, this journey was not of obligation; but compare x. 22 (the Feast of Dedication).

2. there is at Jerusalem...'] The use of the present tense does not prove that the narrative was written before the destruction of Jerusalem. It is quite natural that St John in recalling the event should speak of the place as he knew it. It has indeed been conjectured that a building used for a benevolent purpose might have been spared in the general ruin, but this explanation of the phrase is improbable.

Jjj the sheep market] by the sheep gate (tVt T!) rrpofSaTiKt), super probatica Am.), which lay near the temple on the east of the city (Neh. iii. i, 32, xii. 39), though it cannot now be certainly fixed (' Diet, of Bible,' s. v.). The ellipsis, which is most naturally supplied by gate, is (apparently) without parallel.

a poof] This has been identified by some with an intermittent spring known as the Fountain of the Virgin, in the Valley of Kidron. The traditional site is the Birket Israil by the modern gate of St Stephen, on the north-east of the city. But neither spot fully answers to the conditions of the pool.

in the Hebrew] that is, in the language " of those beyond the river " brought from Babylon, and not in the classical language of the Old Testament. Compare Lightfoot ad loc. Betbesda'] The original reading and the meaning of the name are both very uncertain. The common interpretation of the form Bethesda is House of mercy (XlDn JV3); but this is open to objection on the ground of the usage of NlDn, and it has been supposed to represent the House of the portico (VDDK 7V3, OIKOS orojjr). See Delitzsch, ' Ztschr. f. Luth. Theol.' 1856, 622 f. The true reading appears to contain the element -zatha (-saida), which suggests NJVT JV3, the House of the olive. The pool is not mentioned by any Jewish writer.

frve porches'] Cloisters, or covered spaces round the pool, such as are commonly found by tanks in India.

3, 4. The words from waiting for...he had are not part of the original text of St John, but form a very early note added to explain v. 7, while the Jewish tradition with regard to the pool was still fresh. Some authorities add the last clause of v. 3 only; others v. 4 only; others add both, but with considerable verbal variations. See Additional Note.

3. In these lay a great multitude of impotent folk] In these were lying a multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt, withered, waiting for the moving of the water.

4 For an angel went down at a certain 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.

5 And a certain man was there, which had an infirmity thirty and eight years.

6 When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made whole?

7 The impotent man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool: but while I am coming, another steppeth down before me.

8 Jesus saith unto him, Rise, take up thy bed, and walk.

9 And immediately the man was made whole, and took up his bed, and walked: and on the same day was the sabbath.

10 IT The Jews therefore said unto him that was cured, It is the sabbath

day: *it is not' lawful for thee to * Jer. 17. carry thy bed.

sick folk... The healing properties of the pool may have been due to its mineral elements. Eusebius (' De situ et nom.' s. v.) describes the waters of the pool identified with it in his time as " marvellously red," i.e. probably from deposits of iron on the stones. A chalybeate spring would be efficacious generally in cases of weakness.

A similar scene is still presented by the hot sulphureous springs near Tiberias (Hammatb, Josh. xix. 35): Tristram, ' Land of Israel,' 416.

5. thirty and eight years'] This period of time, corresponding with the period of the punishment of the Israelites in the wilderness, has led many, from a very early date, to regard the man as a type of the Jewish people paralysed by faithlessness at the time of Christ's coming. The detail may however be added simply to mark the inveteracy of the disease (ix. I, blind from his birth).

6. saw him lie (lying) and knew (yvovi)] by the information of bystanders, or (more probably) by His divine intuition (see p. 46). The life of this sick man was open to Him (v. 14), just as the life of the Samaritan woman (iv. 1 8). It is to be noticed that all the miracles recorded by St John, except the healing of the nobleman's son, were wrought spontaneously by Christ. But the question with which this work is prefaced is a peculiar feature.

Wilt thou] i.e. hast thou the will? desirest thou? The word is often ambiguous, as for example, v. 40, vi. n, 67, vii. 17, viii. 44, ix. 27. The question was suggested by the circumstances of the man's case. It might seem that he acquiesced in his condition, and was unwilling to make any vigorous effort to gain relief. If it was so, the words were fitted to awaken attention, hope, effort, in one who had fallen into apathy. Comp. Acts iii. 4.

The sufferer answers the thought which underlay the inquiry. The delay in his healing was due, as he explains, not to want of will but to want of means.

is troubled'] The popular explanation of the phenomenon of an intermittent spring.

put] The original word (/3aXXetc) is that which is commonly translated cast. In late Greek it is used very widely (e.g. xiii. 2, xviii. n, xx. 25, 27), but it may express the necessary haste of the movement according to the gloss in v. 4.

8. The three features of the complete restoration are to be noticed (rise, take up thy bed, walk). The phrase occurs Mark ii. 9.

bed] The word (Kpa/3arros, Vulg. grabbat- /HJ), said to be of Macedonian origin, which is used here, occurs Mark ii. 4 ff. (note), vi. 55; Acts v. 15, ix. 33. It describes technically the bed of the poor — "a pallet."

In this section the various elements of the coming conflict.are brought out distinctly; the significance of the cure as a work of power and judgment (v. 14), the accusations of the Jews (-v-v. 10, 1 6, 1 8), the self-vindication of Christ (v. 17).

9. and on... the sabbath~] A new paragraph begins with these words: Now on that day was a sabbath, which prepares the way for the subsequent discourse. The form of the phrase is very remarkable (comp. ix. 14, xix. 31), and suggests the idea that the sabbath was a day of rest other than the weekly sabbath.

It is the sabbath: and it is not... to carry] Rather, to take up, as in -w. 8, 9, ii, 12. The objectors would refer to such passages as Jer. xvii. 21 f. "If any one carries anything

11 He answered them, He that made me whole, the same said unto me, Take up thy bed, and walk.

12 Then asked they him, What man is that which said unto thee, Take up thy bed, and walk?

13 And he that was healed wist not who it was: for Jesus had con-

in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee.

15 The man departed, and told the Jews that it was Jesus, which had made him whole.

1 6 And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day.

from a public place to a private house on the sabbath...intentionally, he renders himself liable to the punishment of premature death (ma) and stoning" ('Sabb.' 6 a, quoted by Wunsche).

11. He answered them... ~\ But£<r.. The authority of One who had wrought the miracle seemed to him to outweigh any legal enactment. He felt instinctively the presence of that which was greater than the sabbath.

12. Then asked they...What man...which said...'] They asked, Who Is the man that said... The introduction of the man marks the spirit of the inquiry, and suggests the contrast between the Divine Law and this (assumed) human teacher, who claimed to deal with it by his own power. Moreover, as the sufferer had spoken of his healing, these speak only of the technical offence, and pass by that work of power and mercy. Comp.

Take up (omit thy bed) and ivalk] The words are given with great naturalness in an abrupt form.

for Jesus had conveyed himself aivay] for Jesus retired — withdrew — silently and unperceived, from a place where He might be exposed to embarrassment; for this appears to be the force of the reference to the multitude, and not that the crowd made escape easier. The word (tKixvfiv, which occurs only here in New Testament) expresses literally, "to bend the head aside, to avoid a blow" (dedinavit a turba, Vulg.). Comp. Judg. iv. 18, xviii. 26; 2 K. ii. 24, xxiii. 16; 3 Mace. iii. 22 (LXX.); Jos. « Antt.' vii. 4- *.

fndeth] The healing was incomplete till its spiritual lesson was brought out clearly. Though Christ had withdrawn from the multitude He sought (comp. i. 43, ix. 35) the object of His mercy; and so much at least the man had already learnt, that he repaired to the temple, as we must suppose, to offer thanks there for his restoration directly after his cure.

sin no morel Tne original (^xe'rt auapravt, nolipeccare, Vulg.) expresses rather No longer continue to sin (comp. i Joh. iii. 6, 9). How his sickness was connected with his sin must remain undefined; but the connexion is implied, yet in no such way as to lend colour to the belief in the direct connexion of all suffering with personal sin, which is corrected in ix. 3.

a worse thing] even than the sickness of thirty-eight years, by which the greater part of his life had been saddened.

15. The man departed (went away)...] It is difficult to understand the motive of the man in conveying this information to the Jews, since he knew the hostile spirit in which they regarded the cure. He was certainly not ungrateful, for he still speaks of Jesus as having cured him (which had made him whole, -v. ir, and not <which had told him to take up his bed, •v. 12). He may have wished to leave the responsibility of his illegal act on the sabbath with One who had power to answer for it; or it may be simplest to suppose that he acted in obedience to the instructions of those whom, as a Jew, he felt bound to obey.

16. And therefore (&a roGro, for this cause)...] This is the first open declaration of hostility to Christ (though the words and sought to slay him, which are wrongly added in this verse from v. 18, must be omitted); and it is based upon the alleged violation of the letter of the Law with regard to the sabbath, as in the other Gospels, Matt. xii. 2 ff. and parallels. The miracle just recorded called out the settled enmity of the Jews, but the phrase because he did, or rather used to do, (was in the habit of doing, these things (acts of mercy which involved offences against the traditional interpretations of the Law) on a sabbath, shews that the feeling was not due to a solitary act, but to an obvious principle of action.

17 11 But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.

1 8 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do:

17. The answer (see *u. 19, note) of Christ contains in the briefest possible space the exposition of His office: My Father (ii. 16, xx. 17) worketh hitherto (ecoy aprt, Vulg. usque modo, up to the present moment), even until now, and I work. That is to say, the rest of God aftei the creation, which the sabbath represents outwardly, and which I am come to realise, is not a state of inaction, but of activity, and man's true rest is not a rest from human earthly labour, but a rest for divine heavenly labour. Thus the merely negative, traditional, observance of the sabbath is placed in sharp contrast with the positive, final, fulfilment of spiritual service, for which it was a preparation. The works of Christ did not violate the Law, while they brought out the truth to which that tended. Cf. Matt. xii. i ff. and parallels. By the u work " of the Father we must understand at once the maintenance of the material creation and the redemption and restoration of all things, in which the Son co-operated with Him (Hebr. i. 3; Eph. i. 9 f.).

The form of the sentence is remarkable. Christ places His work as co-ordinate with that of the Father, and not as dependent on it. Comp. Mark ii. 27, 28 (The Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath*).

The question of the action of God upon the Sabbath was much debated in the Jewish schools. "Why does not God," said a caviller, "keep the sabbath?" "May not a man," was the answer, " wander through his own house on the sabbath? The house of God is the whole realm above and the whole realm below" ('Shem. R.' xxx.). Comp. Philo, « Leg. Alleg.' I. p. 46 M.

hitherto] even until now. The work of Christ which had excited the hostility of the Jews was, however little they could see it, really coincident with a working of God which knows no interruption.

18. The Jews rightly interpreted the words of the Lord. They saw that He claimed the power of abrogating the law of the Sabbath in virtue of His absolutely special relation to God: He called God His own Father (Rom. viii. 32) — His Father in a peculiar sense — making Himself equal with God, by placing His action on the same level with the action of God. Comp. x. 33. For this reason the more they (not only persecuted Him, v. 16, but) sought to kill Him. Comp. Matt. xii. 14, and parallels. Matt. xxvi. 65, note. Comp. viii. 59, x. 33; Mark ii. 7.

he... had broken] Literally, he was loosing (eXv«, Vulg. sol-vebat), i.e. he declared that the law of the sabbath was not binding. The word (Avo>) expresses not the violation of the sanctity of the day in a special case, but the abrogation of the duty of observance. Comp. Matt. v. 19, xviii. 18. A prophet might absolve from the obligation of the law in a particular instance, but not generally.

The first part of the comprehensive answer of the Lord to the Jews deals with His Nature and prerogatives (i) in relation to the Father (19 — 23), and (a) in relation to men

The fact that the discourse was addressed to a small, trained, audience (see preliminary note) explains the close brevity of the reasoning.

irv. 19 — 23. The action and honour of the Son are coincident with the action and honour of the Father. It is through the action of the Son that men see the action of the Father, and it is by honouring the Son that they honour the Father.

The exposition of these thoughts is made in a series of statements bound together by u for" (•yap) four times repeated.

The Son doeth nothing self-determined of Himself, which would be impossible (19^); for His action is absolutely coincident in range with that of the. Father (19^)5 and this can be; for His Father shews Him His widening counsels, which extend to the exhibition of greater works than healing (20); fcr it is the prerogative of the Son to give life

(21^), as is shewn to be the case; for all judgment is given to Him, and men can see that He exerts this power (22).

Hence it follows that men should honour the Son even as they honour the Father (23).

19. Then answered Jesus..."] Jesus therefore answered.... He met their thoughts and their actions (comp. ii. 18, n.) by a justification of His own works and His divine claims as Messiah. This "answer" is not to be placed in immediate temporal connexion with what precedes.

The Son] iii. 35. The idea is simply that of the absolute relation of the Divine Persons, of for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

2O For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

the Son to the Father, and consequently this term is used (19 — 23), and not (as below vv. 30 ff.) " I " — the Christ whom you reject — or " the Son of God " (v. 25), or " Son of man" (v. 27), which emphasize the divine or human nature of the Lord relatively to man. At the same time the Son is regarded as "sent" (vv. 23 f.), and therefore as Incarnate. But this idea lies in the background here, where the immediate point is the justification of the statement in v. 17 from the essential relation of the Son to the Father. The argument is conducted by the Lord without a direct personal reference to Himself in such a way as to arrest the attention of the Jews, and not to drive them away at once. Perfect Sonship involves perfect identity of will and action with the Father. The Son can do nothing of Himself, self-determined without the Father, nothing, that is, except He see the Father doing It (but what be seeth the Father do). Separate action on His part is an impossibility, as being a contradiction of His unity with the Father (comp. v. 30 and xvi. 13). The limitation (except He see...) refers to can do nothing, and not to the last words (of Himself); and the coincidence of the action of the Father and of the Son is brought out by the exact turn of the phrase — see the Father doing, and not do.

can do notting"] The eternal law of right is (in human language) the definition of divine power. The words do not convey any limitation of the Son's working, but explain something as to its character. Comp. v. 30, iii. 27; Mark vi. 5; (Gen. xix. 22). For another aspect of this "cannot" see vii. 7, note.

of himself'] v. 30, note; Num. xvi. 28 (LXX.). The truth lies in the very idea ot Sonship.

for <wbat things soever...'] The negative statement is supplemented by a positive one... The Son can do nothing...for... His action is not only coincident but coextensive with the action of the Father: what things soever He doeth these also the Son doeth in like manner, not in imitation, but in virtue ot His sameness of nature.

20. For the Father..."] The action of the Son, as coincident and coextensive with that of the Father, depends upon the continuous revelation which the Father makes to Him in accordance with His eternal love: for the Father loveth the Son;... and this revelation, regarded under the limitations of human existence, is progressive, and signs of healing are only preparatory to greater works; for as the Father... quickenetb, even so the Son also quickeneth whom He (unemphatic) will.

Thus we can see that there is a divine coherence, a divine meaning, in all nature and all history. The Son sees all, for the Father shews all to Him; and we also can see parts at least in Him. Comp. Matt. xi. 27.

loveth (the Son)] The word (<£iA«<»>) marks personal affection based upon a special relation (xi. 3, 36; comp. Matt. x. 37), and not the general feeling of regard, esteem, consideration (ayanqv) which comes from 'reflection and knowledge: the former feeling answers to nature, the latter to experience and judgment (iii. 35, x. 17), and so is specially appropriate to spiritual relations. This love expresses (so to speak) the moral side of the essential relation of the Father to the Son. And so it is through the Son that the personal love of God is extended to believers: xvi. 27; comp. Rev. iii. 19.

be will... than these] The Original order is more expressive: greater works (comp. xiv. 12) than these will He shew (comp. x. 32) Him; and He (so it is implied, v. 19) when He seeth them will do them in like manner, that ye (emphatic) may marvel. It cannot but appear strange at first sight that wonder is given as the object of Christ's works. The difficulty is removed by taking account of the pronoun: that^<? who question my authority and are blind to my divine Sonship may marvel. Till Christ was recognised His works could at the most appealonly to be prodigies: their effect would be astonishment, not belief. But wonder might give occasion for faith. Under this aspect "wonder" is presented in two remarkable traditional sayings of the Lord preserved by Clement of Alexandria ('Strom.' n. 9, 45): "He that wonders shall reign, and he that reigns shall rest:" "Wonder at that which is before you." This partial object of wonder, however, is contrasted with the general object in v. 23. Works — outward signs — may produce wonder, but judgment completed enforces honour. Comp. Plat. 'Theaet.' p. 155 D. she<w~\ x. 32. The divine works require the interpretation of sympathy. Such sympathy the Son has absolutely.

works'] This is a characteristic term in St John (comp. Matt. xi. 2) in which Christ includes under the same category the manifold forms of His action. His "works" were fragments contributing to " the work " which

the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. 22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:

23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

He came to finish (iv. 34, xvii. 4), and these He must needs work while it was day (ix. 4). Miracles from this point of view are regarded on the same level with the other works of Christ, though " miraculous" works may in a peculiar sense move to faith (v. 36, x. 35, 32, xiv. 10, iz, xv. 24). All works alike are designed to contribute to the redemption of the world (comp. ch. xvii. 21, note). Seei;. 36, n.

21. The progress in the dignity of the works of the Son follows from the extent of their sphere, for as the Father raiseth the dead...even so the Son also... The restoration of an impotent man is then but a beginning of that giving of life of which it was a sign. The vivifying power of the Father is described in its twofold physical aspect, He raiseth up the dead and quickenetK: that of the Son in reference to its moral law, He quickeneth whom He twill. The "quickening" as it stands in the second clause is necessarily coextensive with the raising the dead and quickening in the first, which is not to be limited to any isolated "miraculous" acts, but extends to all communication of life, natural and spiritual. The main forms of "quickening " are distinguished afterwards, w. 25, 28.

The definition whom He will marks (i) the efficacy of Christ's power, and (2) connects this communication of higher life with the counsels of infinite wisdom and love, and (3) shews its independence of outward descent (as from Abraham). There is no emphasis on the personal will of the Son (whom He twill) as in v. 20 (which He Himself doeth).

The full significance of this claim of Christ to "quicken whom he will" is illustrated by the second of the ' Shemoneh Esreh,' the ' Eighteen [Benedictions],' of the Jewish Prayer Book. It is probable that this thanksgiving was used in substance in the apo-

stolic age: "Thou, O Lord, art mighty for ever: Thou quickenest the dead: Thou art strong to save. Thou sustainest the living by Thy mercy: Thou quickenest the dead by Thy great compassion. Thou...makest good Thy faithfulness to them that sleep in the dust... Thou art faithful to quicken the dead. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who quickenest the dead."

22. The fact that the Son possesses and exercises this quickening power is established by the fact that He has a still more awful prerogative. The quickening of men is contrasted with the judgment of men, which is the correlative of sin (iii. 17 ff.). And this judgment belongs to the Son (as Son of man, v. 27), For not even doth the Father judge any man, but hath committed (given) all judgment (or literally, the judgment which comes and will come, wholly, in all its parts, now in its first beginning and hereafter in its complete accomplishment) unto the Son.

the Father...no man] The exact phrase of the original marks a climax: not even doth the Father — to whom this office might seem to pertain — judge any man.

23. The Son has received the prerogative of judgment, and it is through the exercise of this power that men come to perceive His true majesty. For it was committed to Him for this end, that all men should honour (not future, but present) the Son even. as they honour the Father (x. 37, 38). Sooner or later, in loss or in sorrow, this must be. And there is also a converse form of the Truth. It is by honouring the Son that we can honour the Father; and He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which sent Him (comp. i John iv. 20; ch. xv. 24).

which hath sent him] which sent Him. These words mark the transition from the conception of the Son essentially to that of the Son revealed by the incarnation. The phrase He that sent me is peculiar to St John (comp. Rom. viii. 3). It is used only by the Lord absolutely of the Father, iv. 34, w. 2.4, 30, vi- 38, 39> vii. 16, 28, 33, viii. 26, 29, ix. 4, xii. 44, 45, xiii. 20, xv. 21, xvi. 5. Elsewhere the full form, the Father that sent me, occurs, v. 37, vi. 44, viii. 16, 18, xii. 49, xiv. 24. Comp. i. 33 (He that sent me to baptize).

24 — 29. In these verses we pass from the consideration of the relation of the Son to the Father to that of the relation of Christ to men. The conception of the " greater works" of the Son, the quickening and the judgment of men, is defined more exactly in connexion with the Son as revealed by the Incarnation. At the same time, though the oblique form is generally preserved, the work and the mission of Christ are referred to directly (my word, Him that sent me, v. 24). In -v. 24 the general ideas of all life and all judgment in connexion with the Son (ai, 22) are restated: in -w. 25, 26, they are applied to the present order; in 28, 29, they are applied to the future order.

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.

The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

26 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, because he is the Son of man.

He that... believeth on him... everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation...] He that heareth my word and believeth Him that sent me bath life eternal and cometh not into judgment, but is passed out of death (the death that is truly death) into life (the life that is truly life). (Comp. i John iii. 14.) The two conditions of eternal life are (i) knowledge of the revelation made by the Son, and (2) belief in the truth of it, that is, belief in the word of the Father who speaks through the Son. Comp. xvii. 3. He who knows the Gospel and knows that the Gospel is true cannot but have life. Eternal life is not future but present, or rather it is, and so is above all time. Comp. iii. 1 8 f. For him who hath this life judgment is impossible. He has already gone beyond it. Comp. i John ii. 28, iv. 17.

believeth on him...'] believeth him... (iriffTtvuv TW TT.). The difference between "believing a person or statement" (nHrrfvfiv nvi) and " believing on a person " (wwrnfov tls nva) is as clearly marked in Greek as in English, though it is destroyed here in A. V. and in viii. 31; Acts xvi. 34, xviii. 8; Tit. iii. 8; while it is preserved vv. 38, 46, viii. 45, 46; Rom. iv. 3; Acts xxvii. 25. The two phrases are contrasted in vi. 29, 30, viii. 30, 31; i John v. 10. To believe God or to believe the Lord is to acknowledge as true the message which comes from Him or the words which He speaks. It is assumed that the message does come from Him, and therefore to believe the message is to believe Him. So here Christ refers His word to the authority of the Father: compare v. 37.

shall not come'] cometh not. The issues of action are regarded in their potential accomplishment in the present.

from deaih unto...] out of death into... i John iii. 14. In his epistle St John speaks of "love to the brethren" as the personal proof of this transition. Such love flows from an acceptance in faith of Christ's word (i John ii. 7, iii. u). Death and life are, as it were, two spheres of existence, like darkness and light: i John v. 19, 20, ch. viii. 31, note.

vivifying power in the spiritual resurrection (is coming and now is) is stated in contrast with the future manifestation in the general resurrection (is coming, v. 28). See iv. 23, 21. The hour was " coming," so far as the Christian dispensation truly began with the gift of Pentecost: but it "was" already while Christ openly taught among men.

the dead] the spiritually dead: this is the predominant idea, but at the same time we cannot exclude the outward signs of it as in the raising of Lazarus: comp. xi. 23 ff. For this use of the word see Matt. viii. 22; Luke xv. 24, 32; Rom. vi. ii; Eph. v. 14. It will be observed that the voice of power is attributed to the Son of God. Comp. xi. 4; contrast ix. 35.

they that hear] This phrase is not coextensive with the dead. The voice is addressed to the whole class: those who receive it (ot dKovo-avT(s) shall live. As yet the thought is of life only, and not of judgment, except so far as that is expressed in the want of life.

26. as...so...~\ The particles mark the fact of the gift and not the degree of it. Comp. v. 21; Matt. xiii. 40, &c.

jo hath he given....] so gave He also... The Son has not life only as given, but life in Himself as being a spring of life. «' Nos

non habemus vitam in nobis ipsis, sed in Deo nostro. I lie autem Pater vitam in semetipso habet; et talem genuit Filium qui haberet vitam in semetipso; non fieret vitae particeps, sed ipse vita esset, cujus nos vitae participes essemus " (August. 'Serm.'