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

cxxvil. 9). The tense (gave) carries us back beyond time; and yet it has a further application to the incarnation, wherein the Son became also the Son of man (v. 27). The sovereignty of life is followed by the authority to judge, as in vv. 21, 22. Comp. vi. 57; Rev. i. 17.

27. And hath given (gave) him...judgment (om. also) because he is the Son of man (son of man or a son of man)] The prerogative of judgment is connected with the true humanity of Christ (Son of man) and not with the fact that He is the representative of humanity (the Son of man). The Judge, even as the Advocate (Hebr. ii. 18), must share the nature of those who are brought before

hour is coming, in the which all done evil, unto the resurrection of that are in the graves shall hear his damnation.

Him. The omission of the article concentrates attention upon the nature and not upon the personality of Christ. Comp. i. i; Hebr. i. i, a (ev rols wpcKprjrtur...ev vi<5, in One who was a Son). The phrase (son of man) is found here only in the Gospel, but it occurs also Rev. i. 13, xiv. 14: the Son of Man occurs i. 51, iii. 13, 14, vi. 27, 53, 62, as often in the other Gospels. Comp. i. 51, additional

28. Marvel not at this: for...] The partial spiritual quickening and judgment is con7 summated in a universal quickening and judgment. There is a marked contrast between the corresponding clauses of vv. 25, 28: the dead (v. 25), all that are in the tombs (v. 28): cometh and now is (v. 25), cometh (v. 28). Here the quickening is the inevitable result of the divine action (all... shall hear); before it followed from the concurrence of faith with the divine message (they that hear shall live).

Marvel not...'] Comp. v. 20. Wonder is at most only a stage of transition. Each manifestation of Christ's power is a preparation for something greater.

29. It will be observed that there is a contrast between the one result of the present action of the Son, shall live (v. 25), and the complex result of His future action: shall go they that have done (that wrought) good...'] The " doing " of good is described by a word which sets it forth as issuing in a definite production (ot TO. dyada Tronjo-aires), while in the second member the word is changed: they that have done (did) evil... where the "doing" is regarded simply in the moral character of the action (ot fif <pat)Xa 7rpd£- avT(s). The same words (Troteti', Trpacrcreiv) are contrasted, ch. iii. 20, 21, note; Rom. i. 32, vii. 15, 19, xiii. 4. The distinction is well preserved in the Vulgate, bona fecerunt... mala egerunt.

For the contrast of a resurrection of life (2 Mace. vii. 14), and a resurrection of judgment, see v. 24. In one case the resurrection is accompanied by the full fruition of life, judgment being past: in the other resurrection issues in judgment.

30. This verse forms a transition from the first section of the discourse to the second. At the same time it marks the passage from the indirect (the Son) to the personal (7) revelation of Christ. The truth of the divine Sonship, with which the discourse opened, is first repeated in a new form, / (eyw) can of mine own self do nothing; and then the principle of Christ's judgment is laid down (as I hear, I judge), which is the ground of all true judg- viii. 28, 42, (xii. 49> «'£ «>•)> xi.v- Io> (xi- 5J)» xv. 4, note, xvi. 13. The very idea of Sonship involves (in some sense) that of dependence. There is but one " fountain " of Deity. But under another aspect the Son "lays down His life of Himself " (x. 18).

as I hear, I judge] The judgment of the Son is based upon the perfect knowledge of the thoughts of the Father, as the action ot the §on is based upon the perfect vision of His works. The " hearing " in this verse with regard to judgment corresponds to the "seeing" in v. 19 with regard to action.

because I seek... the will of the Father which hath sent mi] of Him that sent me (iv. 34, vi. 38, 39). The two conditions of absolute justice are (i) negative: absence of all respect of self; and (2) positive: devotion to the will of the Father. In both these respects the just judgment of the Son is contrasted with the false judgment of the Jews, vv. 41 — 44.

The connexion between the obedience rendered by the Son, and the honour rendered to the Son (v. 23), must be noticed.

It will be observed that the "will" ot Christ corresponds with His one unchanged personality (/, e'yw). Comp. Matt. xxvi. 39, gnd parallels. The thought of the verse is partially illustrated by a noble saying of R. Gamaliel: "Do His will as if it were thy will, that He may do thy will as if it were His will." But he continues: "Annul thy will before His will, that He may annul the will of others before thy will" (' Aboth,' n. 4).

This second main division of the discourse consists, like the first, of two parts. The witness to the Son is first laid open (31 — 40), and then the rejection of the witness in its cause and end (41 — 47).

31 — 40. Christ appeals to a witness separate from His own, and yet such that He has immediate knowledge of its truth. Such wit-

mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.

31 rflf 1 bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.

32 f 'There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true.

33 Ye sent unto John, and /he '^p. 1.7. bare witness unto the truth.

34 But I receive not testimony from man: but these things I say, that ye might be saved.

35 He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice inthis light.

ness is partly provisional and partly final. Of the former kind that of John the Baptist is the type (33 — 35). The latter lies in the witness of " works" leading up to the witness of the Father (36—40).

31. If I (emphatic) bear witness of (concerning)...] The stress lies on the pronoun, " If I alone and in fellowship with no other..." Comp. viii. 14.

is not true] The words anticipate an objection, and define the amount of truth which it contains. According to legal usage the testimony of a witness was not received in his own case. This principle the Jews might urge against Christ; and He acknowledges the deeper meaning which lay beneath it. If He asserted His claims self-prompted (of Himself) He would violate the absolute trust which the Son owed to the Father; though there was a sense in which He could bear witness of Himself (viii. 12 ff.) when the Father spoke through Him (viii. 18).

32. There is another] In due time and in due manner another bears witness. The whole i scope of the statement decides that this other is " the Father " and not the Baptist. In the ' verses which follow the testimony of the Baptist is treated as provisional, and as being in a certain degree an accommodation. The testimony of the Father is that upon which the Son rests, v. 37, viii. 18.

that beareth witness'] The action is present and continuous (o piaprvpa>f.../zaprv/>ct).

I kno<w...~\ In the certainty of this knowledge Christ could repose. Such witness could not but produce its true effect. The absolute knowledge spoken of here (oi8a) is to be distinguished from the knowledge of experience (eyvo>Ka) in v. 42.

the (witness which be wttnesseth] This full form of expression, as distinguished from " his witness," emphasizes the idea of the continuity of the witness as a matter of actual experience.

33. Ye (emphatic) sent,..and be bare..."] Te have sent...and he hath borne... The mission and the testimony are spoken of as abiding in their results. The prominent idea is not the historic fact (i. 32), but the permanent and final value of the witness (i. 34, iii. 26, v. 37, xix. 35).

marks a contrast between the standard of authority which the Jews set up and that which Christ admitted (v. 34). At the same time the reference to John follows naturally after the mysterious reference to "another" in whom some might think that they recognised him.

34. But I receive not testimony from man...] But though the witness of John was decisive according to your view, / (emphatic as distinguished from you) receive not my witness (rr)v paprvpiav, the witness which characterizes the reality of my work and answers to it) from a man (even though he be a prophet), but these things I say — I appeal even to this imperfect witness, 1 urge every plea which may be expected to prevail with you — that ye — even ye — might (may) be saved.

35. He <was a burning and a shining light.. ^\ He was — though now his work is ended by imprisonment or death — the lamp that burneth and shineth (giveth light)... The phrase may also be rendered, the lamp that is kindled and shineth, by the analogy of Matt. v. 15; but Luke xii. 35, Rev. iv. 5, viii. 10, are strongly against this interpretation. John the Baptist was the lamp, the derivative and not the self-luminous light (i. 8). Comp. Matt. vi. 22; 2 Pet. i. 19; but the word is used also of the Lamb, Rev. xxi. 23, where the glory of God, as the source of light, is placed in connexion with the Lamb, through whom (as the lamp of this vast temple) the light is conveyed in the city of God. The definite article (the lamp) simply marks the familiar piece of household furniture (comp. Mark iv. 21; Luke xi. 36). The epithets complete the image. The lamp is exhausted by shining; its illuminating power is temporary, and sensibly consumed. John the Baptist necessarily decreased (iii. 30). The title is eminently appropriate to the Baptist in his relation to Christ (the Light); but there is no evidence to shew that it was given to the herald of Messiah by tradition, though it was applied to several distinguished teachers. Compare Buxtorf, ' Lex.' s. v. K2W3, p. 338. But while his glory lasted the Jews (ye emphatic) were willing for a season (an hour, i Cor. vii. 8; Gal. ii. 5; Philem. 15) to rejoice (dya\\ia(r6fjvai) in his light. This exulting joy however shewed their real misundet-

finish, the same works that I do, bear shape, witness of me, that the Father hath 38 And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath

standing of his mission. They welcomed his power, but disregarded the solemn warning of his preaching of repentance. His stern presence became a mere spectacle. Comp. Luke vii. 24 ff.

36, 37 a. But I have greater 'witness...'] More exactly: But the witness which I (emphatic) have is greater (more conclusive) than that of John (or than John), for... the very works that I do bear witness of me...and the Father which sent me, He hath borne witness. The one witness was even then being given; the other was complete. The revelation made in Christ, and especially in His works of power, was a proof developed before the eyes of men. The historical revelation of the Old Testament consummated at the Baptism was already a finished whole, and recorded in the preparatory Scriptures of the old Covenant.

the works...given] "The works" of j Messiah from the divine side were a complete whole (hath given); but they were gradually wrought out on earth (that I should accomplish, v. 34); and this accomplishment was the end proposed in the divine gift (iva).

the works'] This phrase is used, as generally in St John's Gospel (v. 20, n.), to describe the whole outward manifestation of Christ's activity, both those acts which we call supernatural and those which we call natural. All alike are wrought in fulfilment of one plan and by one power. The many "works" (vii. 3, ix. 3, x. 25, 32, 37 f., xiv. 10 ff., xv. 24) are parts of the one "work" (iv. 34, xvii. 4). The phrase occurs elsewhere in Matt. v. 16.

hath given (deftmicev)'] The declaration of this relation of the Father to the Son (Incarnate) is characteristic of St John. The Father hath given all things in His hand (iii. 35, xiii. 3); He hath given Him all judgment (vv. 22, 27); He gave Him to have life in Himself (v. 26); He hath given Him a company of faithful servants (vi. 39; comp. vi. 65, xvii. 2, 6, 9, 12, 24, xviii. 9); He hath given Him commandment what to say (xii. 49) and to do (xiv. 31, xvii. 4; comp. xvii. 7 f.). He gave Him authority over all flesh (xvii. 2); He hath given Him His name (xvii. n f.) and glory (xvii. 24; comp. v. 22). ^finish] accomplish. Comp. iv. 34, note.

that I do] The pronoun («y») which is inserted in the common text must be omitted. It stands in x. 25, xiv. 12, and xiii. 7.

37. the Father (omit himself)...He (e«ai>oy) hath borne witness..."] Side by side with the continuous witness of the Father (v. 32) there is a witness which is complete. This was given, in its outward form, in the prophetic teaching of the Old Testament closed by the work of the Baptist; and in its spiritual form, in the constitution of man whereby he recognises in Christ the fulfilment of the providential teaching of God. Comp. Introd. pp. xiv. ff.

37 b, 38. But still the double witness was unavailing. The words and visions of the Old Testament were fulfilled in Christ (i. 17). If He was rejected at His coming, they were inarticulate and unreal to the faithless. So too it was with the last witness at the Baptism (i. 32 ff.). Since therefore it is only through the Son that men can hear or see God (xiv. 9), the Jews by their disbelief of Christ failed to hear and see Him (ye is unemphatic); nor was His word, which answers from within to the revelation without, abiding in them (i John ii. 14). This all follows from the words which are emphasized in the original by their position: whom He sent, Him ye (v/iels) believe not.

The passage is a summary of the mode and conditions of revelation. The teaching and the character of God can be discovered in nature and history, but His Word must be welcomed and kept in the soul in order that that which is without may be intelligible.

38. his word] Compare xvii. 6 ff.; i John i. 10, ii. 14, (Hebr. iv. 12). The word of God is a power within man, speaking to and through his conscience; not simply the sum of the earlier revelation under the old Covenant as an outward power; nor yet an independent illumination; but the whole teaching of Providence felt to be a divine, message.

for (because)...] This is not alleged as the ground, but as the sign of what has been said. Comp. Luke vii. 47; i John iii. 14. he hath sent] he sent. Comp. xx. 21, note.

39. 40. From the essential elements of revelation, external (voice, shape) and internal

39 f Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

42 But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you.

43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another

(•word}, the Lord passes to the record of Revelation in Scripture. This the Jews misused.

39. Search the scriptures...,] Ye search the Scriptures... The original word may be either imperative (A.V.) or indicative. The indicative rendering is strongly recommended by the (i) immediate connexion, ye search... and they...; (2) the sense of for in tKem ye think..., which rather explains a practice than recommends a precept; (3) the general form of the passage: ye have... ye have not... ye will not; (4) the character of the Jews who reposed in the letter of the Old Testament instead of interpreting it by the help of the living Word. On the other side the position of the verb at the beginning of the sentence, and the omission of the pronoun, which occurs in the second clause, are in favour of the imperative rendering. But on the whole, tNe former view is the most probable. The insertion of the pronoun would weaken the stress which is laid on the idea of searching, and this is the central thought. The intense, misplaced diligence of search is contrasted with the futile result.

Search] ch. vii. 52; I Pet. i. n. Comp. Rom. viii. 27; i Cor. ii. 10; Rev. ii. 23. The original word (lpaw^.v) describes that minute, intense investigation of Scripture (EH1) which issued in the allegorical and mystical interpretations of the Midrash. A single example of the stress laid upon the written word will suffice: " Hillel used to say...more Thorah (Law), more life (Prov. iii. i f.)... He who has gotten to himself words of Thorah, has gotten to himself the life of the \vorldto come" (' Aboth,' ii. 8. Compare 'Perek R. Meir' throughout; Taylor, 'Sayings of the Fathers,' pp. 113 ff.). The knowledge of God, it was thought, without repentance brought forgiveness of sins (Just. M. 'Dial.' § MI).

for (because)., jr think~\ because you tor your part (v/i««r), following your vain fancies, think falsely and superstitiously that in them — in their outward letter — ye have eternal life, without penetrating to their true, divine meaning. You repose where you should be moved to expectation. You set up your theory of Holy Scripture against the divine purpose of it.

and they... and ye will not...'] The words mark a double failure. The scriptures witnessed of One whom the Jews rejected; they pointed to life which the Jews would not seek. There is a deep pathos in the simple co-ordination: and... and...

and they (eKtlvai)...] those very scriptures which you idolize. Comp. i. 18, note.

which testify'} ffiH and always. Comp. v. 32. The teaching of the Old Testament is never exhausted. As we know more of Christ it reveals more to us concerning Him.

40. And] still, even with this testimony before you, the personal act of faith fails, ye will not (ye have no will to) come unto me (comp. Matt, xxiii. 37, ch. iii. 19) that ye may have life — "life" in its simplest form, the condition of all else (iii. 36, xx. 31), not qualified even as "eternal life" (y. 39).

ye ^will not] Man has that freedom of determination which makes him responsible. This truth is expressed in various forms in St John'5 Gospel (comp. vii. 17, viii. 44, vi. 67) side by side with the affirmation of the divine action through which the will is effective for good (vi. 44).

41 — 47. In this section Christ, starting from the fact of a want of will to believe in His hearers, unfolds the cause (41 — 44) and the end (45 — 47) of their rejection of Himself.

The ground of rejection (41 — 44) lies in a want of divine love in the Jews (v. 42), which is shewn by their inability to recognise Christ's self-sacrifice (i». 43), while they themselves pursued selfish ends (y. 44).

41. The connexion of thought with what precedes appears to lie in the anticipation of a natural objection. The condemnation which Christ pronounced might be referred to disappointed hope. It is, He replies, your spiritual life and not my own glory that I seek. I want nothing for myself, but I see a fatal defect in you. " Glory from men I receive not" — the order is emphatic, and contrasted with that in v. 34 — "but I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you."

honour (glory) from men] The glory of Messiah lies in His perfect fellowship with the Father (comp. i. 14, "'• "> x»- 4i); and men shew their sympathy with Him by " the love of God." This the Jews had not, and their rejection of Christ was the sign of the fatal defect.

the love of God] The phrase occurs elsewhere in the Gospels only in Luke xi. 44.

shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

44 * How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one

that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.

46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: k for he * Gen- 3- wrote of me. Dem. is.

Comp. i John ii. 5, iii. 17, iv. 7, 9, v. 3; Rom. v. 5; a Cor. xiii. 14; a Thess. iii. 5; Jude a i. God is at once the Author and the Object of this love; and it is frequently difficult to determine whether the words express the quickening love of God towards man, or the responsive love of man towards God,

43. The utter want of fellowshjp with God on the part of the Jews js exhibited in its contrasted results: / (emphatic) am come in the name of my Father, revealing God to you in this character, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, giving expression to his own thoughts, his own der sires, which are in harmony with your own, him ye (will receive.

In the name of my Father] ch. x. aj, that is, resting absolutely in Him who is my Father and whom I make known to you as such; not simply "as representing" or "by the authority of" my Father, though these ideas are included in that deeper and more comprehensive one. Comp. xiv. 13 f., xv. 16, xvi. 33 f., 26, xvii. n, 12, xx. 31.

44. The Jews offered a complete contrast to Christ (v. 30); for they made the judgment of men their standard. Hence the cause of their faithlessness is summed up in the question which represents faith as an impossibility for them: How can ye (emphatic) believe, seeing that ye receive glory (the highest reward of action) one of another (comp. Matt, xxiii. 5); and the glory that cometh from the only God (not from God only) ye seek not? The only God, the one source of all glory, absolutely one in nature, stands in opposition to the "gods many" and to the many common dispensers of praise; to regard these in themselves is idolatry (comp. xii. 42, 43). The change of construction in the original is remarkable, from a causal participle (seeing that ye receive) to the finite verb (ye seek not). The first clause gives the sufficient reason of unbelief; the second an accompanying fact. Comp. i. 32.

45 — 47. The rejection of Christ carries condemnation with it. The accuser is found in the supposed advocate (v. 45); and unbelief in the vaunted belief (v. 47).

45. Do not think...'] Though I lay bare the cause and nature of your unbelief, do not think that I will accuse you to the Father (not my Father); thepe is one that accuseth you, even Moses on whom you have set your hope. Disbelief in me is disbelief in him, in the record of the ppomises to the patriarchs (viii. 56), in the types of the deliverance from Egypt (iii. 14), in the symbolic institutions of the Law, iq the promise of a prophet like to himself; for it was of me (the order is emphatic) he wrote. If ye were now at this very time his faithful disciples, you would be mine also. Christ was the essential subject of the Law ^s of the Prophets; and so of the perrnanent records of the earlier dispensa-

47. The converse of v. 46 also holds true. Disbelief in Moses involved disbelief in Christ. If ye believe not his writings, the testimony which he has given formally, solemnly, and which you profess to accept as authoritative, how shall ye believe my words, my sayings (iii. 34), which come to you without the recommendation of use and age? The essence of the disbelief which the Jews shewed to Moses lay in refusing to regard the Law as transitory. They failed to seize the principle of life by which it was inspired, and petrified the form. If they thus allowed their pride to interfere with their acceptance of the real teaching of Moses, they could much less admit the teaching of Christ. Outward zeal became spiritual rebellion.

(writings'] The original word (ypa^ara) appears to mark the specific form rather than the general scope of the record (ypa(j)ai). Comp. 2 Tim. iii. 15 f.

The evidence for the identification of the of the three great Jewish festivals — the Passunnamed feast in v. i is obscure and slight, over (Irenaeus, Eusebius, Lightfoot, Neander, The feast has in fact been identified with each Greswell, &c.), Pentecost (Cyril, Chrysostom,

Calvin, Bengel, &c.), and the feast of Tabernacles (Ewald, &c.). It has also been identified with the Day of Atonement (Caspar!), the feast of Dedication (Petavius?), and more commonly in recent times with the feast of Purlm (Wieseler, Meyer, Godet, &c.).

The difficulty was felt at a very early time. The definite article (r> toprrf) was added as soon as the second century, and is found in a large number of copies, among which are N, C, L, and the early Egyptian versions. It is however omitted by ABD, Origen, and a large number of later copies; and this combination of authorities is of far greater weight in such a case than the former. We may therefore safely conclude that the Evangelist speaks of "a feast," not of "the feast." If the definite article were authentic the reference would be to the Feast of Tabernacles, which was emphatically " the Feast of the Jews " (comp. Browne, 4 Ordo Sasclorum,' p. 87), and not, as is commonly said, to the Passover. One MS., it may be added, inserts "of unleavened bread," and another " the Feast of Tabernacles."

The determination of the event, if it can be reached, has a decisive bearing both upon the chronology of St John's narrative, and upon the relation of St John's narrative to that of the Synoptists.

The fixed points between which the Feast lies are the Passover (ii. 23) and the Feeding of the Five Thousand; the latter event taking place, according to the universal testimony of MSS. and versions, " when the Passover was near at hand " (vi. 4).

1. After leaving Jerusalem at the conclusion of the Passover (iii. 21), the Lord " tarried " in Judaea. This stay was sufficiently long to lead to results which attracted the attention of the Baptist's disciples (/. c.) and of the Pharisees (iv. i).

2. On the other hand, the interval between the Passover and the Lord's return to Galilee was such that the memory of the events of that Feast was fresh in the minds of those who had been present at it (iv. 45); and from the mention of " the Feast " it is unlikely that any other great Feast had occurred since.

3. The ministry of the Baptist, who was at liberty after the Passover (iii. 26 ff.), is spoken of as already past at the unnamed Feast (v. 35).

4. To this it may be added that the language in which the Lord's action in regard to the Sabbath is spoken of, implies that His teaching on this was now familiar to the leaders of the people (v. 18, t\vt).

5. The phrase used in iv. 35 has special significance if the conversation took place either shortly after seedtime or shortly before harvest.

6. The circumstances of the conversation in ch. iv. suit better with summer than with early spring.

7. At the time when the healing took place the sick lay in the open air, under the shelter of the porches.

8. From vii. 21 ff. it appears that the Lord had not visited Jerusalem between this unnamed Feast and the Feast of Tabernacles, and that the incident of v. i ff. was fresh in the minds of the people at the later visit.

9. It is improbable that the Feast was one of those which St John elsewhere specifies by name (the Passover, ii. 13, vi. 4, xi. 55; the Tabernacles, vii. 2; the Dedication, x. 22).

A consideration of these data seems to leave the choice between Pentecost, the Feast of Trumpets, (the Day of Atonement) and Purlm.

Purlm (March) would fall in well with the succession of events; but the character of the discourse has nq connexion with the thoughts of the Festival; and the Festival itself was not such as to give a natural occasion for such teaching.

Pentecost would suit well with the character of the discourse, but the interval between the Passover of ch. ii. and the Pentecost of the same year would scarcely leave sufficient time for the events implied in ch. iii., iv.; while to regard it as the Pentecost of the year after (McClellan) seems to make the interval too great.

It is scarcely likely that the Day of Atonement would be called simply " a festival."' though Philo ('de septen.' § 23) speaks of it as " a festival of a fast " (i/ijorei'ar eopnT), but the Feast of Trumpets (the new moon or September), which occurs shortly before, satisfies all the conditions which are required. This "beginning of the year," "the day of memorial," was in every way a most significant day. It had, according to the contemporary interpretation of Philo, a double significance, national and universal: national in memory of the miraculous giving of the law with the sound of the trumpet; and universal a? calling men to a spiritual warfare in which God gives peace (/. c. § 22). On this day, according to a very early Jewish tradition, God holds a judgment of men (Mishnah, 'Rosh Hashanah,' § n. and notes); as on this day He had created the world (Suren. on Mishnah, ' Rosh Hashanah,' § i, n. pp. 306, 313). Thus many of the main thoughts of the discourse, creation, judgment, law, find a remarkable illustration in the thoughts of the Festival, as is the case with the other Festival discourses in St John. These find expression in the ancient prayer attributed to Rav (second century), which is still used in the Synagogue service for the day:

" This is the day of the beginning of Thy works, a memorial of the first day... And on the provinces is it decreed thereon, ' This one is for the sword,' and 'This for peace;' 'This one is for famine,' and 'This for plenty.'

And thereon are men (creatures) visited, that they be remembered for life and for death. Who is not visited on this day? for the remembrance of all that hath been formed cometh before Thee..." ('Additional Service

didst reveal Thyself in the cloud of Thy glory unto Thy holy people, to speak with them; from the heavens didst Thou make them to hear Thy voice, and Thou didst reveal Thyself to them in a dense bright cloud. Yea the whole world trembled at Thy presence, and the creatures of Thy making trembled because of Thee, when Thou, our King, didst reveal Thyself Ori Mount Sinai, to teach1 Thy people Thy Law and THy commandnlents "

NOTE ON THE READING IN v. 3 ff.

The various readings in w. 3, 4 are very instructive. The last clause of i>. 3 and the whole of v. 4 (cK8exo/jLfvwv...voo-iiiJiaTi) is omitted by NBC*, Memph., TKeb,, Syr. vt., and one Latin copy (g).

The last clause of v. 3 ({KSe^b^e'i/coi/..;*/^- (TIV) is omitted by A*L; while it is contained in D, i, 33, (Z,att.), (tyrr.), and the great mass of later authorities.

The whole of v. 4 is omitted by D, 33, and by some Latin copies, and is marked as spurious in very many MSS.; while it is contained in AL, (Latt.*), (Syr.), and the great mass of later authorities. The passage is not referred to by any writer except Tertullian (see below) earlier than Chrysostom, Didymus and Cyril of Alexandria.

Thus the whole passage is omitted by the oldest representatives of each great group of authorities. And, on the other hand, the whole passage is not contained in any authority, except Latin, which gives an ante-Nicene text. It is also to be noticed that the passage is inserted in the later texts of the Memph. and Ami., which omit it, wholly or in part, in their earliest form.

The earliest addition to the original text was the conclusion of i». 3. This was a natural gloss suggested by v. 7, which is undisturbed.

The gloss in v. 4 probably embodied an early tradition; and Tertullian was acquainted with it ('deBapt.'j).

The glosses (though longer and more important) are like many which are found in ND, Syr. -vt. and Lat. i>t., and the fact that they are not found in X, Syr. vt., and only partly in D, shews that they were for a time confined to North Africa.

It is obvious that there could be no motive for omitting the words, if they originally formed part of St John's text; nor could any hypothesis of arbitrary omission explain the partial omissions in the earliest authorities which omit; while all is intelligible if the words are regarded as two glosses. The most ancient evidence and internal probability perfectly agree.

The record of a critical scene in Christ's work, in Galilee follows the record of the critical scene at Jerusalem. At Jerusalem Christ revealed Himself as the Giver of life; here He reveals Himself as the Support and Guide of life. In the former case the central teaching was upon the relation of the Son to the Father; in this case it is on the relation of Christ to the believer.

This episode contains the whole essence of the Lord's Galilsean ministry. It places in a decisive contrast the true and false conceptions of the Messianic Kingship, the one universal and spiritual, the other local and material.

(15 — 21), combine to shew Christ as the support of life and as the guide and strengthener of the toiling. Through His disciples He first satisfies the multitudes, and then He Himself, at first unseen and unrecognised, brings His labouring disciples to the haven of rest.

The feeding of the five thousand is the only incident in the Lord's life, before His last visit to Jerusalem, which is recorded by all four Evangelists. The variations of detail in the four narratives are therefore of the deepest interest (Matt. xiv. 13 — 21; Mark vi. 30 — 44; Luke ix. 10 — 17; John vi. i — 15).

Generally it may be said that the Synoptic narratives are given in broad outline, as part of a prolonged ministry. St John's narrative is part of an isolated episode, but at the same time individual in detail. The actors in the former are the Lord and " the disciples," or the "twelve:" "the disciples say to Him,"

ATER these things Jesus went over the sea of Galilee, which is the sea of Tiberias.

him, because they saw his miracles which he did on them that were diseased.

" He saith to them; " in the latter, the Lord. and Philip, and Andrew. As a natural consequence the conversation, of which St John has preserved characteristic fragments, is condensed into a simple form by the first three Evangelists; and, on the other hand, the circumstances which led up to the event are to be found only in the Synoptists, though we may detect traces of their influence in St John's record.

It follows that the two narratives are derived from two distinct sources; for it is not possible that the narrative of St John could h.ave been derived from any one of the Synoptists, or from the common original from whfch they were finally derived.

The chronology of the event cannot be determined with absolute certainty. Some have supposed that the words TO »rdcr^a (v, 4) are a very early and erroneous gloss ( i); and others again have suggested that chh. v. and vi. were transposed accidentally, perhaps at the time when chh. vi., xxi. —episodes of the Galilaean lake — were added on the last review of the Gospel (»).

Against (i) (Browne, « Ordo Saeclortim,' pp. 84 fF.) it must be urged that all direct documentary evidence whatever supports the disputed words. The ground for suspecting them is derived indirectly from patristic citations, and it is by no means clear that there js not in the passages quoted a confusion between vi. 4 and vii. 2. Irenseus (n. 22, § 3) appears to interpret nigh (vi. 4, iyyvs) retrospectively. Comp. Mark vi. 39, note.

The transposition (2) (Morris, ' Journal qf Philology,' 1871, pp. 107 fF.) would give a simple connexion of events, but in the absence of all external evidence it cannot be maintained.

Our knowledge of the details of the Lord's life is far too fragmentary to justify us in the endeavour to make a complete arrangement of those which have been recorded. The very abruptness of the transition in vi. i is characteristic of St John; comp. iii. 22, x. 22, xii. i.

'went'] Rather, departed, went away, th'at is from the scene of His ministry at the time, which is left undetermined, and not from Jerusalem, as if this verse stood in immediate connexion with ch. v. The abruptness with which the narrative is introduced is most worthy of notice. All we read is that the departure "over the sea of Galilee" (i.e. to the east side of it) took place at sometime after the visit to Jerusalem, which, as we have seen, probably took place at the feast of the New Year. The Passover also was near, if the present text in v. 4 is correct; but we learn nothing from St John as to the facts by which the incident was immediately preceded. This information must be sought from the other Gospels. And it is very significant that the Synoptists set the withdrawal of the Lord in connexion with, two critical events. They all agree in stating that it followed upon tidings brqught from without. St Matthew makes it consequent upon the account of the death of the Baptist brought by his disciples (xiv. 13). St Luke places it immediately after the return of the twelve from their mission, but without any definite combination of the two events (ix. 10). St Mark brings out more clearly that at least one object of the retirement was rest from exhausting labour (vi. 30, 31). These indications of a concurrence of motives exactly correspond to the fulness of life. And St Luke has preserved the link which combines them. "Herod," he says, "sought to see [Jesus]," troubled by the thought of a new John come to take the place of him whom he had murdered (ix. 9). The news of the death of the Baptist, of the designs of Herod, of the work of the twelve, coming at the same time, made a brief season of quiet retirement, and that outside the dominions of Herod, the natural counsel of wisdom and tenderness. St Luke alone gives the name of the place which was chosen for this object, " a city called Bethsaida" (ix. 10), that is the district of Bethsaida Julias in Gaulonitis, at the N.E. of the lake (Jos. 'Ant.' xvin. 2. i). This second city of the same name was probably present to the mind of St John when he spoke of "Bethsaida of Gali/ee" (xii. 21; but not i. 44) as the home of Philip. Perhaps we may add, that this withdrawal for calm devotion would be still more necessary, if it was intended to cover the period of the Passover, which the Lord could not celebrate at Jerusalem owing to the hostility shewn towards Him there not long before.

the sea of Tiberias'] This is the name by which the lake was known to classical writers (Paus. V. 7, p. 391. ^"77 Tt/3eptds). The title occurs only here and in ch. xxi. i in the New Testament; and it will be noticed that in xxi. i no second name is given. The later incident was not contained in the common basis of the Synoptic accounts, and was not therefore connected with the Synoptic title of the lake. The name _ of Tiberias, the splendid but unholy capital tain, and there he sat with his dis- Whence shall we buy bread, that ciples. these may eat?

4 a And the passover, a feast of 6 And this he said to prove him: for he himself knew what he

* Matt 14. 5 fl *When Jesus then lifted up would do.

bis eyes, and saw a great company 7 Philip answered him, Two huncome unto him, he saith unto Philip, dred pennyworth of bread is not suf- which Herod the tetrarch had built for himself, is not mentioned in the New Testament except in these two places and in f. 23.

2. followed] not simply on this occasion but generally (r/KoAovtfei). The verse describes most vividly the habitual work and environment and influence of Christ. The sense stands in contrast with that in Matt. xiv. 13; Luke ix. n.

his miracles.,.'] the signs which he did... This verb (eVtu'fi, Vulg. faciebat), like those which precede, marks a continued ministry.

3. Into a mountain] into the mountain, and... So v. 15. The use of the definite article implies an instinctive sense of the familiar landscape, the mountain range closing round the lake. This use is found also in the Synoptic narrative, Matt. v. i, xiv. 23, xv. 29; Mark iii. 13, vi. 46; Luke vi. 12, ix. 28. St Matthew adds that it was " a desert spot" (xiv. 13).

4. And (Now) the pas server... was nigh~\ i.e. "near at hand" (ii. 13, vii. 2, xi. 55), and not as Irenaeus (?) and some moderns have taken it, "lately past." The notice of the feast is probably designed to give a clue to the understanding of the spiritual lessons of the miracle which are set forth in the discourse which followed (i Cor. v. 7); and at the same time it serves to explain how trains of pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem may have been attracted to turn aside to the new Teacher, in addition to " the multitude" who were already attached to Him.

the feast of the Jews] i.e. "the well-known feast." The phrase when it stands alone signifies the Feast of Tabernacles, "the one great national feast." Compare vii. 2 (where the order is different), and v. i, note.

5. When Jesus then lifted up...and saw... come...he saith...'] Jesus therefore having lifted up his eyes and seen that... cometh... saith. Comp. iv. 35, (i. 38).

come (cometh)] Literally, is coming. Jesus and His disciples sailed across the lake (Matt. xiv. 13), but "the multitudes" observed their departure and reached Bethsaida on foot

(Mark vi. 33). The point of time here is evidently the first arrival of the people. A day of teaching and healing must be intercalated before the miracle of feeding was wrought (Matt. xiv. 14; Mark vi. 34; Luke ix. n). St John appears to have brought together into one scene, as we now regard it, the first wofds spoken to Philip on the approach of the crowd, and the words in which they were afterwards taken up by Andrew, when the disciples themselves at evening restated the difficulty (Matt. xiv. 15; Mark vi. 35; Luke ix. 12). If this view be true, so that the words addressed to Philip with his answer preceded the whole day's work, then the mention of '• two hundred pennyworth of bread " made by the disciples in St Mark (v'- 3?) gains great point, and so too the phrase "what He was about to do" (v. 6), which otherwise appears to be followed too quickly by its fulfilment. It appears also from i>. 15 that the Lord came down from the mountain before the miracle was wrought.

Whence shall we...] The words are one expression of the feeling of tender compassion noticed by the Synoptists (Matt. xiv. 14; Mark vi. 34).

6. to prove] Literally, trying him, to see whether he could meet the difficulty. Comp. 2 Cor. xiii. 5; Rev. ii. 2. The word does not necessarily carry with it (as these passages shew) the secondary idea of temptation (comp. also Matt. xxii. 25; Mark xii. 28); but practically in the case of men such trial assumes for the most part this form, seeing that it leads to failure, either as designed by him who applies it (Matt. xvi. i, xix. 3, xxii. 18, &c.), or consequent upon the weakness of him to whom it is applied (Hebr. xi. 17; i Cor. x. 1.3). Comp. Deut. xiii. 3.

for he himself knew...would (was about to) do] Throughout the Gospel the Evangelist speaks as one who had an intimate knowledge of the Lord's mind. He reveals both the thoughts which belong to His own internal, absolute knowledge (eiSeVm, -w. 61, 64, xiii. 3, xviii. 4, xix. 28), and also those which answered to actual experience and insight (yivuo-Kfiv, -v. 15, iv. i, v. 6, xvi. 19).

7. Two hundred pennyworth] *'.?. between six and seven pounds worth. See Mark vi. 37. We cannot tell by what calculation this

ficient for them, that every one of them may take a little.

8 One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, saith unto him,

9 There is a lad here, which hath five barley loaves, and two small fishes: but what are they among so many?

10 And Jesus said, Make the men sit down. Now there was much grass in the place. So the men sat down, in number about five thousand.

1 1 And Jesus took the loaves; and when he had given thanks, he distributed to the disciples, and the disciples to them that were set down; and likewise of the fishes as much as they would.

12 When they were filled, he said unto his disciples, Gather up the fragments that remain, that nothing be lost.

13 Therefore they gathered them together, and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the five barley loaves, which remained over and above unto them that had eaten.

14 Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that prophet that shoifld come into the world.

9. barley loaves] v. 13. The detail is peculiar to St John. Comp. 2 K. iv. 42. Barley bread was the food of the poor. Wetstein (ad loc.) has collected a large number of passages to shew the small account in which it was held. See Judg. vii. 13 f.; Ezek. xiii. 19.

small Jishes] Rather, fishes. It is worthy of remark that the original word (ctydpia) « found in the New Testament only in this passage and in ch. xxi. It may have been a familiar Galilxan word.

the men... the men] //.v people (rovs av6pu>- 7roi;i).../Af men (ot avSpts)... about five t/jousand. The change of word in the latter case implies the remark added by St Matthew (xiv. 21) beside women and children.

much grass] See note on Mark vi. 39. The difference of the form in which the detail is introduced marks apparently the testimony of two eye-witnesses. This detail corresponds with the date, which is fixed (vi. 4) in the early spring.

when he had given thanks (v. 23)] By this act the Lord takes the place of the head of the family fcomp. Luke xxiv. 30). The word itself is found elsewhere in St John only, xi. 41. This second passage suggests that the thanksgiving was rendered in acknowledgment of the revelation of the Father's will in accordance with which the miracle was wrought. In the parallels the word is blessed (yet comp. Matt. xv. 36; Mark viii. 6). The two words preserve the two aspects of the action in relation to the source and in relation to the mode he distributed to...them that...] The words to the disciples... and the disciples must be omitted. They are an obvious gloss introduced from St Matthew xiv. 19.

fragments] i.e. the pieces broken for distribution (Ezek. xiii. 19). The command to collect these is preserved by St John only.

that remain] that remain over, and so in v. 13 (jwfyich remained over), where the same word is used.

13. gathered...together] gathered... up. The word is the same as in v. 12. The simple repetition gives character to the narrative.

twelve] The number implies that the work was given to the apostles, though they have riot been specially mentioned. Comp. v. 70.

14. 15. This incident is peculiar to St John, but St Luke has preserved a detail which illustrates it. He notices that Christ spoke to the multitudes " concerning the kingdom of God" (ix. n); and it is natural to suppose that the excitement consequent upon the death of the Baptist, which in part led to the Lord's retirement, may have moved many to believe that He would place Himself at the head of a popular rising to avenge the murder.

that prophet that should come...] the prophet that cometh... Comp. i. 21, 25, vii. 40. The phrase is peculiar to St John. Yet see Matt. xxi. n, and Acts vii. 37.

ceived that they would come and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed again into a mountain himself alone.

1 6 'And when even was now come, his disciples went down unto the sea,

17 And entered into a ship, and went over the sea toward Capernaum. And it was now dark, and Jesus was not come to them.

1 8 And the sea arose by reason of a great wind that blew.

19 So when they had rowed about five and twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Jesus walking on the sea, and drawing nigh unto the ship: and they were afraid.

20 But he saith unto them, It is I; be not afraid.

21 Then they willingly received him into the ship: and immediately

15. would (were about \,o)...take him by force (apira(tiv, Vulg. ut raperenf)} Comp. Actsxxiii. 10; (Judg. xxi. 21, LXX.); Matt. xi. 12. The multitude wished to use Christ to fulfil their own ends even against His will. In this lies the foreshadowing of the sin of Judas, ch. xviii. 6.

again] It follows (v. 3) that He had descended towards the shore when the miracle took place.

himself alone] to pray, as is added in the parallel narratives (Matt. xiv. 23; Mark vi. 46). The dismissal of the apostles mentioned in Matt. xiv. 22; Mark vi. 45, is involved in these words (contrast "v. 3). The apostles were first withdrawn from the influence of the multitude, and the mass of the people were then sent away; but some (T;. 22) still lingered with vain hopes till the morning.

This incident is related also by St Matthew (xiv. 22 ff.) and by St Mark (vi. 45 ff.). The change in time, scene, persons, belongs to the significance of the sign.

when even was now come] The " second evening," from sunset till dark. Comp. Matt, xiv. 15, 23.

17. into a ship] The definite article is omitted in the true text, so that A. V. is correct.

went... toward] Literally, set out on their <way to... Comp. iv. 30. This continuous toil is contrasted by the tense with the simple act which preceded it (narf^no-av, ffpxovro).

was not yet come...] at the time when they finally started. It appears that some incidents are here omitted. Probably Jesus had directed the apostles to meet Him at some point on the eastern shore on their way to Capernaum.

18. The singular vividness of the description is to be noticed. Comp. Jonah i. 13 (LXX.>

19. Jive and twenty... furlongs'] The lake is at its broadest about forty stades ("furlongs"), or six miles. Thus they were "m the middle" of the lake (Mark vi. 47), having for a time kept to the shore.

see~] behold. The word marks the arrested, absorbed attention of the disciples. Comp. •v. 2.

on the sea] The words might mean (as xxi. i) "on the sea-shore," but the context and parallels determine the sense here. Comp. Job ix. 8 (LXX.).

21. 'willingly recet"ved~\ Literally, they willing to take (fjQtKov Xa/3eii>, Vulg. "voluerunt accipere). The imperfect in the original expresses a continuous state of feeling as distinguished from an isolated wish. It is commonly used of a desire which is not gratified (vii. 44, xvi. 19; Mark vi. 19, 48; Gal. iv. 20, -&c.Y but this secondary idea does not necessarily lie in the word. Here the force of the tense is adequately given by A. V., though in Mark vi. 48 the same word is used of the supposed purpose of the Lord to " pass by" the disciples, which was not fulfilled. Comp. Mark xii. 38; Luke xii. 46. Fear passed into joy. Compare Luke xxiv. 37 with John xx. 20.

at the land] The original phrase (eVi rf/s •yjyj) may mean in the direction of the land, that is, "moving straight towards the land;" but it more probably means on the land, being used of the vessel run up on the beach. Comp. Ps. cvii. (cvi.) 30. The Synoptists notice that the opposing forces were removed (Matt. xiv. 32; Mark vi. 51, the wind ceased^; St John that the desired end was gained. Both results followed at once from the presence of Christ welcomed.

the ship was at the land whither they went.

22 IT The day following, when the people which stood on the other side of the sea saw that there was none other boat there, save that one where-

into his disciples were entered, and that Jesus went not with his disciples into the boat, but that his disciples were gone away alone;

23 (Howbeit there came other boats from Tiberias nigh unto the

It will be obvious that these two "signs" are introductory to the discourse which follows. Both correct limited views springing out of our material conceptions. Effects are produced at variance with our ideas of quantity and quality. That which is small becomes great. That which is heavy moves on the surface of the water. Contrary elements yield at a divine presence. Both "signs," in other words, prepare the way for new thoughts of Christ, of His sustaining, preserving, guiding power, and exclude deductions drawn from corporeal relations only. He can support men, though visible means fall short. He is with His disciples, though they do not recognise or see Him. And in both cases also the powers and action of men are needed. They receive and assimilate the food which is given; they take Christ into their boat before they reach their haven.

The remarks with which Augustine opens his explanation of the narrative are of perma-

nent value. " Miracula quse fecit Dominus noster Jesus Christus sunt quidem divina opera et ad intellegendum Deum de visibilibus admonent humanam mentem... Nee tamen sufficit haec intueri in miraculis Christi. Interrogemus ipsa miracula, quid nobis loquantur de Christo: habent enim si intellegantur linguam suam. Nam quia ipse Christus Verbum Dei est, etiam factum Verbi verbum nobis est" (August. ' in Johann. Tract.' xxiv.

The discounts at Capernaum (22 — 59).

The discourses which followed the feeding of the five thousand serve in part as an answer to the mistaken expectations of the multitude (vv. 14, 15), while they unfold those views of Christ's Person and work which became a decisive trial for the faith of the disciples who were already attached to Him. The short absence had been sufficient to remove the fear of immediate violence on the part of Herod; though it appears that the Lord withdrew not long afterwards to " the coasts of Tyre and Sidon" (Matt. xv. 21 ff.).

The discourses fall into three groups: -w. 26 — 40, in;. 41 — 51, iw. 52 — 58. Each group is introduced by some expression of feeling on the part of those to whom the words are addressed, a simple question (i>. 25), a murmuring (v. 41), a contention among themselves (v. 52). The thoughts successively dealt with are distinct: (i) the search after life, (2) the relation of the Son to God and man, (3) the appropriation by the individual of the Incarnate Son; and it appears that the audience and place do not remain the same. There are evident breaks after <v. 40, and i>.

52, but not before. The last words were spoken "in synagogue" (v. 59), but it is scarcely conceivable that the conversation began there.

26 — 40. The first part of the discourses consists of answers to successive questions (jwv. 25, 28, 30, 34). The conversation is natural and rapid; and deals in succession with the aim of religious effort (26, 27); the method (28, 29); the assurance (30 — 33); the fulfilment (34 — 40).

22 — 24. This long sentence is complicated and irregular in construction. The irregularity is due to the mention of two facts which are intercalated between the beginning and end of the sentence. The narrative would naturally have run: The day following the multitude... when they saw (v. 24) that Jesus was not there... took shipping...; but St John has inserted two explanatory clauses, the first to explain why they still lingered on the eastern shore in the hope of finding Jesus: The day following, the multitude...saw (tlbov) that there was... save one (omit whereinto his disciples were entered) and that Jesus... but that his disciples went away alone; and the second to explain how they were themselves able to cross over: howbeit there came boats from Tiberias... As a consequence he begins the sentence again in v. 24, When the multitude therefore saw..., where the saw is not a simple resumption of the saw in v. 22, but the result of later observation.

22. tlx people which stood] the multitude...(and so in v. 24), some, that is, who still lingered when the rest were dismissed (Matt xiv. 23), the more eager zealots, as it seems, who wished still to make Christ fulfil their designs. They were not more than could cross the lake in the boats which came over

23. Howbeit there came other boats'] Omit other (reading aXXa r/Xdfv TrXota). These boats, perhaps, were driven by the "contrary wind " (Matt. xiv. 24) across the lake. Their coming probably explains the reference to the "disciples" in -v. 24. At first the multitude

place where they did eat bread, after that the Lord had given thanks:)

24 When the people therefore saw that Jesus was not there, neither his disciples, they also took shipping, and came to Capernaum, seeking for Jesus.

25 And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, when earnest thou hither?

26 Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye

seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.

27 "Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto

28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?

might have supposed that they had returned in one of them from some brief mission to the other side.

nigh unto the place] that is, to some unfrequented part of the shore, as driven by stress of weather.

24. they also] they themselves. The force of the word is that they also did what they found the disciples had done.

25. (when earnest...'} The idea suggested by when, as contrasted with the more natural bow, is that of the separation from Christ; as if the people had pleaded, " We sought thee long and anxiously on the other side. Could it be that even then thou hadst left us?" If this turn is given to the words the connexion of the answer is obvious: "It is not me ye seek, but my gifts."

26. not because ye saw the miracles...'] not because ye saw signs..., not because my works of healing and sustaining led you to look for other manifestations of spiritual glory. That one last miracle — a speaking sign — was to you a gross material satisfaction, and not a pledge, a parable of something higher. You failed to see in it the lesson which it was designed to teach, that I am waiting to relieve the hunger of the soul.

were filled] Literally, " were satisfied with food as animals with fodder" (c'^oprao-^rjre, Vulg. saturati estis, and so in v. 12). The original word is different from that used in i>. 12. It is however used in connexion with the narrative in the other Gospels (Matt. xiv. 20, and parallels) without any disparaging sense; and it is not therefore possible to press the material idea which predominates in it (Luke xv. 16, xvi. 21). See Matt. v. 6; Luke vi. 21.

27. Labour not for..."] Work not for... The verb stands emphatically at the head of the sentence. " Work, yea win by work, not..." Thus perhaps there is a contrast between "seeking" and "working." Comp. Isai. Iv. i ff.

work...give'] The contrast of these verbs is essential to the sense of the passage. The believer's work does not earn a recompense at the last, but secures a gift. Even common work may bring more than its natural result, "the meat which perisheth." And no work brings more than the possibility of blessings to be used. Comp. i. 12 f., note.

the meat which perisheth] that food (jSpw- (ris) which belongs to our material life; which supports life only by undergoing change; for material life is truly a process of death (comp. i Cor. vi. 13). It is possible too that there may be even at this point a reference to the manna: Exod. xvi. 20.

that (the) meat which endureth (abide th) unto everlasting (eternal)///*-] that food which suffers no change, but remains in the man as a principle of power issuing in eternal life. Comp. iv. 14.

the Son of man] This title suggests the thought which underlies the whole discourse. Christ is speaking of His relation to men in virtue of His perfect humanity. He, as the absolute representative of mankind, will give this food of the higher life — the life also being His gift, v. 25— for Him the Father (not my Father, v. 32), His Father and the Father of men, sealed, even God (ch. x. 36. See also v. 36 ff.).

shall give'] as the issue of His work (v. 5 1); or perhaps as the crown of your work of faith in Him.

God the Father] the Father...even God. The addition of the divine name at the close of the sentence emphasizes the identification of God with "the Father" of "the Son of man." Comp. viii. 19.

sealed'] solemnly set apart for the fulfilment of this charge and authenticated by intelligible signs. Comp. iii. 33, note.

28. Then said they... What shall we do, that we might...'] They said therefore...What must we do, that ivem&y... The questioners appear to admit in word the necessity of the higher aim of work, and inquire as to the method of reaching it; but the phrase work the works of God marks the external concep-

• i John 3. them, ' This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?

31 •'"Our fathers did eat manna in/Exod. u* the desert; as it is written, *"He gave Numb. n. them bread from heaven to eat. rPnL 7s

32 Then Jesus said unto them, 25> Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.

tion of the service of God to which they still clung. The works of God — works which He requires — are assumed to be the one condition oi" obtaining the spiritual food.

29. The Lord deals with the error and the truth in the question which was put to Him. In the one work which God requires of man and man owes to God, all fragmentary and partial works are included. It is a true work as answering to man's will, but it issues in that which is not a work. This is the work of God, that ye believe on... Comp. i John iii. 43 (his commandment).

that ye believe (Iva iri(rr(\>rjTf)~\ The phrase marks not only the simple fact of believing (TO triortvtiv'), but the effort directed to and issuing in this belief. Comp. iv. 34, note. And again it expresses not the single decisive act (iva iri(rrtv(rT)Tt, xiii. 19), but the continuous state of faith.

This simple formula contains the complete solution of the relation of faith and works. Faith is the life of works; works are the I necessity of faith.

30. They said therefore..."] as recognising the claim which Christ preferred, and seeking an authentication of it.

What sign shewest thou (emphatic) then...'] Literally, What then doest thou as a sign... thou, with thy commands to us, peremptory as a second Moses? Christ had charged the questioners with misunderstanding His signs before (v. 26); they ask therefore for some clear attestation of His claims. And in this there is nothing inconsistent with the effect which the feeding of the multitude had produced on some. Great as that work was, their history taught them to look for greater. They ask, as in the Synoptists, for "a sign from heaven" (Matt. xvi. i).

that we may see, and believe thee] In these 1 words faith is reduced to simple belief in the truth of a message, and grounded upon the testimony of the senses. The " believing on Christ" (v. 29) is reduced to "believing Christ." Comp. viii. 30, 31, note.

what dost thou work?] The words take up the demand made on themselves. There is a work, they plead, for the teacher as well as for the hearer. The question expresses what was suggested by the emphatic pronoun (thou) just before. Words must be justified by works.

31. did eat manna] the manna^ [Ps. Ixxvii. (Ixxviii.) 24]. The miracle which Christ had wrought suggested the greater miracle of Moses, by which the people were sustained for forty years. There was a tradition (' Midrash Koheleth,' p. 73, quoted by Lightfoot and Wiinsche) that "as the first Redeemer caused the manna to fall from heaven, even so should the second Redeemer (prlK "?N1J) cause the manna to fall." For this sign then, or one like this, the people looked from Him whom they were ready to regard as Messiah. Compare Matt. xvi. i; Mark viii. n. The manna was a favourite subject with Jewish expositors. A single passage from Philo (' De profugis,' § 15, p. 566) may serve as an example of their interpretations: " [When the people]

sought what it is which feeds the soul, for they did not, as Moses says, know what it was, they discovered by learning that it is the utterance (pij/xa) of God and the divine word (ddos Xoyos) from which all forms of instruction and wisdom flow in a perennial stream. And this is the heavenly food which is indicated in the sacred records under the Person of the First Cause (rov amov) saying, Behold I rain on you bread (aprovr) out of heaven (Exod. xvi. 4). For in very truth God distils from above the supernal wisdom on noble and contemplative minds; and they when they see and taste, in great joy, know what they experience, but do not know the Power which dispenses the gift. Wherefore they ask, What is this which is sweeter than honey and whiter than snow? But they shall be taught by the prophet that this is the bread which the Lord gave them to eat " (Exod. xvi. 15). Comp.

from heaven} out of heaven (and so throughout), which came out of the heavenly treasures, and did not simply descend from a higher region.

32. Then Jesus..."] Jesus therefore... Moses gave... not that (the) bread'} There is a double contrast. It was not Moses but God revealing Himself through Moses who gave the manna; and again the manna — the perishable bread — was not in the highest sense " bread from heaven," but rather the symbol of spiritual food.

gave you] The people are identified with their ancestors. If the reading " hath given" (8fSa>Kfv) be adopted, then the present realisa-

33 For the bread of God is he am the bread of life: he that cometh

which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

.34 Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.

to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

but my Father giveth...] not in one miraculous act only, but now and at all times.

the true bread] that which fulfils absolutely, ideally, the highest conception of sustaining food (d\r)div6s). Comp. iv. 23, note. The exact form of the original is emphatic: the bread out of heaven, the true bread (rbv a. «K T. ov. TOV d\.).

33. the bread of God] the bread which God gives directly; not simply that which He gives by the hand of His servants. Comp. i. 29 (the Lamb of God}, note.

be which cometh down..] that which cometh down... Christ does not identify Himself with "the bread" till the next answer; and the request of the Jews which follows shews that nothing more than the notion of heavenly bread was present to them (comp. vv. 41, 50). This new manna was distinguished from the old in that it was continuous in its descent and not for a time; and again it was not confined to one people, but was for the world.

unto the 'world'] Without the Word, without Christ, the world can have no life. He makes the blessing, which was national, universal.

34. Then said they..] They said therefore... The Jews see in the words of Christ a mysterious promise which they cannot understand; but they interpret it according to their material hopes. Lord, evermore, not on one rare occasion but always, give us this bread. They acknowledge that the gift must be constant (i Thess. v. 15, Trajrore), though its effects are lasting.

35. Jesus (omit and} said...] The Jews asked for something from Christ: He offers them Himself. The great gift, if only it were rightly perceived, was already made.

cometh...believeth] The. first word presents faith in deed as active and outward; the second presents faith in thought as resting and inward. Each element is, it is true, implied in the other, but they can be contemplated apart. For coming to me see v. 40, *w. (37), 44 f., 65, vii. 37.

shall never hunger...shall never thirst} The double image, suggested it may be by the thought of the Passover, extends the conception of the heavenly food, and prepares the way for the double form under which it is finally described (v. 53). The gift of strength corresponds with the effort to reach to Christ; the gift of joy with the idea of repose in shall never thirst] The exact form of expression in the original is remarkable and irregular (ov /ui) 8iijrrjo-(i TTWTrore. Contrast iv. 14, ov fif/ Sct/rijcrft fls TOV al<a>vd). Perhaps it suggests the image of Christ present in all time and regarding the unfailing satisfaction of those who come to Him, as distinguished from a simple future.

36. But..] The gift was indeed made, but the presence of the gift was unavailing, for the condition required of those who should receive it was unfulfilled.

I said unto you...] The thought is contained in v. 26, and the reference may be to those words; but more probably the reference is to other words like them spoken at some earlier time.

That ye (omit also) have seen me, and...] The first conjunction (ccai) emphasizes the fact: that ye have indeed seen and... Comp. ix. 37. The Lord returns to the words in i;. 30 (see, believe), now that the question in v. 34 has been answered. He Himself was the sign which the Jews could not read. No other more convincing could be given.

37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which

he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

37. There is a pause in the discourse before this verse. The unbelief of the people was not a proof that the purpose of God had failed. Rather it gave occasion for declaring more fully how certainly the Son carried out the Fathers will.

All that (All that which) the Father... him that cometh..,~\ The first clause is a general and abstract statement (nav o); the second gives the concrete and individual realisation of it (rov fpxoufvov). Believers are first regarded as forming a whole complete in its several parts, a gift of the Father; and then each separate believer is regarded in his personal relation to the Son. In the first case stress is laid upon the successful issue of the coming, the arrival (>j£ei, shall reach me; comp. Rev. iii. 3, xv. 4, xviii. 8); in the second case on the process of the coming (rov tpxaptvov, not rov fKdavTo) and the welcome.

The same contrast between the abstract conception and the concrete fulfilment of it is found in w. 39 f. and xvii. 2. Compare also the use of the abstract form, i John v. 4 contrasted with v. 5, 18; and ch. iii. 6 contrasted with iii. 8.

/ twill in no wise...] The stern words to the Galilzeans might have seemed to be a casting out, but the Lord shews that, on the contrary, they were not truly coming to Him.

38. For...'] For this is the Father's will, as is implied in the gift (v. 39), and I am come down...

I came down] lam come down. Comp. iii. 13; (Eph. iv. 9 f.?). With these exceptions the word is used of Christ's descent only in this discourse.

from heaven} In this verse the original preposition (according to the true reading) expresses the idea of leaving (ano), in v. 42 (as iii. 13) of proceeding out of («K). In the one case the thought is that of sacrifice; in the other that of divinity.

39. this is the Father's will which hath...'] According to the true reading, this is the will of him that...

that of all...'] The construction in the original is broken: " that as for all that which hath given] The present used in v. 37 (giveth) is here changed into the past when the gift is looked at in relation to the will of the Father, and not to the waiting of the Son.

should lose nothing, but should raise it up] filled with a new life, transfigured and glorified. This is the issue of the communication of Christ to the Church. In this place the effect is represented as dependent on the Father's will; but when the words are repeated (vv. 40, 44, 54) — once in each great division of the discourses — the effect is referred to the will of the Son (and I twill raise him up).

40. And... the twill of him that sent me, that...'] TOT...the will of my Father, that... The general fulfilment of the will of the Father passes into this further truth, that the contemplation of the Son and belief on Him brings with it eternal life.

seeth (beholdeth) the Son] Comp. xii. 45, xiv. 19, xvi. 10, 16, 19. The act of contemplation and faith is not momentary or past, but continuous.

have everlasting (eternal) life] not as future, but as present already as a divine power. Comp. v. 47, xvii. 3.

The possession of eternal life is followed by the crowning action of the Son: and I — I the Incarnate Son — will raise him up. Eternal life is consummated in the restoration to the believer of a transfigured manhood. So far from the doctrine of the Resurrection being, as has been asserted, inconsistent with St John's teaching on the present reality of eternal life, it would be rather true to say that this doctrine makes the necessity of the Resurrection obvious. He who feels that life is now, must feel that after death all that belongs to the essence of its present perfection must be restored, however much ennobled under new conditions of manifestation.

41 51. The second part of the discourses, which deals with the relation of Christ to God and to man, is directly connected both with the first and with the third part: with the

41 The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven. * Matt 13. 4.2 And they said, Als not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is

it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

43 Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves.

first by the reiteration of the office of the Son (v. 44), and with the third by the reference to Christ's "flesh" (v. 51). It touches on the greatest mysteries of Christ's life, the Incarnation and the Atonement (vv. 42, 51), and the greatest mysteries of man's life, the concurrence of the divine and human will, and the permanence of life (vv. 44, 45, 37 ff.). It is briefly an answer to the question, How can the spring and support of life be in Christ, who is truly man?

41. This verse seems to mark the presence of new persons and a new scene, as well as a new stage in the history. The verses 37 — 40 were probably addressed specially to the immediate circle of the disciples. Thus we can understand how the Jews dwelt on the words in which Christ identified Himself with the true spiritual food of the world, while they took no notice of the loftier prerogatives which followed from this truth, since the exposition of these was not directed to them.

The Jews then] The Jews therefore..., the representatives of the dominant religious party, full of the teaching of the schools.

murmured at (concerning) him] half in doubt (vii. 32,) and half in dissatisfaction (v. 61; Luke v. 30). These murmurings probably found expression for some little time before they were answered.. There is nothing to shew that they were first uttered in Christ's presence.

1 am the bread <whicb came down from heaven] The exact phrase does not occur in the previous record; but it is a fair combination of the three phrases in which the Lord had described Himself: the bread of God is that which comet h down from heaven (v. 33); / am the bread of life (y. 35); / have come down from heaven (v. 38).

42. Is not this..."] There is perhaps a tinge of contemptuous surprise in the pronoun (OVTOS) as in v. 52, vii. 15, iii. 26, though it does not necessarily lie in the word, iv. 14, ix. 33, &c.

we know~\ The pronoun is emphatic: whose father, we, directly in the way of our ordinary life, know... There was (so they argue from their point of view) no room for mistake upon the matter. The word know expresses simply acquaintance with the fact that Joseph was in popular esteem the father of Jesus (comp. vii.

how is it then that he saith] how doth he now say — now, at last, when for so long he has lived as one of ourselves?

43. Jesus therefore answered..."] Jesus answered... The answer corresponds in some way with that given to Nicodemus (iii. 3). The false claim to knowledge, and the assertion of unsubstantial objections, are both met in the same manner. The Jews were unable to understand the divine descent of the Lord, which seemed irreconcileable with His actual circumstances. He replies that a spiritual influence is necessary before His true Nature can be discerned, and that such influence was promised by the prophets as one of the characteristic blessings of the Messianic age.

44. No man can...draw him] Compare v. 40, ye will not come to me. As in all similar cases this "coming to Christ" may be regarded from its human side, as dependent on man's will; or from its divine side, as dependent on the power of God. So St Bernard remarks in connexion with these words: "nemo quippe salvatur invitus" (' De grat.et lib. act.' XI.). Yet even the will itself comes from a divine nature, a divine gift (chh. i. 12 f., iii. 7 flf., viii. 47, vi. 65). The " drawing" of the Father is best illustrated by the " drawing " of the Son, xii. 32. The constraining principle is love stirred by self-sacrifice, a love which calls out, and does not destroy, man's freedom and issues in self-sacrifice. The mission of the Son by the Father (which sent [omit hath'] me), the sovereign act of love (iii. 16), is thus brought into close connexion with the power exerted by the Father on men. Augustine (ad loc.) puts the thought most forcibly: " 'Trahit sua quemque voluptas;' non trahit revelatus Christus a Patre? Quid enim fortius desiderat anima quam veritatem?" Comp.

No man can come~\ This divine impossibility is the expression of a moral law. It is not anything arbitrary, but inherent in the very nature of things; it does not limit but it defines the nature of human power. Comp. v. 19 (note), 30 (of the Son), xii. 39, note.

come] Here and in v. 65 the "coming" (fXddv) is regarded as complete, and not in progress as in f. 37, vii. 37 (tp^iadut).

cept the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

nsai. 54. 45 *'It is written in the prophets, je'r. 3i. 34. And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.

and I...] The Son takes up and completes what the Father has begun. The change in the position of the pronoun slightly modifies the force of this repeated clause. In v. 40 the believer and Christ are placed in remarkable juxta-position (ai/aorjjo-o) avrov cyw, him, /); here the / stands first with a reference to the whole preceding clause (*a! t'yci ai/acmja-w O.VTQV).

45. The " drawing " of the Father is illustrated by a prophetic promise. And under this new image of " teaching " the power is seen in its twofold aspect; the divine and human elements are combined. The " hearing " brings out the external communication, the learning the internal understanding of it. " Videte quomodo trahit Pater: docendo delectat, non necessitatem imponendo" (Aug. ad /or.).

in the prophets] i.e. in the division of the Scriptures which is so called. Compare Acts xiii. 40, vii. 42 (the book of the prophets)', ch. i. 45, note. The phrase is found substantially in Isai. liv. 13; and the central idea of it is the promise of direct divine teaching. Thus the emphasis lies on "taught of God" and not on " all." This teaching lies for us in the Person and Work of Christ interpreted by the Spirit

Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father...] Every one that heareth from the Father and learneth (duotio-at KOI u.a6a»v)... The fulfilment of the promise is followed by its proper consequence. The "hearing" and " learning " are presented as single events corresponding to a definite voice and revelation. The call is obeyed at once, though it may be fulfilled gradually; the fact of the revelation is grasped at once, though it may be apprehended in detail little by little.

46. But though the revelation made by the Father is direct in one sense, yet it must not be understood to be immediate. " Hearing" and "learning" fall short of seeing. The Father is seen only by the Son (i. 18. Comp. Matt. xi. 27, and parallels). He alone who is truly God can naturally see God. The voice of God came to men under the old Covenant, but in Christ the believer can now see the Father (xiv. 9) in part, and will hereafter see God as He is (i John iii. 2).

he which is of (from, irapa)...'] Comp. vii. 29, ix. 1 6, 33. The phrase implies not only mission (xvi. 27 f., came forth from), but also a present relation of close dependence.

be hath seen] when He was "with God" (i. i) before He "became flesh." The words mark emphatically the unchanged personality of Christ before and after the Incarnation. The substitution God for the Father in some early texts (N*D) is a kind of gloss which is not unfrequent in the group.

47. At this point the discourse takes a fresh start. The objection of the Jews has been met, and the Lord goes on to develope the idea set forth in vv. 35, 36, taking up the last word: He that believeth (omit en me, the phrase stands absolutely) hath eternal life. The actual existence of true faith implies the right object of it. Comp. c. iii. 3, note.

48 — 51. There is a close parallelism and contrast between vv. 48 — 50 and 51. The bread of life: the living bread — which comet h down... that...: which came down; if... may... not die: shall live for ever. In the first case the result is given as part of the divine counsel (that cometb down, that [<W]...); in the second as a simple historical consequence (came down...if a man...).

49. Tour fathers did eat manna (ate the manna)... and are dead (died)] The words are quoted from the argument of the Jews, v. 31. The heavenly food under the old Dispensation could not avert death. This eth down from heaven, that a man is my flesh, which I will give for the

51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give

52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us bis flesh to eat?

then was not bread of life, even in the sphere to which it belonged. Comp. iv. 13.

50. This is the bread which cometh...that...} This bread — the true manna — is the bread which cometh...that... It is best to take this [bread~\ as the subject (v. 48, / am the bread of life, further defined in v. 51), and the bread which cometh down from heaven as the predicate; compare vv. 33, 58. The interpretation which makes this the predicate (the bread which cometh... is this, that is, is of such a nature, that...) appears to destroy the connexion.

51. / am the living bread} able to communicate the life which I possess. He therefore who receives me receives a principle of the bread... which I (fyw) 'will give} The pronoun is emphatic, and brings out the contrast between Christ and Moses. At the same time a passage is made from the thought of Christ as the living bread (7 am..) to the thought of the participation in Him (/ will give...). This participation is spoken of as still future, since it followed in its fulness on the completed work of Christ. There is also a difference indicated here between that which Christ is and that which He offers. He is truly God and truly man (e'yw); He offers His "flesh," His perfect humanity, for the life of the world.

The life of the world in the highest sense springs from the Incarnation and Resurrection of Christ. By His Incarnation and Resurrection the ruin and death which sin brought in are overcome. The thought here is of support and growth, and not of atonement (/ lay flown my life for.., x. ii, 15, note). The close of the earthly life, the end of the life which is, in one aspect, of self for self, opens wider relations of life. Comp. xii. 24. At this point no more than the general truth is stated. It is not yet indicated how the " flesh" of Christ, the virtue of His humanity, will be communicated to and made effectual for mankind or men. That part of the subject is developed in the last division of the whole argument.

my flesh, 'which I will give for the life...} The true text gives simply my flesh for the life... For this shortened form compare i Cor. xi. 24. The omission of the clause which I will give turns the attention to the general action of Christ's gift rather than to the actual making of it. The special reference to the future Passion would distract the thought at this point, where it is concentrated upon the Incarnation and its consequences generally. See Additional Note.

52 — 59. This last section of the teaching on " the true bread from heaven " carries forward the conceptions given in vv. 41 — 51 to a new result. The question before was as to the Person of the Lord: "Is not this the soti of Joseph? " The question now is as to the communication of that which He gives: " How can this man give us his flesh to eat? " How can one truly man impart to others his humanity, so that they may take it to themselves and assimilate it? The answer is in this case also not direct but by implication. The fact, and the necessity of the fact, dispense with the need for further inquiry. The life is a reality.

52. The Jews (v. 41, note)... strove among themselves (one with another, Trpoe dXXr;- Xow, iv. 33, xvi. 17)] They did not all reject at once the teaching of Christ. There were divisions among them; and they discussed from opposite sides the problem raised by the last mysterious words which they had heard (comp. vii. 12, 40 ff., x. 19 ff.). It is important to notice how the Evangelist records the varying phases of contemporary feeling. " The Jews " were not yet all of one mind.

How can...} The old question (iii. 4, 9), which is again left without an explicit answer. The simple reassertion of the fact is opposed both in a negative (v. 53) and in a positive statement to the difficulty as to the manner.

to eat} The Jews transfer directly to "the flesh " what hitherto, as far as our record goes, has been said only of " the bread,'' now identified with it. There is no gross misunderstanding on their part, but a clear perception

Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he

53. The thought indicated in v. 51 is now developed in detail. The " flesh " is presented in its twofold aspect as " flesh " and l< blood," and by this separation of its parts the idea of a violent death is presupposed. Further "the flesh " and " the blood " are described as " the flesh " and " the blood" " of the Son of man," by which title the representative character of Christ is marked in regard to that humanity which He imparts to the believer. And once again both elements are to be appropriated individually ("eat," "drink"). By the "flesh" in this narrower sense we must understand the virtue of Christ's humanity as living for us; by the " blood " the virtue of His humanity as subjectto death. The believer must be made partaker in both. The Son of man lived for us and died for us, and communicates to us the effects of His life and death as perfect man. •Without this communication of Christ men can have " no life in themselves." But Christ's gift of Himself to a man becomes in the recipient a spring of life within. Comp. iv. 14.

Then Jesus said...,] Jesus therefore said.,. meeting the difficulty which was raised by an appeal to what is really a fact of experience.

eat...drink'] To "eat" and to "drink" is to take to oneself by a voluntary act that which is without, and then to assimilate it and make it part of oneself. It is, as it were, faith regarded in its converse action. Faith throws the believer upon and into its object; this spiritual eating and drinking brings the object of faith into the believer.

drink bis blood~\ The phrase is unique in the New Testament. To Jewish ears it could not but be full of startling mystery. The thought is that of the appropriation of " life sacrificed." St Bernard expresses part of it very well when he says... hoc est si compatirriini conregnabitis ('De Dil. Deo,' iv.). Compare ' in Psalm.' m. 3, " Quid autem est manducare eius carnem et bibere sanguinem nisi communicare passionibus eius et earn conversationem imitari quam habuit in carne? "

inyou] Literally, in yourselves. Compare v. 26; Matt. xiii. 21. Without the Son men have no life; for in men themselves there is no spring of life. Even to the last their life is " in Christ" and not " in themselves."

54. Wt/oso (He that, as in v. 56) eatetb~] The verb used here (rpo>y«ii>) expresses not only the simple fact of eating but the process as that which is dwelt upon with pleasure (Matt. xxiv. 38. Comp. ch. xiii. 18). So also the tense (o rpu>ya>v, contrast •v. 45, o aKova-as) marks an action which must be continuous and not completed once for all. bath eternal life...'} Compare v. 40, note.

55. For my flesh...] The possession and the highest manifestation of life follow necessarily from participation in Christ's " flesh " and " blood:" such is their power.

it meat indeed..."] My flesh is true (aXr^'j, real) meat... It stands in the same relation to man's whole being, as food does to his physical being. It must first be taken, and then it must be assimilated.

56. The truth of v. 54 is traced to its necessary foundation. In virtue of Christ's impartment of His humanity to the believer, the believer may rightly be said to " abide in Christ " and Christ to " abide in the believer." The believer has therefore "eternal life," and in that, the certainty of a resurrection, a restoration in glory of the fulness of his present powers.

in me, and I in him...'] There is, so to speak, a double personality. The believer is quickened by Christ's presence, and he is himself incorporated in Christ. Compare xv. 4, xvii. 23; i John iii. 24, iv. 15 f. This twofold aspect of the divine connexion is illustrated by the two great images of the " body" and the " temple." " Manemus in illo cum sumus membra eius: manet autem ipse in nobis cum sumus templum eius" (Aug. 'in Joh.' xxvn. 6).

Some early authorities (D, &c.) add a remarkable gloss at the end of the verse: even as the Father is in me and I in the Father. Verily, verily, I say unto you, unless ye receive (\aprjre) the body of the Son of man as the bread of life ye have not life in him.

he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

down from heaven: not as your fa- synagogue, as he taught in Caperthers did eat manna, and are dead: naum.

hath sent me (sent me)] The introduction of these words marks the fact that Christ speaks of His vital fellowship with the Father not as the Word only, but as the Son Incarnate, the Son of man. Comp. v. 23. And thus the acceptance of the divine mission by the Son, and His dependence in His humanity on the Father, are placed in some sense in correlation with the appropriation of the Incarnate Son (he that eateth me) by the Christian; so that the relation of the believer to Christ is prefigured in the relation of the Son to the Father. Compare x. 14, 15, note.

by (because of) the Father..J>y (because of) me] The preposition (Sta TOV Trare'pa, Vulg. p ropier pattern) describes the ground or object (./or, on account of), and not the instrument or agent (by, through, 8ta row jr.). Complete devotion to the Father is the essence of the life of the Son; and so complete devotion to the Son is the life of the believer. It seems better to give this full sense to the word than to take it as equivalent to by reason of; that is, " I live because the Father lives."

the Father] not "my Father." Emphasis is laid upon the universal relationship. Comp. iv. 21, note.

he that eateth me] In this phrase we reach the climax of the revelation. The words eat of the bread (w. 50, 51), eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink His blood (v. 53), rise at last to the thought of eating Christ. The appropriation of the food which Christ gives, of the humanity in which He lived and died, issues in the appropriation of Himself.

even he] he also. The insertion of the emphatic pronoun (Kaxtlvos) immediately after the subject, which it repeats and emphasizes, is most remarkable. It appears to lay stress upon that relation of dependence which constitutes the parallel between the disciples and the Son. Compare xiv. 12.

shall live] not I'meth. The fulness of the life was consequent upon the exaltation of Christ. Comp. xiv. 19.

58. These concluding words carry back the discourse to its commencement (w. 33, 35). The fulfilment of the type of the manna in Christ, after it has been set forth in its complete form, is placed in direct connexion with the earlier event.

This is that (the) bread which came...] This bread, this heavenly food, which has been shewn to be Christ Himself, and His " flesh " (o. 51), is the bread which came... Contrast v. 50: This is the bread which cometh.... Both aspects of Christ's work must be kept in mind. He came, and He comes.

not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead'] not as the fathers did eat and died. The construction is irregular. Naturally the sentence would have run: This is the bread...heaven: he that eateth this bread..., but the parenthetical clause expresses in a condensed form the contrast between the true and the typical manna. "The fact and the issue of the fact is not as the fathers ate and died." Comp. i John iii. 12 (01) Ka0d>s). The reference to the "death" of "the generation in the wilderness" would have a fuller meaning if the tradition were already current that this generation "had no part in the world to come" (quoted by Lightfoot on v. 39).

the fathers] This title, as distinguished from the common text jour 'fathers, recognises the representative position which the early generation occupied.

the fathers... he that eateth... ] There appears to be significance in the passage from the plural to the singular. Throughout the discourses the believer is dealt with as exercising personal faith and not only as one of a society. Compare vv. 3.5, 3.7, 40, 45, 47, 5°» 51. 54, 56-

59. in the synagogue] This is the only notice of the kind in St John's Gospel, though the general custom is referred to, xviii. 20; The absence of the definite article in the original here and in xviii. 20, which leads to a form of expression (eV crvvu>ya.yfj) not found elsewhere in the New Testament, seems to mark the character of the assemblage rather than the place itself: "when people were gathered for worship," "in time of solemn assembly " (comp. i Mace. xiv. 28). It is a fact of great interest that among the ruins which mark the probable site of Capernaum (Tell Hum) are the remains of a handsome synagogue, of which Wilson says: "On turning over a large block [of stone] we found the pot of manna engraved on its face" (Warren's 'Recovery of Jerusalem,' pp. 344 ff.). This very symbol may have been before the eyes of those who heard the Lord's words. It may be added that the history of the manna (Exod. xvi. 4 — 36) is appointed to be read in the Synagogues at morning service.

as he taught] The phrase gives a marked emphasis to the words which have gone before.

60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?

6 1 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?

62 ' What and if ye shall see the l <=Hap. 3 Son of man ascend up where he was I3 before?

The crisis corresponds in character with that at Nazareth, Luke iv. 16 ff. Comp. Matt. xi. 23. Some early authorities add, what may be a true traditional gloss, " on a sabbath."

The discourses proved a trial to the faith of the disciples. The immediate effect was a " murmuring " among them which led to a clear affirmation of the divine conditions of discipleship (60 — 6.5). And this was followed by a separation between the faithful and the unfaithful, both visibly (66 — 69) and invisibly (70, 70-

60. Many therefore} not only of the misunderstanding multitude (28 ff.) and of the ill-disposed Jews (41 ff.), but of the disciples (v. 3) who had hitherto followed Him, when they heard (omit had) this, found the new teaching of life through death a burden too heavy to be borne.

hard saying] that is, difficult to receive, accept, appropriate. The idea is not that of obscurity. The discourse was offensive, and not unintelligible. It made claims on the complete submission, self-devotion, self-surrender of the disciples. It pointed significantly to death. The same word (o-jcXiypop, Vulg. durus) occurs Jude 15, in a somewhat similar connexion. Compare Gen. xxi. n, xlii. 7; i K. xii. 13 (LXX.).

saying} or rather, speech, discourse (Xoyos, Vulg. sermo). The English representative of the original ('word) is not sufficiently elastic to give its sense in all cases.

bear it] Listen to it (aKoiieiv aurou) with patience, as ready to admit it. See vii. 40, x. 3, 16, 27, xii. 47, xviii. 37. The pronoun (avToC) may be taken as personal: <who can bear him? but this is an unlikdy rendering.

62. WlMt and if ye shall see...'] What then if ye should behold... This incomplete question, which seems to leave open in some measure the altei natives of greater offence and possible victory, has been interpreted in two very different ways, by supplying in one case a negative answer: " Ye will not then be offended any more; " and in the other a positive: " Ye will then assuredly be still more offended." According to the first interpretation the

" ascending up " is the Ascension as the final spiritualizing of the Lord's Person, whereby the offence of the language as to His flesh would be removed by the apprehension of the truth as to His spiritual humanity. In the second the " ascending up " is referred to the "elevation" on the Cross, and the offence caused by the reference to the death of Christ is regarded as increased by the death itself in its actual circumstances. Each of these two interpretations appears to contain elements of the full meaning. The whole context shews! distinctly that the disciples were to be subjected to some severer trial. The turn of the sentence therefore must be: " If then ye see the Son of man ascending...ye will be, according to your present state, more grievously offended; for that trial you must still be disciplined." But, on the other hand, the Crucifixion alone could not be described as an "ascending up where Christ was before;" yet it was the first part of the Ascension, the absolute sacrifice of self which issued in the absolute triumph over the limitations of earthly existence. The Passion, the Resurrection, the Ascension, were steps in the progress of the "ascending up" through suffering, which is the great offence of the Gospel. The difficulty of accepting this completed fact is (though greater) of the same kind as the difficulty of accepting life only through the communicated humanity of the Incarnate Son.

the Son of man ascend up (ascending) where he was before] Compare viii. 58, xvii. 5, 24; Col. i. 17. No phrase could shew more clearly the unchanged personality of Christ. As " the Son of man " He speaks of His being in heaven before the Incarnation. " Filius Dei et filius hominis unus Christus... Filius Dei in terra suscepta carne, filius hominis in cselo in imitate personae" (Aug. ad toe.).

63. the spirit...the flesh..} The same contrast occurs in iii. 6 (see note), i Pet. iii. 18. lust as in man the spirit is that part of his nature by which he holds fellowship with the unseen eternal order, and the flesh that part of it by which he holds fellowship with the seen temporal order, so the two words are applied to the working of Christ. Nothing can carry us beyond the limits of its own realm. The new life must come from that which belongs properly to the sphere in which it moves. Compare i Cor. xv. 45, (* Cor. iii. 6). The truth is expressed in its most general form, and is not to be limited to the spiritual and the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.

unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

66 11 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

67 Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?

carnal apprehension of Christ's Person; or to the spiritual and external participation in the Holy Communion; or even to the spiritual and historical manifestation of Christ. Each of these partial thoughts has its place in the whole conception. Compare 2 Cor. v. 16.

the words] Here the definite utterances (p?fpaTa, Vulg. verba, v. 68) and not the whole revelation (\6yos, Vulg. sermo, v. 60). The reference is to the clear unfolding of the complete relation of man and humanity to the Incarnate Saviour. Hence a marked emphasis is laid on the pronoun /: the words that I and no prophet, not even Moses (v. 32) before me; and on the tense: the words that /have spoken (AfAaXrjKa, according to the true reading), and not generally speak, though in some sense all Christ's words are life-giving, as conveying something of this central truth.