are spirit, and they are life] that is, belong essentially to the region of eternal being, and so are capable of conveying that which they essentially are. Compare v. 68.
64. But] even so, in the closest circle of my disciples there are some to whom they convey no vivifying influence, because the human condition is unfulfilled: there are of you (e'£ v/i<5i>) some who believe not. For the order compare v. 70 (of you one).
from the beginning] Compare xvi. 4, (xv. 27). From the first moment when the public work of Christ began (i John ii. 7, 24, iii. n; Luke i. 2). The phrase must always be relative to the point present to the mind of the writer or speaker; and here that seems to be fixed by v. 70.
who should (who it was that should) betray him] This first allusion to the sin of Judas evidently stands in a significant connexion with the first unveiling of the Lord's Passion. The word rendered betray (TrapaStdofat) means strictly deliver up, to give into the hands of another to deal with as he pleases (ch. xviii. 30, 35 f., xix. 16; Matt. v. 25, &c.). The title of " traitor " is only once applied to Judas in the New Testament: Luke vi. 16 (TrpoSonjf). In other words his act is regarded in relation to the Lord's Passion, and not to his sin.
65. Therefore said /...] For this cause have I said... The divine condition of discipleship was clearly stated, because the disciples would have to bear the trial of treachery revealed in their midst, which might seem to be inconsistent with Christ's claims, and with what they thought that they had found in Him. His choice even of Judas was not made without full knowledge (xiii. 18).
come unto me] Judas then, though "chosen out " (v. 70) and called, had not come to Christ (v. 37). He remained still in himself; and now at this crisis he can keep silence.
were given unto him of my Father] have been (or be) given unto him of the Father. Comp. iii. 27. There is a sense in which all life is the unfolding of the timeless divine will. The Father (not my Father) here is looked upon as the source (ei<) from whom all flows. Comp. x. 32; i Cor. vii. 7; (2 Cor. ii. 2). It must be noticed likewise how here the divine and human elements are placed in close juxtaposition, given, come. The mystery must be left with the assertion of both the concurrent parts, the will of God and the will of man.
66 flF. The "murmuring" issued in separation. This separation was partly open and partly secret. The same teaching which led some disciples to desert Christ, appears to have called out in Judas that deeper antagonism of spirit which was shewn at last in the betrayal.
went back (a.Tr^\6ov fls TO. 6irt(ro), Vulg. abierunt retro}] They not only left Christ, but gave up what they had gained with Him, and, so far as they could, reoccupied their old places, Phil. iii. 13.
walked no more (with him] Compare vii. i, xi. 54. The phrase gives a vivid portraiture of the Lord's life.
67. Then said Jesus...] Jejus therefore said... The test had been applied to the mass, and it was now necessarily applied to the innermost circle of disciples.
the twelve] These are spoken of as known, though they have not been mentioned before.
him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. 69 ""And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.
The number is implied in v. 13. In the earlier part of the record (chh. i. — iv.) no such chosen company is noticed, a fact which is a slight sign of the distinctness with which the course of the work of Christ was impressed on the apostle's mind. He does not record the call of the twelve, yet it lies hidden and implied in his narrative. From another side the reference shews that St John assumes that his readers are familiar with the main facts of the history.
Will ye also...'] The form of the question 0^7 6i\(Tf, Vulg. numquid vultii.*) implies that such desertion is incredible and yet to be feared; but here the negation is virtually assumed. Compare vii. 47, 52, xviii. 17, 25.
go away... go (v. 68)...] Perhaps more exactly, go (ynaytiv, v. 21)... go away (dn(\ddv, -v. 22)... The first word suggests the notion of the personal act in itself; the second that of separation. See vii. 33, note.
Then Simon Peter answered
68. Then Simon Peter (omit Then)...] St Peter occupies the same representative place in St John's narrative as in the others. Comp. xiii. 6 ff., 24, 36, xviii. 10, xx. 2, i xxi. 3. His reply is the strong confession that the apostles have found in Christ all that they could seek. The thought is of what Christ has, as they have known, and not of Himself: thou (unemphatic) hast in thy spiritual treasury ready to be brought forth according to our powers and necessities (Matt. xiii. 52) the words, or rather words of eternal life. This phrase may mean either ( i) words — utterances (v. 63) — concerning eternal life; or (2) words bringing, issuing in, eternal life (i John i. i). The usage of St John is on the whole decidedly in favour of the second interpretation. Thus we find the bread of life (w. 35, &c.), the light of life (viii. 12), the (water of life (Rev. xxi. 6, xxii. I, 17), the tree of life (Rev. ii. 7, xxii. 2, 14). St Peter does not speak of the completed Gospel ("the word "), but of specific sayings (p^ara, not ra prmara) which had been felt to carry life with them. He had recognised the truth of what the Lord had said v, 63 (ra prjf
69. And we] The pronoun is emphatic; we who are nearest to Thee and have listened to Thee most devoutly.
believe and are sure] have believed and know (or rather, have come to know). The vital faith which grasps the new data of the higher life precedes the conscious intellectual appreciation of them. " Non cognovimus et credidimus...Credidimus enim ut cognosceremus; nam si prius cognoscere et deinde credere vellemus, nee cognoscere nee credere
In i John iv. 16 the words stand in the inverted order, but it will be noticed from the construction there that the words have believed qualify and explain, so to speak, have come to know (know), but do not go closely with the love that God hath to us, which depends directly on know.
that Christ, the Son of the living God] According to the true reading (see additional note), the Holy One of God. Mark i. 24; Luke iv. 34. The knowledge of the demoniacs reached to the essential nature of the Lord. Comp. Rev. iii. 7; i John ii. 20. See also ch. x. 36, and v. 27 of this chapter.
With this confession of St Peter that which is recorded in Matt. xvi. 16, which belongs to the same period but to different circumstances, must be compared. Here the confession points to the inward character in which the Apostles found the assurance of life; there the confession was of the public office and theocratic Person of the Lord. To suppose that the one confession is simply an imperfect representation of the other is to deny the fulness of the life which lies behind both. This confession must be compared with the confessions in ch. i. Here the confession is made after the disappointment of the popular hope, and reaches to the recognition of that absolute character of Christ which the demoniacs tried to reveal prematurely.
70. Even in those who still clung to Christ there was an element of unfaithfulness. Comp. xiii. 10 f.
Jesus answered...] The reply is to the confident affirmation of St Peter, who rested his profession of the abiding faithfulness of the apostles upon their perception of the Lord's nature. So far was this from leaving no ground for doubt that the Lord shews that even His own choice (Did not I— even I— choose) left room for a traitor among those whom He had chosen.
them] St Peter spoke for all, and the Lord still speaks to the twelve and not to their representative only.
Have not I chosen you twelve?] Did not I choose you the twelve? you the marked representatives of the new Israel, the patriarchs of a divine people. The reference is not to the number of the apostles, but to their special position (yuM$ rovs Sa>8«/ca: comp. xx. 24).
I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devii?
son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve.
Even out of this chosen body (V£ vp£v) one is faithless. There is a tragic pathos in the original order.
a devil] viii. 44, xiii. 2; i John iii. 8, 10; Rev. xii. 9, xx. 2. The fundamental idea seems to be that of turning good into evil (8(aj3dXXeti/). The two great temptations are the characteristic works of "the devil." Hence Judas, by regarding Christ in the light of his own selfish views, and claiming to use His power for the accomplishment of that which he had proposed as Messiah's work, partook of that which is essential to the devil's nature. "With this term applied to Judas we must compare that of Satan applied at no long interval to St Peter (Matt. xvi. 23). Judas wished to pervert the divine power which he saw to his own ends; St Peter strove to avert what he feared in erring zeal for his Lord.
Judas Iscariot the son of Simon] Judas the son of Simon Iscariot. The true reading here marks Iscariot as certainly a local name: a man of Keriotb (Karioth). The place is commonly identified with Keriotb, a town of Judah (Josh. xv. 25), according to the A. V., so that Judas alone was strictly a Judasan. But it appears that the rendering there is incorrect, and that Kerioth ought to be joined with Hezron (Kerioth-Hezron). May not the town be identified with the Kerioth (Kapico0) of Moab mentioned in Jer. xlviii. 24?
he it iv as that should'] it was he that was about to (ffj.f\\€v irapa8i86vat)... Compare xii. 4; Luke xxii. 23. The phrase in v. 64 is different (o jrapaSeocrtaj').
being one of the twelve] The phrase (eff (K r. 8.) is slightly different from that in Matt. xxvi. 14, 47 and parallels (fly T. 8.), and seems to mark the unity of the body to which the unfaithful member belonged. Compare xx. 24.
26 — 58. A brief summary of the argument of the three discourses furnishes the best clue to their general interpretation in view of the controversies which have attached to parts of them. Their central subject is Christ, truly man, the source and the support of life. They deal, as we have seen, with three questions in succession. How can man gain fellowship with God? How can one who is man be the source and support of life? How can the virtue of Christ's humanity be imparted to and appropriated by others? Or, putting the two last questions in their final form: Can the Incarnation be a fact? Can the Incarnate Son of God communicate Himself to men? They are, it is evident, questions of universal moment, which go to the very heart of faith; and according as they are answered bring separation or closer union at all times between Christ and His disciples.
He is Himself the gift; and even through apparent failure He fulfils His work (34 — 38).
Man lives only by the participation in the virtues of His life and death (53 — 55).
This participation brings with it a personal union between the believer and Christ (56),
From first to last the gift to men on the part of God is set forth as Christ " the Son of man; " and the power by which man makes the gift his own is active " faith." The repetition of the title "the Son of man" three times in most significant connexions brings out very clearly the aspect of Christ's Person to which the teaching specially points (vv. 27> 53> 62). So also the stress laid on believing (Triovevfiv «r, -w. 29, 35, 40, 47) keeps in prominence the requirement from man. In the last section (52 — 58) "believing" is not mentioned, but the same effect is attributed to "eating the flesh and drinking the blood" of Christ as before to "believing" absolutely (vv. 47, 54, e^
Here then the activity of faith is presented in its completes! energy in connexion with the fullest description of the divine gift. The fundamental antithesis of the human and divine, which appears at the opening of the discourses, is thus distinctly expressed at the close.
It must not however be concluded that " eating the flesh of the Son of man and drinking His blood " is simply a metaphorical expression for "believing on Christ," or more specifically for " believing on Christ as having lived and died for men." It is quite unnatural to suppose that the earlier and plain words are involved in dark figures by the later phrases. On the contrary, these figures indicate the effective action and issue of faith, while they preserve and recognise the meeting together of the human and divine in the highest consummation of the destiny of man.
The progress which underlies the apparent monotony of the discourses is most conspicuously marked by the comparison of the corresponding phrases "believing on the Son of man," and "eating" the Son of man, and is indicated also in the recurrent forms of expression which seem at first sight to be identical. Thus w. 33, 50, 58, which in their general structure and elements are closely connected, are yet found upon examination to be clearly distinguished:
•v. 33. The bread of God is that which cometh down from heaven, and givetb (8»3oi!j) life to the world.
•v. 50. This (bread) [v. 48, I am the bread of life] is the bread which cometh down from heaven that a man may eat of it («'£ auroG <£ayr/) and not die.
v. 58. This (bread) [i.e. I (v. 57)] is the bread which came down from heaven: be that eateth (rptoyuv) this bread shall live for ever.
The general divine fact is stated first; next the divine purpose in connexion with man; and then last the historic fact as it is appropriated by individual men.
From what has been said it will be seen that the discourses spring naturally out of the position in which the Lord stood at a critical moment towards His disciples and the people, and are perfectly intelligible as an answer to the questionings among them conveyed in such a parabolic form (Matt. xiii. 34) as was suggested partly by the miracle of feeding, and partly by the memories of the passover. That which is outward is made the figure of the inward, and then, when the spiritual conception is fully developed, the outward imagery is again adopted in order to indicate fresn forms of the truth. The people had " eaten of the loaves" (v. 16); that which it was their highest blessing to do was to eat the Son of man (v. 57). This "eating" is essential for all, inasmuch as without it there is no life and no resurrection (v. 53). And further, this "eating" leads necessarily to life in the highest sense; it has no qualification (such as eating " worthily "); it is operative for good absolutely.
It follows that what is spoken of " eating <£ayel»>) of the bread which cometh down from heaven" (v. 51), "eating ($aye~iv) the flesh of the Son of man" (ju. 53), "eating (rpoiyt iv) His flesh, and drinking His blood " (vv.54, 56), " eating (rpwy^v) Him" (v. 57), " eating (rpiaytiv) the bread which came down from heaven" (v. 58) — the succession ot phrases is most remarkable — cannot refer primarily to the Holy Communion; nor again can it be simply prophetic of that Sacrament. The teaching has a full and consistent meaning in connexion with the actual circumstances, and it treats essentially of spiritual realities with which no external act, as such, can be co-extensive. The well-known words of Augustine, crede et manducasti, " believe and thou hast eaten," give the sum of the thoughts in a luminous and pregnant sentence.
But, on the other hand, there can be no doubt that the truth which is presented in its absolute form in these discourses is presented in a specific act and in a concrete form in the Holy Communion; and yet further that the Holy Communion is the divinely appointed means whereby men may realise the truth. Nor can there be a difficulty to any one who acknowledges a divine fitness in the ordinances of the Church, an eternal correspondence in the parts of the one counsel of God, in believing that the Lord, while speaking intelligibly to those who heard Him at the time, gave by anticipation a commentary, so to speak, on the Sacrament which He afterwards instituted. But that which He deals with is not the outward rite, but the spiritual fact which underlies it. To attempt to transfer the words of the discourse with their consequences to the Sacrament is not only to involve the history in hopeless confusion but to introduce overwhelming difficulties into their interpretation, which can only be removed by the arbitrary and untenable interpolation of qualifying sentences.
In this connexion two points require careful consideration. The words used here of the Lord's humanity are " flesh " and " blood," and not as in every case where the Sacrament is spoken of in Scripture "body "and " blood." And again St John nowhere refers directly to the Sacraments of Baptism and Holy Communion as outward rites.
The second point need not cause any surprise. St John living in the centre of Christian society does not notice the institution of services which were parts of the settled experience of Church life. He presupposes them; and at the same time records the discourses in which the ideas clothed for us and brought near to us in the two Sacraments were set forth. He guards the Sacraments in this way from being regarded either as ends in themselves or as mere symbols. He enables us to see how they correspond with fundamental views of the relations of man to God; how they are included in one sense in the first teaching of the Gospel; how Christianity is essentially sacramental as Judaism is essentially typical; how, through the Incarnation, the relations between things outward and inward, things seen and unseen, are revealed to us as real and eternal, and not superficial and transitory.
The first point is evidently of critical importance for the understanding of the relation between the discourses and the Sacrament. The " flesh" is (so to speak) the constituent element of the human organization; the " body " is the organization itself. That which the believer must appropriate is, as we have seen, the virtue of Christ's humanity; through this, in the unity of His Person, Christ unites him to God. That which Christ presents to His Church in the institution of Holy Communion is His " Body." The term "flesh" marks that which must be assimilated, and suggests the due co-operation of the individual recipient for an effect which is absolute. The term "body" answers to the outward rite, which is primarily social (i Cor. x. 16 f.). Or, to put the idea in a somewhat different light, the " flesh" expresses that which characterizes the essential limitation of that humanity which "the Word became," capable of an indefinite variety of manifestations, while the ' ' body " is a specific manifestation. The one suggests the conception of the principle of human life; the other the unity of a particular form of human life. (The gloss in D on 11. 56 shews how soon the distinction was neglected.)
Among early writers Augustine has expressed very clearly the relation of the discourse to the Sacrament, though he does not dwell on the difference of " flesh " and "body."
"This food and drink," he writes, "Christ wishes to be understood as fellowship with His Body and members... The Sacrament of this thing, that is, of the unity of the Body and Blood of Christ, is prepared on the Lord's table (in dominica mensd) in some places daily, in other places at stated intervals, and is taken from the Lord's table, for some to life, for some to destruction (ad exitium); the thing itself however of which [that rite] is a sacrament, is for every man to life, to none to destruction, whoever partakes of it (' Tract, in Joh.' xxvi. 15)... This is therefore to eat that food (escam) and to drink that blood, to abide in Christ and to have Him abiding in oneself. And through this, he who does not abide in Christ and in whom Christ does not abide, doubtless does not eat His flesh (procul dubio nee manducat carnem eius, the addition spiritualiter is a false gloss), nor drink His blood, although he eats and drinks the Sacrament of so great a thing to his own judgment" (Id.
§ 1 8, etiamsi tantte ret sacramentum ad jud'tcium sibi manducet et blbat according to the MSS. The text as it is quoted in Art. xxix. has been interpolated from the commentary of Bede).
There are several readings of considerable interest in ch. vi. which require notice as illustrating the history of the text.
9. The common text reads jratbapiov fv. This is supported by A, the mass of later uncial and cursive MSS., some copies of -vt. Lot., Vulg,, the Syriac versions (except Syr. •vt.}, &c.
On the other hand, eo is omitted by KBDL and a fair number of later copies, including some very important cursives, the most important copies of Lat. vt., Syr. -vt., Origen, Cyril Alex., Chrysostom, &c. (C is defective). Here it will be observed that the oldest representatives of each class of authorities omit the word in dispute, the oldest Greek MSS., the oldest forms of the oldest versions, and the oldest father who quotes the passage.
15. In this verse N has one of those paraphrastic glosses which are characteristic of ND, "vt. Lat. and -vt. Syr. In place of tva irotrja-wa-iv [mJroi/] £ao-tX<?a, which is read by all other authorities with one questionable exception, it reads KOL dvaofi<vvvai /3a<rtXe'a. This phrase is followed by (pevyfi for dff^prja-ev. This reading <t>(vy{i is supported by other authorities of the same group, -vt. Lat., Vulg., Syr. iit.; but such evidence only shews the wide extension of the gloss at a very early
The insertion of the clause TJV eyw 8wVa> in (3) is evidently an attempt to remove the harshness of the construction in (i), which is removed in (a) by a transposition. But the addition of such a clause as vntp T. T. K. f. to a sentence already grammatically complete in order to bring out a wider thought is completely in St John's style.
63. The common reading XaXw is supported by the great mass of later MSS., but by no early evidence whatever; all the oldest MSS., versions, and fathers reading AeXdArjica, which at first sight seems to limit the statement unduly.
69. The words of St Peter's confession offer a most instructive example of the manner in which a (supposed) parallel influences a reading.
The last form (5) is identical with that in Matt. xvi. 1 6, in which the authorities (practically) do not vary. It is then scarcely to be questioned that the language in St John has been brought into accord with St Matthew and not changed from it. The stages of the assimilation are preserved in (2), (3), (4). Two changes were made separately at a very early time, the addition of o Yp«m5y (Egyptian versions) and the substitution of V'i6s for ayios. These two changes were then combined, and this is the reading preserved in the mass of Latin copies. And finally the complete phrase of St Matthew was introduced by the addition of TOV (atvrot.
71. The mass of later copies, with the Gothic and the later copies of the Vulgate, give the title Iscariot ('l<rKapi(OTT)i>) to Judas, but the earlier MSS. (XCBC with some others) and the best copies of the Vulgate connect it with Simon ('lo-Kapiwrou). In D and some early Latin copies the reading is simply 2«ipiu>d (cariotti), for which N* and four other early authorities read (as D reads xii. 4, xiii. 2, 26, xiv. 22) djro KapviaTov. In xii. 4, xiv. 22, the title undoubtedly belongs to Judas. Here and in xiii. 2, 26 it appears scarcely less certainly to belong to his father Simon. The natural conclusion is that it was a local name borne by father and son alike.
II. THE GREAT CONTROVERSY (vii. — xii.). The record of the great controversy at Jerusalem, during which faith and unbelief were fully revealed, falls into two parts. The first part (vii. — x.) contains the outline of the successive stages of the controversy itself; the second the decisive judgment (xi., xii.).
This central section of the whole Gospel contains events and discourses connected with two national festivals, the Feast of Tabernacles and the Feast of Dedication, which commemorated the first possession of Canaan and the great recovery of religious independence. Thus the festivals nad a most marked meaning in regard to the life of the Jews, and this, as will be seen, influenced the form of the Lord's teaching.
There is a clear progress in the history. The discussions at the Feast of Tabernacles (vii., viii.) are characterized by waverings and questionings among the people. The discussions at the Feast of Dedication shew the separation already consummated (ix., x.).
(i) The Feast of Tabernacles (vii., viii.). No section in the Gospel is more evidently a transcript from life than this. It reflects a complex and animated variety of characters and feelings. Jerusalem is seen crowded at the most popular feast with men widely differing in hope and position: some eager in expectation, some immovable in prejudice. There is nothing of the calm solemnity of the private discourse, or of the full exposition of doctrine before a dignified body, such as has been given before. All is direct, personal encounter. The "brethren" of the Lord (vii. 3 ff.), "the Jews" (vii. i, u, 13, 15, 35, viii. 22, 48, 52, 57), "the multitudes" (vii. 12 f.), "the multitude" (vii. 12, 20, 31 f., 40 f., 43, 49), "the people of Jerusalem" (vii. 45), "the Pharisees" (vii. 32, 47, viii. 13), "the chief-priests (i.e. the Sadducean hierarchy) and Pharisees" (vii. 32, 45 1 f°r tne first time), Nicodemus (vii. 50), "the Jews who believed him" (viii. 31), appear in succession in the narrative, and all with clearly marked individuality. Impatient promptings to action (vii. 3 ff.), vague inquiries (vii. n), debatings (vii. 12, 40 ff.), fear on this side and that (vii. 13, 30, 44), wonder (vii. 15, 46), perplexity (vii. 25 ff.), belief (vii. 31, viii. 30), open hostility (vii. 32), unfriendly criticism (vii. 23 ff, viii. 48 ff.), selfish belief in Christ's Messianic dignity (viii. 31 ff.), follow in rapid alternation. All is full of movement, of local
these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him.
3 His brethren therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and go into Judaea, that thy disciples also may see the works that thou doest.
4 For there is no man that doeth any thing in secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly. If thou do these things, shew thyself to the world.
5 For neither did his brethren believe in him.
6 Then Jesus said unto them, My time is not yet come: but your time is alway ready.
The section is naturally divided into several distinct scenes. The circumstances of the visit (vii. i — 13). The discussions at "themidst of the feast" (14 — 36). The discussions on the last day (37 — 52). The after-teaching (viii. 12 — ao). The trial of true and false faith
CHAP. VII. 1 — 13. In these verses there is a lively picture of the position which the Lord held at the time. Continued teaching in Judasa had become impossible (v. i). His brethren impatiently pressed for some more decisive public manifestation of His power (w. 3 — 9). The multitudes gathered at Jerusalem were divided between faith and distrust (•w. n, i a). But the dominant party kept down all open discussion of His claims (v. 13). The description brings out distinctly various aspects of a work and a Person not yet fully revealed.
1. After these things'] And after these things, that is, the whole crisis brought about by the miracle of feeding.
•would not walk in Jewry (Judsea, as v. 3)] The words imply a previous work in Judasa corresponding to that now accomplished in Galilee.
2. the Jews'1 feast of tabernacles] the feast of the Jews, the feast of Tabernacles. This feast was pre-eminent among the festivals "as the holiest and greatest" (Jos. ' Ant.' vm. 4. i). It fell on 15 — »a Tisri (September, October), and thus there is an interval of six months after the events of ch. vi., of which the Evangelist records nothing. The record of some details of this period is given in Matt. xii. — xvii., xxi.
3. His brethren] See Lightfoot, Excursus II. on ' Gal.it ians.' Perhaps we may conclude even from this notice, compared with Mark iii. ai, 31, that the brethren were elder brethren
(i.e. sons of Joseph by a former marriage) who might from their age seek to direct the Lord.
thy disciples also may see (behold)...] not only those disciples who would be gathered from all parts to Jerusalem, but specially those who had been gained by earlier teaching in Judaea and Jerusalem, and who still remained there. From this notice it appears that miracles were wrought chiefly among strangers to arrest attention; and also that the Lord was accompanied only by a small group of followers in His Galilaean circuits.
4. For there is no man that (no man) doeth any thing in secret] as Christ did, for His works in Galilee and even beyond the borders of Galilee were practically withdrawn (such is the argument) from the observation of those who could best judge of their worth.
and he...seeketh (and seeketh) to be known openly] Literally, "to be in boldness" (eV irapprjo-ia tlvai, Vulg. in pa/am esse), to stand forth boldly as one urging his* claims before the world without reserve or fear. Comp. Wisd. v. i; Col. ii. 15. The words refer to the position claimed and not to the position gained ("to be publicly known''). The phrase however (fcODrpQS) is not unfrequent in Rabbinic writers in the sense of "in public " as opposed to " in secret," see Buxtorf, ' Lex.' s. v.
If thou do (doest)...] The words do not carry with them any definite denial of the fact (v. 3), but simply place the fact as the basis for the conclusion.
5. For neither (not even) did his brethren believe in him] The phrase need not mean more than that they did not sacrifice to absolute trust in Him all the fancies and prejudices which they cherished as to Messiah's office. Thus their belief could not be a constant power (OVK (trlo-Ttvov) influencing their whole mode of thinking. They ventured to advise and urge when Faith would have been content to wait.
7 The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil.
8 Go ye up unto this feast: I go » chap. s. not up yet unto this feast; *for my
9 When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee.
10 11 But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.
1 1 Then the Jews sought him at the feast, and said, Where is he?
12 And there was much murmuring among the people concerning him: for some said, He is a good man: others said, Nay; but he deceiveth the people.
My time] the seasonable moment for the revelation of myself (<j tempos 6 f>6s). The word (" season," «a«pof) occurs in St John's Gospel only in this passage [v. 4 is a gloss]. As compared with "hour" (vni. 20, note) "season '' appears to mark the fitness of time in regard to the course of human events, while " the hour" has reference to the divine plan.
your time (»ca«poj) is alway ready] Christ's brethren had no new thoughts to make known. What they had to say was in harmony with what others were feeling. Their time was always ready. They were in sympathy with the world; while Christ was in antagonism with the world. They risked nothing by joining in the festival pilgrimage; He kept back not only from the danger of open hostility, but also from the violence of mistaken zeal, lest some should "make Him a king" (vi. 15). The thought which underlies the verse corresponds with that in <v. 1 7.
7. cannot hate you] This " cannot " answers to the law of moral correspondence. It is of frequent occurrence in St John's Gospel and in different relations. Thus it is used of the relation of "the Jews" to Christ (vii. 34, 36, viii. ai f., 43 f., xii. 39), and of "the world" to the Paraclete (xiv. 17); and in another aspect of the relation of the believer to Christ, in his first approach (vi. 44, 65, Hi. 3, 5), and in his later progress (xiii. 33, 36, xvi. 12); and yet again of the relation of the Son to the Father (v. 19, note). In each case the impossibility lies in the true nature of things, and is the other side, of the divine "must" (xx. 9, note).
8. Go ye up unto this feast (the feast')'] The pronoun is emphatic: Do ye, with your thoughts and hopes, go up (v/icir a.va^r\ri).
I go not up yet unto this feast] The sense may be " I go not up with the great train of worshippers." Nor indeed did Christ go to the feast as one who kept it. He appeared during the feast (v. 14), but then as a prophet suddenly in the temple. Perhaps however it is better to give a fuller force to the "going up" and to suppose that the thought of the next paschal journey, when " the time was fulfilled,"
already shapes the words. The true reading "not yet" (followed by A. V.) and also the exact phrase "this feast" give force to this interpretation. The Feast of Tabernacles was a festival of peculiar joy for work accomplished. At such a feast Christ had now no place.
10. But when... were gone tip, then went he also up unto the feast] But when... were gone up to the feast, then went he also up.
but as it were in secret] hidden as one solitary stranger and not the centre of an expectant band. Contrast the visit in ii. 13 (in power), v. i (as a pilgrim), and here, when Christ was withdrawn from the pilgrim-company, with the final visit in triumph, xii. 12 f.
11. Then the Jews (The Jews therefore) sought him] in the parties of Galilsean worshippers, asking of them Where is he 1 that famous teacher (cxelpof) whom we saw, and of whom we have since heard (ix. 12)? The question was asked half perhaps in ill-will and half in curiosity.
12. murmuring'] Or perhaps here muttering (yoyyvtruos, Vulg. murmur), as of men who did not dare to speak plainly and loudly what they felt. Comp. v. 32.
among the people] among themultltudes, that is, among the different groups of strangers who had come up to the festival, and such as consorted with them. This confluence and separation will explain the occurrence of the plural (fV rols fyXotr) which is found here only in St John, as it occurs also once only in St Mark.
for some said] some said. The omission of the particle gives vividness to the descrip- a good man] unselfish and true. Compare Mark x. 17.
deceiveth the people] leadeth the multitude astray (77X01-9, Vulg. seducit). Comp. •v. 47. The thought is of practical and not of intellectual error.
13 Howbeit no man spake openly of him for fear of the Jews.
14 11 Now about the midst of the feast Jesus went up into the temple, and taught.
15 And the Jews marvelled, say- "Or«. ing, How knoweth this man ' letters,
My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.
17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.
1 8 He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the
13. no man] whether he thought well or ill of Christ, spake openly (boldly) of him for fear — an all-pervading fear (8ia TOP <f>6fiov) — of the Jews, the leaders or the "national" party, who had as yet not pronounced judgment openly though their inclination was plain.
openly] boldly. The original word (irappr]<ria) has a double sense. It may mean either without reserve or veil, giving free utterance to every thought plainly (x. 24, xi. 14, xvi. 25, 29, xviii. 20), or without fear (xi. 54). Here, and so probably in -z>. 26, it is used in the latter sense.
14 — 36. The discussions at "the midst of the feast " lay open thoughts of three groups of men: "the Jews" (14 — 24), "some of the inhabitants of Jerusalem" (25 — 31"), the envoys of " the chief priests and the Pharisees" (32 — 36). Each discussion constitutes a separate scene. "The multitude" is swayed to and fro by conflicting fears and hopes (20, 31 f.). In dealing with the successive questioners the Lord indicates the authority of His teaching, His connexion with the old dispensation, the brief space of the people's trial.
14 — 24. In the first scene in the temple Christ shews the source and the test of His teaching (16 — 18) as against the false interpretations of the Law (v. 19), which were against the spirit and history of the Law itself
14. the midst of the feast} The feast properly lasted seven days, but to these an eighth day was added as "the last day" of the feast (v. 37), Lev. xxiii. 36; 2 Mace. x. 6.
into the temple, and taught] This is the first mention of the appearance of the Lord as a public teacher at Jerusalem. Compare vi. 59, vii. 28, viii. 20 (the case is different in x. 23), xviii. zo.
knowetb... letters] Compare Acts xxvi. 24. The marvel was that Jesus shewed Himself familiar with the literary methods of the time, which were supposed to be confined to the scholars of the popular teachers.
having never learned'] though He has never studied in one of the great schools (fj.fi /^a- 6r]K(os). Christ was in the eyes of the Jews a merely self-taught enthusiast. They marvelled at His strange success, while they did not admit His irregular claims.
16. Jesus answered"] Jesus therefore answered. The Lord's reply meets the difficulty of the questioners. His teaching was not self-originated (My doctrine (teaching) is not mine), but derived from a divine Master; infinitely greater than the popular Rabbis. And it had a twofold attestation — an inward criterion and an outward criterion; the first from its essential character, and the second from the character of Him who delivered it. He whose will was in harmony with the will of God could not but recognise the source of the teaching. And again, the absolute devotion of Christ to Him who sent Him was a sign of His truth.
17. If any man will do (6t\rj TO Trotetj/, Vulg. si qitis voluerit voluntatem facere')...'] i.e. If it 'be any man's will to do His will. The force of the argument lies in the moral harmony of the man's purpose with the divine law so far as this law is known or felt. If there be no sympathy there can be no understanding. Religion is a matter of life and not of thought only. The principle is universal in its application. The will of God is not to be limited to the Old Testament revelation, or to the claims of Christ, but includes every manifestation of the purpose of God. A fine saying is attributed to " Rabban Gamaliel, the son of R. Jehudah ha-Nasi:" "Do His will as if it were thy will, that He may do thy will as if it were His will " (' A both,' II. 4).
18. his own glory] Compare v. 30, 41 ff. but he that seeketh...,] The second part of the sentence is changed in form so as to take a positive shape, wrought out both in relation to thought absolutely (is true, d\n0rjs, Vulg. verax) and action relating to others (there is no unrighteousness in him).
is in him. «Exod.24. 10, *Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the *chap. 5. law? rfWhy go ye about to kill me?
20 The people answered and said, Thou hast a devil: who goeth about to kill thee?
them, I have done one work, and ye all marvel.
22 'Moses therefore gave unto you <Lev.ia.3. circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, -^but of the fathers;) and ye •'Gen. 17. on the sabbath day circumcise a man. *°
receive circumcision, • that the law ing the of Moses should not be broken; are %%£
19. The principle laid down is applied to the condemnation of the Jews. They professed unbounded devotion to Moses, and yet they broke the Law because they were estranged from its spirit. Their ignorance of the Law had at last grown so great that they were prepared to murder Him who came to fulfil the Law.
Did not... the law, and yet none.,. the la<wf\ Did not...the law? and none...the law. The question is an appeal to their own proud boast. Then follows their condemnation by the Lord.
20. The people] The multitude, made up chiefly of pilgrims, and therefore unacquainted with the full designs of the hierarchy. Omit and said.
Thou hast a devif] Compare Matt. xi. 18; Luke vii. 33, where the same phrase is used of John the Baptist, as one who sternly and, in men's judgment, gloomily and morosely withdrew himself from the cheerfulness of social life. So here perhaps the words mean no more than "thou art possessed with strange and melancholy fancies; thou yieldest to idle fears." In a different context they assume a more sinister force, viii. 48 f., 52, x. 20. Yet even in these cases the sense does not go beyond that of irrationality.
21. Jesus answered... ~\ The point of the answer lies in the indication of the ground of the hostility which ended in murderous designs. All alike — "the Jews" and "the multitude" — marvelled at that which should have been an intelligible illustration of the Law. This wonder contained the germ of open misunderstanding and opposition which, if followed to its legitimate development, could not but end in deadly enmity. If men failed to see the inner significance of the Law they must persecute Christ who came to interpret it and offer its fulfilment in the Gospel.
/ have done (did) one work] ch. v. i ff. This special healing on the Sabbath is singled out of the many which Christ wrought (ii. 23, iv. 45) from its exceptional circumstances.
marvel] Yet even wonder may be a first step towards a truer apprehension of the divine lesson. Compare v. 20.
22. Moses therefore gave unto you...] For this cause Moses hath given you, as an abiding ordinance... The cause referred to is the typical realisation of the lesson which underlies the restoration of the impotent man, as it is brought out in v. 23.' The words for this cause certainly commence a new sentence, and do not close i>. 21. In this respect the usage of St John is decisive, vi. 65, viii. 47.
not because (that) it is... but...] The words are parenthetical. The case was not simply a conflict of two Mosaic precepts. The law of circumcision was not in origin Mosaic; and thus in itself it carried men's thoughts back to the great ideas which the Mosaic Law was designed to embody. The Mosaic Law of the Sabbath was, on the other hand, new.
The connexion of for this cause with not because (that) appears to be against the usage of the language (vi. 46); 2 Cor. i. 24, iii. 5; Phil. iv. 17; 2 Thess. iii. 9: / do not mean that... but...; yet see xii. 6 (where ort is repeated); and against the argument, for the point in question was not the origin of circumcision, though this furnished a subsidiary thought, but the fact of conflicting enactments in the Law which were adjusted in a particular manner.
on the (a) sabbath] if that happened to be the eighth day. The principle is distinctly recognised in the Mishna, 'Sabb.' xix. i. R. Akiva said: "Every work which can be done on the eve of the Sabbath does not set aside the Sabbath; but circumcision, which cannot be done on the eve of the Sabbath [if the eve be the seventh day], sets aside the Sabbath." Compare Lightfoot and Wetstein, ad loc,
23. should not be broken] by the violation of the commandment which enjoined circumcision on the eighth day. Comp. x. 35, v. 18, are ye angry... because I have made (I made)...] The contrast is between the effect of circumcision which made (as it were) one member sound, and that of the miracle which made the whole paralysed man sound. If then the Law itself ratified the precedence of this act of partial healing over the ceremonial observance of the Sabbath, how much more lawful was the complete healing.
ye angry at me, because I have made a man e"ery whit whole on the sabbath day?
*• Deue. x. 24 * Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judg-
25 Then said some of them of Jerusalem, Is not this he, whom they seek to kill?
and they say nothing unto him. Do the rulers know indeed that this is the very Christ?
27 Howbeit we know this man whence he is: but when Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence he is.
28 Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I
a man every whit whole...,] More exactly, a whole man sound (o\ov avdpunrov vyifj, Vulg. totum hominem sanuni). A whole man regarded from the physical side, and not with the subordinate distinction of "soul and body." Comp. v. 14.
24. Judge not according to the appearance] superficially, by the external aspect, as the matter first presents itself (/car' S^tv, Vulg. secundum faciem).
righteous judgment} Or rather, the righteous judgment; give the one true and complete decision of which the case admits. The truth is one.
25 — 31. In the second scene, which is still in the temple (v. 28), the Lord meets the popular objection which was urged against the belief that He was the Christ (vv. 25 — 27). He had perfect authority for His work, from Him whom the Jews " knew not" (v. 28 f.). So the people were divided by His words and works (v. 31).
25. Then said some... Jerusalem..,,] Some therefore of them of Jerusalem said, who were acquainted with the designs of the hierarchy, and yet not committed to them. Hence they are described by the local name ('ifpoffoXu/itrcu, Vulg. (inexactly) quidam_ ex Hierosolymis), which occurs elsewhere in New Testament only in St Mark i. 5 (Vulg. Hierosolymitx). The chain of sequence (therefore) is that the Lord had taken up the position of accuser when He was Himself accused.
Do the... know.., the very Christ?"] Can it be that the rulers indeed know (/i^Vorf?yj/(oo-aj/)...the Christ? Can it be that they have learnt, come to know...? The words seem to mark some point of transition, as if a change might have passed over the Sanhedrin. Possibly (so the people argue) they have examined the matter, and found reason to decide in favour of Him whom they before opposed. Perhaps there is a reference to the examination in ch. v. 19 if.
27. Howbeit (dXXd)...J The suspicion is at once set aside as impossible: we know...no man knoweth. The two words know, knoweth (oiSa/aei/, yivwKti) offer a contrast between the knowledge which is full and abiding, and that which comes by progress and observation. Compare xiv. 7, ii. 24, note.
whence he is"] i.e. we know His family and His home. Yet even so they thought of Nazareth and not of Bethlehem, David's city, v. 42. Compare Matt. xiii. 54 f. It seems to have been expected that Messiah would appear suddenly (perhaps from Dan. vii. 13, or from Isai. liii. 8), no one knew whence, while Christ had lived long among His countrymen in obscurity and yet known to them. According to a Jewish saying ('Sanhedr.' 97 a) "three things come wholly unexpected, Messiah, a god-send and a scorpion." According to another tradition, Messiah would not even know his own mission till he was anointed by Elijah. Just. M. ' Dial.' § 8, p. 226 B.
when Christ (the Christ) cometh] The exact expression (Zrav cp^i/rat contrasted with orav (\6r), •*>• 31) marks the actual moment when the' coming is realised. The appearance is a surprise.
28. Then cried Jesus...as he taught, saying] Jesus therefore, as being acquainted with their partial knowledge and the conclusions which they drew from it, cried aloud (e«pa- £tv) in the temple, teaching and saying. The testimony is given publicly and with solemn emphasis. Comp. v. 37, xii. 44, i. 15. The original word (Kpdfw) occurs only in these places in the Gospel (xii. 13, xix. 12, are false readings).
The repetition of the words in the temple (comp. v. 14) seems to indicate a break between this scene and the last.
Te both know met and ye know (and k n o w}...] The claim of the people of Jerusalem is drawn out at length (me, and whence I am), and its superficial truth is conceded. So far as mere outward experience goes, Christ answers, Ye do know me and my origin; but that is not all. / am not come of myself, selfcommissioned, dependent on no other authority, but He that sent me is true, is one who completely satisfies the conception of a sender
am: and I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not.
29 But I know him: for I am from him, and he hath sent me.
30 Then they sought to take him: but no man laid hands on him, because his hour was not yet come.
lieved on him, and said, When Christ cometh, will he do more miracles than these which this man hath done?
32 *(\ The Pharisees heard that the people murmured such things concerning him; and the Pharisees and the chief priests sent officers to take him.
(dA»70iKor); it is on Him I rely, and from Him I draw my strength; and Him ye (emphatic) know not.
and I am not...] The facts which the people knew and the facts which they did not know are simply set side by side. Comp. v. 30, viii. ao, ix. 30; Mark xii. 12.
it true] The word rendered true (aXndtvos, compare iv. 23) retains its proper meaning. God is described as true not merely in so far as He gave a true message, but as one who really sent a messenger; a real Father, as it were, sending a real Son. The question was as to the authority of Christ.
ye know nof\ Comp. iv. 22. This fatal want of knowledge made their boast of knowledge vain. The words are a sad echo of the opening words. As they thought they knew Christ so they thought they knew
29. / (omit But) — as opposed to you — know him, for (because) / am from him~\ Now as always I rest upon Him, deriving my whole being from Him, and he bath tent (sent) me. The continuance of being and the historic mission are set side by side; and both are referred to God.
30. Then they sought...'] They sought therefore— because of His claim to be sent from God — to take him. The subject is taken from "some of them of Jerusalem" (v. 25), those among them who are specially called " Jews." Compare <w. 32, 44, (viii. 20, 59), (x. 31), x. 39, xi. 57- but no man...'} and no man... Compare •v. 28, note. his hour} Compare xiiL i, note.
31. And many of the people... ~\ But of the multitude — in contrast with the leaders of Jerusalem — many believed on bim, not only gave credence to what He said ("believed Him"), but surrendered themselves to His guidance. It does not appear that they yet definitely recognised Him as Messiah, because He had not yet openly asserted His claim to the title (x. 24), though they were prepared to do so.
(^17, Vulg. num quid) suggests the inference that Jesus must be the Christ, though the inference is not drawn.
this man hath done} this man did. They look back upon the "signs" which Christ had wrought as a whole, now seen dispassionately far off.
32 — 36. These verses describe the third scene in the controversy. The wishes of Christ's enemies (v. 30) soon found active expression. The Sanhedrin sent public officers to seize Him; and in their presence for the first time He announces His speedy and irrevocable departure from "the Jews" (<w. 33 f.), to their bewilderment (yv. 35 f.).
heard that the people murmured such things'} heard the multitude murmuring these things, as being inwardly dissatisfied and irresolute.
the Pharisees and the chief priests'} the chief priests and Pharisees. The combination occurs also in St Matthew: Matt. xxi. 45, xxvii. 62. The phrase probably describes the Sanhedrin under the form of its constituent classes. Comp. v. 45, note, xi. 47, 57, xviii. 3.
chief priests] The title appears to be given not only to those who had held the office of high-priest, like Annas (see ch. xviii. 13, note), and his son Eleazar, and Simon the son of Kamhit, and Ishmael the son of Phabi, who may all have been alive at the time, but also to members of the hierarchical families which were represented by these men, alike infamous in Jewish tradition. Comp. Derenbourg, 'Histoire de Palestine,' pp. 230 ff. Thus the title describes rather a political faction than a definite office. Comp. Acts iv. 6 (as many as were of the kindred of the high priest). See v. 45, xi. 47, 57, xii- Io> xviii- 3, (35), xix. 6, 15, 21.
33. Then said Jesus unto them} Jesus therefore said. The words have a wider application than to the officers.
Yet a little while am I with you, arid then I go unto him that sent me.
34 AYe shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I am, thither ye cannot come.
35 Then said the Jews among themselves, Whither will he go, that
shall not find him? will he go unto the dispersed among; the' tQen- 'Or«,
36 What manner of saying is this that he said, Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I thither ye cannot come?
with you] The "multitude," the "Jews," the " officers," are all grouped together in one body.
I go...'] Three Greek words are thus translated in St John, and two of them in similar connexions. Each word expresses a distinct aspect of departure, and its special force must be taken into account in the interpretation of the passage in which it is found. The first word (vTrayo)), which is used here, emphasizes the personal act of going in itself, as a withdrawal (viii. 14, ai f., xiii. 3, 33, 36, xiv. 4 f., 38, xvi. 5, 10, 16 f.).
The second word (iropevopai) marks the going as connected with a purpose, a mission, an end to be gained, a work to be done (v. 35, xiv. 3, ia, 28, xvi. 7, 38).
The third word (airfpxopcu) expresses simple separation, the point left (vi. 68, xvi. 7, go away).
Their differences are very clearly seen in a comparison of xvi. 10 (vndy<a) with xiv. a 8 (n-opewo/iat), and the succession of words in xvi. 7 — 10 (iropfvdvt, aTre\6a>, virdyca).
unto him that sent me] During the discourses in this chapter the reference is to the authority of mission (him that sent me) and not of nature (the Father). The thought of the Father is added in ch. viii. 16, 18. These words themselves leave a riddle unsolved.
34. Ye shall seek me..."] not in penitence nor yet in anger, but simply in distress. You shall recall my words and works, and wish once again to see if it might be that in me there were deliverance. The thought is not of the Christ generally, but of the Lord Himself, whose power and love they had experienced. Comp. Luke xvii. aa. Contrast this ineffectual seeking with Matt. vii. 7.
and where I am...'] The fact of failure is referred to the cause of failure. Christ is essentially there whither He goes. The stress in this place is laid upon the difference of character (/ am) which involves separation, and not upon the simple historical separation. Comp. viii. ai, xiii. 33 (I go). The pronouns in the original are placed in emphatic juxtaposition («/u ryw, v/ monopoly of religious privileges are separated from the rest. Hence we have among themselves (xii. 19) and not one to another.
will he go~] will this man go, this strange pretender (ovros). The pronoun here carries an accent of surprise and contempt. Comp. vi. 5 a.
that we shall not..."] that we (iJ/Kfts) who stand in the closest connexion with all the people of God.
the dispersed among the Gentiles'] the dispersion among the Greeks (ij diaa-nopa TU>V 'EXXj^coi/, Vulg. dispersio gentium), the Jews, that is, who are scattered among the heathen Greek-speaking nations. The Jews who were still separated from their own land after the Return were called by two strikingly n?J, he made bare, twoi/an, fji(ToiK«riai at Xwo-t'a), and the "Dispersion" (Si which has no distinct Hebrew correlative. The first marks their relation to their own land; the second their relation to the lands which they occupied. Their own land was stripped of them, and they were separated from their national privileges. On the other hand, they were so scattered among the nations as to become the seed of a future harvest. This thought is recognised in a striking comment on Hos. ii. 34, quoted by Wlinsche: R. Eliezer said the Eternal has therefore scattered the Israelites among other nations that the heathen may attach themselves to them ('Pesach.' 87 b). Diaspora first occurs Deut. xxviii. 35. Comp. Isai. xlix. 6; Jer. xv. 7; a Mace. i. 37; i Pet. i. i; James i. i. For the genitive see i Pet. i. i. This usage seems to be quite decisive against the interpretation "the dispersed Greeks."
and teach the Gentiles (Greeks)] make these isolated groups of Jews the startingpoint (as the apostles actually did) of teaching among the Gentiles. This is the climax of irrationality. No true Messiah, no one seriously claiming the title, could (it is argued) entertain such a plan.
36. What manner of saying is this..."] What Is this word... In spite of all, Christ's words cannot be shaken off. They are not to be explained away. A vague sense remains that there is in them some unfathomed meaning.
'Lev. 23. ^y 'In the last day, that great day of the* feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.
the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
39 ('But this spake he of the Spirit, /Isa>-44.3. which they that believe on him should *'
3. The discussions on the last day of the Feast (vv. 37 — 52).
The record of the circumstances of the last day of the Feast consists of a fragmentary utterance containing a most significant promise (37 — 39), together with its effect upon the multitude (40 — 44); and then more remotely upon the Sanhedrin (45 — 52).
37. la the... the feast} Now on the last day, the great day of the feast. The peculiar greatness of the eighth day lay in the fact that it was the close of the whole festival and kept as a Sabbath (Lev. xxiii. 36). It has been conjectured that it was observed in memory of the entrance into Canaan. At present it is treated as a separate Festival. Compare Lightfoot, ad loc.
stood} The original (tiorquti) is singularly vivid: Jesus was standing, watching, as it might be, the procession of the people from their booths to the temple, and then, moved by some occasion, he cried... Comp. i. 35, note, xviii. 5, note.
If any man thirst] The image appears to have been occasioned by the libations of water brought in a golden vessel from Siloam which were made at the time of the morning sacnfice on each of the seven days of the feast while Isai. xii. 3 was sung. It is uncertain whether the libations were made on the eighth day. If they were not made, the significant cessation of the striking rite on this one day of the feast would give a still more fitting occasion for the words.
The pouring out of the water (like the use of the great lights, viii. 12), was a commemoration of one conspicuous detail of the life in the wilderness typified by the festival. The water brought from the rock supplied an image of future blessing to the prophets: Ezek. xlvii. i, 12; Joel iii. 18. And that gift is definitely connected with the Lord by St Paul: i Cor. x. 4.
Christ therefore shews how the promise of that early miracle was completely fulfilled in Himself in a higher form. He who drank of that water thirsted again; but the water which He gave became a spring of water within. As in iv. 14 the thought passes at once from the satisfaction of personal wants to the satisfaction of the wants of others which follows on this.
Nothing can prove more clearly the intimate relation between -the teaching recorded by
St John and the Old Testament, than the manner in which Christ is shewn to transfer to Himself the figures of the Exodus (the brazen serpent, the manna, the water, the fiery pillar).
38. The connexion of the phrase he that believeth on me, either with the words which precede (let him that believeth on me come to me and drink), or with those which follow (he that believeth on me as the Scripture hath said, i.e. truly, in accordance with the divine word), is obviously against the spirit of the whole passage. The words are out of strict construction. Comp. vi. 39; (Rev. ii. 26, iii. 12, txV.
The sense of thirst — personal want — comes first; then with the satisfaction of this, the fulness of faith; and then, the refreshing energies of faith.
as the scripture hath said (said)] The reference is not to any one isolated passage, but to the general tenour of such passages as Isai. Iviii. 1 1; Zech. xiv. 8, taken in connexion with the original image (Exod. xvii. 6; Num. xx. n).
shall flow rivers} The reception of the blessing leads at once to the distribution of it in fuller measure. Compare the thought in iv. 14, vi. 57, v. 26. He who drinks of the Spiritual Rock becomes in turn himself a rock from within which the waters flow to slake the thirst of others.
There is a fine passage in Augustine's Commentary on this passage as to the character of Christ's gifts: ' in Job. Tract.' xxxn. 9.
39. But this spake he} The inspired activity of the apostles did not commence till after Pentecost. Comp. Luke xxiv. 49.
they that believe on him should receive} they that believed on him were about to receive (were to receive)... The thought of the Evangelist goes back to the definite group of the first disciples (reading ot iriorevo-avTes not the Holy Ghost (the Spirit) was not yet given] The addition of the word given expresses the true form of the original, in which Spirit is without the article (ovirco T^v irvevfjia). When the term occurs in this form, it marks an operation, or manifestation, or gift of the Spirit, and not the personal Spirit. Compare i. 33, xx. 22; Matt. i. 18, 20, iii. n, xii. 28; Luke i. 15, 35, 41, 67, ii. 25, iv. i.
because that} Comp. xvi. 7, note, xx. 17. The necessary limitations of Christ's historical presence with the disciples excluded that reali-
yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
40 H Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet.
41 Others said, This is the Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee?
»"Matt2. 42 "*Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was?
43 So there was a division among the people because of him.
44 And some of them would have taken him j but no man laid hands on him.
45 11 Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; and they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him?
46 The officers answered, Never man spake like this man.
47 Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived?
It is impossible not to contrast the mysteriousness of this utterance with the clear teaching of St John himself on the " unction " (ypi'oyxa) of believers (i John ii. 20 ff.), which forms a commentary, gained by later experience, upon the words of the Lord.
glorified] This is the first distinct reference to the Lord's " glorification." The conception is characteristic of St John's Gospel (compare i. 14, ii. n; Introd. p. xlvii.), and includes in one complex whole the Passion with the Triumph which followed. Thus St John regards Christ's death as a Victory (compare xii. 32 f. note, xi. 4, 40), following the words of the Lord who identified the hour of His death with the hour of His glorification (xii. 23 f.). In accordance with the same thought Christ spoke of Himself as already " glorified " when Judas had gone forth to his work (xiii. 31, note); and so He had already received His glory by the faith of His disciples before He suffered (xvii. 10, note). In another aspect His glory followed after His withdrawal from earth (xvii. 5, xvi. 14). By this use of the phrase the Evangelist brings out clearly the absolute divine unity of the work of Christ in His whole "manifestation " (i John iii. 5, 8, i. a), which he does not (as St Paul) regard in distinct stages as humiliation and exaltation.
40. Many of the people therefore... this saying] Some therefore of the multitude... these words (Xoyovs, Vulg. sermones, discourses), that is, as it appears, all the discourses at the festival, and not those on the last day only. Probably this judgment marks the general opinion.
said] The original verb in this verse and the next (eA«yoi>, Vulg. dicebant) describes vividly a repeated expression of opinion.
out of the town of Bethlehem, where...] From Bethlehem the village where... Comp. Isai. xi. i; Jer. xxiii. 5; Mic. v. a. It seems strange that anyone should have argued from this passage that the writer of the Gospel was unacquainted with Christ's birth at Bethlehem. He simply relates the words of the multitude who were unacquainted with it (comp. Luke iv. a3); and there is a tragic irony in the fact that the condition which the objectors ignorantly assumed to be unsatisfied was actually satisfied.
44. some of them] of the multitude. Part of "the common people" were now dissatisfied with Christ, and would have taken Him, as the people of Jerusalem (v. 30) and the Pharisees (v. 32) before.
45. Then... officers] The officers therefore came, because they had found no opportunity for fulfilling their mission.
the chief priests and Pharisees] Regarded now as one body (npos rovs a. «cat *.)' tne Sanhedrin, and not as the separate classes composing it, as in v. 32 (01 a. KOI ol <t>.). The day was a Sabbath and yet the council was gathered.
they said... Why have ye not brought f (Why did ye not bring?)] The pronoun (eKeti/ot) used in the first clause (they said) is that which generally marks the more remote subject (comp. Acts iii. 13). In the thought of the apostle these enemies of Christ fill up, as it were, the dark background of his narrative, ever present in the distance.
46. Never man spake like this man] Never man so spake, according to the true reading.
47. Then... the Pharisees] The Pharisees therefore specially standing out from the whole body answered them. The hostility of opinion is stronger than that of office.
Are...deceived?] Are ye also — whose simple duty it is to execute our orders — led astray (v. i a)? Their fault was in action (led astray) rather than in thought (deceived).
48 Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him?
49 But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed.
50 Nicodemus saith unto them, • chap. 3. («ne that came to Jesus by night, »Deut.i7, being one of them,)
before it hear him, and know what he doeth?
52 They answered and said unto him, Art thou also of Galilee? Search, and look: for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet.
53 And every man went unto his own house.
48. of the rulers] of the members of the Sanhedrin (cf. v. z6, iii. i, xii. 41), whom you are bound to obey, or of the Pharisees whose opinions you are bound to accept. The original form is significant: Hath any one (/*»} rig) of the rulers believed on htm; or, to take a wider range, of the Pharisees t
49. this people] this multitude of whom we hear, and by whose opinion you are influenced, are cursed. As knowing not the law, they were in the opinion of the wise " a people of the earth," such that he who gave them a morsel merited divine chastisement A saying is given in ' Aboth ' n. 6, " No brutish man is sin fearing, nor is one of the people of the earth pious." Compare Wetstein, ad loc. Men were divided into " people of the earth" and "fellows" (Dnan), i.e. educated men.
60. that came to Jesus by night} that came to him before, according to the true reading.
being one of them] and therefore able to speak from a position of equality. So the question of -v. 48 was answered.
51. Doth our law...hear him] Those who pleaded for the law really broke the law. Compare Deut. i. 16; Exod. xxiii. i.
before it bear him] Literally, except It first hear from himself, i.e. "hear what he has to urge on his own side." The Law is personified. The true Judge is a living law.
52. Art thau also of Galilee?'] and therefore moved by local feeling. At the same time by the choice of this term to characterize Christ's followers, the questioners contrast them contemptuously with the true Jews.
Search, and look: for..."] Search, and see that... The particle (on) is ambiguous; but it seems on the whole better to give to it the sense " that " than " for."
reference appears to be not so much to the past as to the future. Galilee is not the true country of the prophets; we cannot look then for Messiah to come thence. The words have that semblance of general truth which makes them quite natural in this connexion, though Jonah, Hoshea, Nahum, and perhaps Elijah, Elisha and Amos were of Galilee. Thus it was said by R. Jehuda in the name of Rab that " the law was maintained by the dwellers in Judsea " (' Eruv.' 53, as quoted by Wlinsche). Comp. Neubauer, ' La Geogr. du Talmud,' pp. 183 f.
This account of a most characteristic incident in the Lord's life is certainly not a part of St John's narrative. The evidence against its genuineness, as an original piece of the Gospel, both external and internal, is overwhelming (see Additional Note); but on the other hand it is beyond doubt an authentic fragment of apostolic tradition. Probably its preservation was due to Papias. The incident seems to belong to the last visit to Jerusalem; and it is placed in this connexion in some MSS. of St Luke (after Luke xxi.).
The special importance of the narrative lies in the fact that it records the single case in which the Lord deals with a specific sinful act. And this He does (i) by referring the act to the inward spring of action, and (a) by declining to treat the legal penalty as that which corresponds to the real guilt. So there is opened to us a glimpse of a tribunal more searching, and yet more tender, than the tribunals of men.
53. every man went] More closely, they went every man... but Jesus (viii. i)... Thus the contrast between the whole gathering in the temple (not the members of the Sanhedrin only) and Christ is made more complete.
ADDITIONAL NOTE on CHAP. vii. 39-
There is a singular and interesting variety tian Versions represent the same reading, of readings in the phrase which describes the though Memph. adds the article in its rendergift of the Holy Spirit as yet future, though ing. ^ T,,,, the sense is not materially affected by them. (a) OVTTO> yap ijv irvevpa aywv, LX, Mass (i) o07T« yap fr 7rm>,Mi, NT. The Egyp- of authorities. (A is defective.)
All the readings have early authority. But while (i) explains the others, it is not easy to see how it could have been derived from them.
The simple addition of ayiov in (a) was a natural assimilation with xx. 22; and the glosses (3) and (4) which appear to be of equal antiquity express the sense truly, which might easily appear to be obscure in the bare (and original) text. The ungrammatical form in D marks the process of corruption.
JESUS went unto the mount of Olives. 2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5 * Now Moses in the law com- * Lev. 20 manded us, that such should be I0 stoned: but what sayest thou?
6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him.
CHAP. VIII. 1. the mount of Olives] The Mount of Olives is nowhere mentioned by name in St John's Gospel. It is mentioned several times in each of the other Gospels in connexion with the last scenes of the Life of the Lord.
2. early in the morning (op#pou)] Compare Luke xxi. 38 (tfp4jpt(n>).
he sat down] assumed the position ot the authoritative teacher. Compare Matt. v. i, xxiii. a; Mark ix. 35.
3. the scribes and the Pharisees'] This is a common title in the Synoptists for the body summarily described by St John as the Jews. Compare Luke v. 30, vi. 7, xi. 53, xv. a. St John never names "the scribes."
brought (bring) unto him] We may suppose that the guilty woman had been brought first to them as a preparatory step to her trial.
4. was taken] hath been taken. The original (KaretXqTn-at) brings the present reality of guilt vividly before the reader (Vulg. modo deprehensa esf).
5. Now Moses in the law... that such should be stoned (to stone such)] Deut. xxii. 43 f. The punishment of stoning was specified in the case of a betrothed bride. The form of death in other cases was not laid down, and according to Talmudic tradition it was strangulation. It seems better therefore to suppose that this exact crime had been committed than to suppose any inaccuracy in the statement. It is said also that a priest's daughter was stoned if she committed adultery; but this was not a provision of the Law. Compare Lightfoot, ad loc.
but what] what therefore... Assuming this enactment as explicit, what conclusion canst thou draw for the guidance of our action in the present case? Thou claimest to speak with authority and to fulfil the Law: solve our difficulty now.
6. This (And (S<) this)... tempting him] Compare Matt. xxii. 18. The dilemma corresponds to that in the question as to the tribute money. To affirm the binding validity of the Mosaic judgment would be to counsel action contrary to the Roman law. To set the Mosaic judgment aside would be to give up the claim to fulfil the Law. In either case there was material for accusation, prac* tically fatal to the assumption of the Messiahship to which the Lord's teaching evidently pointed. He might be carried away into a premature declaration of His claims, and fall under the civil power; or he might disparage Moses, and lose the favour of the people. The "temptation" lay in the design to lead the Lord to one of these two answers.
wrote] Both here (Karfypafav), and in •v. 8 (eypatjxv), the tense in the original presents the action as going on before the witnesses. It is quite vain to conjecture what was written, if indeed we are to understand anything more than the mere mechanical action of writing. The attitude represents one who follows out his own thoughts and is unwilling to give heed to those who question him. The very strangeness of the action marks the authenticity of the detail. The words added in italics in A. V. represent a gloss found in many MSS. (ji^ Trpoa-iroiov-
But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said
*Deut-'7- unto them, 5He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard /V, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at
the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
1 1 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
He that is without sin...'] The colour of the word "sinless" is caught from the context. Though it would be unnatural to assume that all in the group of accusers were actually guilty of adultery, there is nothing unnatural in supposing that each could feel in himself the sinful inclination which had here issued in the sinful act. In this way the words of the Lord revealed to the men the depths of their own natures, and they shrank in that Presence from claiming the prerogative of innocence. At the same time the question as to the woman's offence was raised at once from a legal to a spiritual level. The judges were made to feel that freedom from outward guilt is no claim to sinlessness. And the offender in her turn was led to see that flagrant guilt does not bar hope. The Law as in a figure dealt with that which is visible; the Gospel penetrates to the inmost soul.
Jirst] taking, as it were, the place of the witness; Deut. xvii. 7. For here the guiltless was required to take the place of a witness in a higher sense. There is nothing in the words which disparages legal punishment. These men were not the appointed instruments of the law.
8. again he stooped down... and with his finger wrote...'} as unwilling to speak more.
9. And they which heard...conscience, went out one by one] And they when they heard went out one by one, as they felt the power of Christ's sentence. The interpolated clause (being convicted by their own conscience) is a true explanation of the sense.
beginning at the eldest... (the elders)] whose sorrowful experience of life was the fullest. The word is not a title of office, but simply of age.
the woman standing (being) in the midst] She still remained bound as it were by her sin in the presence of Christ. " Two persons were left," Augustine says (ad loc.~), " the unhappy woman and Compassion Incarnate " (Rflicti sunt duo, misera et mtserioordia).
Woman... thine accusers? hath... tbeef] Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn thee? The question marks the interval during which the Lord had waited for the effect of His words.
Neither do I condemn thee] though I am truly sinless. The words are not words of forgiveness (Luke vii. 48), but simply of one who gives no sentence (comp. Luke xii. 14). The condemnation has reference to the outward punishment and not to the moral guilt: that is dealt with in the words which follow. " Ergo et Dominus damnavit, sed peccatum non hominem " (Aug. ad loc.).
The Lord had applied to Himself one of the typical miracles of the Exodus (vii. 37 ff.): in this section He seems to apply to Himself that of the fiery pillar. As " the light of the world" He is self-attested (v. ia f.). But for the apprehension of His nature sympathy is needed (14, 15). At the same time even as the Lord's judgment was an expression of the divine will, so His witness included that of the Father (irv. 16 — 18), who could be recognised by those who truly knew Christ
12. Then spake Jesus again...'] Jesus there fo re again spake... The opinions about Jesus were divided. The rulers were blinded by their prejudices. Jesus therefore traces back doubt and unbelief to want of inner sympathy with Himself. At the same time (again, vii. 37) the second symbol of the festival was interpreted.
spake~] This word compared with cried (vii. 37) suggests an occasion of less solemnity, probably after the Feast, but the time cannot be certainly determined.
walk in darkness, but shall have the them, ^Though I bear record of my- d chaP- *•
13 The Pharisees therefore said unto him, Thou bearest record of thyself j thy record is not true.
self, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go.
unto theni\ Not to the multitude of the pilgrims, but rather to the representatives of the Jewish party at Jerusalem (the Pharisees, <v. 13; the Jews, w, 22, 31). The words refer back to the subject of vii. 52. The "multitude" (vii. 20, 31, 32, 40, 43> 49)^ which figures throughout the last chapter, does not appear again till xi. 41.
/ am the light of the (world] In the court of the women, where this discourse was held (see -v. 20), were great golden candelabra which were lighted on the first night of the Feast of Tabernacles, and perhaps on the other nights. The sight of these and the remembrance of the light which they had cast over the otherwise unbroken gloom of the city seems to have suggested the figure. But the lamps themselves were only images of the pillar of light which had guided the people in the wilderness, just as the libations (vii. 38) recalled the supply of water from the Rock. And it is to this finally that the words of the Lord refer. The idea of that light of the Exodus — transitory and partial — was now fulfilled in the living Light of the world. Compare Isai. xlii. 6, xlix. 6; Mai. iv. a; Luke ii. 3*. According to tradition " Light" was one of the names of Messiah. Compare Lightfoot and Wtlnsche, ad loc. The same title in all its fulness was given by the Lord to His disciples (Matt. v. 14); and St Paul (Phil. ii. 15) speaks of Christians as "luminaries " ((/HBo-rijpf r). God is " Light " absolutely (i John i. 5).
of the world] not of one nation only. This thought went beyond the popular hope. Buxtorf ('Lex.' s. v. 13) quotes a remarkable saying from Talm. Hieros. 'Sabb.' ch. 2, that "the first Adam was the light of the world."
that followeth] The thought of the pilgrimage still remains. The light is not for self-absorbed contemplation. It is given for action, movement, progress.
in darkness"] in the darkness. The phrase does not simply describe an accompanying circumstance of the movement, but the sphere in which it takes place. "The darkness" is opposed to "the light" (compare i. 5, xii. 46; i John ii. 9, ii), and includes the conceptions of ignorance, limitation, death.
shall have] not only shall look upon, or regard from a distance, but receive so that it becomes his own, a part of his true self. Comp. iv. 14, vi. 57. The Pauline phrase the light of life] the light which both springs from life and issues in life; of which life is the essential principle and the necessary result. Compare i. 4. Parallel phrases are The bread of life (vi. 35, note); the -water of life (Rev. xxi. 6); the tree of 'life, Rev. xxii. 14; and perhaps the crown of life, James i. 12.
13. Thou bearest record (witness) of (concerning) thyself] This objection points to the very characteristic of Christ's Being. It must be as they say because Christ is the light. The reality, the character of light, is attested by its shining. If men deny that it does shine, then there is no more room for discussion.
thy record (witness) is not true] This is perhaps as much an independent assertion as a consequence from the fact that the witness to Christ was from Himself, and so formally imperfect. The Pharisees set their judgment against His assertion. He affirms a truth; they, as claiming equal right of knowledge, deny it. Lightfoot (ad loc.} gives some interesting examples of the application of the law of witness to a particular case (' Rosh Hashanah,' i ff.). "No man," it is said, "can give witness for himself" (Mishnah,- ' Ketub.' ii. 9).
14. Though (Even if) I bear record (witness) of myself, my record (witness) is true...] The reply meets the objection of the Pharisees. The witness of Christ to Himself was essentially complete, and they had not that equality of knowledge on which they presumed to rely. A strong emphasis is thrown upon the pronoun (Even if /...), to mark at once the peculiarity in the source and in the foundation of the witness. Compare v. 31. The " I " in the earlier passage marked the separate individuality; here it marks the fulness of the whole Person.
is true] in point of fact (aXrjdjs), and not, as in xix. 35, in formal validity (d\r)0ivij).
for (because) / know...] True witness even to a single fact in the spiritual life involves a knowledge of the past and of the future. In the past lie the manifold elements out of which the present grew; in the future lies the revelation of what the present implicitly contains. He can bear witness to himself who has such knowledge of his own being. This no man has, but the Son has it, and in virtue of it He can reveal the Father. Comp.xvi. 28.
1 6 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.
Matt. 18. that the testimony of two men is true.
1 8 I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.
19 Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.
ye cannot tell...'] ye know not... To such knowledge the Pharisees could lay no claim. They could not even discern the immediate spiritual relationship of the Lord to the unseen order (whence I come and (or)...), and still less the mystery of the Incarnation (whence I came...) which underlay it.
15. The thought of "knowledge" passes into that of "judgment." The Pharisees had not the knowledge, nor could they in their present state gain the knowledge. They judged after the flesh (comp. 2 Cor. v. 16). They were content to form their conclusions on an imperfect, external, superficial examination. Without feeling any necessity for deeper or wider insight, they decided according to the appearance of things; and so by that part of our nature which deals with appearances. Christ, on the other hand, though He embraced in this knowledge all the circumstances, and aspects, and issues of life, judged no man. The time for this was not yet; nor was this His work (xii. 47).
The contrast in these words may be compared with that below in v. 23, (26?).
16. But this absence of judgment on Christ's part was not from any defect in the completeness of His knowledge. For He adds, And yet (even, vi. 51, note) if I judge, my judgment is true...
is true., for (because)...] Not only true as answering to the special facts (dXndijs, -v. 14), but true as satisfying our perfect conception of what judgment ought to be (dXqdtpn, comp. iv. 23, note, and xix. 35), because it is not an isolated or personal judgment, but a judgment springing out of a conscious union with the Author of all Truth. A saying given in ' Pirke Aboth' (iv. 12) gives the characteristic thought which the Lord meets: " Judge not alone (HTP), for none may judge alone save ONE."
17. // is also written in your Jaw, that the testimony...'] And even In your law — the Law which is your law — it is written...that the witness... The Pharisees had appealed to the Law; the Law then of which they claimed absolute possession (vii. 49) is shewn to decide against them (Deut. xix. 15). The phrase does not in any way disparage or set aside the Law as a divine revelation, but marks the Jewish claim (v. 56, your father).
It is...written] The exact form used here (yiypanrai) is found in St John of the old Scriptures only in this place (compare xx. 31). It is the common form of citation in other books. St John elsewhere uses the resolved form (yrypa/iji«>oi> eVnV), which is read here by Cod. Sin.; ii. 17, note, x. 34, (xv. 25).
of two men] The word "men" (8v'o avdpdmuv) does not occur in the original text or in the LXX. It appears to be introduced here to indicate the superior force of the divine witness.
18. / am one that bear witness... beareth witness] I am he that beareth witness (o /uzprvpcoi')... The change in the form of the two clauses presents the difference of the mode in which the two witnesses give their testimony. He that gave the witness was one, but through Him the Father also spake and wrought: " / am he that beareth witness; and, at the same time, in and through me, the Father beareth witness of me, so that your objection loses its point." The witness of the Father from whom Christ came was given not merely in the miracles done but in the whole ministry of the Son.
19. Then said they...'] They said therefore... The appeal to an absent, unseen, witness did not satisfy the Pharisees.
Where is thy Father f\ The form of the question shews the spirit of the questioners. They do not say "Who is thy Father?" as if they were in uncertainty as to the reference, but "Where...?" implying that a reference to one whom they could not look upon and interrogate was of no avail for the purpose of the argument.
Te neither know me, nor...'] Rather, Ye know neither me nor... The question was futile. The mere fact that it was put shewed that the true answer to it could not be given or received. There must be knowledge of what we seek before we can profitably ask where to seek it.
With this question and answer the question of Philip and the answer given to it may be contrasted, xiv. 8 ff.
20. These (words spake Jesus (He) in the treasury] The Treasury was in the Court of the women, the most public part of the temple (compare Mark xii. 41 ff.; Luke xxi. i). The mention of the locality adds force to the the treasury, as he taught in the temple: and no man laid hands on him j for his hour was not yet come.
21 Then said Jesus again unto them, I go my way, and ye shall
seek me, and shall die in your sins: whither I go, ye cannot come.
22 Then said the Jews, Will he kill himself? because he saith, Whither I go, ye cannot come.
notice of the Lord's immunity from violence which follows. For the Sanhedrin held their sittings ordinarily in the chamber Gazitb, which was situated between the Court of the women and the inner Court. So Jesus continued to teach within earshot of His enemies.
This section describes the spiritual crisis in the preaching to Israel. It consists of two parts. The first part (21 — 30) contains the distinct presentation of the one object of faith with the declaration of the consequences of unbelief (v. 24). This is closed by the notice of a large accession of disciples (v. 30). The second part (31 — 58) gives an analysis of the essential character and issues of selfish belief and false Judaism. This is closed by the first open assault upon the Lord with violence O- 59)-
21 — 30. The subject of these verses is that which had been already partly announced at the feast (vii. 33 ff.). Christ shews the momentous issues which hang upon His brief sojourn with the Jews (v. 21), who are essentially opposite to Him in character (i>. 23), and therefore only to be delivered by transforming faith in Him (v. 24). At present a plainer revelation of Himself was impossible (v. 25 f.); but hereafter all would be made clear (v. 28). Meanwhile His work was His witness (i». 29). And this some were enabled to accept (v. 30).
21. Then said Jesus again...'] He therefore— because while He was still able to speak freely (v. 20) there was yet time and opportunity for some at least to gain the knowledge which they lacked — said again to them, as He had said before, vii. 34, but now with a more distinct and tragic warning, I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins (sin).
ye shall seek me] The emphasis lies (as in vii. 34) upon the word seek. There is no contrast here between "ye" and "me." The search was the search of despair under the pressure of overwhelming calamity; and the issue was not failure only but death, and death in sin, for the search under false motives, with false ends, was itself sin, an open, utter abandonment of the divine will.
your sin] The sin was one in its essence, though its fruits were manifold (i;. 24). Hence the order here is, " in your sin shall ye die," while in v. 24 the emphasis is transposed (" ye shall die in your sins").
whither I (tya) go, ye (iip-els) cannot come~] Compare vii. 34 (where I am...). Here the contrast of persons (/, ye) is distinctly marked, as containing the ground of the separation. When the same words are applied to the disciples (xiii. 33) the impossibility of following is shewn to be for a time only (xiii. 36).
22. Then said the Jews'] The Jews, who were the speakers also in vii. 35, therefore said, in scornful contempt of such an assumption of superiority. The repetition of the imperfect (eXe-yo^, eA«yei> contrasted with flirev, 21, 24, 28) marks the record as a compressed summary.
Will he (furjrt, iv. 29, note) kill himself? because (that)...] The bitterness of the mockery, like the sternness of the denunciation, is increased (vii. 35). The questioners assume that no way can be open to Jesus which is not equally open to them, unless it be the way to Gehenna opened by self-murder. Thither indeed they could not follow Him. By the Jews suicide was placed on the same level with murder, Joseph. ' B. J.' in. 8 (14). 5; and the darkest regions of the world below were supposed to be reserved for those who were guilty of the crime (aSijs oVxerai ras •\j^V)(as {TKOTtcorepoj, Jos. /. c.).
23. The Lord meets the taunt of His opponents by developing that difference of nature in which lay at once the cause of their inability to follow Him, and the cause of their inability to understand Him. He and they belonged essentially to different regions; the spring of their life, the sphere of their thoughts, were separated from the spring and the sphere of His by an infinite chasm. The difference was equally great whether it was regarded in its final source or in its present manifestation. The circumstances of earthly life give scope for the embodiment of two characters absolutely opposed. For earthly life lies between and in connexion with two orders, and it includes in itself two orders. It may be swayed by higher or lower influences; it may be fashioned on a fleeting or on an eternal type. And between these there can be no fellowship.
23 And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world j I am not of this world.
24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
25 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning.
26 I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him.
Te arc from beneath} Your whole being in its deepest principles is drawn from the powers of the lower, sensual, realm (« T«5i> *«ra>, Vulg. de deorsum)-, you are "flesh of flesh" (iii. 6). Comp. James iii. 15 ff. For the phrase "to be of" (tlvai «•'«) see v. 47, xviii. 37-
/ am not of this 'world'] but the bringer in of a new and spiritual order, to which entrance can be gained only by a new birth.
24. / said therefore] because this fatal chasm separates you from my true home and from the region of life, that ye shall die — here the emphasis is changed and lies upon the end "death," and not upon the state "sin" — in your sins, which in their varied form reveal the presence of the one fatal source (v. 21). For there is but one mode of escape from death, one means of obtaining life, one " way " of approaching the Father by which earth and heaven are united, even fellowship by Faith with Him who is, and who has become man, and if ye believe not (unless ye believe) that I am, ye shall die in your sins.
that I am] not simply " that I am the Messiah," such as your imagination has drawn for you-; but far more than this, that I am, that in me is the spring of life and light and strength; that I present to you the invisible majesty of God; that I unite in virtue of my essential Being the seen and the unseen, the finite and the infinite.
Who art thou f] The question corresponds with the general translation " I am." The wish of the questioners is evidently to draw from the Lord an open declaration that He is "the Christ," that is the Deliverer such as they conceived of him.
Even the same.../^ beginning] Among the many interpretations of this most difficult phrase two appear to have chief claim to consideration:
(1) Altogether, essentially, I am that which I even speak to you. That is to say, My Person is my teaching. The words of Christ are the revelation of the Word Incarnate; and
(2) Hoiv is it that I even speak to yuu at allf How is it that I so much as speak with you? That is to say, The question which you ask cannot be answered. The very fact that it is proposed makes it clear, as it has been clear before, that it is vain for me to seek to lead you by my words to a better knowledge of myself.
Of these two the second interpretation, which was in the main that of the Greek fathers, seems to fall in best with the general sense of the dialogue. See Additional Note.
26. We must suppose a pause after the last words, if they are taken interrogatively, and then the sad train of thought is continued. The Jews, even if they had misunderstood the revelation which Christ had given of Himself, and were unworthy of any further manifestation of His Person — and indeed in virtue of this their grievous fault — furnished many subjects for teaching and judgment. In them unbelief was embodied. So the sentence follows: I have many things to say and to judge of (concerning) you. The utterance of these judgments will widen the chasm between us. But they must be spoken at all cost; they are part of my divine charge; he that sent me is true', in His message there is no superfluity and no defect, and the things which I heard from Him, when I came on earth to do His will, these speak I unto the world.
but he...'].It seems best to find the opposition (as above) in the anticipated failure of these further revelations. Others find jt in a contrast between these personal judgments
27 They understood not that he spake to them of the Father.
28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am be, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
29 And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.
30 As he spake these words, many believed on him.
31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye con-
and the Father's commission; as if the sense were: "but these self-chosen subjects must be set aside; He that..." In this case however the force of the affirmation of the " truth " of the Father appears to be lost. The general scope of the words seems to be that the divine message must be delivered whatever its immediate effect may be.
speak to] The construction is very remarkable (XaXw els TQV *.). It is not simply "address to the world,1' but "speak into, so that the words may reach as far as, spread through, the world." Christ stands, as it were, outside the world, mediating between two worlds. Comp. i Thess. ii. 9 («j v/uSs), iv. 8; Hebr. ii. 3.
27. They understood (perceived) wo/...] preoccupied as they were with thoughts of an earthly deliverer, and perhaps with doubts as to the possibility that Jesus might have come to them from some one such as they looked for, who awaited the favourable time for his appearance.
28. Then said Jesus unto them] Jesus therefore said... because He read their imaginations and knew why they were offended byHis Person and teaching, When ye have lifted up the Son of man by the Cross to His throne of glory, then shall ye know — perceive at last — that I am, and that I do nothing of myself; perceive, that is, that my being alike and my action are raised above all that is limited, and in absolute union with God.
that I do~] It is not unlikely that the verb begins a new sentence, and does not depend on the "that" of the previous clause: "you shall then perceive my true Nature. Yes, and in fact my whole work answers to a divine guidance."
do... speak these things'] The present teaching was part of the appointed work of Christ. The last phrase is not general, as if it were equivalent to "so I speak," but is used with a specific reference to the revelations which the Lord was even now making.
taught. The mission of the Son is regarded as the point when He received all that was required for His work. The teaching is so far looked upon as compressed into one supratemporal act, and gradually realised under the conditions of human life.
Compare the use of 7 heard (q*ov<ra, iii. 32, viii. 26, 40, xv. 15). On the other hand / hear is used in regard to special acts
29. The whole being of the Son was in absolute harmony with the being of the Father, and the Father was personally present with the Son. In one sense there was a separation at the Incarnation: in another sense there remained perfect unbroken fellowship. There was a " sending " and yet a " remaining together." He that "sent" was still with Him that " was sent." The pregnancy of the phrase must be observed.
the Father...alone'] He, even He that sent me (so the words run, omitting the Father), at that crisis left me not alone — the new relation was superadded to and did not destroy the old relation — and men themselves can see the signs of this abiding communion, for (because) 7 — I («'yo>)> in the complete Person on which you look — do always — not fitfully, Uncertainly, partially — the things that please Him.
fdr] The word seems to be used here as In Luke vii. 47, to indicate the sign of the truth of the statement made, and not to give the ground of the fact stated. The perfect coincidence of the will of the Son with the will of the Father is presented as the effect, and not as the reason of the Father's Presence. And yet here as always the two thoughts run into one another.
30. believed on him] in the fullest sense: cast themselves upon Him, putting aside their own imaginations and hopes, and waiting till He should shew Himself more clearly. This energy of faith in a person (jruTTfVfiv et?, " to believe in any one") is to be carefully distinguished from the simple acceptance of a person's statements as true (irio-Ttvfiv ru-i, " to tinue in my word, then are ye my 32 And ye shall know the truth, disciples indeed; and the truth shall make you free.