Expository Thoughts on the Gospels

15. — [John hare witness....cried.] The time at which John the Baptist bore this testimony is not specified. We have not yet come to the historic part of John's Gospel, properly speaking. We are still in the i troductory preface. It seems therefore probable, as Lightfoot says, that the sentence before us describea the habitual character of John's testimony to Christ. He was, throughout his ministry, continually proclaiming Christ's greatness and superiority to himself, both in nature and dignity.

[Cried] The Greek word so rendered, implies a very loud cry, like that of one making a proclamation. Parkhurst defines it in this place as " speaking out very openly."

[He that Cometh after me....pr^ef erred hefore....was hefore we. This sentence has caused much discussion and some difference of opinion. The Greek words literally translated would be, " He that cometh after me has become, or been made, in front of me, — for he was first of me." I feel no doubt that our English version gives the correct meaning of the sentence. — Hammond's note on the text is very good.

The first " before," signifies before in place, position, or dignity. The Greek adverb so rendered, is used forty-nine times in the New Testament, but never once in the sense of " before in point of time or age."

The second " before," signifies before in point of time or existence. " He was existing before me, at the time when I was not." The expression is certainly remarkable and uncommon, but there is another exactly like it in this Gospel, " It hated me before it hated you," where the literal rendering would be, "it hated me first of you."

The sentence " he was before me," is a distinct statement of Christ's pre-existence. He was born at least six months after John the Baptist, and was therefore younger in age than John. Yet John says, " He was before me. He was existing when I was born," If he had meant only, that our Lord was a more honourable person than himself, he would surely have said, " He is before me."

The greatness of John the Baptist's spiritual knowledge appears in this expression. He understood the doctrine of Christ's pre-existence. Christians are apt to think far too slightingly of John the Baptist's attainments, and the depths of his teaching.

16. — [Q/* His fulness have all we received^ This sentence means, " all we who believe on Jesus, have received an abundant supply of all that our souls need out of the fall store that resides in Him for His people. It is from Christ and Christ alone, that all our spiritual wants have been supplied."

Waterland, in his book oa the Trinity, calls particular attention to this expression. He thinks that it was specially used with a view to the strange doctrines of the Gnostics in general, and th« Cerinthians in particular, whose heresies arose before

St. Jo- n's Gospel was written. They seem to have held that there was a certain fulness or plenitude of the Deity, into which only certain spiiitnnl men, including themselves, were to be received, and from which others who were less spiritual, though they had grace, were to be excluded. " St. John," says Waterland, " here asserts, that all Christians, equally and indiflferently, all behevers at large, have received of the plenitude or fulness of the divine Word, and that not sparingly, but in the largest measure, even grace upon grace."

Melancthon on this verse, caUs particular attention to the word " all," He observes that it embraces the whole Church of God, from Adam downwards. All who have been saved have received out of Christ's fulness, and all other sources of fulness are distinctly excluded.

[Grace for grace.] This expression is very pecuHar, and haa caused much dijBference of opinion among commentators.

1. Some think it means "the new grace of the Gospel in place of. or instead of, the old grace of the law." This is the view of Cyril, Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius, Rupertus, Lyranus, Bucer, Beza, ScaHger, De Dieu, Calovius, Jansenius, Lampe, and Quesnel.

2. Some think that it means "grace, on account of God's grace or favour, and specially His favour towards His Son." This is the view of Zwingle, Melancthon, Chemnitius, Flacius, RoUock, Grotius, Camerarius, Tarnovius, Toletus, Barradius, Cartwright, and Cornelius a Lapide.

3. Some think that it means " grace on account of, or in return for, the grace of faith that is in us." This is the view of Augustine, Gomarus, and Beda.

4. Some think that it means " grace answering to, or proportioned to, the grace that is in Christ." This is the view of Calvin, Leigh, and Bridge.

5. Some think that it means " grace for the propagation of grace." This is the view of Lightfoot.

Brentius, Bullinger, Aretius, Jansenius, Hutcheson, Gill, Scott, and Henry, give several views, but signify their adhesion to no one in particular.

On the whole, I am inchned to think that the sixth and last is the correct view. I admit fully that the Greek preposition, here rendered ''for," is only found in three senses in the G-reek Testament,— viz.: " In the room or place of." (Matt. li. 22.) " In return for.".(Rom. xii. 17.) and '' On account of" (Acts xii. 23; Ephes. V. 31.) Ill composition it also signifies " opposition," but with that we have nothing to do here. In the present case I think the meaning is " grace in the place of grace, constant, fresh, abundant suppUes of new grace, to take the place of old grace, and therefore unfaihng, abundant grace, continually filling up and supplying all our need."

17. — [For the law was given, Sc] This verse seems intended to show the inferiority of the law to the Gospel. It does so by putting in strong contrast the leading characteristics of the Old and New dispensations, — the religion which began with Moses, and the religion which began with Christ.

By Mose5 was given the law, — the moral law, full of high and holy demands, and of stern threatenings against disobedience; — the ceremonial law, full of burdensome sacrifices, ordinances, and ceremonie.^, which never healed the worshipper's conscience, and at best were only shadows of good things to come.

By Christ, on the other hand, came grace and truth, — grace by the full manifestation of God's plan of salvation, and the offer of complete pardon to every soul that believes on Jesus, — and truth, by the unveiled exhibition of Christ Himself, as the true sacrifice, the true Priest, and the true atonement for sin.

Augustine, on this verse, says, " The law threatened, not

helped; commanded, not healed; showed, not took away, our feebleness. But it made ready for the Physician, who was to come with grace and truth."

18.— [A^o man hath seen God, c&c] This verse seems intended to show the infinite personal superiority of Christ to Moses, or to any other saint that ever lived.

No man hath ever seen God the Father; neither Abraham nor Moses, nor Joshua, nor David, nor Isaiah, nor Daniel. All these, however holy and good men, were still only men, and quite incapable of beholding God face to face, from very weakness. What they knew of God the Father, they knew only by report, or by special revelation, vouchsafed to them from time to time. They were but servants, and " The servant knoweth not what his lord doeth." (John xv. 15.)

Christ on tne other hand, is the only begotten Son, which if in the bosom of the Father. He is one who is most intimately united fiora all eternity to God the Father, and is equal to Him in all things. He, during the time of His earthly ministry here, fully showed to man all that man can bear to know concerning

His Father. lie has revealed His Father's wisdom, and hoKnes^, aud compas-ion, and power, and hatred of siu, and love of sinner.?, in the fullest possible way. He has brou,2:ht into clear light the great mystery how God the Father can be just, and yet justify the ungodly. The knowledge of the Father which a man derived from the teaching of Moses, is as ditferentfrom that derived from the teaching of Christ, as twilight is different from noon-day.

We must carefully remember that none of the appearances of God to man, described in the Old Testament, were the appearances of God the Father. He whom Abraham, and Jacob, and Moses, and Joshua, and Isaiah, and Daniel saw, was not the First Person in the Trinity, but the Second.

The speculations of some commentators on the sentence now before us, as to whether any created being, angel or spirit, has ever seen God the Father, are, to say the least, unprofitable. The sentence before us speaks of man, being written lor man's use.

The expression, " Which is in the bosom of the Father," is doubtless a figurative one, mercifully accommodated to man's capacity. As one who lies in the bosom of another is fairly supposed to be most intimate with him, to know all his secrets, and possess all his affections, so is it, we are to understand, in the union of the Father and the Son. It is more close than man's mind can conceive.

The Greek word rendered " declared," means Hterally, "hath expounded." It is the root of the words, which are well known among hterary students of the Bible, " exegesis and exegetical." The idea is that of giving a full and particular explanation. (Acts XV. 14.) Whether the " Declaring of God the Father," here described, is to be confined to Christ's oral teaching about the Father, or Avhether it means also that Christ has in His Person given a visible representation of many of the Father's attributes, is a doubtful point. Perhaps both ideas are included in the expression.

In leaving this passage, I must say something about the disputed question, To whom do the three verses beginning, " And of his fulness," belong? Are they the words of John the Baptist, and a part of his test'mony? Or are they the words of John the Gospel-writer, and an explanatory comment of his, such as we occasionally find in his Gospel? — There is something to be said on both sides.

(a.) Some think that these three verses were spoken by John the Baptist, because of the awkwardness and abruptness with which his testimony eads upon the other theory, — because they run on harmoniously with the fifteenth verse, — and because there is nothing in them which we might not reasonably expect John the Baptist to say.

(b.) Others think, that the three verses are the comment of John the Gospel-writer, arising out of John's testimony about Christ's pre-existence, and out of the expression, Grace and truth, in the fourteenth verse. — They regard the verses as an exposition of the expression, "Full of grace and truth." — They question whether the language is such as would have been used by John the Baptist, — whether he would have said " all we," after just saying " me," — whether he would have used the word "fulness," — whether he would, at so early a period, have contrasted the religion of Moses and of Christ, — and whether he would have so openly declared Christ to be the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father. — Finally, they think that if these were John the Baptist's words, the Gospel would not have begun again in the nineteenth verse, " This is the record of John."

The arguments on either side are so nicely balanced, and the names on either side are so weighty, that I venture an opinion with much difl&dence. But on the whole, I am inclined to think that the three verses are not the words of John the Baptist, but of John the Evangelist. — The remarkable style of the first eighteen verses of this chapter makes the abruptness and brevity of the testimony which John the Baptist bears, upon this theory, appear to me not strange. — And the connection between the three verses, and the words "full of grace and truth" in the fourteenth verse, appears to me much more marked and d'stinct, than the conned ion between John's testimony, and the words " of his fulness all we have received."

Happily the point is one which involves no serious question, and is therefore one on which Christians may be content to differ, if they cannot convince one another.

24 And they ■which were sent were of the Pharisees.

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

26 John answered them saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not;

27 He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose.

28 These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing.

19 And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent Priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, "Who art thou?

20 And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ.

21 And they asked him. What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

22 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself?

23 He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias.

The verses we have now read begin the properly historical part of St. John's Gospel. Hitherto we have been reading deep and weighty statements about Christ's divine nature, incarnation, and dignity. Now we come to the plain narrative of the days of Christ's earthly ministry, and the plain story of Christ's doings and sayings among men. And here, like the other Gospel-writers, St. John begins at once with " the record " or testimony of John the Baptist. (Matt. iii. 1; Mark i. 2; Luke iii. 2.)

We have, for one thing, in these verses, an instructive example of true humility. That example is supplied by John the Baptist himself.

John the Baptist was an eminent saint of God. There are few names which stand higher than his in the Bible calendar of great and good men. The Lord Jesus Himself declared that "Among them that are born of woman there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist." (Matt. xi. 11.) The Lord Jesus Himself declared that he was " a burning and a shining light." (John v. 35.) Yet here in tbis passage we see this emincDt saint lowly, self-abased, and full of humility. He puts away from himself ihi honour which the Jews from Jerusalem were ready to paj him. He declines all flattering titles. He speaks of him.J self as nothing more than the '.' voice of one crying in th( wilderness," and as one who " baptized with water." He proclaims loudly that there is One standing among the Jews far greater than himself. One whose shoe-latchet he is not worthy to unloose. He claims honour not for himself but for Christ. To exalt Christ was his mission, and to that mission he steadfastly adheres.

The greatest saints of God in every age of the Church have always been men of John the Baptist's spirit. In gifts, and knowledge, and general character they have often differed widely. But in one respect they have always been alike; — they have been "clothed with humility." (1 Pet. V. 5.) They have not sought their own honour. They have thought little of themselves. They have been ever willing to decrease if Christ might only increase, to be nothing if Christ might be all. And here has been the secret of the honour God has put upon them. " He that humbleth himself shall be exalted." (Luke xiv. 11.)

If we profess to have any real Christianity, let us strive to be of John the Baptist's spirit. Let us study humility. This is the grace with which all must begin, who would be saved. We have no true religion about us, until we ca^t away our high thoughts, and feel ourselves sinners. — This is the grace which all saints may follow after, and which none have any excuse for neglecting. All God's children have not gifts, or money, or time to work, or a wide sphere of usefulness; but all may be humble. — This is the grace, above all, which will appear most beautiful in our latter end. Kever shall we feel the need of humility so deeply, as when we lie on our deathbeds, and stand before the jiidgment-seat of Christ. Our whole lives will then appeal

We have, for another thing, in these verses, a raoumful example of the blinchiess of unconverted men. That example is supplied by the state of the Jews who came to question John the Baptist.

These Jews professed to be waiting, for the appearance of Messiah. Like all the Pharisees they prided themselves on being children of Abraham, and possessors of the covenants. They rested in the law, and made their boast of God. They professed to know God's will, and to believe God's promises. They w^ere confident that they themselves were guides of the bhnd, and lights of them that sat in darkness. (Rom. ii. 17 — 19.) And yet at this very moment their souls were utterly in the dark. " There was standing among them," as John the Baptist told them, " One whom they knew not." Christ Himself, the promised Messiah, was in the midst of them, and yet they neither knew Him, nor saw Him, nor received Him, nor acknowledged Him, nor believed Him. And w^orse than this, the vast majority of them never would know Him! The words of John the Baptist are a prophetic description of a state of things which lasted during the whole of onr Lord's earthly ministry. Christ " stood among the Jews," and yet the Jews knew Him not, and the greater part of them died in their sins.

It is a solemn thought that John the Baptist's words in this place apply strictly to thousands in the present day. Christ is still standing among many who neither see, nor know, nor believe. Christ is passing by in many a parish and many a congregation, and the vast mnjority have neither an eye to see Him, nor an ear to hear Him. The spirit of slumber seems poured out upon them. Money, and pleasure, and the world they know; but tht/ know not Chribt. The kinijjdom of God is close to them; but they sleep, Salvation is within their reach; but they sleep Mercy, grace, peace, heaven, eternal life, are so nigh that they might touch thera; and yet they sleep. "Christ standeth among them and they know him not." These are sorrowful things to write down. But every faithful minister of Christ can testify, like John the Baptist, that they are true.

What are we doing ourselves? This, after all, is the great question that concerns us. Do we know the extent of our religious privileges in this country, and in these times? Are we aware that Christ is going to and fro in our land, inviting souls to join Him and to be His disciples? Do we know that the time is short and that the door of mercy will soon be closed for evermore? Do we know that Christ rejected will soon be Christ withdrawn? — Happy are they who can give a good account of these inquiries and who " know the day of their visitation!" (Luke xix. 44.) It will be better at the last day never to have been born, than to have had Christ *' standing among us " and not to have known Him.

19. — [This is the record.] The Greek word translated "record," is the same that is rendered •' witness" in the 7th verse. The sentence means, " this is the testimony that John bore."

[WAen.] This word raises the question, " At what time was this testimony of John borne?" It appears to have been after our Lord Jesus Christ's b;iptism, and at the end of Bis forty days' temptation in the wilderness. The 29th verse tells us, that " the next day John seeth Jesus coming to him." It is worthy of notice that nowhere in the Gospels do we find "days "so carefully marked, as in that portion of the first chapter of St. John, which we have now begun.

[The Jevs.] This expression is remarkable, a"=5 pecuhar to St. John's Gospel, lie generally speaks of our Lord s en( mies and questioners, as "the Jews." It seems to indicate that St. John did not write his Gospel in Palestine or at Jerusalem, and that it was written especially for the Gentile Christians scatteied over the world, and much later than the other three Gospels.

[Sent Priests and Levites.... Jerusalem.] These words show that those who questioned John the Baptist on this occasion, were a formal deputation, senl with authority from the Sanhedrim, or ecclesiastical council of the Jews, to inquire about John's proceedings, and to report Avhat he taught, and whom he gave himself out to be.

Wordsworth remarks, that "More honour was paid by the Jews to John than to Christ, both ia the persons s(mt, and in the place from which they were sent. They esteemed John for his sacerdotal lineage." When Christ appeared, they called Him. the Carpenter's Son. Our Lord refers to this great respect at first shown to John, when He says, "ye were wilhng for a season to rejoice in his light." (John v. 33.)

[To ash him, Who a7^t thou?] We can hardly suppo-e that these Priests and Levites were ignorant that John was the son of a priest, Zacharias, and therefore a Levite himself. Their inquiry seems to refer to John's office. " What did he profess to be? Did he assume to be the Messiah? Did he claim to be a prophet? What reason could he assign for his having taken up his remarkable position as a preacher and a baptizer at a distance from Jerusalem? What account could he give of himself and his ministry?"

Two things are plainly taught in this verse. One is, the great sensation which John the Baptist's ministry caused throughout Palestine. He attracted so much notice, and such crowds followed him, that the Sanhedrim felt it necessary to inquire about him. — The other is, the state of expectation in which the minds of the Jews were at this particular season. Partly from the seventy weeks of Daniel having expired, partly from the sceptre having practically departed from Judah, there was evidently an expectation that some remarkable person was about to appear. — As to the sort of person the Jews expected, it is plain that they only looked for a temporal King, who would make them once more an independent nation. They had no idea of a spiritual Saviour from sin. But as to the fact that this vague expectation existed throughout the East at this particular time, w^have the direct testimony of Latin historians. The extraordmary ministry of John the Baptist, at once suggested the idea to the Jews at Jerusalem, that he might possibly be the expected Redeemer. Therefore they sent to ask, "Who art thou? Art thou the long expected King?" 20. — [Re confessed....denied not....confessed^ &c.], This is a peculiar form of speech, implying a very positive, unmistakeable, emphatic assf-veration. It gives the idea of a man shrinking with holy indignation from the very thought of being regarded as the Christ; — " Pain me not by suggesting that such an one as I can be the Christ of God. I am one far inferior to Him."

Bengel says on this verse, '' Whilst John denied himself, he did not deny Christ." — Luther makes some excellent remarks on the strong temptation which was here put in John's way, to take honour to himself, and the humility and faith which he showed in overcoming it.

21. — [Art tliou Elias?] This question was not an absurd and unnatural one, as some commentators have thought fit to say. It was based upon that prophecy of Malachi, which speaks of God "sending EUjah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord." (Mai. iv, 5) The manner, dress, and ministry of John the Baptist, as well as his appearing in the wilderness, constituted a great similarity between him and Elijah, and suggested tlie idea that John might possibly be Elijah. " If this man," thought the Priests and Levites, " is not the Christ, perhaps he is his forerunner, the prophet Elijah."

[And he saith^ I am not.] This answer of John's deserves particular notice, and involv^es a grave difficulty. How could John say, " I am not Elias," when Christ says distinctly in another place, '' This is Elias." How shall we reconcile these two statements? — To me it seems impossible to explain John's words, except on the simple theory, that there are two comings of Elijah the prophet. The first was only a coming in spjrit and in power, but not a literal coming. The second will be a literal and real appearance on earth of him whom Ehsha saw taken up into heaven. The first coming took place at Christ's first advent, and was fulfilled by John the Baptist going before Messiah's face in the spirit and power of Elijah. The second coming of Elijah will take place at the second advent of Jesus Christ, and will be fulfilled by Elijah himself once more coming as a prophet to the tribes of Israel.

It is of this second, future, literal coming of Elias that John speaks in this place. When he says, " I am not Elias," he means, " I am not that Elijah you mean, who was taken up to heaven 900 years ago. The coming of that Elijah is yet a future thing. I am the forerunner of the first advent in humiliation, not of the second advent in glory. I am not the herald of Christ coming to reign, as Elijah will be one day, but the herald of Christ coming to suffer on the cross. I am not come to prepare the way for a conquering Kin;r, such as you fondly expect, but for a meek and lowly Saviour, whose great work is to bear our tins and to die. I am not the Elias you expect."

In confirmation of this view, our Lnr "'s remarkable words in another Grospel. ought to be carefully studied. He says distinctly "Elias iruly sliall first cane, and rest >re all things," (Ma't. xvii. 11.) And yet He adds in the same breath, " I say unto you. that Elias is come already," that is, " He is come, in a certain sense, by John the Baptist going before my face in the spirit and ] ower of Ehas." In short, our Lord says at the same time, "Eiias shall come," and "Elias is come!" — To me His words seem a plain proof of the theory I am here mninta-ning, that there are two comings of Elias. In spirit Elias came, when John the Baptist came, a man like to Elias in mind and habits. But in the flesh Elias has not yet come, and is yet to appear. And it was in the view of this future, literal coming, that John the Baptist saM, '' I am not Elias." — He knew th it the Jews were thinking of the times of Messiah's glory, and of the literal coming of Elijah, which would usher in those times. Therefore he says, "I am not the E ias you mean. I belong to a different dispensation."

The other view, which is undoubtedly ma'ntained by the vast majority of commentators, appears to me surrounded with insuperable difl&culties. According to them, there never was to be more than one fulfilment of Ma'achi's prophecy about Elias. It was to be fulfilled by John the Baptist; and when he appeared, it had received its full accomplishment. How John the Baptist's answer in tli's place can be satisfactorily exp'ained, according to this theory, I am quite unable to see. The Jcavs ask him plaitdy, whether he is Elias, that is, whether he is the person who is to fulfil Malachi's prophecy. This, at any rate, was evidently the idea in their minds. He answers distinctly that he is not. And yet according to the theory against which I contend, he wds Elias, and he ought to have rephed, " I am." In short, he appears to say that which is i.ot true! — Tliere never was to be any one after him, who was to fulfil Malachi's prophecy, and yet he declares in effect that he does not fulfil it, by saying that ho is not Elias!

About the future hteral coming of Elijah the prophet, when the Jews will at last see a living person, who will say, " I am EUas," this is not the place to speak. Whether or not he will minister to any but the Jews, — whether or not he will prove one of the two witnesses spoken of in Etvelation, (Rev. xi. 3,) are interesting and disputed questions. I will only remark, that the subject deserves far more attention than it ordinarily receives.

The following quotations from the Fathers will show that the opinion I have expressed is not a modern one:

ings of Christ, — first, to suffer, — secondly, to judg.^, so there are two com'ngs of Elias; first of John before Christ's first coming, who is called Elias, l3ecause he came in the manner and spirit of Elias; secondly, of the person of Elijah, the Tishbite, bef>re

Christ's second coming." — Jerome and Theophylact say just the same.

self to be Ehas, and Christ after affirmeth it, there is no contradiction. There is a double coming of Elias. The one is in spirit, before Christ's coming to redeem; the other in person, before Christ's coming to judgment. According to the first, Christ's s^.ying is true, ' This is Ehas.' According to the second, John's speech is true, ' I am not.' This was the fittest answer to men asking in a curnal sense."

Augustine says, " What John was to the first advent, Ehas will be to the second advent. As there are two advents, s) there are two heralds."

{Art thou that prophet?] There are two views of this question. Some think, as Augustine and Gregory, that the words should be as our marginal reading has them, " Art thou a prophet?" Others think, as Cyril and Chrysostom, that the question referred to '' the prophet," of whom Moses foretold that he would come. (Deut. xviii. 15.) I decidedly prefer the latter view. It seems veiy improbable that John the Baptist would entirely deny that he was a prophet. — Besides this, it seems not unreasonable that the Jews would ask whether he was " the great prophet foretold by Moses." And to this question, John answers most truly, that he was not. — It admits of doubt, whether the Jews who qu^-sLioned him, clearly saw that the "prophet hke unto Moses," and the " Messiah," were to be one and the same. It rather looks as if they thought " Christ " and " the prophet" were two different persons.

Lightfoot thinks that the question refers to a common expectation among the Jews, that the prophets were to rise again at the coming of Messiah, and that John's questioners meant, "Art thou one of the prophets raised from the dead?" This superstitious notion explains the words of the disciples in Luke, " Others say that one of the old prophets is risen again." (Luke ix. 19.) But the Greek article in the words before us, seems to me too strong to be rendered " a prophet."

22. — [An answer to them that sent us.] This expression c> nfirms the opinion already given, about the character of those who questioned John. They were not idle inquirers, but a formal depu-

• tation sent down from the Sanhedrim at Jerusalem, with a c immission to find out who John was, and to make a report of what th y discovered.

23, — [He said, I am the voice, <frc.] John the Baptist's account of himself in this verse, consists of a reference to Scripture. He reminds the Priests and Levites who wanted to know who he was, of Isaiah's prophecy concerning the times of the Messiah. (Isaiah xl. 3.) They would there fmd Isaiah saying, with the abruptness of an inspired prophe", and speaking as if he saw what lie was describing, "The voice of Him that crielh in the wilderness 1" That means, "I hear in spirit, as I look forward to Messiah's time, a man crying in a wilderness, prepare ye the way of the Lord," — " That prophecy," says John the Baptist, " is this day fulfilled in me. I am the person whom Isaiah saw and heard in vision. I am come to prepare the way for Messiah, like a man going before a King in a desert country, to prepare a road for his master. I am come to make ready the barren hearts of the Jewish nation for Christ's first advtnt, and the kingdom of God. I am only a voice. I do not come to work miracles. I do not want disciples to follow me, but my master. The object of my mission is to be a herald, a crier, a warning voice to my fellow-countrymen, so that when my master begins His ministry they may not be found unprepared."

[The wilderness.'] The common view of this expression is, that it refers to John the Baptist's ministry having begun in the wilderness of Judaea. I rather doubt the correctness of this idea. The whole quotation is undeniably figurative. The prophet compares Messiah's forerunner to one preparing a road for a King through a desert or uninhabited country. The " way " or road, is unquestionably figurative, and the straightness of the way too. No one supposes that Isaiah meant that John the Baptist was hteraUy to make a road. But if the '' way " is figurative, the country through which it is made must surely be figurative too. I therefore think that the wilderness is a prophetical and figurative description of the spiritual barrenness of Israel, when the Messiah's forerunner began his ministry. At the same time, I fully admit that John's retired and 'ascetic habits and hia residence in the wilderness, form a remarkable coincidence with the text.

The expression " voice," has often been remarked as a beautiful illustration of the general character of John's ministry. He was eminently a humble man. He was one who desired to be heard, and to awaken attention by the sound of his testimony, but not to be seen or visibly honoured. 2i..—[And they....senf....Pharisees.] The object of this verse is somewhat doubtful. Some think that it refers to the verse preceding, which ontains a quotation from Isaiah. They which wer.' s nt, being Phui-ees, and not Sadduoees or Herodian?, should have seen and admitted the Scriptural charact r of John's mi s;on._Some think,:ti8 Bengel, that it refers to the following verse, in which a question was raised about baptism. They which ^^ere sent, being Pharisees, were specially strict about cerenionies, ordinances, and forms. Therefore they were not satisfied with a reference to Scripture. They asked John's authority for baptizing. Some think that it refers generally to the notorious enmity and disUke with which the Phar.sees regarded John the Baptist all through his ministry. Our Lord says in another place, " They rejected the counsel of God, not being baptized by him." (Luke vii. 30.) The text before us would then mean, that they which ask-d all these questions, asked them with a thoroughly unfriendly spirit, and with no real desire to learn Grod's truth, because they were Pharisees.

25. — [Why haptizest thou....if thou he not, Sc] This verse evidently imphes that John's c[uestioners expi 3ted the Messiah, or his forerunner, to baptize whenever he apptared. It is not unlikely, as Lightfoot says, that the idea arose from the text in Ezekiel, describing Messiah's time, " Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean," &c. (Ezek. xxxvi. 24.)

Luther thinks, that this verse shows that the questioners who came to John, now changed their tone. Hitherto they had flattered. Now they began to threaten.

One thing is yerj clear from this verse. The Jews were not unacquainted with baptism as a religious ordinance. It was one of the ceremonies, according to Lightfoot, by which proselytes were admitted into the Jewish Church. Moreover it is worthy of notice, that when proselytes were so admitted, their children were baptized together with them. It was not therefore the fact of John baptizing, which the Pharisees here called in question, but his authority for administering baptism.

26. — [/ laptize with water; hut <fcc.] The answer of John the Baptist here reported is very eUiptical, and the full meaning of what he said must be suppUed fTom other places. He seems to say, " I do not baptize by my own authority, but by a commission fro n One far higher than either you or I. I only baptize with Avater; and I do not do it to make disciples for myself, but for my master. I form no party. I ask no man to follow me. I tell all whom I baptize to believe on that Mighty One who is coming after me. I am only the servant of One far gi-eater than myself, who is even now standing among you, if you had eyes to see him. He is one so much above me in nature and dignity, that I am not worthy to be his humblest servant. He can baptize hearts, and will fulfil the promises about Messiah, to which you are vaguely referring. In the mean time I only baptize with water all those who profess repentance and willingness to receive my master. — I baptize for another and not for myself."

[There standeth one among you.] I doubt whether these wor -s literally mean, "There is standing in the crowd of you m • hearers." I prefer the sense, " there is already living and abiding among you in this land of Judaui one greater than I." I think this the sense because of the words in the 29th verse, " John seeth Jesus coming to him," which seem to imply that he was not with him the previous clay. — The thought seems parallel to that contained in the words,," Tlie kingdom of God cometh not with observation." — " The messenger of Grod cometh suddenly to his temple." (Mai. iii. i; Luke xvii. 20.) All serve to point to the same truth, viz. — that when Messiah came the first time, He came quietly, Avithout noise, without display, without the nation of the Jews knowing it, so that he "stood among them," and yet they were not aware of His presence.

The Greek word rendered "standeth," is in the perfect tense, and would be literally rendered, " there hath stood," that is, ''hatli stood for some httle time, and is still standing." The Messiah has come and is present. Bengel renders it, " hath taken his stand."

Tlie view I have maintained of the meaning of the word " standeth," is held by Parkhurst, who defines it as " being or living," and quotes John vi. 22, as a parallel instance. Pearce takes the same view, and quotes Acts xxvi. 22. Jansenius renders it, "has conversed among you, as when he sat among the doctors" in the temple. Aretius renders it, " He is present in the flesh, and walking in Judaea."

f Ye know not] Tiiis seems to mean, not only that the Jews knew not Jesus the Messiah by sight, but that they had no spiritual knowledge of him, and of the true nature of his office, as the Saviour of sinners. — " Ye look for a conquering, reigning Messiah. Ye know not the suffering Messiah, who came to be cut ofi", and to be crucified for sinners."

Bengel remarks, that John is here specially " addressing

inhabitants of Jerusalem, who had not been present at the bapdsm of Jesus. And he Avhets their desires, that they may be anxious to become acquainted with him."

27. — [Coining after....preferred before.] The remarks made on the 15th verse apply fully to this expression. John declares, that though his master, in point of time, began his ministry after him, in point of dignity he was far above him. To exalt Christ, and abase himself, seem ideas never long out of John's mind.

[Shoe's lafchet....worthy to unloose.] This is evidently a proverbial expression. "I am so interior to Him that came after me, that in comparison with him, I am like the humblest servant compared to his master." To be not fit to carry a person's shoes, in our times, is a well-known proverb, describing inferiority.

Palestine, it was evidently important for John the Baptist to be near a supply of water, suited to the baptism of the multitudes who came to him. If Beth-barah, spoken of in Gideon's history is the same place, it is worthy of notice that it is specially mentioned as near " waters.'' (Judges vii. 24.)

The name of the place ought always to be dear to the hearts of Christians. It is the place where the first disciples of Jesus were made, and the foundation of the Christian church was laid. It was here, " the next day," that Jesus was publicly proclaimed as the "Lamb of God." It was here, ''the day after," that Andrew and another disciple followed Jesus. Here then the Church of Christ, properly so called, began.

In leaving this passage, let us remember that John the Baptist's ministry left the Jews entirely without excuse, when afterwards they refused to believe on Christ. They could never plead that our Lord's ministry came on them unawares and took them by surprise. The whole nation dwelling in Palestine, from the great ecclesiastical council down to the humblest classes, were evidently aroused to a state of attention by John's doings.

29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith. Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

33 This is he of whom I said, After me Cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.

31 And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.

32 And John bare record, saying.

I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.

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

34 And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

This passage contains a verse which ought to be printed in great letters -in the memory of every reader of the Bible. All the stars in heaven are bright and beautiful, and yet one star exceedeth another star in glory. So also all texts of Scripture are inspired and profitable, and yet some texts are richer than others. Of such texts the first verse before us is preeminently one. Never was there a fuller testimony borne to Christ upon earth, than that which is here borne by John the Baptist.

Let us notice, firstly, in this passage, the peculiar name xjchich John the Baptist gives to Christ. He calls Him *' The Lamb of God."

This name did not merely mean, as some have supposed, that (/hrist was meek and gentle as a lamb. This would be truth no doubt, but only a very small portion of tho truth. There are greater things here than this! It meant that Christ was the great sacrifice for sin, who was come to make atonement for transgression by His own death upon the cross. He was the true Lamb Avhich Abraham told Isaac at Moriah God would provide. (Gen. xxii. 8.) He was the true Lamb to which every morning and evening sacrifice in the temple had daily pointed. He was the Lamb of which Isaiah had prophesied, that He would be " brought to the slaughter." (Isaiah liii. '7.) He was the true Lamb of which the passover lamb in Egypt had been a vivid type. In short, He was the great propitiation for sin which God had covenanted from all eternity to send into the world. He was God's Lamb.

Let us take heed that in all our thoughts of Christ, we first think of Him as John the Baptist here represents Him. Let us serve him faithfully as our Master. Let US obey Him loyally as our King. Let us study His teaching as our Prophet. Let us walk diligently after Him as our Example. Let us look anxiously for Him as our coming Redeemer of body as well as soul. But above all, let us prize Him as our sacrifice, and rest our whole weight on His death as an atonement for sin. Let His blood be more precious in our eyes every year we live. Whatever else we glory in about Christ, let us glory above all things in His cross. This is the corner-stone, this is the citadel, this is the rule of true Christian theology. We know nothing rightly about Christ, until we see him with John the Baptist's eyes, and can rejoice in Him as " the Lamb that was slain."

Let us notice, secondly, in this passage, the peculiar work which John the Baptist describes Christ as doing. He says that " he taketh away the sin of the world."

Christ is a Saviour. He did not come on earth to be a conqueror, or a philosopher, or a mere teacher of morality. He came to save sinners. He came to do that which man could never do for himself, — ^to do that which money and learning can never obtain, — to do that which is essential to man's real happiness, — He came to " take away sin."

Christ is a complete Saviour. He " taketh away sin." He did not merely make vague proclamations of pardon, mercy, and forgiveness. He " took" our sins upon Himself, and carried them away. He allowed them to be laid upon Himself, and "bore them in His own body on the tree." (l Pet. ii. 24.) The sins of every one that believes on Jesus are made as though they had never been sinned at all. The Lamb of God has taken them clean away.

Christ is an almighty Saviour, and a Saviour for all mankind. He "taketh away the sin of the world." He did not die for the Jews only, but for the Gentile as well as the Jew. He did not suffer for a few persons only, but for all mankind. The payment that He made on the cross was more than enough to make satisfaction for the debts of all. The blood that He shed was precious enough to wash away the sins of all. His atonement on the cross was sufficient for all mankind, though efficient only to them that believe. The sin that He took up and bore on the cross was the sin of the whole world.

Last, but not least, Christ is a perpetual and unwearied Saviour. He " taketh away " sin. He is daily taking it away from every one that believes on Him, — daily purging, daily cleansing, daily washing the souls of His people, daily granting and applying fresh supplies of mercy. He did not cease to work for His saints, when He died for them on the cross. He lives in heaven as a Priest, to present His sacrifice continually before God. In grace as well as in providence, Christ workethi still. He is ever taking away sin.

These are golden truths indeed. Well would it be for the Church of Christ, if they were used by all who know them! Our very familiarity with texts like these is one of our greatest dangers. Blessed are they who not only keep this text in their memories, but feed upon it in their hearts!

Let us notice, lastly, in this passage, the peculiar office which John the Baptist attributes to Christ. He speaks of Him as Him " which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost."

The baptism here spoken of is not the baptism of water. It does not consist either of dipping or sprinkling. It does not belong exclusively either to infants or to grown up people. It is not a baptism which any man can give, Episcopalian or Presbyterian, Independent or Methodist, layman or minister. It is a baptism which the great Head of the Church keeps exclusively in His own hands. It consists of the implanting of grace into the inward man. It is the same thing with the new birth. It is a baptism, not of the body, but of the heart. It is a baptism which the penitent thief received, though neither dipped nor sprinkled by the hand of man. It is a baptism which Ananias and Sapphira did not receive, though admitted into church-communion by apostolic men.

Let it be a settled principle in our religion that the baptism of which John the Baptist speaks here, is the baptism which is absolutely necessary to salvation. It is well to be baptized into the visible Church; but it is far better to be ba^)tized into that Church which is made up of true believers. The baptism of water is a most blessed and profitable ordinance, and cannot be neglected without great sin. But the baptism of the Holy Ghost is of far greater importance. The man who dies with his heart not baptized by Christ can never be saved.

Let us ask ourselves, as we leave this passage, "Whether we are baptized with the Holy Ghost, and whether we have any real interest in the Lamb of God? Thousands, unhappily, are wasting their time in controversy about water baptism, and neglecting the baptism of the heart Thousands more are content with a head-knowledge of the Lamb of God, or have never sought Him by faith, that their own sins may be actually taken away. Let us take heed that we ourselves have new hearts, and believe to the saving of our souls.

29. — [The next day.] This means the day after the conversation between John the Baptist and the deputation of priests and Levites. The careful marking of days by St. John at this stage of his gospel deserves particular notice.

[Seeth Jesus coming unto him.] These words seem to prove that Jesus was not present on the preceding day, during the conversation with the priests and Levites, and that John's words, ''standeth among you," cannot be Hterally taken.

It seems probable, as before observed, that our Lord came back to John after His temptation in the wilderness. The Spirit took Him into the wilderness "immediately" after His baptism, (Mark i. 12,) and it was upon His return, at the end of forty days, that John the Baptist saw him again.

[And saithj iehold.] This appears to have been a public, open, proclamation made by John to his disciples and the multitude who surrounded him. "Behold that person who is coming towards us. He is the Lamb of Grod, the Messiah of whom I have been preaching to you, and on whom I have told you to believe."

[The Lamb of Ood^ There can be no reasonable doubt that John gave this name to our Lord because He was the true sacrifice for sin, the true antitype of the passover lamb, and the lamb prophesied of by Isaiah. (Is. liii. 7.) The idea that he only refers to the quietness and meekness of our Lord's personal character is utterly unsatisfactory. He is describing our Lord's official character as the great propitiation for sin.

The expression, " Lamb of God," according to some, signifies " that eminent, great, divine, and most excellent Lamb." It is a well-known Hebraism to describe anything very great as a thing

" of God." Thus we read of " thunderings of Grod," and "trembling of God," (Exod. ix. 28; 1 Sam. xiv. 15.) — According to others i signifies the Lamb which God has provided from all eternity, and which God has long covenanted and promised to send into the world to be slain for sinners. Both views make good doctrine, but the second seems the preferable one.

Bengel thinks that John called our Lord "the Lamb of God," with a special reference to the Passover, which was then near. (John ii. 13.) He also sees a parallel between the expression " Lamb of God," and the phrase. " sacrifice of God," (Psalm li. 17,) which means " the sacrifice which God acknowledges as pleasing to Him."

Chemnitius thinks, in addition to other reasons why John calls our Lord " the Lamb," that he desired to show that Christ's kingdom was not pohtical. He was neither the ram nor the he-goat described in Daniel. (Dan. viii. 20.)

[Taketh away.] The Greek word so rendered, is given in the marginal reading, " beareth." Both ideas are included. It means " taketh away by his expiatory death." The Lamb of God " beareth " the sin of the world by taking it upon Himself He allowed our guilt to be laid upon Him, and carried it away like the scapegoat, so that there was none left. It is one of the many expressions which describe the great Scripture truth, that Christ's death was a vicarious sacrifice for sin. He became our substitute. He took upon Him our sin. He was made sin for us. Our sins were imputed to Him. He was made a curse for us.

The word here rendered " taketh away " is found at least 100 times in the New Testament. In 82 places it is rendered, " take," — " take up," — or " take away." In 5 places it is, " bear." In 4 it is, "lift up." In 2 it is, " remove." In most of the other places it is the imperative expression, "away with!" All point to the same view of the text before us, viz., " a complete atonement for sin."

The use of the present tense, " taketh away," is remarked by all the best commentators, ancient and modern. It is intended to show the completeness of Christ's satisfaction for sin, and the continual application of His once-made sacrifice. He is always taking sin away. RoUock observes, " The influence of Christ's sacrifice is perpetual, and His blood never dries up."

The idea maintained by some, that "taking away sin," in this place, includes sanctification as well as justification, seems to me quite untenable. That Christ " takes away " the power of a believ<ir's sins, when He applies His redemption to his soul, is no doubt true. But it is not the truth of this text.

[The sin.] Let it be noted that the singular number is used here. It is '' the sin," not " the sins." The expression seems to me purposely intended to show that what Christ took away, and bore on the cross, was not the sin of certain people only, but the whole accumulated mass of all the sins of all the children of Adam. He bore the weight of all, and made an atonement sufl&cient to make satisfaction for all.

The idea propounded by some, that "the sin " which Christ is said here to take away, is only man's original sin, — and that for man's actual sins each man must make satisfaction himself, ia destitute of the slightest foundation in Scripture, contradicts scores of plain texts, and utterly overthrows the whole Gospel.

[Of the world.] It is almost needless to say that there are two views of this expression. Some say, that it only means, that Christ takes away the sins of G-entiles as well as Jews, and that it does not mean the sin of any but the elect. Others say, that it really means that Christ "taketh away" the sin of all mankind, that is, that He made an atonement sufficient for all, and that all are salvalle, though not all saved, in consequence of His death.

I decidedly prefer the latter of these two views. I hold as strongly as any one, that Christ's death is profitable to none but to the elect who believe on His name. But I dare not limit and pare down such expressions as the one before us. I dare not say that no atonement has been made, in any sense, except for the elect. I beheve it is possible to be more systematic than the Bible in our statements. When I read that the wicked who are lost, " deny the Lord that bought them," (2 Peter ii. 1,) and that " God was in Christ, reconcihng the world unto himself," (2 Cor. V. 19,) I dare not confine the intention of redemption to the saints alone. Christ is for every man.

I am aware the objection is often made, that "if Christ taketh away the sin of the world, and yet the vast majority of men die in their sins and are lost, Christ's work for many was wrought in vain." I see no force in this objection. I think we might as well argue, that because sin came into the world and marred creation, creation was in vain. We are not talking of the works of men, but of the eternal Word, and we must be content to see much in His works that we do not entirely understand. Though multitudes are lost, I have no doubt the last day will prove that nothing that Christ did for them was in vain.

I rest in the view of the text, that in some ineffable and inscrutable way, the whole world's sin was borne and atoned for by Christ. " He taketh away, or makes atoriement for, the sin cf all the men and women in the world." I have no doubt, from Scripture, that the vast majority of " the world's " inhabitants will be found at last to have received no benefit from Christ, and to have died in their sin?. I repudiate the idea of universal salvation, as a dangerous heresy, and utterly contrary to Scripture. — But ihe lost will not prove to be lost because Christ did nothing for them. He bore their sins. He carried their transgressions. He provided payment, but they would not put in their claim to any interest in it. He set the prison door open to all; but the majority would not come out and be free. In the w^ork of the Father in election, and of the spirit in conversion, I see limitation m the Bible most clearly. But in the work of Christ in atonement I see no limitation. The atonement was made for all the world, though it is applied to and enjoyed by none but believers.— Christ's intercession is the peculiar privilege of His people. But Christ's atonement is a benefit which is ojBfered freely and honestly to all mankind.

In saying all this I am fully aware that the word ^' world " is sometimes used in a qualified sense, and must be interpreted with some limitation. When it is said, " The world knew him not," (John i. 10,) it cannot mean that not a single person in the world knew Him. Bat in the text before us I see no necessity for limitation. I see the whole mass of mankind's guilt brought together in one singular word, " the sin of the world," and that sin, I am told, Christ '' taketh away." And I believe the true meaning to be, that the Lamb of God has made atonement sufficient for all mankind, though efficient unquestionably to none but believers.

Augustine remarks, " How weighty must be the blood of the Lamb, by whom the world was made, to turn the scale when weighed against the world!"

Calvin, in his commentary on this verse, says, ' John uses the

word sin in the singular number for any kind of iniquity; as if he had said that every kind of unrighteousness which alienates men from God is taken away by Christ. And when he says ' The sin of the world,' he extends this favour indiscriminately to the whole human race, that the Jews might not think that He had been sent to them alone. Hence we infer that the whole world is involved in the same condemnation; and that as all men, without exception, are guilty of unrighteousness before God, they need to be reconciled to Him. John the Baptist, by speaking generally of the sin of the world, intended to impress upon us the conviction of our own misery, and to exhort us to seek the remedy. Now our duty is to embrace the benefit which is offered to all, that each of us may be convinced that there is nothing to hinder him from obtaining reconciliation in Christ, provided that he comes to Him by the guidance of f lith."

Brentius says, "Although all the men in the world do not receive the benefit of Christ's passion, because all do not believ<! on Christ, yet that benefit is so offered to the whole woild, that whosoever, whether circumcised or uncircumcised, king or peasant, high or low, rich or poor, sick or well, old or youn^-, receive- Christ by faith, is justified before God, and saved with an eternal salvation."

Muscnlus says, " John places before us no one particular person whose sins the Lamb has come to take away; but under the expression ' the world,' he comprehends the whole race of mortals from the very beginning of the world to the end of it."

Melancthon says, " lie taketh away the sin, that is the universal condemnation, of the human race."

Chemnitius says, "John affirms that the benefits of Christ belong not to the Jews only, but to the whole world, and that no one who is in the world is excluded from them, if he is only wilhng to receive them by faith."

The deep spiritual knowledge exhibited by John the Baptist in this verse, ought not to be overlooked. Such a sentence as the one before us never fell from the lips of any other disciple of Christ before the day of Pentecost. Others could say that our Lord was the Christ, the Son of God, the Messiah, the Son of David, the King of Israel, the Son of the Blessed, who was to come into the world. But none seem to have seen so clearly as John that Christ was the sacrifice for sin, the Lamb that was to be slain. Weh would it be for the Church of Christ in the nineteenth century, if all its ministers possessed as much knowledge of Christ's atonement as is here shown by John the Baptist 1 John saw the vicarious sacrifice of Christ, before He died on the cross. Many so-called Christians cannot see Christ's vicarious sacrifice even at this day!

30. — [This is he of whom I said.] These words appear to have been spoken in our Lord's presence, and to have been specially intended to point the multitude to Him. "This person before you is He of whom I have repeatedly spoken in my ministry, as the coming One who is far greater than myself. You see Him now before you."

[A man.Jie was before me.] ' The human and divine natures of our Lord are here brought together by John in one sentence, "He of whom I spake to you is a man, and yet at the same time He is One who was before rae, because He has existed from all eternity."

31. — [/ knew him not] This means "I was not acquainted with Him in time past. There has been no private collusion or arrangement between Him and me. I did not even know Him by sight until the day when He came to be baptized." The difficulty connected with these words of John will be considered fwlly at the 33d verse.

[That he should he made manifest to Israd^ t&c] John here declares that the great end of his ministry was, that this wonderful Person, whom he had just pointed out, should be manifested and made known to the Jews. He did not come to form a party of his own, or to baptize in his own namr^. The whole object of his preaching and baptizing was now betore his hearers, it was simply to make known to Israel the Mighty One, the Lamb of God, whom they now saw.

32. — [And John hare record^ These words seem to denote a pubhc and solemn testimony borne by John to the fact, that our Lord had been visibly acknowledged by God the Father as the Messiah. If his hearers would have further proof that this Person, to whom he was pointing them, was really the Christ, he would tell them what he had seen with his own eyes. He would bear witness that he had seen visible proofs that this Person was really the Messiah.

[/saw.] This means, "At the time when our Lord was baptized, I saw this heavenly vision." Whether any beside John saw this vision, and heard the voice of the Father, which accompanied it, may well be doubted. At any rate, if they did, they did not understand either what they saw or heard.

[The Spirit descending^ &c'\ This means that John saw something coming down from heaven after the manner of a dove flying downwards, and that what he saw was the Holy Spirit, graciously revealing Himself in a visible manner.

[It abode upon him.] This means that the heavenly vision of the Holy Spirit rested upon Christ at the time of His baptism. It lighted down upon Him as a dove would settle down, and did not leave Him.

I cannot satisfy myself that the expression " like a dove " in this verse, means that any dove was really seen by John, when our Lord was baptized. All the four Gospel-writers describe an appearance "like a dove." St. Luke distinctly speaks of "a bodily shape." That something visible was seen by John is plain, and that its appearance descending on our Lord, resembled tlie downward flight of a dove, is also plain. But I am unable to see that the Holy Ghost took upon Him the actual form of a dove.

Some think, as Augustine, that the likeness to a dove was especially employed at this time, to answer the figure of Noah's

flood. He says, " As a dove did at that time bring tidings of the abating of the water, so doth it now of the abating of the wrath of God, upon the preaching of the Gospel."

We must beware of supposing for a moment, that this vision of the Spirit descending was meant to imply, that our Lord first received the grace of the Holy Ghost at that particular time, or that He had not received it before in the same degree. We must not doubt that the Holy Ghost dwelt in Jesus " without measure " from the very time of His incarnation. The vision was meant to show the Church, that when Christ's ministry began, a fuUer revelation of all Three Persons in the Trinity was made at once to mankind. It was meant at the same time to be a formal testimony to John the Baptist that the Messiah was before him, — that this was the promised Saviour whom God had anointed with the Holy Ghost and sent into the world, ^-that the time of Christ's ministry had begun, — that He who had the Spirit to bestow on men was before him, — and that His entrance on His public work was attested by the presence both of the Father and the Holy Ghost, in short, by a manifestation of all three Persons in the Trinity at one time.

As a Levite, John doubtless was familiar with all the ceremonies by which the Jewish high priests and kings were solemnly inducted into their office. For his satisfaction, therefore, our Lord received visible attestation from heaven, and was pubhcly recognized as the Messiah, the anointed Priest, and King, and Prophet, before his forerunner's eyes.

Musculus on this verse remarks, " The Spirit did not descend

on Christ's account, who was never separate, either from the Holy Spirit or fi om the Father, — but oa our account, that He who came to redeem the world, might be made manifest, through John's declaration of Him."

3Z. — [I knew himnot] The Greek word so rendered, both here and in the 31st verse, is hterally, "I had not known him." There is a difficulty connected with the expression which demands explanation. St. Matthew tells us, that when our Lord came to John to be baptized, John said to him, " I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?" (Mait. iii. 14,) showing plainly by these words that he knew He was before him. And yet here we find John saying, " I knew him not." How can this apparent inconsistency be reconciled?

Some think, as Chrysostom, that " John is speaking of former times, and not of the times near to his baptism."

Some think, as Augustine, that it means, '' I had not known till that day that Jesus would baptize with the Holy Ghost, although I had long known him porsoaaUy, and had recognized him as the Christ of God. But when He came to be baptized, it was also revealed to me, that He would confer on men the great gift of the Holy Ghost."

Some think, as Brentiu^ and Beza, that it means, " I had not known Jesus by sight until the day when He came to be baptized. I knew that He had been born of the Virgin Mary, but was not personally acquainted with Him, having been myself brought up ' in the desert.' (Luke i. 80.) I had only been told by Him who senrt me to baptize, that whenever the Messiah came to be baptized, I should recognize Him by the descent of the Holy Ghost. When He did come, I received a secret revelation from God that Messiah stood before me, and under the power of that feeling I confessed my unworthiness to baptize Him. But when, at last I did baptize Him, I received a full confirmation of my faith by beholding the promised sign of the descent of the Holy Ghost." Those who hold this view, think the case of Samuel receiving a secret revelation about Saul, an illustration of the matter. (1 Sam. ix. 15.)

Some think, as Poole, that it means, " I knew him not perfectly and distinctly, though I had an impression when I first saw Him coming to be baptized, that He was One far greater than myself, and under that impression demurred to baptizing Him. After His baptism I saw clearly who He was."

The last explanation is perhaps the simplest, and most probable. That John at one time did not know our Lord by sight at all, that he afterwards knew Him imperfectly, and that his perfect knowledge of Him, His nature, ofl&ce, and work, was not attained till the time when the Spirit descended at His baptism, are points that seem clear. The time when he said, " I have need to be baptized of thee," would seem to be the time of imperfect knowledge, when the fact that Jesus was the Messiah began to dawn upon him, and made him cry out, '' comest thou to me?"

Chrysostom observes, that the expression is a proof '' that the

miracles which they say belong to Christ's childhood are false, and the invention of those who bring them to notice. For if He had begun from His early age to work miracles, neither could John have been ignorant of Him, nor would the multitude have needed a teacher to make Him known."

[He that sent ine...same saidi] This expression indicates that John the Baptist had many special revelations of God concerning His work, of which we have no record given to us. He seems to have been taught and instructed like one of the old prophets.

description of our Lord, here given by John the Baptist, has received three very different interpretations.

Some think that it means, " Tliis is He who shall institute Christian baptism, with which the gift of tl^e Holy Ghost shall be connected. His baptism shall be like mine, a baptism of water. But it shall not be a baptism of water only, as mine is, but a baptism accompanied by the regenerating grace of the Spirit."

Some think that it means, " This is He who shall baptize with the Holy G-host on the day of Pentecost, and confer miraculous gifts on the church."

Some think it means, "This is He who shall baptize the hearts of men, which neither thou canst do nor any other human minister. He has the prerogative of giving spiritual life. He is the giver of- the Holy Spirit to all who believe on Him."

I am decidedly of opinion that this third view is the correct one. It is the only one which seems at all answerable to the majesty of the person spoken of, the dignity of the speaker, and the solemnity of the occasion. — To say, "This is He who shall institute Christian baptism " seems a very lame and impotent account of the expression. — To say, " This is He who shall bestow miraculous gifts at the day of Pentecost," is a degree better, but gives a picture of our Lord's office confined to a single generation. — But to say, " This is He who, in every age of the church, will baptize the hearts of his people by the Holy Ghost, and by this baptism continually replenish the ranks of His mystical i3ody," is saying that which exactly suits the occasion, and describes our Lord's work in the world in a worthy manner.

Musculus, on this verse, remarks, " What is it to baptize with

the Holy Ghost? It is to regenerate the hearts of the elect, and consecrate them into the fellowship of the sons of God." Again, he says, "It is Christ alone who baptizes with the Holy Ghost, a power which, as divine, He keeps in His own hands and never communicates to any minister."

The view T have maintained is ably set forth in Bucer's commentary on this place. He s-ays, " By the baptism of water Ave arc received into the outward Church of God; by the baptism of the Spirit into the inward Church." The opinion of one who Wivs Regius Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, in the reign of Edward the Sixth, and the personal friend and adviser of Cranmer and the other English reformers, deserves much consideration. It proves, at any rate, that the doctrine of inward baptism of the Spirit, which Christ alone gives to every beUever, and the identity of this baptism with conversion or new birth, are not

The untenableness of the view, held by many, that John's baptism was not the same as Christian bap' ism, to all intents and purposes, is ably shown by Lin^htfoot, in his Harmony of the Four Evangelists. If it was not Christian baptism, it would be hard to prove that some of the disciples ever received Christian baptism at all. There is not the slightest evidence that Andrew, Peter, and Philip were baptized by Jesus.

The familiarity which John displays with the Holy Ghost and his work, deserves particular attention. To say, as many do, that the Holy Grliost was not known until the day of Pentecost, is saying what cannot be proved. The Holy Grhost has always been in the hearts of believers in every age of the world. His abundant outpouring is undoubtedly a leading mark of the days since Christ came into the world. But the Holy Ghost was ever in God's elect, and without Him there never was a soul saved. 34. — [/ saw and hare record, dx.] This means, " I saw perfectly, and from that time have distinctly and unhesitatingly testified that the person whom you now see before you is the Christ, the Son of the living God. From the day of His baptism I have been fully convinced that this is the Messiah."

John here declares his own firm conviction of our Lord's divinity and eternal generation. He w^as satisfied that our Lord was not the son of Mary only, but the Son of God.

35 Again the next day after John stood, and two of his disciples;

36 And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of Gk)dl

3*7 And the two disciples heard him speak, and they followed Jesus.

38 Then Jesus turned, and saw them following, and salth unto them. What seek ye? They said unto him. Rabbi, (which is to say, being interpreted, Master,) where dwellest thou?

39 He saith unto them, Come ani see. They came and saw

where he dwelt, and abode with him that day, for it was about the tenth hour.

40 One of the two which heara John speak, and followed him, waa Andrew, Simon Peter's brother.

41 He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ.

42 And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said. Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.

These verses ought always to be interesting to every true Christian. They describe the first beginnings of the Christian Church. Yast as that church is now, there was a time when it consisted of only two weak raenibers. The calling of those two members is described in the passage which is now before our eyes.

We see, for one thing, in these verses, what good is done hy continually testifying of Christ.

The first time that John the Baptist cried, " Behold the Lamb of God," no result appears to have followed. We are not told of any who heard, inquired, and believed. But when he repeated the same words the next day, we read that two of His disciples "heard him speak and followed Jesus." They were received most graciously by Him whom they followed. "They came and saw where he dwelt, and abode with him that day." Truly it was a day in their lives most eventful, and most blessed! From that day they became fast and firm disciples of the new-found Messiah. They took up the cross. They continued with Him in His temptations. They followed Him whithersoever He went. One of them at least, if not both, became a chosen apostle, and a master builder in the Christian temple. And all was owing to John the Baptist's testimony, " Behold the lamb of God." That testimony was a little seed. But it bore mighty fruits.

This simple story is a pattern of the way in which good has been done to souls in every age of the Christian Church. By such testimony as that before us, and by none else, men and women are converted and saved. It is by exalting Christ, not the church, — Christ, not the sacraments,— Christ, not the ministry, — it is by this means that hearts are moved, and sinners are turned to God. To the world such testimony may seem weakness and foolishness. Yet, like the ram's horns, before whose blast the walls of Jericho fell down, this testimony is mighty to the pulling down of strongholds. The stoiy of the crucified Lamb of God has proved in every age, the power of God unto salvation. Those who have done most for Christ's cause in every part Df the world, have been men like John the Baptist. They have not cried, Behold me, or Behold the church, or Behold the ordinances, but " Behold the Lamb." If souls are to be saved, men must be pointed directly t(

One thing, however, must never be forgotten. There must be patient continuance in preaching and teaching the truth, if we want good to be done. Christ must be set forth again and again, as the " Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world." The story of grace must be told repeatedly, — line upon line, and precept upon precept. It is the constant dropping w^hich wears away the stone. The promise shall never be broken, that " God's word shall not return unto him void." (Isai. Iv. 11.) But it is nowhere said that it shall do good the very first time that it is preached. It was not the first proclamation of John the Baptist, but the second, which made Andrew and his companion follow Jesus.

We see, for another thing, lohat good a believer may do to others^ by speaking to them about Christ.

No sooner does Andrew become a disciple, than he tells iiis brother Simon what a discovery he has made. Like one who has unexpectedly heard good tidings, he hastens to impart it to the one nearest and dearest to him. He says- to his brother, ""We have found the Messias," and he " brings him to elesus." Who can tell what might have happened if Andrew had been of a silent, reserved, and uncommunicative spirit, like many a Christian in the present day? Who can tell but his brother might Jiave lived and died a fisherman on the Galilean lake? But happily for Simon, Andrew was not a man of this sort. He was one whose heart was so full that he must speak.

And to Andrew's out-spoken testimony, under God, the great apostle Peter owed the first beginning of light in his soul.

The fact before us is most striking and instructive. Out of the three first members of the Chnstian Church, one at least was brought to Jesus, by the private, quiet word of a relative. He seems to have heard no public preaching. He saw no mighty miracle wrought. He was not convinced by any powerful reasoning. He only heard his brother telling him that he had found a Saviour himself, and at once the work began in his soul. The simple testimony of a warm-hearted brother was the first link in the chain by which Peter was drawn out of the world, and joined to Christ. The first blow in that mighty work by which Peter was made a pillar of the Church, was struck by Andrew's words, " We have found the Christ."

Well would it be for the Church of Christ, if all believ ers were more like Andrew! Well would it be for souls if all men and women who have been converted themselves, would speak to their friends and relatives on spiritual subjects, and tell them what they have found! How much good might be done! How many might be led to Jesus, who now live and die in unbelief! The work of testifying the Gospel of the grace of God ought not to be left to ministers alone. All who have received mercy ought to fijid a tongue, and to declare what God has done for their souls. All who have been delivered from the power of the devil, ought to " go home and tell their friends what great things God has done for them." (Mark v. 19.) Thousands, humanly speaking, would listen to a word from a friend, who will not listen to a sermon. Every believer ought to be a home-missionary, a missionary to his family, children, servants, neighbours, and friends. Surely, if we can find nothing to say to others about Jesus, we may well doubt whether we are savingly acquainted with Him ourselves.

Let us take heed that we are among those who really follow Christ, and abide with Him. It is not enough to hear Him preached from the pulpit, and to read of Him as described in books. We must actually follow Him, pour out our hearts before Him, and hold personal communion with Him. Then, and not till then, we shall feel constrained to speak of Him to others. The man who only knows Christ by the hearing of the ear, will never do much for the spread of Christ's cause in the earth.

35. — [The next day.] Let St. John's particularity in noting days at this period of our Lord's history, be observed again in this verse. If, as many suppose, St. John was one of the two who this day followed Jesus and became His disciples, we can well understand that it was a memorable day to him.

[John stood.] This expression seems to imply that there was some particular spot near Bethabara, where John the Baptist was in the habit of standing, to preach, and to receive those who came to be baptized. While he '' stood " here, the event which follows took place. 36. — [Looliing.... Jesus ^ as he walked.] This probably means that he saw Jesus walking among the crowd of persons who were attracted to Bethabara, alone, without followers, and as yet not recognized by any one as the Messiah.

Stier remarks, "John saw Jesus walking, in silent meditation, waiting for His hour, and His Father's commands; in full preparation for the world and its sin: equipped for the testimony to the truth, with that armour, which has been tested aud approved in His first great spiritual conflict; and for the utterance of the new words of God, which the Father has given Him."

[lie saithj behold, t£-c.] This seems to have been a second public proclamation of our Lord's office and character, a partial repetition of what had been said the day before; and yet, as the event shows, a more effective proclamation. The same truth may do good the second time that it is preached, which does noihing the first time. d7. — [Heard....speak....foUowed.] The three steps described in this verse, are very noteworthy. John the Baptist "speaks." The disciples " hear," After hearing they '' follow Jesus." This is a succinct summary of God's way of saving myriads of souls.

Eollock on this verse remarks, '' We learn by this example,

how powerful is the preaching of Christ, — yea, one or two words about Christ and the cross, how powerful are they in changing the hearts of men! Preach, if you like, about the great deeds of kings and generals, and their courage and dory; — these things will please men for a little time, but they will not convert them. But preach concerning Him that was crucified, a subject apparently ignominious and foohsh, — and then the story of the cross, which is foolishness to them that perish, will be the power and wisdom of God to them that believe."

38. — [ What seek ye?] We cannot doubt that our Lord knew perfectly well the hearts and motives of these two disciples. In asking this question, therefore, He spoke partly for th'iir encouragement, and partly to stir them up to self-inquiry. " What seek ye? Is there anything that I can do for you, any truth that I can teach you, any burden that I can take away? If so, speak, and be not afraid." — " What seek ye? Are you sure that you are following me with right motives? Are you sure that you are not regarding me as a temporal ruler? Are you sure that you are not, like other Jews, seeking riches, honour, greatness, in this world? Prove your own selves, and be sure that you are seeking the right object."

[ Which is to say, being interpreted.] This is one of a class of expressions which shows that John wrote for Gentile readers rather than Jews. A Jew would not have needed this parenthetical comment. This same remark apphes to verse 41.

[Where dwellest thou?] This question seems to imply a desire for conversation and private communion. *' We would fain know more of Thee. We are drawn to Thee by John the Baptist's proclamation. We w^ould like to go aside with Thee from the crowd, and inquire of Thee more privately and quietly, at thy dwelling, about the things which are upon our heart"?."

To apply the text, as many do, to our Lord's spiritual dwelling in ''contrite hearts," &c., (Isaiah Iviii. 15,) may produce good doctrinal and practical theology. But it is not the point of the text.

3D — [Come and see.] The great afFabilitv, and condescension of these first words of our Lord's after His public appearance aa Messiah, ought not. to be overlooked. The very first thing that we hear Him saying, after He has been publicly proclaimed as the "Lamb of God," is ''Come and see." It is a pleasant type of wb.at He has been ever saying to the sons of men from that; day down to thi?. " Come and see who I am, and what I am. Come and be acquainted with me."

'' Come and see," is a very common one in Rabbinical writings, and would be very familiar to the Jews.

[ Where he dwelt] We can only suppose that the place where our Lord was dwelling at this time, was some temporary residence in or near Bethabara. At the best, it was probably some • humble lodging. It is not impossible that it was nothing more than a cave. He often " had not where to lay His head," If the two disciples had the least relic of Jewish expectation, that Messiah would appear in royal dignity and glory, our Lord's d welling would go far to disabuse their minds of the idea.

[Abode with Him that day...tenth hour.] The Jewish day began at six o'clock in the morning. The tenth hour therefore means, four o'clock in the afternoon. At this late hour of the day, His disciples found it impossible to conclude their couversatioa with Jesus, and therefore remained in the same lodging with Him all night.

Many commentators, from Augustine downwards, make the natural remark, that this evening must have been a blessed evening for these two disciples; and that it would have been pleasant if the conversation had been given to us 1 Yet if it had been good for us to know the conversation, it would doubtless have been recorded. There are no deficiencies in Scripture.

40. — [One of the two....was Andrew.] The priority of Andrew to Peter ought not to be overlooked, Peter, to whom the Church of Rome boastfully attributes a primacy among the apostles was neither converted nor made acquainted with Christ, so soon as his brother.

Who the other of these two disciples was, we are not told. It is highly probable, as Chrysostom and Theophylact conjecture, that it was St. John himself. On seven other occasions in this Gospel he humbly withholds his name. (John xiii. 23; xix. 26, 35; XX. 2; xxi. 7, 20, 24.) It is therefore very hkely that he withheld it here. — The supposition of Musculus, and others, that the other disciple was a person of less zeal and sincerity than Andrew, and is therefore not named, appears to me improbable.

41. — [He first.] This expression must either mean that Andrew was the first of the two disciples who brought a brother to Jesus. — or that he was the first disciple, speaking generally, who spoke to others of the Messiah, when he had found Him, — or that h(i was the first to tell his brothei Peter, and Peter was not the first to tell him about Christ.

[ We have found.] This expression implies arv unexpected and joyful discovery. The evening's conversation which Andrew

[Ihe Messias....interpreted.... Christ.] It is almost needless to remark, that these names mean the " anointed one." The first is Hebrew, and the second is Greek. Kings, prophets, and priests, in the Old Testament, were anointed, and our Lord as the Prophet, Priest, and King of the Church was called tne Anointed One, not because He was really anointed with oil, but because he was " anointed with the Holy Ghost." (Acts x. 38.)

The extent of Andrew's religious knowledge ought not to be overlooked. Poor and humble in station as he was, he seems, like all the Jews, to have known what the Old Testament prophets had foretold about Messiah, and to have been prepared to hear of a person appearing in the character of Messiah. It is one of many expressions in the Gospels which show that the lower orders among the Jews were far better acquainted with the letter of the Old Testament Scriptures, than the poor in our own day generally are with the letter of the New Testament, or indeed of any part of the Bible.

Calvin remarks on Andrew's conduct, " Woe to our indolence, if we do not, after having been fully enlightened, endeavour to make others partakers of the same griice."

42. — [When Jesus heheld....said....thou art Simon.'] Our Lord here displayed His perfect knowledge of all persons, names, and things. He needed not that any should tell Him who and what a person was. This knowledge was supposed by the Jews to be a peculiar attribute of Messiah, whenever He came. He was to be one of " quick understanding." (Isaiah xi. 3.) Enough fur us to know that it is a peculiar attribute of God. He alone knows the hearts of men. Our Lord's perfect knowledge of all hearts was one among many proofs of His divinity. The same knowledge appears again in His address to Nathanael, in this chapter, ver. 47, and in His conversation with the Samaritan woman. (John iv. 18, etc.) — The eflect produced in both cases, is very worthy of notice.

[Cephas.] This is a Syriac word, and is equivalent to the Greek word Petros, which we render Peter. Both mean a stone, a portion of a rock. "Petra" means a rock, "Petros" a piece of a rock. Peter was the latter, but not the former.

[A stone.] The marginal reading here, as Lightfoot remarks, would have been much better than that which the translators have put in our version. If the words were "Ceplias, wldch is by interpretation Peter," it would have conveyed our Lord's meaning far more clearly.

common in!N'ew Testament times. The apostle Petei seems to have been only known as " Cephas" in the Corinthian Church. Out of the five other places in the New Testament where the name Cephas is found, four are in the epistle to the Corinthians, while the name Peter is not used in that epistle at all.

Nifanius gives the names of three Popes who have so grossly mistaken the origin of the word Cephas as to suppose that it is derived from the Greek word which signifies " a head," and that it indicated Peter's headship in the Church! Such a palpable blunder is one of a thousand proofs that Popes are no more infallible than other men. Calovius makes the same charge against no less a person than Cardinal Beharmine,

If it be asked why our Lord gave Simon this new name, the best answer appears to be that it was given with a special reference to the change which grace was to work in Simon's heart. Naturally impulsive, unstable, and unsteady, he was finally to become a firm, solid stone in the Church of Christ, and to testify his unshaken adherence to Christ by suffering martyrdom.

Chrysostom thinks that our Lord altered Simon's name " to show that it was He who gave the old covenant, that it was He who called Abram Abraham, and Sarai Sarah, and Jacob Israel."

Lightfoot, on these verses, after noticing the error which Roman Catholic writers attempt to found upon it, about Peter being the rock upon which the Church is built, makes the following

curious observation, — " If they will so pertinaciously adhere to it, let us apprehend our Lord speaking prophetically ^ and foretelling the grand error that would spring up in the Church, namely that Peter is a rock, than which the Christian Church has known nothing more sad and destructive."

Let it be noted, in leaving this passage, that the selection of such humble unlearned men as th -se here described, to be the first apostles and preachers of the Grospel, is a strong evidence of the truth of Christianity. A religion which was propagated by such weak instruments, in the face of persecution and opposition from the great and learned, must be a religion from God. Such results from such instrumentahty cannot possibly be accounted for on natural principles.

43 The day following Jesus would go forth into Galilee, and findeth Philip, and saith unto him, Follow me.

44 Now Philip was of Bethsaldn, the city of Andrew and Peter.

45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him. We have found

him, of whocr Moses in the Law, and the PropI.ets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

46 And Nathanael said unto him, Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth? Phihp eaith unto him, Come and see.

47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israehte indeed, in whom is no guile I

48 Nathanael saith unto him, "Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him. Before that Philip called thee, when

thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.

49 Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israo^

50 Jesus ar swered and said ur to him. Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig tree, believest thou? thou shalt see greater things than these.

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

Let us observe, as we read these verses, how variovs are the ijaths by which souls are led into the narrow way of life.

We are told of a man, named Philip, being added to the little company of Christ's disciples. He does not appear to have been moved, like Andrew and his companions, by the testimony of John the Baptist. He was not drawn, like Simon Peter, by the out-spoken declaration of a brother. He seems to have been called directly by Christ Himself, and the agency of man seems not to have been used in his calling. Yet in faith and life he became one with those who were disciples before him. Though led by different paths, they all entered the same road, embraced the same truths, served the same Master, and at length reached the same home.

The fact before us is a deeply important one. It throws light on the history of all God's people in every age, and of every tongue. There are diversities of operations in the saving of souls. All true Christians are led by one Spirit, washed in one blood, serve one Lord, lean on one Saviour, bcjieve one truth, and walk by one general rule. But all are not converted in one and the same manner. All do not pass through the same experience. In conversion, the Holy Ghost acts as a sovereign. He calleth every one severally as He will.

A careful recollection of this point may save us much trouble. We must beware of making the experience of other believers the measure of our own. We must beware of denying another's grace, because he has not been led by the same way as ourselves. Has a man got the real grace of God? This is the only question that concerns us. — Is he a penitent man? Is he a believer? Does he live a holy life? — Provided these inquiries can be answered satisfactorily, we may well be content. It matters nothing by what path a man has been led, if he has only been led at last into the right way.

Let us observe, secondly, in these verses, how much of Christ there is in the Old Testament Scriptures, We read that when Philip described Christ to Nathanael, he says, " We have found Him of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write."

Christ is the sum and substance of the Old Testament. To Him the earliest promises pointed in the days of Adam, and Enoch, and Noah, and Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob. To Him every sacrifice pointed in the ceremonial worship appointed at Mount Sinai. Of Him every high priest was a type, and every part of the tabernacle was a shadow, and every judge and deliverer of Israel was a figure. He was the prophet like unto Moses, whom the Lord God promised to send, and the King of the house of David, who came to be David's Lord as well as son. He was the Son of the virgin, and the Lamb, foretold by Isaiah, — the righteous Branch mentioned by Jeremiah, — the true Shepherd, foreseen by Ezekiel, — the Messenger of the Covenant, promised by Malachi, — and the Messiah, who, according to Daniel, was to be cut off, though not for Himself. The further we read in the volume of the Old Testament, the clearer do we find the testimony about Christ. The ' light which the inspired writers enjoyed in ancient daya was, at best, but dim, compared to that of the Gospel.

But the coming Person tliey all saw afar oft*, and on whom they all fixed their eyes, was one and the same. The Spirit, which was in them, testified of Christ. (1 Pet.

Do we stumble at this saying? Do we find it hard to see Christ in the Old Testament, because we do not see His name? Let us be sure that the fault is all our own. It is our spiritual vision which is to blame, and not the book. The eyei of our understanding need to be enlightened. The veil has yet to be taken away. Let us pray for a more humble, childlike, and teachable spirit, and let us take up "Moses and the prophets" again. Christ is there, though our eyes may not yet have seen Him. May we never rest till we can subscribe to our Lord's words about the Old Testament Scriptures, "They are they which testify of me." (John v. 39.)

Let us observe, thirdly, in these verses, the good advice which Philip gave to Nathanael. The mind of Nathanael was full of doubts about the Saviour, of whom Philip told Him. " Can there any good thing," he said, " come out of Nazareth?" And what did Philip reply? He said, " Come and see."

Wiser counsel than this it would be impossible to conceive! If Philip had reproved Nathanael's unbelief, he might have driven him back for many a day, and given offence. If he had reasoned with him, he might have failed to convince him, or might have confirmed him in his doubts. But by inviting him to prove the matter for himself, he showed his entire confidence in the truth of his own assertion, and his willingness to have it tested and proved. And the result shows the wisdom of Philip's words. Nathanael owed his early acquaintance with Christ to that frank invitation, " Come and see."

If we call ourselves true Christians, let us never be afraid to deal with people about their souls as Philip dealt

%vit]i ^f»thaiiael. Let us invite tbem boldly to make proof of otr religion. Let us tell them confidently that they cannot know its real value until they have tried it. Let us assure them that vital Christianity courts every possible inquiry. It has no secrets. It has nothing to conceal. Its faith and practice are spoken against, just because they are not known. Its enemies speak evil of things with which they are not acquainted. They understand neither what they say nor whereof they afiirm. Philip's mode of dealing, we may be sure, is one principal way to do good. Few are ever moved by reasoning and argument. Still fewer are frightened into repentance. The man who does most good to souls, is often the simple believer who says to his friends, " I have found a Saviour; come and see Him."

Let us observe, lastly, in these verses, the high character which Jesus gives of Nathanael. He calls him " an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile."

Nathanael, there can be no doubt, was a true child of God, and a child of God in difficult times. He was one of a very little flock. Like Simeon and Anna, and other pious Jews, he was living by faith and waiting prayerfully for the promised Redeemer, when our Lord's ministry began. He had that which grace alone can give, an honest heart, a heart without guile. His knowledge was probably small. His spiritual eyesight waa dim. But he was one who had lived carefully up to his light. He had diligently used such knowledge as he possessed. His eye had been single," though his vision had not been strong. His spiritual judgment had been honest, though it had not been powerful. What he saw in Scripture, he had held firmly, in spite of Pharisees and Sadducees, and all the fashionable religion of the day. He was an honest Old Testament believer, who had stood alone. And here was the secret of our Lord's peculiar commendation! He declared ISTatlianael to be a true son of Abraham, — a Jew inwardly, possessing circumcision in the spirit as well as in the letter, — an Israelite in heart, as well as a son of Jacob iu the flesh.

Let us pray that we may be of the same spirit as Kathanael. An honest, unprejudiced mind, — a child-like willingness to follow the truth, wherever the truth may lead us, — a sim]3le, hearty desire to be guided, taught, and led by the Spirit, — a thorough determination to use every spark of light which we have, — are a possession of priceless value. A man of this spirit may live in the midst of much darkness, and be surrounded by every possible disadvantage to his soul. But the Lord Jesus will take care that such a man does not miss the way to heaven. "The meek will he guide in judgment: and the meek will he teach his way." (Psalm xxv. 9.)