CHAPTER VII.

Ch. 7:1-52. JESUS AT THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES. THE DEMAND OF THE UNBELIEVER FOR AN EXHIBITORY CHRIST.--THE WORLD NEVER READY FOR ITS REFORMERS AND REGENERATORS; ALWAYS READY FOR THOSE WHO HAVE FOR IT NO MESSAGE.--THE TRUE AUTHORITY AND ORDINATION OF THE CHRISTIAN TEACHER.--LAY PREACHING SANCTIONED BY THE EXAMPLE OF CHRIST.--THE LAW OF THE CHRISTIAN SABBATH AND THE LAW OF CHRISTIAN JUDGMENT.--WHENCE CHRIST COMETH; WHITHER HE GOETH.--THE POWER OF FAITH: TO RECEIVE; TO IMPART.--THE MORAL POWER OF CHRIST ILLUSTRATED.

PRELIMINARY NOTE.--Between the close of ch. 6 and the beginning of ch. 7 occurred a period of retirement, employed by Christ in giving to his apostles especial instructions concerning the kingdom of God. The fullest account of these instructions is afforded in Matthew, chaps. 15, 16, 17, 18. During this time occurred the healing of the Syrophenician woman’s daughter and the transfiguration. The public ministry of Christ in Galilee was substantially brought to an end by his sermon in the synagogue at Capernaum and his consequent rejection by the people. The ministry in Judea begins with this chapter and continues to ver. 39 of the tenth chapter, verses 40-42 affording a concise statement of that ministry in Perea, of which Luke alone gives any extended account. The journey to Jerusalem mentioned below (ver. 10) is, I think erroneously, identified by some harmonists with that described by Luke, ch. 9:51, 52. That journey was immediately before his passion, and was notably public, messengers going before his face to prepare the way for him; this was “as it were in secret,” and six months of instruction in Judea and Perea intervened between it and his death. See Luke 9:51-56, Prel. Note, and Tabular Harmony, Vol. I, p. 45.

1 After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him.

[Illustration: BOOTH ON THE HOUSETOP.]

2 Now the Jews’ feast[260] of tabernacles was at hand.

[260] Lev. 23:34.

3 His brethren therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and go into Judæa, that thy disciples also may see the works that thou doest.

4 For _there is_ no man _that_ doeth anything in secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly. If thou do these things, shew thyself to the world.

=2-4. Now the Jews’ feast of Tabernacles was at hand.= This was one of the three greater festivals to be observed by Israel. It was also called the feast of Ingathering, from the fact that it was held at the year’s end, when all the labors of the field were consummated. It thus resembled nearly our own Thanksgiving Day. It commenced on the fifteenth of the seventh month, answering to our October, and lasted seven days. It was instituted to commemorate the dwelling in tents when in the desert; accordingly, while the feast lasted the people dwelt in booths or tents placed on the flat roofs of the houses, in the courts of the temple, and in the squares and open places, and the streets when their width allowed. The particular sacrifices to be offered are detailed in Num. 29:1-38, and notices of the observance are to be found in Neh. 8:13-18; Hos. 12:9; Zech. 14:16-19.--=His brethren.= Their names are given in Matt. 13:55. I believe his half brothers, children of Joseph and Mary, are intended. See Note on Brethren of the Lord, Vol. I, p. 187.--=That thy disciples also may see the works that thou doest.= This was after the commission, the missionary tour, and the return of the twelve (Matt., ch. 10), through whose ministry probably many had become in a certain loose sense disciples of our Lord, regarding him as a Jewish rabbi, and perhaps as an inspired prophet, who had never seen him personally. The language of Christ’s brothers is that of contempt. Leave this province, said they, and go up into Judea, the religious centre of the Holy Land, and show yourself to those who have heard of you, and exhibit to them what you can do. Additional significance is given to this language if we remember that it was used after a period of retirement of more than six months. See above.--=For no one does anything in secret, and yet seeks himself to be frank and open= (ἐν παῤῥησίᾳ). The intimation is that the reason why Jesus does not make more public exhibition of himself and his work is that he is deceiving the people. His brothers attempt to compel him to adopt their policy by imputing to him, because of his course, a lack of frankness and fearlessness.--=If thou do these things, show thyself to the world.= _If_ implies a doubt. In a worldly view the policy of these brothers would seem wise; but it was really, in a more subtle form, the policy suggested by Satan in the second temptation (Matt. 4:5-7). Christ would be accepted by faith and love, not by wonder and fear; for the sake of his truth, not because of his miracles. These he persistently refused to show to the world as a means of compelling allegiance.

5 For neither did his brethren[261] believe in him.

[261] Mark 3:21.

=5. For neither had his brethren faith in him.= This verse seems to me quite conclusive that none of the brethren here mentioned were among the twelve, and therefore that James, Simon, and Judas, the brethren of the Lord, cannot be the apostles who bore the same name. They afterward became believers (Acts 1:14; 1 Cor. 9:5). They may at this time have recognized that Jesus possessed extraordinary powers, without recognizing in him the Messiah, or even an inspired teacher, whose instructions they were willing to follow. “They expected him to make a startling exhibition of his power to the eye. They did not believe in HIM; for faith rests upon that which is not seen; it confesses an inward vital power.”--(_Maurice._)

6 Then Jesus said unto them, My[262] time is not yet come: but your time is alway ready.

[262] verses 8, 30; chaps. 2:4; 8:20.

7 The[263] world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil.

[263] ch. 15:19.

8 Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come.

9 When he had said these words unto them, he abode _still_ in Galilee.

=6-9. My time is not yet; but your time is always prepared.= The context indicates the meaning. They had urged him to show himself to the world; his answer is, My time to show myself to the world is not yet. This manifestation of himself is gradual and successive; he partially manifested himself in the discourse delivered in Jerusalem at this very feast (see vers. 16, 18, 28, 29, 37, 38); more fully by his subsequent discourses in the temple during the Passion week (Matthew, chaps. 21, 22, 23); still more fully by his crucifixion, in which was disclosed that love which is the wisdom and power of God unto salvation (1 Cor. 1:24), and in which, even at the time and by the manner of his death, his divine Sonship was revealed to the Roman centurion (Mark 15:39); yet again by his resurrection from the dead (Acts 2:32-36; 3:15); increasingly in the ages since, by his personal presence and power in the church (Matt. 28:18, 20; Rom. 1:3, 4); a manifestation to be finally consummated when he is revealed from heaven in his second coming (Matt. 24:27; Col. 3:4; 2 Thess. 1:7). For this final coming the church is ever preparing the world, casting up a highway for him; and not till this highway is completed and he comes again shall all flesh see the salvation of God (Luke 3:4-6). The time of his brothers was always prepared; for the world is always ready for him who has no message for it. “If I,” said Luther, “would speak what the Papists like to hear, I would be very glad, too, to take lodgings with the Bishop of Magdeburg at Rome.” “The Son of man feels all the difference between those whose time was always ready, who could go up to the feasts whenever it pleased them, merely with the expectation of meeting friends and mixing in a crowd, and him who had the straitening consciousness of a message which he must bear, of a baptism which he must be baptized with.”--(_Maurice._)--=The world cannot hate you=, etc. Comp. chaps. 15:18; 17:14; 1 John 3:13; Luke 6:26. He that would preach the gospel of salvation to the world must first testify of it that its deeds are evil. The Holy Spirit convinces the world of righteousness only after convincing it of sin (John 16:8, 9). For illustrations of Christ’s preaching against the works of the world, see Matt. 5:20; 6:1, 2, 5, 16; 7:22; 11:16-24; 12:39-15; Luke 6:46; 10:12-16; 11:45-54; 12:54-57, etc. A study of the preaching of Christ and the apostles, and of the writings of Paul, will show that the divine method is always to convince of sin as a preparation for proclaiming the good news of salvation from it.--=I go not unto this feast.= The word yet is not in the original, though it probably correctly interprets the real meaning of Christ’s answer. This was not, =I shall not go= (future), but, =I am not now going= (present). Perhaps Christ did not know whether he should go or not; he who acted constantly under the guidance of the Divine Spirit may not have received guidance on this point. It would at all events have defeated his purpose to have gone up with those who were determined that he should make an exhibition of himself and his work. There is no ground for either the reproach that he deceived his brethren, or that he acted in a fickle manner in subsequently going up to the feast.

10 But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.

11 Then[264] the Jews sought him at the feast, and said, Where is he?

[264] ch. 11:56.

12 And[265] there was much murmuring among the people concerning him: for some said, He is a good man: others said, Nay; but he deceiveth the people.

[265] ch. 9:16.

13 Howbeit, no man spake openly of him, for fear of the Jews.

=10-13. Not openly, but as it were in secret.= Not _secretly_, but _as if_ in secret, that is, quietly, unostentatiously, _incognito_, in contrast to the way in which his brothers wished him to go up. “Not in the company of a caravan of pilgrims or in any other way of outward observation, but so that the journey to that feast is represented as made in secrecy, and consequently quite differently from his last entry at the feast of the Passover.”--(_Meyer._) The description of this journey to Jerusalem renders it improbable that it is to be identified with the journey described in Luke 9:51, 52. See Prel. Note.--=Then the Jews sought him.= By the _Jews_ John generally if not invariably means the inhabitants of Judea, in contradistinction to the other inhabitants of the Holy Land. See ch. 6:41, note.--=Where is that fellow= (ἐκεῖνος)? The language is derisive. “Thus contemptuously can they speak of the man, that they cannot name him.”--(_Luther._)--=And there was much murmuring.= The original (γογγυσμός) implies suppressed discourse.--=Some indeed said.= The Greek particle which I have rendered _indeed_ (μέν) implies a concession, at the same time pointing forward to something antithetic. The implication is that among the Judeans the believers were a minority.--=No! but he deceiveth the people.= He that is popular with the multitude is generally looked upon with aversion by the hierarchy.--=No one spoke openly.= “Both mistrusted the hierarchy; even those hostile in their judgment were afraid, so long as they had not given their official decision, that their verdict might be reversed. A true indication of an utterly Jesuitical domination of the people.”--(_Meyer._) Hostility to Christianity fears nothing so much as free discussion; and it quite accords with human nature that the consideration of Christ’s claims by the people at all should be dreaded by the priesthood. The interpretation of Alford, Godet, Tholuck, and others, that only the friends of Christ feared to speak openly, is in direct conflict with the explicit language of the narrative. Maurice pictures the scene well: “It is a hum of voices. There is a fear of something, the people do not well know of what. It is a fear of the Jews; the apostle says each fears the other. There is a concentrated Jewish feeling in the Sanhedrim, among the rulers, which all tremble at. Till that has been pronounced--above all, while there is a suspicion that it will come forth in condemnation--it is not wise for any to commit themselves. Brethren, do we not know that this is a true story? Must it not have happened in Jerusalem then, for would it not happen in London now?”

14 Now about the midst of the feast, Jesus went up into the temple, and taught.

15 And[266] the Jews marvelled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned?

[266] Matt. 13:54.

=14, 15. About the midst of the feast.= Bengel calculates that on this year the middle of the feast would be the Sabbath; the temple would in that case be especially crowded, and the day would suggest the remarks respecting the Sabbath.--=Jesus went up into the temple and taught.= He came to Judea privately, he went into the temple publicly; he would not exhibit himself, he would not conceal his doctrine.--=And the Judeans marvelled, saying.= The form of the question which follows indicates a hostile spirit; but it may have been raised, not by the scribes or teachers (_Meyer_, _Alford_), but by the people (_Tholuck_).--=How knoweth this fellow learning, never having been taught?= “A rule analogous to that which still prevails in most church communions forbade any rabbi to teach new truths except he was a regular graduate of one of the theological schools. He might catechise, but he could not preach. This rule the Jews cited against Jesus. ‘How,’ said they contemptuously, ‘does this man know anything of sacred literature, being no graduate?’”--(_Abbott’s Jesus of Nazareth._) _Letters_ (γράμμα) is here the sacred writings of the Jews, _i. e._, the sacred Scriptures and the comments thereon. This question affords the key to the interpretation of the discourse which follows, which is upon the authority, primarily of Christ, secondarily of every Christian teacher, an authority derived, not from theological schools or clerical ordination, but from the indwelling Spirit of God. Christ was himself a “lay preacher;” his example and his precept alike sanction unordained preaching.

16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not[267] mine, but his that sent me.

[267] chaps. 8:28; 12:49.

17 If[268] any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or _whether_ I speak of myself.

[268] ch. 8:43.

=16, 17. My teaching is not mine, but his that sent me.= For _doctrine_ read _teaching_; for not merely the subject-matter taught, but the power with which it was presented, was divine. _My teaching is not mine_ is not a hyperbole. It is not merely equivalent to “not acquired by any labor on my part in learning” (_Bengel_), or “not an invention of my own” (_Geikie_). Neither in origin nor in aim was Christ’s teaching his own. Ever about his Father’s business, he was ever teaching his Father’s words and doing his Father’s works (ch. 5:19, 30). In a sense every true Christian teacher should be able to repeat this saying of Christ (chaps. 14:26; 16:13). It does not follow that the Christian teacher need not be a Christian student; but it does follow that he should be a student only of those things which enable him better to understand and interpret the Father’s will and nature. Only so far as schools of theological thought help him to do this are they truly Christian schools.--=If any one wills to do his will, he shall know concerning the teaching, whether it be of God or whether I speak of myself.= An often misunderstood declaration. The promise is not that if any man does God’s will all theology shall be made clear to him, nor even that he shall be brought to a correct apprehension of the most important truths of the Christian system. The last clause qualifies the first; the declaration is that if any man purposes to do God’s will, _makes that his ultimate and supreme choice_ (1 Tim. 6:11-16), he shall know respecting Christianity _whether it is of divine or human origin_. The declaration is both a promise and the enunciation of a spiritual law. The purpose to do God’s will itself clarifies the spiritual sight, so that the soul recognizes the Spirit of God in the life, the character, and the teachings of his Son. The degree of advancement which one subsequently makes in comprehending the full significance of those teachings will depend partly upon the purity of his spiritual purposes, but partly upon other conditions. Not the mere outward obedience to God’s commandments, but a true spiritual purpose, is declared to be the condition of spiritual light; and to that purpose is attached, not a promise of _all_ light, but only of so much as will enable the soul to know the source from which it may obtain constantly increasing illumination. Nevertheless, the first step toward the solution of any theological difficulty whatever, is repentance of sin and practical obedience to the voice of God in the soul. Except a man be born again he cannot _see_ the kingdom of God.

18 He[269] that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: but he that[270] seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.

[269] ch. 8:50.

[270] Prov. 25:27.

19 Did not Moses[271] give you the law, and _yet_ none[272] of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill[273] me?

[271] John 1:17; Gal. 3:19.

[272] Rom. 3:10-19.

[273] ch. 5:16, 18; Matt. 12:14.

=18, 19. He that speaketh from himself seeketh his own glory.= _From_ (ἀπό) represents the remote cause; _out of_ (ἐκ) represents the more immediate cause. The former refers to what is general, the latter to what is special. See _Rob. Lex._, ἀπό. Every Christian teacher must speak _out of_ himself, _i. e._, out of his own experience of truth internally possessed and become a part of his nature; but no Christian teacher may speak, _from_ himself, _i. e._, of his own notions and by his own authority. The inward experience out of which he speaks is powerful only as it is derived from the Spirit of God. Egotism is the natural expression of him who speaks from himself, and has not the rhetorical skill to conceal the inherent weakness.--=But he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.= This is a general proposition. In so far as any one seeks the divine glory he is preserved both from error and from unrighteousness (Rom. 8:1, 2; 1 John 1:5, 7; 3:6). Christ is the only one who is absolutely true, and in whom is no unrighteousness, because he is the only one in whom there is no self-seeking.--=Did not Moses give you the law=, etc. The connection is well given by Alford: “There is a close connection with the foregoing. The will to do his will was to be the great key to a true appreciation of his teaching; but of this there was no example among _them_; and therefore it was that they were no fair judges of the teaching, but bitter opponents and persecutors of Jesus, of whom, had they been anxious to fulfil the law, they would have been earnest and humble disciples” (ch. 5:46).--=Why go ye about to kill me?= The reference is to the purposed assassination at a previous visit to Jerusalem (ch. 5:18), a purpose from which the Pharisees had evidently not relented (ch. 7:1).

20 The people answered and said,[274] Thou hast a devil: who goeth about to kill thee?

[274] ch. 8:48.

21 Jesus answered and said unto them, I have done one work, and ye all marvel.

22 Moses[275] therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but[276] of the fathers;) and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man.

[275] Lev. 12:3.

[276] Gen. 17:10.

23 If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because[277] I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day?

[277] ch. 5:8.

24 Judge[278] not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

[278] Deut. 1:16, 17.

=20-24. Thou hast a devil; who goeth about to kill thee?= It is evident from ver. 25 that some of his auditors knew the secret design which had been formed for Christ’s assassination. Their language here is that of foulest abuse. I judge then that they were startled by Christ’s sudden revealing of the secret designs against him; and with that inconsistency which is common to the self-condemned, they in the same sentence denied that his death had been compassed, and implied that the fact that it was compassed had been disclosed to him by an evil spirit which possessed him.--=Jesus answered * * * * I have done one work, and ye all marvel.= The work referred to is that described in the fifth chapter of John, the only miracle in Jerusalem up to this time which is described in detail; not the only one which he had wrought (chaps. 2:23; 3:2), but presumptively the last one. They wondered not at the miracle, but at the fact that he had performed it on the Sabbath day (ch. 5:16). It is not necessary to give to the word _wonder_ here any accessory idea, as of doubt (_Bengel_) or disquietude (_Chrysostom_); Christ begins with the mildest characterization of their sentiment as that of mere surprise. Here, as habitually, he does not proceed to severe language till milder language has proved unavailing.--=Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision.= There is some doubt whether the word _therefore_ belongs to this or to the preceding verse; _i. e._, whether Christ says, _I have done one work, and ye all therefore marvel_, or, _Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision, not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers_. The latter reading is preferred by the later scholars, _e. g._, Bengel, Meyer, Alford, against Olshausen, Tholuck. Either is grammatically possible; and the purely grammatical considerations appear to me to be about equally balanced. The latter interpretation is preferable, because it gives a better meaning to the sentence. Accepting this rendering, the meaning appears to be, Moses gave unto you circumcision for this reason, viz., because it was patriarchal, not because it originated with him. And this statement of the reason of the Mosaic law respecting circumcision affords a basis for the argument which follows. It was a saying of the rabbis “that circumcision drives away the Sabbath,” and they held that the rite, notwithstanding the work which it necessarily entailed, might be performed on the Sabbath day, because it was of patriarchal origin, and so antedated the Mosaic institution of the Sabbath. Christ, referring to this fact, convicts the Jews of inconsistency in being angry with him for placing the law of mercy above the law of the Sabbath. For the law of mercy was older than either; it belongs to the eternal law of God’s nature.--=That the law of Moses should not be broken.= That law prescribed that circumcision should be performed on the eighth day (Lev. 12:3); to allow that day to pass by, therefore, without circumcision would be a breach of the law.--=Because I have made an entire man= (ὅλον ἄνθρωπον) =well on the Sabbath day=. We can hardly suppose, with Bengel and Olshausen, that the _entire man_ here signifies the healing of both soul and body; for there is no evidence in the original account that the physical was accompanied with a spiritual healing, and no likelihood that Christ’s auditors would have understood him here to refer to spiritual healing. The contrast rather seems to be between circumcision as an act of wounding, which brought only ceremonial cleanness, and the miracle at the pool of Bethesda, which gave relief from the consequences of sin (ch. 5:14), and gave health to the whole body.--=Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment.= See Zech. 7:9. One of Christ’s Sabbath laws; we are ourselves to avoid, but we are not to condemn in others, the appearance of evil. What is Sabbath observance and what Sabbath transgression is to be determined, not by the external act, but by the inward motive and the ultimate end.

25 Then said some of them of Jerusalem, Is not this he, whom they seek to kill?

26 But, lo, he speaketh boldly, and they say nothing unto him. Do[279] the rulers know indeed that this is the very Christ?

[279] verse 48.

27 Howbeit[280] we know this man whence he is: but when Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence he is.

[280] Matt. 13:55.

=25-27. Then said some of them of Jerusalem.= Residents of Jerusalem, who were therefore more likely than the pilgrim strangers to know the designs of the hierarchy.--=Whom they seek to kill.= See chaps. 5:18; 7:19, 32.--=Surely= (μήποτε) =the rulers do not know that this is indeed the Messiah=? The form of the sentence is an inquiry, strongly implying a negative answer.--=Howbeit as to this fellow, we know whence he is; but when the Messiah cometh, no man knoweth whence he is.= It is true that prophecy foretold that the Messiah should be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2; Matt. 2:6); but according to the Rabbinical teaching he was straightway to be snatched away by spirits and tempests, lie hidden for a while, and unexpectedly and supernaturally reappear to enter upon his miraculous mission (Lightfoot on Matt. 2:1). The people here bore an unconscious testimony to the Messiahship of Jesus; for they neither knew his earthly nor his heavenly origin. They believed him who was born in Bethlehem to be a native of Nazareth, and the Son of God to be the son of a carpenter.

28 Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am: and[281] I am not come of myself, but he that sent me[282] is true, whom[283] ye know not.

[281] ch. 5:43.

[282] Rom. 3:4.

[283] chaps. 1:18; 8:55.

29 But[284] I know him: for I am from him, and he hath sent me.

[284] ch. 10:15; Matt. 11:27.

=28, 29. Then Jesus cried aloud teaching in the temple, and said, Ye do indeed know me, and ye know whence I am; and I am not come of myself, but it is the True One who hath sent me; him ye do not know. I know him, for I have come from him, and he it is that hath sent me forth.= As I read it, this is one of those outbursts of indignation with which we occasionally meet in the teachings of Christ. The obduracy and resoluteness in evil of the Jews aroused his indignation and elicited his stern rebuke. Comp. chaps. 8:41, 44; 9:41; Matthew, ch. 23. I understand then his language to be neither ironical nor interrogative, but affirmative, and not to refer to his human nature and origin, but to his divine character and mission. In his miracles and his instructions they had seen and heard enough to assure them that he was from God (chaps. 3:2; 11:47, 48). Their contemptuous declaration, _We know this fellow_, he transformed into an indictment against them. They had whispered it; he proclaimed it aloud. “Ye do know me,” he says, “and ye know whence I am, for the authentication of my divine mission is ample. Ye do know that I am not come of myself, for my whole life is a conclusive demonstration that I am not a self-seeker.” The _True One_ is not equivalent to the Truthful One nor the Really Existent One merely, but the One True God (2 Chron. 15:3; Jer. 10:10; John 17:3; 1 Thess. 1:9; 1 John 5:20). Him they did not and could not know, because the knowledge of God is only for the pure in heart (Matt. 5:8). Jesus knew him, for he had been his companion from eternity. In a sense we are all from God, but not in the sense in which Christ here indicates that he is from God. The preposition used (παρά) has the sense of _from beside, from near_, French _de chez_ (_Rob. Lex._). The declaration is interpreted by ch. 1:1; Phil. 2:6. The public exposure of their whispered contempt, the equally public exposure of the secret thought of their own hearts, which they had not themselves read as clearly as Christ read it for them, and the tone of fearless assumption in which he at once claimed to be the companion of the Only True God and declared that they did not even know Him, whose peculiar people it was their peculiar boast to be, angered the Judeans, and especially the hierarchy, and led to the unsuccessful attempt to arrest Jesus recorded in the succeeding verse.

30 Then[285] they sought to take him: but no man laid hands on him, because his hour was not yet come.

[285] ch. 8:37; Mark 11:18; Luke 20:19.

31 And many[286] of the people believed on him, and said, When Christ cometh, will he do more miracles than these which this _man_ hath done?

[286] ch. 4:39.

=30, 31. They sought therefore to arrest him.= An arrest for the purpose of bringing him before the authorities, not a mere lawless act of a mob, is indicated by the original (πιάζω). The attempt, however, was probably made by some of the people, acting without special authority; this is implied by the account of the official action subsequently taken (ver. 32).--=Because his hour was not yet come.= The hour appointed in the divine counsel for his passion and death. The immediate cause of the failure to arrest may have been a fear of the Galileans and others with whom Christ was popular; but John passes this wholly by to speak of the real reason in the divine counsels. Predestination is quite as strongly marked in John as in Paul.--=But of the multitude many believed on him.= The degree of faith is not indicated. Its spirituality may have been very slight; yet the rest of the sentence certainly indicates that they were inclined to think that this might be the promised Messiah.--=More miracles than these which this one hath done.= To those which had been wrought in Jerusalem were probably added, in their thought, those which had been wrought in Galilee; some of these had doubtless been witnessed by many of the Galileans present.

32 The Pharisees heard that the people murmured such things concerning him; and the Pharisees and the chief priests sent officers to take him.

33 Then said Jesus unto them, Yet[287] a little while am I with you, and _then_ I go unto him that sent me.

[287] chaps. 13:33; 16:16.

34 Ye[288] shall seek me, and shall not find _me_: and where I am, _thither_ ye cannot come.

[288] ch. 8:21; Hos. 5:6.

=32-34. The Pharisees and the chief priests sent officers to take him.= This was an official act on the part of the Sanhedrim or its officers, carrying out the design of certain of the people, as indicated in ver. 30; and it is the first official endeavor to arrest him, the beginning of a course of action consummated in his final arrest, trial, and crucifixion.--=Therefore said Jesus unto them.= A break evidently occurs between verses 31 and 32. The discourse up to ver. 31 is continuous, and took place about the middle of the feast, that is, the third or fourth day; the discourse in verses 37-39 was on the last day of the feast; between the two the orders for Christ’s arrest were given. Verses 33, 34 are founded on Christ’s knowledge of those orders, and it is a reasonable surmise that the presence of the officers suggested it to him and interpreted its meaning to some at least of his auditors.--=Yet a little while am I with you.= About six months after this address he was crucified.--=And I go unto him that sent me.= With this explicit statement of his meaning, interpreted as it was by the previous declaration that it was the true God who had sent him, it is difficult to understand how the Jews could have been perplexed respecting his meaning. De Wette’s explanation that they knew not the One who had sent him, and therefore that this saying was a dark one to them, is not wholly satisfactory, for surely they did know who was meant by the phrase, _he that sent me_, and as surely they could not fail to understand that going to God was equivalent to death. Meyer supposes that the words _him that sent me_ in this verse were not a part of Christ’s discourse, but added, perhaps by John himself; but they are not wanting in any of the manuscripts; and that is both a doubtful and a dangerous kind of criticism which removes a difficulty by the summary process of removing the difficult words, without any external authority for so doing. I believe therefore that Christ was explicit, that he was understood, and that the assumed perplexity of his hearers was a piece of hypocrisy. See on verses 35, 36.--=Ye shall seek and shall not find me; and where I am ye cannot come.= The key to the true interpretation of this passage, is afforded by Luke 17:22; John 8:21; 13:33. Christ does not refer to an inimical seeking; the _search_ here is the same as the _desire_ to see one of the days of the Son of man in Luke 17:22; _i. e._ the Jewish desire for a manifestation of the Messiah. He does not refer to a true spiritual seeking, for in ch. 8:21 he declares, to the same Jewish auditors, _Ye shall seek me and ye shall die in your sins_. Eusebius declares that many Jews in consequence of the judgments of God on Jerusalem became believers; such did indeed seek Christ, but they found him. The meaning then is that in the coming days of travail and sorrow, when many should go out after false Christs (Matt. 24:23, 24), the Jews would earnestly desire a Messiah for their deliverer, whom, however, they could not have, because with their own hands they had put him to death. They would seek, but theirs would be a temporal, not a spiritual seeking; the seeking of fear and self-interest, not of repentance, faith, and love. This verse affords no authority whatever for the opinion that any earnest spiritual soul ever seeks Christ in vain.

35 Then said the Jews among themselves, Whither will he go, that we shall not find him? will he go unto the dispersed[289] among the Gentiles, and teach the Gentiles?

[289] Isa. 11:12; James 1:1; 1 Pet. 1:1.

36 What _manner of_ saying is this that he said, Ye shall seek me, and shall not find _me_; and where I am, _thither_ ye cannot come?

=35, 36. Then said the Jews among themselves.= Their utterance has been by some regarded as the utterance of a genuine perplexity. So apparently Maurice: “He had broken down the barriers between different classes of Israelites--between Galileans, Samaritans, and Jews. Why might he not carry his designs further? Why might he not go to the dispersed tribes in heathen lands? Why might he not preach to the heathen themselves?” By others it is regarded as the language of scorn and contempt. So Meyer: “An insolent and scornful supposition, which they themselves, however, do not deem probable (therefore the question is asked with μή), regarding the meaning of words to them so utterly enigmatical. The bolder mode of teaching adopted by Jesus, his universalistic declarations, his partial non-observance of the law of the Sabbath, would lead them, perhaps, to associate with the unintelligible statement a mocking thought like this, and all the more because much interest was felt among the heathen, partly of an earnest kind, and partly (comp. St. Paul in Athens) arising from curiosity merely, regarding the Oriental religions, especially Judaism.” The latter view seems to me the more probable, because (1) it is inconceivable that the Jews should have misapprehended Christ’s meaning (ver. 33, note); (2) his analogous language in the next chapter they clearly did understand to refer to his death (ch. 8:22); (3) the fact that what was said was “among themselves” indicates that it was not an honest perplexity, in which case they would have asked Christ for an explanation, but of the same quality as the murmuring reported in verses 26, 27.

37 In the last[290] day, that great _day_ of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If[291] any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.

[290] Lev. 23:36.

[291] Isa. 55:1; Rev. 22:17.

=37. In the last day, that great day of the feast.= The feast of the Tabernacles proper lasted for seven days (Lev. 23:34, 41, 42), but on the eighth day a solemn assembly kept as a feast-Sabbath was directed to be held (Lev. 23:36; Numb. 29:35; Neh. 8:18); and though the people dwelt in the booths only the seven days, this eighth day was reckoned by the Jews as a part of the feast. Whether the seventh or the eighth is intended here by the “last day of the feast” is a little uncertain, as it also is whether the drawing of water from the brook Siloah, which was a characteristic ceremonial of the other days of the feast, took place also on the eighth day. This ceremonial recalled the miraculous supply of water in the wilderness from the riven rock; it was connected by the more superstitious of the people with the notion that at this time God determined the amount of rain which should fall during the year; and the more spiritual saw in it a symbol of the time when the promised gift of the Holy Spirit should be bestowed upon Israel (Isa. 12:3). Whether the words of Christ were uttered, as Dr. Geikie supposes, during this ceremonial, or, as Alford supposes, the day after this service had come to an end, the reference to it is unmistakable. Dr. Geikie’s supposition certainly makes this reference more striking, and gives, if not peculiar significance, at least peculiar force, to Christ’s words. “The last day of the feast, known as ‘the Hosanna Rabba’ and the ‘Great Day,’ found him, as each day before, doubtless, had done, in the temple arcades. He had gone thither early, to meet the crowds assembled for morning prayer. It was a day of special rejoicing. A great procession of pilgrims marched seven times round the city, with their lulabs, music, and loud-voiced choirs preceding, and the air was rent with shouts of Hosanna, in commemoration of the taking of Jericho, the first city in the Holy Land that fell into the hands of their fathers. Other multitudes streamed to the brook of Siloah, after the priests and Levites, bearing the golden vessels with which to draw some of the water. As many as could get near the stream drank of it amidst loud shouting of the words of Isaiah--‘Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters,’ ‘With joy shall we draw water from the wells of salvation’--rising in jubilant chants on every side. The water drawn by the priests was, meanwhile, borne up to the temple, amidst the boundless excitement of a vast throng. Such a crowd was, apparently, passing at this moment. Rising as the throng went by, his spirit was moved at such honest enthusiasm, yet saddened at the moral decay which mistook a mere ceremony for religion. It was burning autumn weather, when the sun had for months shone in a cloudless sky, and the early rains were longed for as the monsoons in India after the summer heat. Water at all times is a magic word in a sultry climate like Palestine, but at this moment it had a double power. Standing, therefore, to give his words more solemnity, his voice now sounded far and near over the throng, with soft clearness, which arrested all: If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink.”--(_Geikie._)--=If any man thirst.= This is not an unconditional promise; it is conditioned, not merely on desire, but on a fervent desire. Comp. Isa. 55:1; Matt. 5:6; Rev. 22:17. “None are called to obtain the riches of the Spirit but those who burn with the desire of them. For we know that the pain of thirst is most acute and tormenting, so that the very strongest men, and those who can endure any amount of toil, are overpowered by thirst.”--(_Calvin._) An illustration of this spiritual thirst is afforded by David in Psalms 42, 43, and by Paul in Phil. 3:8-14.--=Let him come unto me.= If one can imagine these words spoken to the throng while the procession is marching into the temple, or even just after the solemn service is over and the minds of the people are still full of it, he will form a faint conception of the divine assumption implied in them; and if he further considers the effect produced, both on the multitude (verses 40, 41) and on the officers sent to arrest Jesus (ver. 46), he will form a faint conception of the divine dignity with which those words were uttered.

38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out[292] of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

[292] ch. 4:14; Prov. 18:4; Isa. 58:11.

=38. He that hath faith in me.= As in ch. 6 to eat the flesh and drink the blood of Christ is to have faith in him and live by him, so here, to come unto him and drink is to come with the affections and receive him into the soul.--=As the Scripture hath said.= There is no passage in the O. T. which directly sustains this citation, and no reason to suppose that Christ refers to any lost book. Alford refers to Ezek. 47:1-12, where the river of the water of life is described as flowing from under the temple, which Alford regards as a symbol of the believer; similarly Olshausen; but both this reference and that to Zech. 14:8 are remote and unnatural. We are either to suppose that the phrase “as the Scripture hath said” refers only to the preceding clause, “he that believeth on me,” so that the meaning is, He that according to the O. T. believeth on me; or else we are to suppose that John by the following verse (39) not only interprets the meaning of Christ’s promise, but also the meaning of his reference, and that we are to look for the Scripture in those passages which refer to and promise the gift of the Holy Ghost. The former of these interpretations is that of Chrysostom, the latter that of Meyer, who refers to Isa. 44:3; 55:1; 58:1; Joel 3:18; Zech. 13:1.--=Shall flow rivers of living water.= This declaration is not to be limited so that it shall be simply equivalent to the promise in John 4:14, “Whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst.” The language _out of his belly_ clearly implies something received that it may flow _from_ the recipient unto others. The water which he drinks becomes in him a spring from which living waters flow, as the light which illuminates him makes him in turn one of the lights which illuminate the world (Matt. 5:14; Phil. 2:15). That this is the meaning is clear, not only from the language here, but from John’s interpretation in the succeeding verse. “The mutual and inspired intercourse of Christians from Pentecost downwards, the speaking in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, the mutual edification in Christian assemblies by means of the charismata even to the speaking with tongues, the entire work of the apostles, of a Stephen and so on, furnish an abundant historical commentary upon this text.”--(_Meyer._)

39 (But this spake he of the[293] Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet _given_; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

[293] ch. 16:7; Isa. 44:3; Joel 2:28; Acts 2:17, 33.

=39. But this spake he of the Spirit.= This declaration of John makes the second chapter of Acts and the succeeding history of the Church of Christ the true commentary on Christ’s promise.--=For the Spirit was not yet.= The meaning cannot of course be that the Holy Spirit had no existence, for “this would be not only in flat contradiction to chaps. 1:32, 33; 3:5, 8, 34, but to the whole O. T., in which the agency of the Spirit in the _outward world_ is recognized even more vividly than in the N. T.” (_Alford._) And it is not only in the outward world that the O. T. recognizes the Holy Spirit, but also in the hearts of individual prophets, who thus became the ministers of divine grace to others (Gen. 41:38; Exod. 4:11, 12; 31:3; 2 Chron. 15:1; Ps. 51:11; Isa. 63:11, 14). Nor does the addition by the translators of the word _given_ adequately represent the meaning, for the Holy Ghost was given before the glorification of Christ, but not to all men; he was not a universal gift. The meaning is that the dispensation of the Holy Ghost had not yet begun; he had not yet been so given that whoever had faith in the Son of God received the gift of the Holy Ghost and became one of the Lord’s prophets (Acts 2:38). See Acts 2:4, note.--=Because Jesus was not yet glorified.= The death and resurrection of Christ were the conditions precedent of the outpouring of the Holy Ghost (ch. 14:16, 17; 16:7; Acts 1:7-9).

40 Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet.[294]

[294] ch. 6:14; Deut. 18:15, 18.

41 Others said, This is the[295] Christ. But some said, Shall[296] Christ come out of Galilee?

[295] chaps. 4:42, 6:69.

[296] verse 52; ch. 1:46.

42 Hath not the scripture said, That Christ[297] cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem,[298] where David[299] was?

[297] Ps. 132:11; Jer. 23:5.

[298] Micah 5:2; Luke 2:4.

[299] 1 Sam. 16:1-4.

43 So there was a division among the people because of him.

44 And some of them would have taken him; but no man laid hands on him.

=40-44.= These verses give the impressions produced on different auditors by Christ’s discourses at the feast. The word _many_ is wanting in the best manuscripts, and is omitted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, Alford, Schaff; for it read _some_. Some regarded Jesus as the prophet foretold in Deut. 18:15 (comp. ch. 1:21; Matt. 16:14); others thought that he might even be the Messiah. See ver. 31. The opponents of Christ based their opposition not upon his character or that of his teaching, but upon their Jewish prejudice to his supposed Galilean origin. There is no good ground for the conclusion, arrived at by some rationalistic critics from John’s language here, that he did not know that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. Writing his Gospel many years after the main facts of Christ’s birth, life, and death were known throughout the church, he here simply narrates as an historian the objections which the Judeans made to the claim that Jesus was the Messiah; to have pointed out their mistake would have been a work of supererogation. Alford’s note on this point is quite conclusive: “De Wette’s ‘probability that John knew nothing of the birth at Bethlehem’ reaches much further than may appear at first. If John knew nothing of it, and yet the mother of the Lord lived with him, the inference must be that _she_ knew nothing of it--in other words, that it never happened.”

[Illustration: OFFICERS OF THE CHIEF PRIESTS.]

45 Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; and they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him?

46 The officers answered, Never[300] man spake like this man.

[300] Luke 4:22.

=45, 46. Then came the officers.= Not Roman soldiers, but temple police, answering to the modern constable or the Roman lictor or the English beadle. They had been directed by the officers of the Sanhedrim to arrest Jesus (ver. 32). Presumptively this return of the officers occurred several days after their commission to make the arrest. They had been watching him during the feast.--=Never man spake like this man.= They were not overawed by the multitude, but by the words of Christ himself. There is no stronger testimony, even in the Gospels, to the marvellous moral power of Christ’s personality and words than this declaration of the temple police, who were probably ignorant but also simple men, without the culture, but also without the religious prejudices, of the rulers. In the life of Whitefield are several illustrations of analogous moral power over roughs who had come to the preaching to break it up, but who remained spell-bound under its influence. To have elicited such testimony as this from such men as these, Jesus must have possessed the power of a true oratory.

47 Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived?

48 Have any of the rulers[301] or of the Pharisees believed on him?

[301] ch. 12:42; Jer. 5:4, 5; 1 Cor. 1:26.

49 But this people, who knoweth not the law, are cursed.

=47-49.= The language of the Pharisaic rulers is that of unbounded scorn for Jesus and for the multitude. The latter are declared to be under divine wrath and cursed with moral blindness because they have an admiration for such a Sabbath-breaker. “All here is wonderfully living and characteristic. The faint effort of the officers to execute the command of their masters; the awe which held them back; their simple confession of the power which they found in the words of Jesus; the surprise of the Sanhedrim that the infection should have reached even their servants; their terror lest there might be traitors in the camp, lest any Pharisee or lawyer (probably some eyes were turned on Nicodemus) should have been carried away by the impulse to which the crowd, naturally enough, had yielded; their scorn of the people, as wretched, ‘accursed’ men, utterly ignorant of the law--who does not feel as if he were present in that convocation of doctors? as if he were looking at their perplexed and angry faces? as if he were hearing their contemptuous words?”--(_Maurice._)

50 Nicodemus saith unto them, (he[302] that came to Jesus by night, being one of them,)

[302] ch. 3:2.

51 Doth[303] our law judge _any_ man before it hear him, and know what he doeth?

[303] Deut. 17:8; Prov. 18:13.

52 They answered and said unto him, Art thou also of Galilee? Search and look: for out of Galilee[304] ariseth no prophet.

[304] Isa. 9:1, 2.

=50-52.= On the character of Nicodemus, see notes on ch. 3. The impression which Jesus had made upon him in that interview was an abiding one. There is a covert sarcasm in his question here, _Doth our law judge the man except it first hear him and know what he doeth?_ They themselves knew not the law, and were openly disregarding it. The Rabbinical laws explicitly required that every accused person should have a hearing, with an opportunity to confront the witnesses against him and to cross-examine them. See Vol. I, p. 298. That Nicodemus’ rebuke was felt by the Pharisees is shown by the tone of their answer. They replied, not by argument, but by a sneer, _Art thou also of Galilee?_ and by a falsehood, _Out of Galilee hath arisen_ (perfect, not present) _no prophet_. Jonah was of Galilee (2 Kings 14:25), Elijah very probably so (1 Kings 17:1;--_Alford_), and Nahum either of Galilee or of Assyria, a heathen land (Nahum 1:1). The prejudices of the Pharisees led them to forget their history as well as their law. In lieu of _doth our law judge any man?_ read _the man_, _i. e._, this man; Nicodemus refers specifically to Jesus. In lieu of _ariseth_ read _hath arisen_; though there is some uncertainty. Alford gives the present tense, _ariseth_; Lachmann, Tischendorf, and Meyer, with greater probability, the past tense, _hath arisen_. With either reading the meaning is substantially the same; not, as Godet, The promised prophet is not now arising, but, as Meyer and Alford, No prophet ever ariseth from Galilee.

53 And every man went unto his own house.

=53.= This verse belongs with the next chapter.