Paes τ 
 Pat " 
 BaP oe A nelle ae ie agai 
 - wet PIE IN LS ISIE PIN EA Rig rs ποκα OL AL ARI A ere RA NAA NAG Neh yet A Sy ἀρ λάνή 
 - νας, OER ID Ry Pe On gl ie eee Oe gl he LO Fs FN i LE Ii EN al A NIN, i PI Pot. PAD RM RE ee πο πον ey Oe es alae ρων an Og Ao HN ay tig ng ta nny 
 Oi te πε aman, mie Fa Apa er Se Pye Reet B.A Pte te Linh, alin fa Ay ie Pal Θ΄ θυ αὖ FMP A PMA IE PP Oe eee aed POP PI i OL I RB PP IA ON Mr i Ot a ee A LT NO nO ον pa ae! Saadins deeded aa att ee 
 tits one ς νν,»..». Pete πρὸς ete Pg gh oar FPP πον το ast ig ee Pals tig, ethene OM her ".+ “πον i eI. Peep TOL + yt Mr GD Ae ae. ARAL PLN INP MIL O e  prttam Sam PM ee etna A Pegi Te eh erg ha gl mee wee tet hy neh ORe 
 προσ ίσως ας, ΄, od eee eh te NL AEDS LPP RP BRL aI ee δ σῷ I, LA OIL NE LO ee ας δια τα ae, EP ον στο Ag! eee tag hw eg te ΨΩ 
 «τ. te i ee i ee ALP. Asien AP oe PON er “5... “Ἄν I a σου» πα πνὴΝ πσυσσλδοι κα eta ee ας i 
 tht ah abate te Peg A ale aah Yon - 4 Pea, a ΄“ = βο DO PPAR AR KAPPA ADO mee ἮΝ αν a eng Reet BS Mente, Oa et Ne ete, PN Ae oe are π εν . 
 bellidiestaiethe eal es “ς Re CP Rig Re Pegg PO Or DOL Pe em I PI PL lh de ἑν... =e I INO OP a Tn Pains Me PP te Me, νοι Paella Se ng Se oli att greeny” 
 ὦ - wre Ω “Ὄδιας νι aes ot lien eee ON OL LI LINE FIN Og NN ORNL SP ele να αι ὁ αὦοΆλ σοι eee a OL LR OBI ἡ» ἀντ AO ona ἀρὴν Me ig νοῦ σις MDa haar Dag Rate w+ 
 ire ts > Pete «Pte wean, TO ig LOM ae” πάνθ... - ἀπο ποριλ απ αν π-ττα θόι ᾳ ten, Oe ee νιν ἢ AES eR Brel Be alee? yeaa 
 Peay τῳ, tt _ τῶν, FON eR oem ids ee ee eee “ππινκισ..υ..5 LEAN Eo ~ a re a J AeA ΜΝ tg 
 Mae say Nate ant" oe MaMa te PN es Ns A PON Ni Ag Bee ND. te Be ee eg te ~ A naa 
 -"-“.......- — ee “πῇ ΦΞὩὩ-ῸὩρ deeded ite ee ee ee ee κ κ᾿ 
 eR PR ET RRA ee -- 
 σι re Pe ee TR RA τ καὶ - 
 OPP PF ~~ fe ~ “.“.... > 
 “.-»- om “2 oe ~~ aaa 
 ee ee ee ae 
 . ry ee ee ae —— 
 PPO A AOR ευσρόν κι pee aye 
 EL A PG eee F LON IRI iy Re Ae ile gt PN. 
 em ΄“. 5 A ae mm 
 Ae ὡς - ee ee 
 a ΨΚΟΟΝ ~r- DEAS χα 
 - "= alles ~ ΜΝ 
 ee Pe « ———-: 
 rom 7 ee > -* . oe - 
 eA > ᾿ “γ᾿. es 
 --™ ε “ » hay 
 ae = Ame 
 ~ on ““.»»... as 
 ve Ῥ"ΡῚ ae 
 a 4 ᾿ 
 er κ᾿». φὰς, ΄ 
 ~~ ~ -.- . ϑ 
 pan 
 —* ᾿ ΝΙΝ = a ~ 
 , « τω . 
 ν “ ον ᾿ + - 
 5 ΄ os * σ᾿ - r 
 ΄ »- δ cen 
 - al “ - 
 -- - - ~ . 
 . ~ = - - 
 We NS Set phe” 8m σοα,το»ο. ᾿ 
 
 σφ Τ᾿ te ΕΣ ὍΣ ᾿ +" ἢ 
 τς = ¥ ὡς “ = δ Ne > “ - 
 Piper a Saat oat ba os ΝΣ Se τω ἣν > as PS See a tN a AS ae φν. ES ee ag τνῖΣ 
 ᾿ Feet tyes - πῶς a Νὲ βὶ Ἂ »-σὼ ον 3 
 , ῥ eh ἐν ϑ μουν st ned bee eC eee es eae oe a oe BIA An at ae 
 ¢ eat ne ἐχιχὲ »- ΔΔ onde te κι αν MF Pict ot at testy Re re A , es! (ὴ Ψ 
 Witenes ’ : 
 
 Spates sone ses hy wt a ale vat Le ate 
 
 SIP Ag RE on ta 
 a 
 
Library of The Theological Seminary 
 
 PRINCETON - NEW JERSEY 
 
 TIKES 
 
 PRESENTED BY 
 Princeton University Library 
 
 Be 2341 .Ci7s ν, 4 1893 
 
 Bible. 
 
 The Gospel according to 5. 
 John 
 
na 
 
 ‘ ὦ i } ay ie ᾿ 1 
 ἃ ἡ Nn ia ry 
 By ice ἡ ΤΗ͂Ν eae, 
 
 ? i ne 
 
 wea i 
 ἔ Ὧν WAN 
 
 ἢ Ἶ εν". 
 τ a ὟΝ , 
 ΜΕ δ 
 ἢ ae eae t Ae ἢ 
 ὩΣ 
 
afi, im 
 
 ‘A 
 
SOLS 
 
 Som 
 era ges ae. 
 
THE TEMPLE REBUILT BY HEROD 
 
 WwesT 
 Ἐπ --..-. ee — 
 "OT Ἔ Seas ail} eee 
 ma δὲν κε εκ SEER 
 5 SSS SSS 
 
 σσσσσσσσσσσσσσ.σ.. 
 YY YU YLT), 
 | 
 
 1 Gy 
 
 F 
 “ 
 
 eh al Rat le i ων». ὦ 
 
 7 : 
 PRIEST'S’ : ap : 
 
 «τ 
 WS 
 SOS 
 
 ι- SS 
 
 WOMEN'S 27 
 “72 
 
 wZ AI LZ 
 ΓΖ 
 τ εχ; 
 
 7 ees 
 SOREG= Stone partition 3 cubits high, enclosm¢ the Sz 
 > o 
 
 ALC tary 
 
 Ree One (Ret OF THE PG tea ds fal ὧν Pe) OS 
 
 B. Beautiful Gate 
 
 C. Chambers for treasures & offerings Neh-XIl.44:Mal fiL,10. 
 G. The Hall Gazith, where the Sanhediim met 
 
 T. 13 Trumpet shaped Treasure Chests 
 
 W. Galleries in which the women usually worshipped 
 
 (men assembled in the court below ) 
 
Cambringe Greek Cestament for 
 Schools. _ AT OF Pilioes 
 
 GENERAL EpitTor :—J. J. 5. PEF 
 BisHor oF WORCEST 
 
 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO 
 
 9, JOHN; 
 
 WITH MAPS, NOTES AND INTRODUCTION 
 
 7 BY Ὗ 
 THE REV. A. PLUMMER, ΜᾺ, D.D. 
 
 MASTER OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DURHAM, 
 
 FORMERLY FELLOW AND TUTOR OF TRINITY COLLEGE, OXFORD. 
 
 EDITED FOR THE SYNDICS OF THE YNIVERSITY PRESS. ."' 
 
 Cambridge: , 
 AT THE UNIVERSITY EEESS. 
 
 London: C. J. CLAY anp SONS, 
 CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, 
 AVE MARIA LANE, 
 
 1893 
 
 [All Rights reserved.] 
 
Φ 
 . 
 
 Cambrivge 
 PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AND SONS, 
 
 AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 
 
 ν ν 
 ων Ye 
 ν 
 e”* 
 " » 
 %@ 
 %~e 
 over 
 > Ὁ 
 se Sy, 
 ν 
 Ὁ 
 See 
 e 
 
PREFACE | 
 BY THE GENERAL EDITOR. 
 
 Tue General Editor of The Cambridge Bible for 
 Schools thinks it right to say that he does not hold 
 himself responsible either for the interpretation of 
 particular passages which the Editors of the several 
 Books have adopted, or for any opinion on points of 
 doctrine that they may have expressed. In the New 
 Testament more especially questions arise of the 
 deepest theological import, on which the ablest and 
 most conscientious interpreters have differed and 
 always will differ. His aim has been in all such 
 cases to leave each Contributor to the unfettered 
 exercise of his own judgment, only taking care that 
 mere controversy should as far as possible be avoided. 
 He has contented himself chiefly with a careful 
 revision of the Ree with pointing out omissions, with 
 a200 
 
 054 
 
 \ 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 suggesting occasionally a reconsideration of some 
 question, or a fuller treatment of difficult passages, 
 and the like. 
 
 Beyond this he has not attempted to interfere, 
 feeling it better that each Commentary should have 
 its own individual character, and being convinced 
 that freshness and variety of treatment are more 
 than a compensation for any lack of uniformity in 
 
 the Series. 
 
Pp 
 | 
 | 
 
 ON THE GREEK TEXT. 
 
 ΙΝ undertaking an edition of the Greek text of the 
 New Testament with English notes for the use of Schools, 
 the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press have not 
 thought it desirable to reprint the text in common use*. 
 To have done this would have been to set aside all the 
 materials that have since been accumulated towards the 
 formation of a correct text, and to disregard the results 
 of textual criticism in its application to MSS., Versions 
 and Fathers. Jt was felt that a text more in accordance 
 with the present state of our knowledge was desirable. 
 On the other hand the Syndics were unable to adopt one 
 of the more recent critical texts, and they were not disposed 
 to make themselves responsible for the preparation of an 
 
 * The form of this text most used in England, and adopted in 
 Dr Scrivener’s edition, is that of the third edition of Robert Stephens 
 (1550). The name ‘Received Text” is popularly given to the Elzevir 
 edition of 1633, which is based on this edition of Stephens, and the 
 
 name is borrowed from a phrase in the Preface, ‘‘Textum ergo habes 
 nunc ab omnibus receptum,”’ 
 
vi PREFATORY. 
 
 entirely new and independent text: at the same time it 
 would have been obviously impossible to leave it to the 
 judgement of each individual contributor to frame his own 
 text, as this would have been fatal to anything like uni- 
 formity or consistency. They believed however that a good 
 text might be constructed by simply taking the consent of 
 the two most recent critical editions, those of Tischendorf 
 and Tregelles, as a basis. The same principle of consent 
 could be applied to places where the two critical editions 
 were at variance, by allowing a determining voice to the 
 text of Stephens where it agreed with either of their read- 
 ings, and to a third critical text, that of Lachmann, where 
 the text of Stephens differed from both. In this manner 
 readings peculiar to one or other of the two editions would 
 be passed over as not being supported by sufficient critical 
 consent ; while readings having the double authority would 
 be treated as possessing an adequate title to confidence. 
 
 A few words will suffice to explain the manner in 
 which this design has been carried out. 
 
 In the Acts, the Hpistles, and the Revelation, wherever 
 the texts of Tischendorf and Tregelles agree, their joint 
 readings are followed without any deviation. Where they 
 differ from each other, but neither of them agrees with the 
 text of Stephens as printed in Dr Scrivener’s edition, the 
 consensus of Lachmann with either is taken in preference 
 to the text of Stephens. In all other cases the text of 
 Stephens as represented in Dr Scrivener’s edition has been 
 followed. 
 
ON THE GREEK TEXT. vii 
 
 In the Gospels, a single modification of this plan has 
 been rendered necessary by the importance of the Sinai 
 MS. (x), which was discovered too late to be used by 
 Tregelles except in the last chapter of St John’s Gospel 
 and in the following books. Accordingly, if a reading 
 which Tregelles has put in his margin agrees with ἐξ, 
 it is considered as of the same authority as a reading 
 which he has adopted in his text; and if any words 
 which Tregelles has bracketed are omitted by x, these 
 words are here dealt with as if rejected from his text. 
 
 In order to secure uniformity, the spelling and the 
 accentuation of Tischendorf have been adopted where he 
 differs from other Editers. His practice has likewise been 
 followed as regards the insertion or omission of Iota sub- 
 script in infinitives (as ζῆν, ἐπιτιμᾶν), and adverbs (as κρυφῇ, 
 λάθρα), and the mode of printing such composite forms as 
 διαπαντός, διατί, τουτέστι, and the like. 
 
 The punctuation of Tischendorf in his eighth edition has 
 usually been adopted: where it is departed from, the devia- 
 tion, together with the reasons that have led to it, will be 
 found mentioned in the Notes. Quotations are indicated 
 by a capital letter at the beginning of the sentence. Where 
 a whole verse is omitted, its omission is noted in the margin 
 (6... Matt. xvii. 21; xxiii. 12). 
 
 The text is printed in paragraphs corresponding to those 
 of the English Edition. 
 
 Although it was necessary that the text of all the 
 portions of the New Testament should be uniformly con- 
 
Viii ON THE GREEK TEXT. 
 
 structed in accordance with these general rules, each editor 
 has been left at perfect liberty to express his preference 
 for other readings in the Notes. 
 
 It is hoped that a text formed on these principles 
 will fairly represent the results of modern criticism, and 
 will at least be accepted as preferable to “the Received 
 
 Text”’ for use in Schools. 
 
 J. J. STEWART PEROWNE. 
 
Il. 
 Π|. 
 TY, 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 I. InrrRopvUcTION. PAGES 
 ChapterI The Life of S. Johm .....0.........005 xi—xx 
 - Chapter II, The Authenticity of the Gospel... | xx—xxxv 
 Chapter 111. The Place and Date ............... XXXV—XXXVil 
 Chapter IV. The Object and Plan ............... Xxxvil—xli 
 Chapter V. The Characteristics of the Gospel xli—xlix 
 Chapter VI. Its Relation to the Synoptic 
 ISLS See ΡΠ πε eondendasaey tek xlix—liii 
 Chapter VII. Its Relation to the First Epistle liv 
 Chapter VIII. The Text of the Gospel ......... ly—lix 
 Chapter IX. The Literature of the Gospel...... lix—lx 
 Analysis of the Gospel in Detail lx—lxiv 
 SRR RATED PLCMEIE. |) 5,52 Sh coca v owas awsihenune venues dgerenech 1—357 
 pW PRI POOR ΤΠ. ohne d F's τερτυ νοι ον το see το νοσοῦν 359 —366 
 BITE τε τ soc dane stoznba tes cavdintouer avdiescrshenaleense as 367—382 
 Prawn or ΤΗΝ Tewenr oF FEROD <..2..2.ccicvecccscsce to face p. 1 
 REAP GH (DBA OF GALEUER ᾿ς ταν <cdsesccacendseceneses at end of volume 
 +» 9», PALESTINE IN THE TIME OF OUR SAVIOUR do. 
 a. bg LEAN OF JERUSALEM, εἰς ες νκοῤοιοις ποτ ρος - do. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 THE LIFE OF 8. JOHN, 
 
 THE life of S. John falls naturally into two divisions, the limits 
 of which correspond to the two main sources of information re- 
 specting him. (1) From his birth to the departure from Jerusalem 
 after the Ascension; the sources for which are contained in N.T. 
 (2) From the departure from Jerusalem to his death ; the sources 
 for which are the traditions of the primitive Church. In both 
 cases the notices of 8. John are fragmentary, and cannot be woven 
 together into anything like a complete whole without a good deal 
 of conjecture. But the fragments are in the main very har- 
 monious, and contain definite traits and characteristics, enabling 
 us to form a portrait, which though imperfect is unique. 
 
 (i) Before the Departure from Jerusalem. 
 
 The date of S. John’s birth cannot be determined. He was 
 probably younger than his Master and than the other Apostles. 
 He was the son of Zebedee and Salome, and brother of James, 
 who was probably the older of the two. Zebedee was a fisher- 
 man of the lake of Galilee, who seems to have lived in or near 
 Bethsaida (i. 44), and was well enough off to have hired servants 
 (Mark i. 20). He appears only once in the Gospel-narrative 
 (Matt. iv. 21, 22; Mark i. 19, 20), but is mentioned frequently 
 as the father of 8. James and S. John. Salome (see on xix. 25) 
 was probably the sister of the Virgin, and in that case S. John 
 was our Lord’s first cousin. This relationship harmonizes well 
 
ΧΙ INTRODUCTION. 
 
 with the special intimacy granted to the beloved disciple by his 
 Lord, with the fact of S. James also being among the chosen 
 three, and with the final committal of the Virgin to S. John’s 
 care. Salome was one of those women who followed Christ and 
 ‘ministered to Him of their substance’ (Mark xv. 40; comp. 
 Matt. xxvii. 55; Luke viii. 3). This was probably after Zebedee’s 
 death. S. John’s parents, therefore, would seem to have been 
 people of means; and it is likely from xix. 27 that the Apostle 
 himself was fairly well off, a conclusion to which his acquaintance 
 with the high-priest (xviii. 15) also points. 
 
 S. John, therefore, like all the Apostles, excepting the traitor, 
 was a Galilean ; and this fact may be taken as in some degree 
 accounting for that fieriness of temper which earned for him and 
 his brother the name of ‘sons of thunder’ (Mark iii. 17). The 
 inhabitants of Galilee, while they had remained to a large extent 
 untouched by the culture of the rest of the nation, remained also 
 untouched by the enervation both in belief and habits which culture 
 commonly brings. Ignorant of the glosses of tradition, they kept 
 the old simple faith in the letter of the Law. Uninterested alike 
 in politics and philosophy, they preferred the sword to intrigue, 
 and industry to speculation. Thus, while the hierarchy jealously 
 scrutinise all the circumstances of Jesus’ position, the Galileans 
 on the strength of a single miracle would ‘take Him by force’ 
 (vi. 14, 15) and make Him king. Population was dense and 
 mixed, and between the Syrians and Jews there were often fierce 
 disputes. To this industrious, hardy, and warlike race 8. John 
 belonged by birth and residence, sharing its characteristic energy 
 and its impatience of indecision and intrigue. Hence, when the 
 Baptist proclaimed the kingdom of the Messiah, the young fisher- 
 man at once became a follower, and pressed steadily onwards 
 until the goal was reached. 
 
 Christian art has so familiarised us with a form of almost 
 feminine sweetness as representing the beloved disciple, that the 
 strong energy and even vehemence of his character is almost 
 lost sight of. In his writings as well as in what is recorded of 
 him both in N.T. and elsewhere we find both sides of his cha- 
 racter appearing. And indeed though apparently opposed they 
 
LIFE OF 5. JOHN. ΧΙ 
 
 are not really so; the one may beget the other, and did so in 
 him. The calmness of suppressed emotion leads naturally to 
 passionate utterance, when the fire kindles and at last the tongue 
 speaks. 
 
 In yet another way his Galilean origin might influence S, John. 
 The population of the country, as has been said, was mixed. 
 From a boy he would have the opportunity of coming in contact 
 with Greek life and language. Hence that union of Jewish and 
 Greek characteristics which are found in him, and which have 
 led some to the conclusion that the author of the Fourth Gospel 
 was a Greek. We shall find as we go along that the enormous 
 preponderance of Jewish modes of thought and expression, and 
 of Jewish points of view, renders this conclusion absolutely un- 
 tenable. 
 
 The young son of Zebedee was perhaps never at one of the 
 rabbinical schools, which after the fall of Jerusalem made Tiberias 
 a great centre of education, and probably existed in some shape 
 before that. Hence he can be contemptuously spoken of by the 
 hierarchy as an ‘illiterate and common’ person (Acts iv. 18). 
 No doubt he paid the usual visits to Jerusalem at the proper 
 seasons, and became acquainted with the grand liturgy of the 
 Temple; a worship which while it kindled his deep spiritual 
 emotions and gave him material for reverent meditation, would 
 insensibly prepare the way for that intense hatred of the hierarchy, 
 who had made the worship there worse than a mockery, which 
 breathes through all the pages of his Gospel. 
 
 While he was still a lad, and perhaps already learning to 
 admire and love the impetuosity of his older friend S. Peter, the 
 rising of ‘Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing’ (see on Acts 
 v. 37) took place. Judas, like our own Wat Tyler, raised a revolt 
 against a tax which he held to be tyrannical, and proclaimed that 
 the people had ‘no lord or master but God.’ Whether the boy 
 and his future friend sympathized with the movement we have 
 no means of knowing. But the honest though ill-advised cry of 
 the leaders of this revolt may easily have been remembered by 
 S. John when he heard the false and renegade priests declare to 
 Pilate, ‘We have no king but Caesar’ (xix. 15). 
 
tie INTRODUCTION. 
 
 There was another movement of a very different kind, with 
 which we know that he did sympathize heartily. After centuries 
 of dreary silence, in which it seemed as if Jehovah had deserted 
 His chosen people, a thrill went through the land that God had 
 again visited them, and that a Prophet had once more appeared. 
 His was a call, not to resist foreign taxation or to throw off the 
 yoke of Rome, but to withstand their own temptations and to 
 break the heavy bondage of their own crying sins: ‘ Repent ye, 
 for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!’ §S. John heard and fol- 
 lowed, and from the Baptist learnt to know and at once to follow 
 ‘the Lamb of God’ that was to do what the lambs provided by 
 man in the Temple could never do—‘take away the sin of the 
 world.’ In the Baptist’s teaching, as in that of Christ, 8. John 
 gives us a profounder element than that set forth by the Syn- 
 optists. They give repentance as the substance of his preaching. 
 S. John insists rather on his heralding the Messiah. Assuming 
 that the unnamed disciple (i. 40) is S. John, we infer (i. 41) that 
 he proceeded to bring his brother S. James to Jesus as 8. Andrew 
 had brought 8. Peter. But from ‘that day’ (i. 39), that never to 
 be forgotten day, the whole tenour of the young man’s life was 
 changed. The disciple of the Baptist had become the disciple of 
 Christ. 
 
 After remaining with Jesus for a time he seems to have gone 
 back to his old employment; from which he was again called, 
 and possibly more than once (Matt. iv. 18; Luke v. 1—11), to 
 become an Apostle and fisher of men. Then the group of the 
 chosen three is formed. At the raising of Jairus’ daughter, at 
 the Transfiguration, and in the Garden of Gethsemane, ‘ Peter, 
 James, and John’ are admitted to nearer relationship with their 
 Lord than the rest; and on one other solemn occasion, when He 
 foretold the destruction of Jerusalem (Mark xiii. 3), 8. Andrew 
 also is with them. In this group, although S. Peter takes the 
 lead, it is S. John who is nearest and dearest to the Lord, ‘the 
 disciple whom Jesus loved.’ 
 
 On three different occasions the burning temper of the ‘sons 
 of thunder’ displayed itself. (1) ‘And John answered Him, 
 saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in Thy name, and 
 
LIFE OF 8. JOHN. xv 
 
 he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth 
 not us’ (Mark ix. 38; Luke ix. 49); a touch of zealous intoler- 
 ance which reminds us of Joshua’s zeal against Eldad and 
 Medad (Numb. xi. 28), as Christ’s reply recalls the reply of 
 Moses. Probably his brother 8S. James is included in the ‘we 
 forbad him. (2) When the Samaritan villagers refused to 
 receive Him, ‘because His face was as though He would go to 
 Jerusalem,’ His disciples James and John said, ‘Lord, wilt 
 Thou that we command fire to come down from heaven and 
 consume them?’ (Luke ix. 54). Once again their zeal for their 
 Master makes them forget the spirit of their Master. (3) On 
 the last journey to Jerusalem Salome, as the mouthpiece of her 
 two sons (Matt. xx. 20; Mark x. 35), begs that they may sit, 
 the one on the Messiah’s right hand, and the other on His left, 
 in His kingdom. This is their bold ambition, shewing that in 
 spite of their close intimacy with Him, they are still grossly 
 ignorant of the nature of His kingdom. And in their reply to 
 His challenge the same bold temper and burning zeal are mani- 
 fest. They are willing to go through the furnace in order to be 
 near the Son of God. When 8. John and his mother stood 
 beside the Cross, and when S. James won the crown of mar- 
 tyrdom, Christ’s challenge was taken up and their aspiration 
 fulfilled. 
 
 It will not be necessary to recount at length the history of 
 the last Passover, in which 8. John is a prominent figure. As 
 he gives us so much more than the Synoptists about the family 
 at Bethany, we may infer that he was a more intimate friend of 
 Lazarus and His sisters. He and S. Peter prepare the Last 
 Supper (Luke xxii. 8), at which 8. Peter prompts him to ask who is 
 the traitor ; and after the betrayal S. John gets his friend intro- 
 duced into the high-priest’s palace. He followed his Master 
 to judgment and death, was the one Apostle who dared to stand 
 beside the Cross, and received His Mother as a farewell charge 
 (xviii. 15, xix. 26, 27). His friend’s fall does not break their 
 friendship, and they visit the sepulchre together on Easter morn- 
 ing. (On the characteristics of the two as shewn in this incident 
 see notes on xx. 4—6.) We find them still together in Galilee, 
 
xvi INTRODUCTION. 
 
 seeking refreshment in their suspense by resuming their old 
 calling (xxi. 2); and here again their different characters shew 
 themselves (see notes on xxi. 7). 8S. Peter’s thought is ever 
 ‘What must 7 do?’ S. John’s is rather ‘ What will He do?’ The 
 one acts; the other watches and waits. S. Peter cries, ‘Let 
 us make three tabernacles!’ ‘Shall we smite with the sword?’ 
 S. John sees and believes. And the Gospel closes with Christ’s 
 gentle rebuke to S. Peter’s natural curiosity about his friend. 
 
 In the Acts 8. John appears but seldom, always in con- 
 nexion with, and always playing a second part to his friend 
 (Acts iii., iv., viii. 14—25). We lose sight of him at Jerusalem 
 (viii. 25) after the return from Samaria; but he was not there 
 at the time of S. Paul’s first visit (Gal. i. 18, 19). Some twelve 
 or fifteen years later (c. A.D. 50) he seems to have been at Jeru- 
 salem again (Acts xv. 6), but for how long we cannot tell. Nor 
 do we know why he left. Excepting his own notice of himself, as 
 being ‘in the island called Patmos for the word and testimony 
 of Jesus’ (Rev. i. 9), the N. T. tells us nothing further respect- 
 ing him. 
 
 (ii) From the Departure from Jerusalem to his Death. 
 
 For this period, with the exception of the notice in the 
 Apocalypse just quoted, we are entirely dependent upon tradi- 
 tions of very different value. The conjecture that S. John lived 
 at Jerusalem until the death of the Virgin, and that this set 
 him free, is unsupported by evidence. Some think that she 
 accompanied him to Ephesus. The persecution which followed 
 the martyrdom of 8. Stephen would loosen S. John’s attachment 
 to Jerusalem. From that time it became less and less the heart 
 of Christendom. It would be during this prolonged residence at 
 Jerusalem that he acquired that minute knowledge of the topo- 
 graphy of the city which marks the Fourth Gospel. 
 
 It is quite uncertain whether the Apostle went direct from 
 Jerusalem to Ephesus; but of two things we may be confident: 
 (1) that wherever he was he was not idle, (2) that he was not at 
 Ephesus when 8. Paul bade farewell to that Church (Acts xx.), 
 nor when he wrote the Epistle to the Ephesians, nor when he 
 
LIFE OF δ. JOHN. xvii 
 
 wrote the Pastoral Epistles. That 8S. John did work at 
 Ephesus during the latter part of his life may be accepted as 
 certain, unless the whole history of the subapostolic age is to 
 be pronounced doubtful; but neither the date of his arrival nor 
 of his death can be fixed. He is described (Polycrates in Eus. 
 Hi. E. 11. xxxi. 3, ν. xxiv. 3) as a priest wearing the sacerdotal 
 plate or mitre (πέταλον) which was a special badge of the high- 
 priest (Exod. xxxix. 30); and we learn from the Apocalypse that 
 from Ephesus as a centre he directed the churches of Asia 
 Minor, which, after the fall of Jerusalem, became the most living 
 portion of Christendom. What persecution drove him to Patmos 
 or caused him to be banished thither is uncertain, as also is the 
 _ date of his death, which may be placed somewhere near a.D. 100. 
 
 Of the traditions which cluster round this latter part of his 
 life three deserve more than Ὁ passing mention. (1) John, the 
 disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving 
 Cerinthus within, rushed out of the bath-house without bathing, 
 crying out, ‘Let us fly, lest even the bath-house fall on us, 
 because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within’ (Iren. 
 Ill. 111. 4), Epiphanius (Haer, xxx. 24) substitutes Ebion for 
 Cerinthus. Both Cerinthus and the Ebionites denied the reality 
 of the Incarnation. This tradition, like the incidents recorded, 
 Luke ix. 49, 54, shews that in later life also the spirit of the 
 ‘son of thunder’ was still alive within him. 
 
 (2) After his return from Patmos he made a tour to appoint 
 bishops or presbyters in the cities. In one place a lad of noble 
 bearing attracted his attention, and he specially commended 
 him to the bishop, who instructed and at last baptized him. 
 Then he took less care of him, and the young man went from 
 bad to worse, and at last became chief of a set of bandits. The 
 Apostle revisiting the place remembered him and said, ‘Come, 
 bishop, restore to me my deposit,’ which confounded the bishop, 
 who knew that he had received no money from S. John. ‘I de- 
 mand the young man, the soul of a brother;’ and then the sad 
 story had to be told. The Apostle called for a horse, and rode 
 at once to the place infested by the bandits and was soon 
 taken by them, When the chief recognised him he turned to 
 
 ST JOHN ὀ 
 
Xviil INTRODUCTION. 
 
 fly. But the aged Apostle went after him and entreated him to 
 stay, and by his loving tears and exhortations induced him to 
 return with him to the church, to which in due time he restored 
 him (Eus. H.£. 11. xxxiii. from Clement of Alexandria). 
 
 (3) Towards the very end of his life, when he was so infirm 
 that he had to be carried to church and was too weak to preach, 
 he used often to say no more than this, ‘Little children, love 
 one another.’ His hearers at last wearied of this, and said, 
 ‘Master, why dost thou always say this?’ ‘It is the Lord’s 
 command,’ he replied, ‘and if this alone is done, it is enough’ 
 (Jerome, Comm. in Ep. ad Gal. vi. 10). 
 
 Other traditions may be dismissed more briefly ; but the first 
 rests on respectable authority: that he was thrown into a caul- 
 dron of boiling oil at Rome and was none the worse (Tertullian, 
 Praescr. Haer. xxxvi.); that he drank hemlock without being 
 harmed by it; that in his old age he amused himself with a par- 
 tridge, and pleaded that a bow could not always be bent, but 
 needed relaxation; that after he was buried the earth above him 
 heaved with his breathing, shewing that he was only asleep, 
 tarrying till Christ came. This last strange story S. Augustine 
 is disposed to believe: those who know the place must know 
 whether the soil does move or not; and he has heard it from no 
 untrustworthy people. The belief bears testimony to the unique 
 position held by the last surviving Apostle. Even when he was 
 in his grave Christians refused to believe that they had lost him. 
 
 These fragments form a picture, which (as was said at the 
 outset) although very incomplete is harmonious, and so far as 
 it goes distinct. The two sides of his character, tender love 
 and stern intolerance, are the one the complement of the other; 
 and both form part of the intensity of his nature. Intensity of 
 action, intensity of thought and word, intensity of love and 
 hate—these are the characteristics of the beloved disciple. In 
 the best sense of the phrase S. John was ‘a good hater,’ for his 
 hatred was part of his love. It was because he so loved the 
 truth, that he so hated all lukewarmness, unreality, insincerity, 
 and falsehood, and was so stern towards ‘whosoever loveth and 
 maketh a lie.’ It is because he so loved his Lord, that he shews 
 
LIFE OF 5. JOHN. xix 
 
 such uncompromising abhorrence of the national blindness that 
 rejected Him and the sacerdotal bigotry that hounded Him to 
 death. Intolerance of evil and of opposition to the truth was 
 sometimes expressed in a way that called for rebuke; but this 
 would become less and less so, as his own knowledge of the 
 Lord and of the spirit of the Gospel deepened. With his eagle 
 gaze more and more fixed on the Sun of Righteousness, he 
 became more and more keenly alive to the awful case of those 
 who ‘loved the darkness rather than the light, because their 
 works were evil’ (iii. 19). With all such men compromise was 
 impossible ; and to S. John’s character compromises of all kinds 
 were foreign. To others sin may seem weakness; to him it is 
 simply evil. Eternity for him was a thing not of the future but 
 of the present (11. 36, v. 24, vi. 47, 54); and whereas the world 
 tries to make time the measure of eternity, he knows that eter- 
 nity is the measure of time. Only from the point of view of 
 eternal life, only from its divine side, can this life, both in its 
 nothingness and in its infinite consequences, be rightly esti- 
 mated: for ‘the world passeth away and the lust thereof, but he 
 that doeth the will of God abideth for ever’ (1 John ii. 17). 
 
 We thus see how at the end of a long life he was specially 
 fitted to write what has been well called ‘the Gospel of Eternity’ 
 and ‘the Gospel of Love.’ It is at the end of life, and when 
 the other side of the grave is in sight, that men can best form 
 an estimate both of this world and of the world to come. If 
 that is true of all men of ordinary seriousness, much more true 
 must it have been of him, who from his youth upwards had 
 been an Apostle, whose head had rested on the Lord’s breast, 
 who had stood beside the Cross, had witnessed the Ascension, 
 had cherished till her death the Mother of the Lord, had seen 
 the Jewish dispensation closed and the Holy City overthrown, 
 and to whom the beatific visions of the Apocalypse had been 
 granted. No wonder therefore if his Gospel seems to be raised 
 above this world and to belong to eternity rather than to time. 
 And hence its other aspect of being also ‘the Gospel of Love:’ 
 for Love is eternal. Faith and Hope are for this world, but 
 can have no place when ‘we shall see Him as He is’ and 
 
 b2 
 
xx INTRODUCTION. 
 
 ‘know even as we are known.’ Love is both for time and for 
 eternity. 
 **They sin who tell us Love can die, 
 
 With life all other passions fly, 
 
 All others are but vanity, 
 
 In heaven ambition cannot dwell, 
 
 Nor avarice in the vaults of hell; 
 
 Earthly, these passions of the earth 
 
 They perish where they had their birth. 
 
 But love is indestructible, 
 
 Its holy flame for ever burneth, 
 
 From heaven it came, to heaven returneth. 
 
 Too oft on earth a troubled guest, 
 
 At times deceived, at times oppressed, 
 
 It here is tried, and purified, 
 
 Then hath in heaven its perfect rest: 
 
 It soweth here with toil and care, 
 
 But the harvest-time of Love is there.” 
 
 SouTHEY. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE GOSPEL. 
 
 The Fourth Gospel is the battle-field of the New Testament, 
 as the Book of Daniel is of the Old: the genuineness of both 
 will probably always remain a matter of controversy. With 
 regard to the Gospel, suspicion respecting it was aroused in 
 some quarters at the outset, but very quickly died out; to rise 
 again, however, with immensely increased force in the eighteenth 
 century, since which time to the present day the question has 
 scarcely ever been allowed to rest. The scope of the present 
 work admits of no more than an outline of the argument being 
 presented, 
 
 i. The External Evidence. 
 
 In this section of the argument two objections are made to 
 the Fourth Gospel: (1) the silence of the Apostolic Fathers; 
 
AUTHENTICITY. xxi 
 
 (2) its rejection by Marcion, the Alogi, and perhaps another 
 sect. 
 
 (1) The silence of the Apostolic Fathers, if it were a fact, 
 would not be an insuperable difficulty. It is admitted on all 
 sides that the J'ourth Gospel was published long after the 
 others, and when they were in possession of the field. There 
 was nothing to lead men to suppose that yet another Gospel 
 would be forthcoming; this alone would make people jealous 
 of its claims. And when, as we shall see, it was found that 
 certain portions of it might be made to assume a Gnostic ap- 
 pearance, - jealousy in some quarters became suspicion. The 
 silence, therefore, of the first circle of Christian writers is no 
 more than we might reasonably expect; and when taken in 
 connexion with the universal recognition of the Gospel by the 
 next circle of writers (A.D. 170 onwards), who had far more 
 evidence than has reached us, may be considered as telling for, 
 rather than against the authenticity. 
 
 But the silence of the Apostolic Fathers is by no means 
 certain. The ἘΡΙΒΤΙ oF BARNABAS (c. A.D. 120—130) pro- 
 bably refers to it: Keim is convinced of the fact, although he 
 denies that S. John wrote the Gospel. The shorter Greek form 
 of the IanaTIAN EPIstTLEs (c. A.D. 150) contains allusions to it, 
 and adaptations of it, which cannot seriously be considered 
 doubtful. Bishop Lightfoot! says of the expression ὕδωρ ζῶν 
 (Rom. vii.) “ Doubtless a reference to John iv. 10, 11, as indeed 
 the whole passage is inspired by the Fourth Gospel,” and of the 
 words οἶδεν πόθεν ἔρχεται καὶ ποῦ ὑπάγει (Philad. vii.), “The coin- 
 cidence (with John iii. 8) is quite too strong to be accidental ;” 
 and “the Gospel is prior to the passage in Ignatius;” for “the 
 application in the Gospel is natural: the application in Ignatius 
 is strained and secondary.” Again, on the words αὐτὸς ὧν θύρα 
 τοῦ πατρός (Philad. ix.) he says, “ Doubtless an allusion to John 
 x. 9.” Comp. 6 κύριος ἄνευ τοῦ πατρὸς οὐδὲν ἐποίησεν (Magn. vii-) 
 with John viii. 28, Magn. viii. with John viii. 29, Zrall. viii. 
 
 1 T am enabled to make these quotations from the great work of his 
 
 life (unhappily still unfinished and unpublished) through the great 
 kindness of the Bishop of Durham. 
 
xxii INTRODUCTION. 
 
 with John vi. 51. The Epistte or PotycarpP (c. A.D. 150) con- 
 tains almost certain references to the First Epistle of 8. John: 
 and as it is admitted that the First Epistle and the Fourth 
 Gospel are by the same hand, evidence in favour of the one may 
 be used as evidence in favour of the other. 
 
 Besides these, Papias (martyred about the same time as 
 Polycarp) certainly knew the First Epistle (Eus. H. #. τη. 
 xxxix.). BasiLipEs (c. A.D. 125) seems to have made use of 
 the Fourth Gospel. Justin Martyr (0. A.D. 150) knew the 
 Fourth Gospel. This may now be considered as beyond reason- 
 able doubt. Not only does he exhibit types of language and 
 doctrine closely akin to S. John’s (e.g. ὕδωρ ζῶν, λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ, 
 μονογενής, σαρκοποιηθῆναι), but in the Dialogue with Trypho, 
 LXXXVII- (c. A.D. 146) he quotes the Baptist’s reply, οὐκ εἰμὶ ὁ 
 Χριστὸς ἀλλὰ φωνὴ βοῶντος (comp. John i. 20, 23) and in the 
 First Apology, LXI., he paraphrases Christ’s words on the new 
 birth (John iii. 3—5). Moreover Justin teaches the great 
 doctrine of 8. John’s Prologue, that Jesus Christ is the 
 Word. Keim regards it as certain that Justin knew the Fourth 
 Gospel. 
 
 When we pass beyond a.D. 170 the evidence becomes full 
 and clear: TATIAN, the EPISTLE TO THE CHURCHES OF VIENNE 
 AND Lyons, CELsus, the MURATORIAN FRAGMENT, the CLE- 
 MENTINE HomiLies, THEOPHILUS OF ANTIOCH (the earliest 
 writer who mentions 8. John by name as the author of the 
 Gospel—c. A.D. 175), ATHENAGORAS, IRENAEUS, CLEMENT OF 
 ALEXANDRIA, and TrertTuLLIAN. Of these none perhaps is 
 more important than IRENAEvs, the pupil of Polycarp, who 
 was the friend of 8. John. It never occurs to him to maintain 
 that the Fourth Gospel is the work of S. John; he treats it 
 as a universally acknowledged fact. He not only knows of no 
 time when there were not four Gospels, but with the help of 
 certain quaint arguments he persuades himself that there must 
 be four Gospels, neither more nor less (Haer. m1. i. 1, xt. 8: 
 comp. Vv. xxxvi. 2). So firmly established had the Fourth 
 Gospel become considerably before the end of the second cen- 
 tury. 
 
AUTHENTICITY. xxiii 
 
 (2) The rejection of the Fourth Gospel by Marcion and 
 some obscure sects is of no serious importance. There is no 
 evidence to shew that the Gospel was rejected on critical 
 grounds; rather because the doctrines which it contained were 
 disliked, This is almost certain in the case of Marcion, and 
 probable enough in the other cases. 
 
 Whether the obscure sect mentioned by Irenaeus (Haer. 
 Ill. xi. 9) as rejecting the Fourth Gospel and the promises of 
 the Paraclete which it contains are the same as those whom 
 Epiphanius with a contemptuous double entendre calls "Αλογοι 
 (‘devoid of [the doctrine of] the Logos’ or ‘devoid of reason’), 
 is uncertain. But we can easily understand how a party might 
 arise, who in perfectly good faith and with good but mistaken 
 motives might reject the Fourth Gospel both for the doctrine of 
 the Logos and for other peculiarities which seemed to favour the 
 Gnosticism of Cerinthus. None of the Synoptists, none of the 
 Apostles, had thus far used the term Λόγος ; and the fact that 
 Cerinthus made use of it must have made its prominence in the 
 Prologue to the Fourth Gospel doubly suspicious. Cerinthus 
 maintained that Jesus was a mere man on whom the Logos or 
 Christ descended in the form of a dove at his baptism: and the 
 Fourth Gospel says nothing about the miraculous conception of 
 Christ, or about the wonders that attended and attested His 
 birth, but begins with the Baptism and the descent of the Spirit. 
 The Evangelist pointedly remarks that the miracle at Cana was 
 the first miracle: perhaps this was to insinuate that previous to 
 the Baptism Jesus (being a mere man) could do no miracle. 
 This Gospel omits the Transfiguration, an incident from which 
 a participation of His Human Body in the glory of the Godhead 
 might be inferred. The ‘prince’ or ‘ruler of this world,’ an 
 expression not used previously by any Evangelist or Apostle, 
 might possibly be understood to mean the Demiurgus of the 
 Cerinthian system, the Creator of the world, and the God of the 
 Jews, but inferior to and ignorant of the Supreme God. Again, 
 the Fourth Gospel is silent about the wonders which attended 
 Christ’s death; and this also harmonizes with the system of 
 Cerinthus, who taught that the Logos or Christ departed when 
 
XXIV INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Jesus was arrested, and that a mere man suffered on the Cross; 
 for what meaning would there be in the sympathy of nature with 
 the death of a mere man!? All this tends to shew that if the 
 Fourth Gospel was rejected in certain quarters for a time, this 
 tells little or nothing against its genuineness. Indeed it may 
 fairly be said to tell the other way; for it shews that the uni- 
 versal recognition of the Gospel, which we find existing from 
 A.D. 170 onwards, was no mere blind enthusiasm, but a victory 
 of truth over baseless though not unnatural suspicion. More- 
 over, the fact that these over-wary Christians assigned the 
 Gospel to Cerinthus is evidence that the Gospel was in their 
 epinion written by a contemporary of S. John. To concede this 
 is to concede the whole question. 
 
 li. The Internal Evidence. 
 
 We have seen already that there are some features of this 
 Gospel which would seem to harmonize with a Gnostic system, 
 and that it need not surprise us if some persons in the second 
 century hastily concluded that it savoured of Cerinthus. It is 
 more surprising that modern critics, after a minute study of the 
 Gospel, should think it possible to assign it to a Greek Gnostic 
 of the second century. ΤῸ say nothing of the general tone of the 
 Gospel, there are two texts which may almost be said to sum up 
 the theology of the Evangelist and which no Gnostic would even 
 have tolerated, much less have written: ‘The Word became 
 flesh’ (i. 14); ‘Salvation is of the Jews’ (iv. 22). That the 
 Infinite should limit itself and become finite, that the ineffable 
 purity of the Godhead should be united with impure matter, 
 was to a Gnostic a monstrous supposition ; and this was what 
 was implied in the Word becoming flesh. Again, that the 
 longed-for salvation of mankind should come from the Jews was 
 a flat contradiction of one of the main principles of Gnosticism, 
 viz. that man’s perfection is to be looked for in the attainment 
 of a higher knowledge of God and the universe, to which the Jew 
 as such had no special claim; on the contrary (as some Gnostics 
 
 1 See Dollinger’s Hippolytus and Callistus, Chap. v. 
 
AUTHENTICITY. ΧΕ 
 
 held), the Jews had all along mistaken an inferior being for the 
 Supreme God. While much is promised in the Fourth Gospel to 
 faith in Jesus Christ and union with Him, no rewards are offered 
 to knowledge. On the contrary, knowledge is the fruit of loving 
 obedience (vii. 17). Other passages in the Gospel which are 
 strongly adverse to the theory of a Gnostic authorship will be 
 pointed out in the notes (see on 111, 14, vi. 21, x. 35, xix. 35, xx. 
 31). And here the Gnostics themselves are our witnesses, and 
 that in the second century. Although the Fourth Gospel was 
 frequently used against them, they never denied its genuineness. 
 They tried to explain away what told against them, but they never 
 attempted to question the Apostolic authority of the Gospel. 
 
 But the Gospel not only contains both direct and indirect 
 evidence which contradicts this particular hypothesis; it also 
 supplies both direct and indirect evidence of the true hypothesis. 
 
 (1) There is direct evidence that the author was an eye- 
 witness of what he relates. In two places (according to far the 
 most reasonable, if not the only reasonable interpretation of 
 the words) the Evangelist claims for himself the authority of 
 an eyewitness: in a third he either claims it for himself or 
 others claim it for him. ‘ We beheld His glory’ (i. 14), especially 
 when taken in conjunction with ‘which we beheld and our hands 
 handled’ (1 Johni. 1), cannot well mean anythingelse. Scarcely 
 less doubtful is ‘He that hath seen hath borne witness, and his 
 - witness is true, &c.’ (xix. 35). ‘This is the disciple who wit- 
 nesseth concerning these things, and who wrote these things; 
 and we know that his witness is true’ (xxi. 24), even if it be the 
 addition of another hand, is direct testimony to the fact that the 
 Evangelist gives us not second-hand information, but what he 
 himself has heard and seen. (See notes in all three places.) 
 
 Of course it would be easy for a forger to make such a claim; 
 and accomplices or dupes might support him. But it would also 
 be easy in so wide a field of narrative to test the validity of the 
 claim, and this we will proceed to do by examining the indirect 
 evidence. First, however, it will be well to state the enormous 
 difficulties which would confront a writer who proposed in the 
 second century to forge a Gospel. 
 
XXvi INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The condition of Palestine during the life of Jesus Christ was 
 unique. The three great civilisations of the world were inter- 
 mingled there; Rome, the representative of law and conquest; 
 Greece, the representative of philosophical speculation and com- 
 merce; Judaism, the representative of religion. The relations of 
 these three elements to one another were both intricate and varied. 
 In some particulars there was a combination between two or 
 more of them; as in the mode of conducting the census (Luke 
 ii. 3) and of celebrating the Passover (see on xiii. 23); in others 
 there was the sharpest opposition, as in very many ceremonial 
 observances. Moreover, of these three factors it was exceedingly 
 difficult for the two that were Gentile to comprehend the third. 
 The Jew always remained an enigma to his neighbours, especially 
 to those from the West. This was owing partly to proud reserve 
 on his part and contempt on theirs, partly to the inability of 
 each side to express itself in terms that would be intelligible to 
 the other, so utterly different were and still are Eastern and 
 Western modes of thought. Again, if a Greek or Roman of the 
 first century had taken the pains to study Jewish literature with 
 a view to becoming thoroughly acquainted with this strange 
 people, his knowledge of them would still have remained both 
 defective and misleading, so much had been added or changed 
 by tradition and custom. To a Gentile of the second century 
 this difficulty would be very greatly increased; for Jerusalem 
 had been destroyed and the Jewish nation had been once more 
 scattered abroad on the face of the earth. With the destruc- 
 tion of the Temple the keeping of the Mosaic Law had become 
 a physical impossibility; and the Jews who had lost their 
 language in the Captivity had now to a large extent lost the 
 ceremonial law. Even a Jew of the second century might 
 easily be mistaken as to the usages of his nation in the early 
 part of the first. How much more, then, would a Gentile be 
 likely to go astray! We may say, therefore, that the intricate 
 combination of Jewish and Gentile elements in Palestine be- 
 tween A.D. 1 and A.D. 50 was such that no one but a Jew living 
 in the country at the time would be able to master them; and 
 that the almost total destruction of the Jewish element in the 
 
. AUTHENTICITY. . XXvii 
 
 latter part of the century would render a proper appreciation of 
 the circumstances a matter of the utmost difficulty even to 
 a careful antiquarian. Finally, we must remember that anti- 
 quarian research in those days was almost unknown; and that 
 to undertake it in order to give an accurate setting to a historical 
 fiction was an idea that was not born until long after the 
 second century. We may safely say that no Greek of that age 
 would ever have dreamed of going through the course of archzo- 
 logical study necessary for attempting the Fourth Gospel; and 
 even if he had, the attempt would still have been a manifest 
 failure. He would have fallen into far mere numerous and far 
 more serious errors than those which critics (with what success 
 we shall see hereafter) have tried to bring home to the Fourth 
 Evangelist (see on xi. 49). 
 
 (2) There is abundant indirect evidence to shew that the 
 writer of the Fourth Gospel was a Jew, and a Jew of Palestine, 
 who was an eyewitness of most of the events which he relates. 
 If this can be made out with something like certainty, the circle 
 of possible authors will be very much reduced. But in this 
 circle of possible authors we are not left to conjecture. There 
 is further evidence to shew that he was an Apostle, and the 
 Apostle 8. John. (See Sanday, Authorship of the Fourth Gospel, 
 Chap. xix.) 
 
 THE EVANGELIST WAS A JEW. 
 
 He is perfectly at home in Jewish opinions and points of view. 
 Conspicuous among these are the ideas respecting the Messiah 
 current at the time (i. 19—28, 45—49, 51; iv. 25; vi. 14, 15; 
 vii. 26, 27, 31, 40—42, 52; xii. 13, 34; xix. 15,21). Besides these 
 we have the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (iv. 9, 20, 22; 
 viii. 48); estimate of women (iv. 27), of the national schools (vii. 
 15), of the uneducated (vii. 49), of the * Dispersion’ (vii. 35), of 
 Abraham and the Prophets (viii. 52, 53), &c. &e. 
 
 He is quite familiar also with Jewish usages and observances, 
 Among these we may notice baptism (i. 25, 111. 22, 23, iv. 2), 
 purification (ii. 6, 111. 25, xi. 55, xviii. 28, xix. 31), the Jewish 
 
XXViii INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Feasts, especially the F. of Dedication which is mentioned neither 
 in O.T. nor in the Synoptics (ii. 13, 23, v. 1, vi. 4, vii. 2, 37, x. 
 22, xiii. 1, xviii. 28, xix. 31, 42), cirewmcision and the Sabbath (vii. 
 22, 23), law of evidence (viii. 17, 18), embalming (xix. 40). 
 
 The form of the Gospel, especially the style of the narrative, 
 is essentially Jewish, The language is Greek, but the arrange- 
 ment of the thoughts, to some extent the structure of the 
 sentences, and a great deal of the vocabulary are Hebrew. And 
 the source of this Hebrew form is the O.T. This is shewn not 
 only by frequent quotations but by the imagery employed ;—the 
 lamb, the brazen serpent, the living water, the manna, the 
 shepherd, the vine, &. And not only so, but the Christian 
 theology of the Evangelist is based upon the theology of the 
 OT. ‘Salvation is of the Jews’ (iv. 22); Moses wrote of Christ 
 (v. 46; i. 45); Abraham saw His day (viii. 56); He was typified 
 in the brazen serpent (iii. 14), the manna (vi. 32), the paschal 
 lamb (xix. 36); perhaps also in the water from the rock (vii. 37) 
 and the pillar of fire (viii. 12). Much that He did was done 
 ‘that the Scripture might be fulfilled’ (xiii. 18, xvii. 12, xix. 24, 
 28, 86, 37; comp. ii. 22, xx. 9): and these fulfilments of Scripture 
 are noticed not as interesting coincidences, but ‘that ye may 
 believe’ (xix. 35). Judaism is the foundation of the Christian 
 faith. No one but a Jew could have handled the O. T. Scriptures 
 in this way. 
 
 Tor EVANGELIST WAS A JEW OF PALESTINE. 
 
 This is shewn chiefly by his topographical knowledge, which he 
 uses both with ease and precision. In mentioning a fresh place 
 he commonly throws in some fact respecting it, adding clearness 
 or interest to the narrative. A forger would avoid such gratuitous 
 statements, as being unnecessary and likely by being wrong to 
 lead to detection. Thus, one Bethany is ‘nigh unto Jerusalem, 
 about fifteen furlongs off’ (xi. 18), the other is ‘beyond Jordan,’ 
 (i. 28); Bethsaida is ‘the city of Andrew and Peter’ (i. 44); ‘Can 
 any good thing come out of Wazareth’ (i. 46); Cana is ‘of 
 Galilee’ (ii. 1, xxi. 2), and one ‘goes down’ from Cana to Caper- 
 
AUTHENTICITY, XXixX 
 
 naum (iv. 47); Aenon is ‘near to Salim,’ and there are ‘many 
 waters’ there (ili. 23); Sychar is ‘a city of Samaria, near to the 
 parcel of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph. Now 
 Jacob’s well was there’ (iv. 5); Ephraim is a city ‘near to the 
 wilderness’ (xi. 54). Comp. the minute local knowledge implied 
 in vi. 22—24, iv. 11, 12, 20, ii. 12. 
 
 This familiarity with topography is the more remarkable in 
 the case of Jerusalem, which (as all are agreed) was destroyed 
 before the Fourth Gospel was written. He knows of the traffic 
 in the Temple and of what it consisted (ii. 6); Bethesda is ‘a 
 pool by the sheep-gate, having five porches’ (v. 2); Siloam is ‘a 
 pool, which is by interpretation Sent’ (ix. 7); Solomon’s porch is 
 ‘in the Temple’ (x. 23). Comp. the minute knowledge of the city 
 and suburbs implied in viii. 20, xi. 18, xviii. 1, 28, xix. 13, 17—20, 
 41, 42. 
 
 The way in which the author quotes the 0.T. points to 
 the same conclusion. He is not dependent on the LXX. 
 for his knowledge of the Scriptures, as a Greek-speaking Jew 
 born out of Palestine would very likely have been: he appears 
 to know the original Hebrew, which had become a dead lan- 
 guage, and was not much studied outside Palestine. Out of 
 fourteen quotations three agree with the Hebrew against the 
 LXX, (vi. 45, xiii. 18, xix. 37); not one agrees with the LXX. 
 against the Hebrew. The majority are neutral, either agreeing 
 with both, or differing from both, or being free adaptations 
 rather than citations. (See also on xii. 13, 15.) 
 
 The Evangelist’s doctrine of the Logos or Word confirms us in 
 the belief that he is a Jew of Palestine. The form which this 
 doctrine assumes in the Prologue is Palestinian rather than Alex- 
 andrian. (See note on ‘the Word,’ i. 1.) 
 
 THE EVANGELIST WAS AN EYEWITNESS OF MOST OF THE EVENTS 
 WHICH HE RELATES. 
 
 The narrative is crowded with figures, which are no mere 
 nonentities to fill up space, but which live and move. Where 
 they appear on the scene more than once, their action throughout 
 
XXX INTRODUCTION. 
 
 is harmonious, and their characteristics are indicated with a sim- 
 plicity and distinctness which would be the most consummate 
 art if it were not taken from real life. And where in the lite- 
 rature of the second century can we find such skilful delineation 
 of fictitious characters as is shewn in the portraits given to us of 
 the Baptist, the beloved disciple, Peter, Andrew, Philip, Thomas, 
 Judas Iscariot, Pilate, Nicodemus, Martha and Mary, the Sa- 
 maritan woman, the man born blind? Even the less prominent 
 persons are thoroughly lifelike and real; Nathanael, Judas not 
 Iscariot, Caiaphas, Annas, Mary Magdalene, Joseph. 
 
 Exact notes of time are frequent; not only seasons, as the 
 Jewish Feasts noticed above, but days (i. 29, 35, 43, ii. 1, iv. 40, 
 43, vi. 22, vii. 14, 37, xi. 6, 17, 39, xii. 1, 12, xix. 31, xx. 1, 26) 
 and hours (i. 39, iv. 6, 52, xix. 14; comp. 111. 2, vi. 16, xiii. 30, 
 ey, 28,\xx, 1, 19, xxi. 4): 
 
 The Evangelist sometimes knows the exact or approximate 
 number of persons (i. 35, iv. 18, vi. 10, xix. 23) and objects (ii. 6, 
 vi. 9, 19, xix. 39, xxi. 8, 11) mentioned in his narrative. 
 
 Throughout the Gospel we have examples of graphic and 
 vivid description, which would be astounding if they were not 
 the result of personal observation. Strong instances of this 
 would be the accounts of the cleansing of the Temple (ii. 
 14-- 16), the feeding of the 5000 (vi. 5—14), the healing of the 
 man born blind (ix. 6, 7), the feet-washing (xiii. 4, 5, 12), the 
 betrayal sche 1—13), almost all the details of the Passion 
 (xvili., xix.}, the visit to the sepulchre (xx. 3—8). 
 
 To this it must be added that the state of the text of the 
 Gospel, as we find it quoted by early writers. shews that before 
 the end of the second century there were already a great many 
 variations of readings in existence. Such things take time to 
 arise and multiply. This consideration compels us to believe 
 that the original document must have been made at a time 
 when eyewitnesses of the Gospel history were still living. See 
 notes on i. 13, 18, vii. 8 and ix. 35, | 
 
AUTHENTICITY. ΧΧΧῚ 
 
 THe EVANGELIST WAS AN APOSTLE. 
 
 He knows the thoughts of the disciples on certain occasions, 
 thoughts which sometimes surprise us, and which no writer of 
 Jiction would have attributed to them (ii. 11, 17, 22, iv. 27, vi. 19, 
 60, xii. 16, xiii. 22, 28, xx. 9, xxi. 12). He knows also words that 
 were spoken by the disciples in private to Christ or among them- 
 selves (iv. 31, 33, ix. 2, xi. 8, 12, 16, xvi. 17, 29). He is familiar 
 with the haunts of the disciples (xi. 54, xviii. 2, xx. 19). Above 
 all, he is one who was very intimate with the Lord; for he knows 
 His motives (ii. 24, 25, iv. 1—38, v. 6, vi. 6, 15, vii. 1, xiii. 1, 3, 11, 
 xvi. 19, xviii. 4, xix. 28) and can bear witness to His feelings (x1. 
 33, 38, xiii. 21). 
 
 Tur EVANGELIST WAS THE APOSTLE ὃ. JOHN. 
 
 The contents of the two previous sections are almost sufficient 
 to prove this last point. We know from the Synoptists that 
 three disciples were specially intimate with Jesus, Peter, James, 
 and his brother John. 3. Peter cannot be our Evangelist: he 
 was put to death long before the very earliest date to which the 
 Fourth Gospel can be assigned. Moreover the style of the Gospel 
 is quite unlike the undoubted First Epistle of S. Peter. Still less 
 can S. James be the author, for he was martyred long before 
 S. Peter. Only 8. John remains, and he not only entirely fits in 
 with the details already noticed, but also having long outlived 
 the rest of the Apostles he is the one person who could have 
 written a Gospel considerably later in date than the other three. 
 
 But we have not yet exhausted the evidence. The concluding 
 note (xxi. 24) declares that the Gospel was written by ‘the 
 disciple whom Jesus loved’ (ἠγάπα, xxi. 20). This disciple is 
 mentioned in three other places under the same title (xiii. 23, 
 xix. 26, xxi. 7;—xx. 2 is different). He is some one who is 
 intimate with S. Peter (xiii. 24, xxi. 7; comp. xviii. 15, xx. 2), 
 and this we already know from the Synoptists that S. John was, 
 and we learn from the Acts that he remained so (iii. 1, 3, 11, 
 iv. 13, 19, viii. 14). He is one of those enumerated in xxi. 1, 
 
ΧΧΧΙΪ INTRODUCTION. 
 
 and unless he is one of the two unnamed disciples he must be 
 S. John. | 
 
 One more point, a small one, but of very great significance, 
 remains. The Fourth Evangelist carefully distinguishes places 
 and persons. He distinguishes Cana ‘of Galilee’ (ii. 1, xxi. 2) 
 from Cana of Asher; Bethany ‘beyond Jordan’ (i. 28) from 
 Bethany ‘nigh unto Jerusalem’ (xi. 18); Bethsaida, ‘the city of 
 Andrew and Peter’ (i. 44), from Bethsaida Julias. He distin- 
 guishes also Simon Peter after his call from others named 
 Simon by invariably adding the new name Peter, whereas the 
 Synoptists often call him simply Simon. The traitor Judas is 
 distinguished as the ‘son of Simon’ (vi. 71, xii. 4, xiii. 2, 26) 
 from the other Judas, who is expressly said to be ‘ not Iscariot’ 
 (xiv. 22), while the Synoptists take no notice of the traitor’s 
 parentage. S. Thomas is thrice for the sake of additional 
 clearness pointed out as the same who was called Didymus 
 (xi. 16, xx. 24, xxi, 2), a name not given by the Synoptists. 
 Comp. the careful identification of Nicodemus (xix. 39) and of 
 Caiaphas (xi. 49, xviii. 13). And yet the Fourth Evangelist 
 altogether neglects to make a distinction which the Synoptists 
 do make. They distinguish John the son of Zebedee from his 
 namesake by frequently calling the latter ‘the Baptist’ (more 
 than a dozen times in all). The Fourth Evangelist never does 
 so; to him the Baptist is simply ‘John.’ He himself being the 
 other John, there is for him no chance of confusion, and it does 
 not occur to him to mark the distinction. 
 
 iii. Answers to objections. 
 
 We are now on too firm ground to be shaken by isolated 
 difficulties. It would take a great many difficulties of detail to 
 counterbalance the difficulty of believing that the Fourth Gospel 
 was written by some one who was neither an Apostle nor even 
 a contemporary. But there are certain difficulties supposed to 
 be involved in the theory that the Evangelist is 8. John the 
 Apostle, some of which are important and deserve a separate 
 answer. They are mainly these ;— 
 
AUTHENTICITY. Xxxiii 
 
 (1) The marked dissimilarity between the Fourth Gospel 
 and the three others. 
 
 (2) The marked dissimilarity between the Fourth Gospel 
 and the Revelation. 
 
 (3) The difficulty of believing that S. John (a) would have 
 “studiously elevated himself in every way above the Apostle 
 Peter ;”° (6) would have magnified himself above all as ‘the 
 disciple whom Jesus loved.’ 
 
 (4) The use made by S. Polycarp of S. John’s authority in 
 the Paschal controversy. 
 
 (1) The answer to the first of these objections will be found 
 below in Chapter vi. of the Introduction, and in the introductory 
 note to Chapter iii. of the Gospel. 
 
 (2) The answer to the second belongs rather to the Intro- 
 duction to the Apocalypse. The answer to it is to a large extent 
 a further answer to the first objection ; for “the Apocalypse is 
 doctrinally the uniting link between the Synoptists and the Fourth 
 Gospel” (Westcott). The Gospel is a summary of Christian 
 Theology; the Apocalypse is a summary of Christian Politics. 
 The one exhibits the ideal life in God in the perfect Man, the 
 other exhibits it in the perfect community. Great as are the 
 differences between the two, the leading ideas of both are the 
 same. The one gives us in a magnificent vision, the other in a 
 great historic drama, the supreme conflict between good and evil 
 and its issue. In both Jesus Christ is the central figure, whose 
 victory through defeat is the issue of the conflict. In both the 
 Jewish dispensation is the preparation for the Gospel, and the 
 warfare and triumph of the Christ is described in language satu- 
 rated with the O. T. Some remarkable similarities of detail will be 
 pointed out in the notes (see on i. 14; iv. 6; vii. 30; x1. 44; xiii. 8; 
 xv. 20; xix. 13, 17, 20, 37). Difference of date will go a long way 
 towards explaining the great difference of style. And there are 
 good reasons for believing that the Apocalypse was written early 
 in S. John’s life, before he had mastered the Greek language, and 
 the Gospel and Epistle late in his life, after he had done so. 
 
 (3a) The question, ‘How could S. John have studiously 
 elevated himself in every way above the Apostle Peter?’ reminds 
 
 5T JOHN ἡ 
 
XXXIV INTRODUCTION. 
 
 us of the famous question of Charles II. to the Royal Society. 
 The answer to it is that S. John does nothing of the kind. 
 In his whole narrative he speaks only thrice, and then very 
 briefly ; ‘Rabbi, where abidest Thou?’ (i. 38) ; ‘Lord, who is it?’ 
 (xiii. 25); ‘It is the Lord!’ (xxi. 7). S. Peter takes the lead 
 in the Fourth Gospel as in the other three. His introductioa to 
 Christ and significant naming stand at the very opening of the 
 Gospel (i. 41, 42); he answers in the name of the Twelve (vi. 68); 
 he is prominent if not first at the feet-washing (xiii. 6); he 
 directs S. John to find out who is the traitor (xiii. 24); he takes 
 the lead in defending his Master at the betrayal (xviii. 10); the 
 news of the Resurrection is brought to him first (xx. 2); his 
 companion does not venture to enter the sepulchre until he has 
 done so (xx. 6—8); he is mentioned first in the list of disciples 
 given xxi. 2, and there takes the lead (xxi. 3); he continues to take 
 the lead when Jesus appears to them (xxi. 7, 11); he receives the 
 last great charge, with which the Gospel concludes (xxi. 15—22). 
 
 (ὁ) To suppose that the phrase ‘the disciple whom Jesus 
 loved’ implies self-glorification at the expense of others is alto- 
 gether to misunderstand it. It is not impossible that the 
 designation was given to him by others before he used it of 
 himself. At any rate the affection of the Lord for him was 
 so well known that such a title would be well suited for an 
 oblique indication of the author’s personality. Besides thus 
 gently placing us behind the scenes the phrase serves two 
 purposes: (1) it is a permanent expression of gratitude on the 
 part of the Evangelist for the transcendent benefit bestowed 
 upon him; (2) it is a modest explanation of the prominent part 
 which he was called upon to play on certain occasions. Why 
 was he singled out (xiii. 23) to be told who was the traitor ? 
 Why was the care of the Lord’s Mother (xix. 26) entrusted to 
 him? Why was he allowed to recognise the Lord at the sea of 
 Tiberias (xxi. 7) before any of the rest didso? The recipient 
 of these honours has only one explanation to give: Jesus loved 
 him. 
 
 (4) In the controversy as to the right time of keeping 
 Easter S. Polycarp defended the Asiatic custom of keeping the . 
 
PLACE AND DATE. XXXV 
 
 Christian Passover at the same time as the Jewish Passover, 
 viz. the evening of the 14th Nisan, “because he had always (so) 
 observed it with John the disciple of our Lord, and the rest of 
 the Apostles, with whom he associated” (Eus. H. E. v. xxiv. 16). 
 On this ground he refused to yield to Anicetus, Bishop of Rome, 
 though he did not require Anicetus to give way tohim. But, 
 as we shall see (Appendix A), the Fourth Gospel clearly re- 
 presents the Crucifixion as taking place on the 14th Nisan, and 
 the Last Supper as taking place the evening before. Therefore, 
 either Polycarp falsely appeals to 8. John’s authority (which is 
 most improbable), or the Fourth Gospel is not by S. John. But 
 this objection confuses two things, the Christian Passover or 
 Easter, and the Last Supper or institution of the Eucharist. The 
 latter point was not in dispute at all. The question debated 
 was whether the Christian Churches in fixing the time of Easter 
 were to follow the Jewish Calendar exactly or a Christian 
 modification of it. S. Polycarp claimed S. John as sanctioning 
 the former plan, and nothing in the Fourth Gospel is incon- 
 sistent with such a view. Schiirer, who denies the authenticity 
 of the Gospel, has shewn that no argument against the authen- 
 ticity can be drawn from the Paschal controversy. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 THE PLACE AND DATE. 
 
 Tradition is unanimous in giving Ephesus as the place where. 
 S. John resided during the latter part of his life, and where the 
 Fourth Gospel was written. There is no sufficient reason for 
 doubting this strong testimony, which may be accepted as 
 practically certain. 
 
 There is also strong evidence to shew that the Gospel was 
 written at the request of the elders and disciples of the Chris- 
 tian Churches of Asia. We have this on the early and inde- 
 pendent authority of the Muratorian Fragment (c. a.D. 170) 
 c2 
 
XXXVi1 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 and of Clement of Alexandria (c. A.D. 190); and it is confirmed 
 by Jerome. No doubt S. John had often delivered the contents 
 of his Gospel orally; and the elders wished before he died to 
 preserve it in a permanent form. Moreover, difficulties had 
 arisen in the Church which called for a recasting of Apostolic 
 doctrine. The destruction of Jerusalem had given altogether a 
 new turn to Christianity: it had severed the lingering and ham- 
 pering connexion with Judaism; it had involved a readjustment 
 of the interpretations of Christ’s promises about His return. 
 Again, the rise of a Christian philosophy, shading off by strange 
 compromises and foreign colouring into mere pagan speculation, 
 called for a fresh statement, in terms adequate to the emergency, 
 and by a voice sufficient in authority, of Christian truth. There 
 is both external and internal evidence to shew that a crisis of 
 this kind was the occasion of the Fourth Gospel. 
 
 The precise date cannot be determined with certainty. There 
 are indications in the Gospel itself that it was written late in the 
 author’s life-time. In his narrative he seems to be looking back 
 after a long lapse of time (vii. 39, xxi. 19). And as we study it, 
 we feel that it is the result of a larger experience of God’s Pro- 
 vidence and of a wider comprehension of the meaning of His 
 Kingdom than was possible at the time when the other Evan- 
 gelists, especially the first two of them, wrote their Gospels. 
 As compared with them, it exhibits a marked development of 
 doctrine. All this induces us to place the date of the Fourth 
 Gospel as late as possible; and tradition (as we have seen pp. 
 xvii, xviii) represents S. John as living to extreme old age. S. 
 John would not begin to teach at Ephesus until some time after 
 S. Paul left it, 1.6. not much before a.p. 70. If Irenaeus is right 
 in saying that S. Luke’s Gospel was not written till after the 
 death of S. Peter and S. Paul (Haer. 1. i. 1), this would again 
 place the writing of the Fourth Gospel considerably later than 
 A.D. 70. It is not improbable that the first twenty chapters were 
 written a considerable time before the Gospel was published, that 
 the last chapter was added some years later, and then the whole 
 given to the Church (see introductory note to chap. xxi.). S. John 
 may have lived almost if not quite to the end of the century; 
 
OBJECT AND PLAN. XXXVil 
 
 therefore from A.D. 80 to 95 would seem to be the period within 
 which it is probable that the Gospel was published. 
 
 Those who deny that S. John is the author have tried almost 
 every date from A.D. 110 to 165. Dividing this period into two, 
 we have this dilemma:—If the Gospel was published between 
 110 and 140, why did not the hundreds of Christians, who had 
 known . John during his later years, denounce it as a forgery? 
 If it was not published till between 140 and 165, how did it 
 become universally accepted by 170? 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE OBJECT AND PLAN, 
 
 i. The Object. 
 
 These two subjects, the object and the plan, naturally go 
 together, for the one to a large extent determines the other: 
 the purpose with which the Evangelist wrote his Gospel greatly 
 influences the form which it assumes. What that purpose was 
 he tells us plainly himself: ‘These have been written that ye 
 may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that 
 believing ye may have life in His name’ (xx. 31). His object is 
 not to write the life of Christ; if it were, we might wonder that 
 out of his immense stores of personal knowledge he has not 
 given us a great deal more than he has done. Rather, out of 
 these abundant stores he has made a careful and self-denying 
 selection with a view to producing a particular effect upon his 
 readers, and by means of that effect to open to them an inesti- 
 mable benefit. In this way his object manifestly influences his 
 plan. He might have given himself the delight of pouring 
 forth streams of information, which he alone possessed, to 
 a community ardently thirsting for it. But such prodigality 
 would have obscured rather than strengthened his argument: 
 he therefore rigidly limits himself in order to produce the 
 
XXXVili INTRODUCTION. 
 
 desired effect. His narrative, most fragmentary as a biography, 
 is complete as a Gospel. 
 
 The effect is twofold: (1) to create a belief that Jesus is the 
 Christ; (2) to create a belief that Jesus is the Son of God. The 
 first truth is primarily for the Jew; the second is primarily for 
 the Gentile; then both are for all united. The first truth leads 
 the Jew to become a Christian; the second raises the Gentile 
 above the barriers of Jewish exclusiveness; the two together 
 bring eternal life to both. 
 
 To the Jews the Evangelist would prove that Jesus, the Man 
 who had been known to them personally or historically by that 
 name, is the Christ, the Messiah for whom they had been look- 
 ing, in whom all types and prophecies have been fulfilled, to 
 whom therefore the fullest allegiance is due. To the Gentiles 
 the Evangelist would prove that this same Jesus, of whom they 
 also have heard, is the Son of God, the Only God, theirs as 
 well as His, the Universal Father, their Father as well as His; 
 whose Son’s mission, therefore, must be coextensive with His 
 Father’s family and kingdom. Long before the promise was 
 made to Abraham ‘all things came into being through Him’ 
 (i. 3): if therefore the Jews had a claim on the Christ, the Gen- 
 tiles had a still older claim on the Son of God. 
 
 These two great truths, that Jesus is the Christ, and that 
 Jesus is the Son of God, being recognised and believed, the 
 blessed result follows that believers have life in His name, i.e. 
 in Him as revealed to them in the character which His name 
 implies, There is neither Gentile nor Jew, circumcision nor 
 uncireumcision, barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free; but Christ 
 is all and in all; all are one in Christ Jesus (Col. iii. 11; Gal. 
 11. 28). 
 
 There is no need to look for any additional object over and 
 above that which the Evangelist himself states; although this 
 is frequently done. Thus from the time of Irenaeus (Haer. 
 Il. xi.) it has been common to say that 8. John wrote his 
 Gospel against Cerinthus and other heretics. By clearly teach- 
 ing the main truths of the Gospel S. John necessarily refutes 
 errors; and it is possible that here and there some particular 
 
OBJECT AND PLAN. XXX1X 
 
 form of error was in his mind when he wrote: but the refuta- 
 tion of error is not his object in writing. If his Gospel is not 
 a life of Christ, still less is it a polemical treatise. 
 
 Again, from the time of Eusebius (H. 15. mt. xxiv. 11) and 
 earlier it has been maintained that 8. John wrote to supplement 
 the Synoptists, recording what had not been recorded by them. 
 No doubt he does supplement them to a large extent, especially 
 as regards the ministry in Judaea: but it does not follow from 
 this that he wrote in order to supplement them. Where some- 
 thing not recorded by them would suit his purpose equally 
 well he would naturally prefer it; but he has no hesitation in 
 retelling what has already been told by one, two, or even all 
 three of them, if he requires it for the object which he has in 
 view (see introductory note to chap. vi.). 
 
 ii. The Plan. 
 
 In no Gospel is the plan so manifest as in the Fourth. Per- 
 haps we may say of the others that they scarcely have a plan. 
 We may divide and subdivide them for our own convenience ; 
 but there is no clear evidence that the three Evangelists had 
 any definite scheme before them in putting together the frag- 
 ments of Gospel history which they have preserved for us. It 
 is quite otherwise with the Fourth Evangelist. The different 
 scenes from the life of Jesus Christ which ke puts before us, 
 are not only carefully selected but carefully arranged, leading 
 up step by step to the conclusion expressed in the confession of 
 S. Thomas, ‘My Lord and my God.’ But if there is a develop- 
 ment of faith and love on the one side in those who accept and 
 follow Jesus, so also there is a development of unbelief and 
 hatred on the other in those who reject and persecute Him. 
 ‘The Word became flesh; but, inasmuch as He was not 
 generally recognised and welcomed, His presence in the world 
 necessarily involved a separation and a conflict; a separation 
 of light from darkness, truth from falsehood, good from evil, 
 life from death, and a conflict between the two. It is the 
 critical episodes in that conflict round the person of the Incar- 
 nate Word that the Evangelist places before us one by one. 
 
xl INTRODUCTION. 
 
 These various episodes taken one by one go far to shew,—taken 
 altogether and combined with the issue of the conflict irrefra- 
 gably prove,—‘ that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.’ 
 
 The main outlines of the plan are these :— 
 
 I. Tue Proxnocve or Inrropuction (i. 1—18). 
 1. The Word in His own Nature (i. 1—5). 
 2. His revelation to men and rejection by them 
 (i. 6—13). 
 3. His revelation of the Father (i. 14—18). 
 
 II. Frrst Mar Drviston. _Curist’s Ministry, oR His REVELATION 
 ΟΕ HimsELF TO THE WorxD (i. 19—xii. 50). 
 
 a, The Testimony (i. 19—51) 
 1. of John the Baptist (i. 19—37), 
 2. of the disciples (i. 38—51), 
 3. of the first sign (ii. 1—11). 
 
 ὃ. The Work (ii. 13—xi. 57) 
 1. among Jews (ii. 13—iii. 36), 
 2. among Samaritans (iv. 1—42), 
 3. among Galileans (iv. 43—54), 
 
 (The work has become a Conflict) 4. among mixed multitudes (v.—xi.). 
 
 c. The Judgment (xii.) 
 1. of men (1—36), 
 2. of the Evangelist (37—43), 
 3. of Christ (44—50). 
 Close of Christ’s public ministry. 
 
 III, Srconp Main Division. Tue Issues or Curist’s Ministry, 
 ok His RevewatTion oF HimsetF to His Discretes 
 (xili.—xx.). 
 
 d. The inner Glorification of Christ in His last Dis- 
 courses (xiii.—xvii.). 
 1. His love in humiliation (xiii. 1—30). 
 2. His love in keeping His own (xiii. 31—xv. 27). 
 8. The promise of the Comforter and of His re- 
 turn (xvi.). 
 4. The prayer of the High-Priest (xvii.). 
 
CHARACTERISTICS. xli 
 
 6. The outer Glorification of Christ in His Passion 
 (xviii., xix.). 
 1. The betrayal (xviii. 1—11). 
 2. The ecclesiastical trial (xviii. 12—27). 
 3. The civil trial (xviii. 28—xix. 16). 
 4, The crucifixion and burial (xix. 17—42). 
 
 f. The Resurrection (xx.). 
 1. The manifestation to Mary Magdalene (1—18). 
 2. The manifestation to the ten (19—23). 
 3. The manifestation to S. Thomas with the ten 
 (24—29). 
 4. The conclusion (30, 31). 
 
 IV. Tue Epinocve on APPENDIX (xxi.). 
 
 It is worth noting that, unlike the Synoptists, S. John begins 
 and ends his narrative with personal experiences ; the first great 
 crisis in his life, when from the Baptist he passed to the Christ, 
 and the second, when ‘he saw and believed;’ or, if we include 
 the Appendix, when he received the commission to wait for his 
 Lord. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL. 
 
 Here again, only a few leading points can be noticed: the 
 subject is capable of almost indefinite expansion. 
 
 1, From the time of Clement of Alexandria (c. A.D. 190) 
 this Gospel has been distinguished as a “ΒΡΙΒΙΤΌΑΙ, GosPEL’ 
 (Kus. H, #. vi. xiv. 7). The Synoptists give us mainly the 
 external acts of Jesus Christ: S. John lays before us glimpses 
 of the inner life and spirit of the Son of God. Their narrative 
 is chiefly composed of His manifold and ceaseless dealings with 
 men: in 8. John we have rather his tranquil and unbroken 
 union with His Father. The heavenly element which forms 
 
xlii INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the background of the first three Gospels is the atmosphere of 
 the Fourth. 
 
 It is quite in harmony with this characteristic of the Gospel 
 that it should contain such a much larger proportion of Christ’s 
 words than we find in the others: discourses here form the 
 principal part, especially in the latter half of the Gospel. Not 
 even in the Sermon on the Mount do we learn so much of ‘the 
 spirit of Christ’ as in the discourses recorded by S. John. And 
 what is true of the central figure is true also of the numerous 
 characters which give such life and definiteness to S. John’s | 
 narrative: they also make themselves known to us by what 
 they say rather than by what they do. And this suggests to us 
 a second characteristic. 
 
 2. No Gospel is so rich in TyprcaL but thoroughly REAL 
 AND LIFELIKE GROUPS AND INDIVIDUALS as the Fourth. They 
 are sketched, or rather by their words are made to sketch 
 themselves, with a vividness and precision which, as already 
 observed, is almost proof that the Evangelist was an eye- 
 witness of what he records, and an eyewitness of immense 
 receptive power. 
 
 Among the groups we have the disciples strangely misunder- 
 standing Christ (iv. 33, xi. 12) yet firmly believing on Him 
 (xvi. 30); His brethren, dictating a policy to him and not 
 believing on Him (vii. 3—5); John’s disciples, with their jea- 
 lousy for the honour of their master (111. 26); the Samaritans, 
 proud to believe from their own experience rather than on the 
 testimony of a woman (iv. 42); the multitude, sometimes think- 
 ing Jesus possessed, sometimes thinking Him the Christ (vii. 20, 
 26, 41); the Jews, claiming to be Abraham’s seed and seeking 
 to kill the Messiah (viii. 33, 37, 40); the Pharisees, haughtily 
 asking, ‘Hath any one of the rulers or of the Pharisees 
 believed on Him?’ (vii. 48) and ‘Are we also blind?’ (ix. 40); 
 the chief priests, professing to fear that Christ’s success will be 
 fatal to the national existence (xi. 48), and declaring to Pilate 
 that they have no king but Caesar (xix. 15). In the sketching 
 of these groups nothing is more conclusive evidence of the 
 Evangelist being contemporary with his narrative than the way 
 
CHARACTERISTICS. ΧΙ 
 
 in which the conflict and fluctuations between belief and un- 
 belief among the multitude and ‘the Jews’ is indicated. 
 
 The types of individual character are still more varied, and 
 as in the case of the groups they exemplify both sides in the 
 great conflict, as well as those who wavered between the two. 
 On the one hand we have the Mother of the Lord (ii. 3—5, 
 xix. 25—27), the beloved disciple and his master the Baptist 
 (i. 6—37, iti. 23—36), S. Andrew and Mary of Bethany, all 
 unfailing in their allegiance ; 8. Peter falling and rising again to 
 deeper love (xviii. 27, xxi. 17); S. Philip rising from eager to 
 firm faith (xiv. 8), S. Thomas from desponding and despairing 
 love (xi. 16, xx. 25) to faith, hope, and love (xx. 28). There is 
 the sober but uninformed faith of Martha (xi. 21, 24, 27), the 
 passionate affection of Mary Magdalene (xx. 1—18). Among 
 conversions we have the instantaneous but deliberate conviction 
 of Nathanael (i. 49), the gradual but courageous progress in 
 belief of the schismatical Samaritan woman (see on iv. 19) and 
 of the uninstructed man born blind (see on xi. 21), and in con- 
 trast with both the timid, hesitating confessions of Nicodemus, 
 the learned Rabbi (iii. 1, vii. 50, xix. 39). On the other side we 
 have the cowardly wavering of Pilate (xviii. 38, 39, xix. 1—4, 8, 
 12, 16), the unscrupulous resoluteness of Caiaphas (xi. 49, 50), 
 ᾿ and the blank treachery of Judas (xiii. 27, xviii. 2—5). Among 
 the minor characters there are the ‘ruler of the feast’ (ii. 9, 10), 
 the ‘nobleman’ (iv. 49), the man healed at Bethesda (v. 7, 11, 
 14, 15). 
 
 If these groups and individuals are creations of the imagi- 
 nation, it is no exaggeration to say that the author of the Fourth 
 Gospel is a genius superior to Shakspere. 
 
 3. From typical characters we pass on to typical or sym- 
 bolical events. SymBotism is a third characteristic of this 
 Gospel. Not merely does it contain the three great allegories 
 of the Sheep-fold, the Good Shepherd, and the Vine, from which 
 Christian art has drawn its symbolism from the very earliest 
 times; but the whole Gospel from end to end is penetrated 
 with the spirit of symbolical representation. In nothing is this 
 more apparent than in the eight miracles which the Evangelist 
 
xliv INTRODUCTION. 
 
 has selected for the illustration of his Divine Epic. His own 
 word for them leads us to expect this: to him they are not so 
 much miracles as ‘signs.’ The first two are introductory, and 
 seem to be pointed out as such by S. John (ii. 11, iv. 54). The 
 turning of the water into wine exhibits the Messiah’s sovereign 
 power over inanimate matter, the healing of the official’s son His 
 power over the noblest of living bodies. Moreover they teach 
 two great lessons which lie at the very root of Christianity; 
 (1) that Christ’s Presence hallows the commonest events and 
 turns the meanest elements into the richest ; (2) that the way to 
 win blessings is to trust the Bestower of them. The third sign, 
 healing the paralytic, shews the Messiah as the great Restorer, 
 repairing the physical as well as the spiritual ravages of sin 
 (v. 14). In the feeding of the 5000 the Christ appears as the 
 Support of life, in the walking on the sea as the Guardian and 
 Guide of His followers. The giving of sight to the man born 
 blind and the raising of Lazarus shew that He is the source of 
 Light and of Life to men. The last sign, wrought by the Risen 
 Christ, sums up and concludes the whole series (xxi. 1—12). 
 Fallen man, restored, fed, guided, enlightened, delivered from 
 the terrors of death, passes to the everlasting shore of peace, 
 where the Lord is waiting to receive him, 
 
 In Nicodemus coming by night (iii. 2), in Judas going out into 
 the night (xiii. 30), in the stormy weather at the Feast of the 
 Dedication (x. 22),in the dusky ravine through which the Messiah 
 goes to meet His Passion (xviii. 1), in the dividing of Christ’s 
 garments, and the blood and water from His side (xix. 24, 34), 
 &c. &c., we seem to have instances of the same love of symbolism. 
 These historical details are singled out for notice because of the 
 lesson which lies behind them. And if we ask for the source of 
 this mode of teaching, there cannot be a doubt about the answer: 
 it is the form in which almost all the lessons of the Old Testa- 
 ment are conveyed. This leads us to another characteristic. 
 
 4, Though written in Greek, 8. John’s Gospel is in thought 
 and tone, and sometimes in the form of expression also, thoroughly 
 HEBREW, AND BASED ON THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES. Much has 
 been already said on this point in Chapter IL ii. (2) in shewing 
 
CHARACTERISTICS. xlv 
 
 that the Evangelist must have been a Jew. The Gospel sets 
 forth two facts in tragic contrast: (1) that the Jewish Scriptures 
 in endless ways, by commands, types, and prophecies, pointed 
 and led up to the Christ; (2) that precisely the people who 
 possessed these Scriptures, and studied them most diligently, 
 failed to recognise the Christ or refused to believe in Him. In 
 this aspect the Gospel is a long comment on the mournful text, 
 ‘Ye search the Scriptures; because in them ye think ye have 
 eternal life: and they are they which testify of Me. And ye will 
 not come to Me, that ye may have life’ (v. 39, 40). To shew, 
 therefore, the way out of this tragical contradiction between a 
 superstitious reverence for the letter of the law and a scornful 
 rejection of its true meaning, S. John writes his Gospel. He 
 points out to his fellow-countrymen that they are right in taking 
 the Scriptures for their guide, ruinously wrong in the use they 
 make of them: Abraham, Moses and the Prophets, rightly under- 
 stood, will lead them to adore Him whom they have crucified. 
 This he does, not merely in general statements (i. 45, iv. 22, v. 39, 
 46), but in detail, both by allusions; e.g. to Jacob (i. 47, 51) and to 
 the rock in the wilderness (vii. 37), and by direct references; e.g. 
 to Abraham (vii. 56), to the brazen serpent (iii. 14), to the Bride- 
 groom (iii. 29), to the manna (vi. 49), to the paschal lamb (xix. 
 36), to the Psalms (ii. 17, x. 34, xiii. 18, xix. 24, 37), to the Prophets 
 generally (vi. 45, [vii. 38]), to Isaiah (xii. 88, 40), to Zechariah 
 (xii. 15), to Micah (vii. 42), 
 
 All these passages (and more might easily be added) tend to 
 shew that the Fourth Gospel is saturated with the thoughts, 
 imagery, and language of the O.T. ‘Without the basis of the 
 Old Testament, without the fullest acceptance of the unchanging 
 divinity of the Old Testament, the Gospel of S. John is an 
 insoluble riddle” (Westcott, Introduction, p. 1xix.). 
 
 5. Yet another characteristic of this Gospel has been men- 
 tioned by anticipation in discussing the plan of it (chap. Iv. ii.) ; 
 —its SYSTEMATIC ARRANGEMENT. It is the only Gospel which 
 clearly has a plan. What has been given above as an outline of 
 the plan (Iv. 11.), and also the arrangement of the miracles in 
 section 3 of this chapter, illustrate this feature of the Gospel. 
 
xlvi INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Further examples in detail will be pointed out pp. lxi.—lxiv. and 
 in the subdivisions of the Gospel given in the notes. 
 
 6. The last characteristic which our space will allow us to 
 notice is its styLE. The style of the Gospel and of the First 
 Epistle of S. John is unique. But it is a thing to be felt rather 
 than to be defined. The most illiterate reader is conscious of 
 it; the ablest critic cannot analyse it satisfactorily. A few 
 main features, however, may be pointed out; the rest being left 
 to the student’s own powers of observation. 
 
 Ever since Dionysius of Alexandria (c. A.D. 250) wrote his 
 masterly criticism of the differences between the Fourth Gospel 
 and the Apocalypse (Eus. H. £. vit. xxv.), it has been not un- 
 common to say that the Gospel is written in very pure Greek, 
 free from all barbarous, irregular, or uncouth expressions. This 
 is true in a sense; but it is somewhat misleading. The Greek 
 of the Fourth Gospel is pure, as that of a Greek Primer is 
 pure, because of its extreme simplicity. And it is faultless for 
 the same reason; blemishes being avoided because idioms and 
 intricate constructions are avoided. Elegant, idiomatic, classical 
 Greek it is not. 
 
 (a) This, therefore, is one element in the style,—eztreme 
 simplicity. 'The clauses and sentences are connected together by 
 simple conjunctions co-ordinately; they are not made to depend 
 one upon another; ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν, καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ has τ. ἀνθρώ- 
 πων, not ἣ ἦν τ. φῶς. Even where there is strong contrast in- 
 dicated a simple καί is preferred to ἀλλά, καίτοι or ὅμως ; εἰς τὰ 
 ἴδια ἦλθεν, καὶ οἱ ἴδιοι οὐ παρέλαβον (i. 11). In passages of great 
 solemnity the sentences are placed side by side without even a 
 conjunction ; ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς..-ἀπεκρίθη ὁ Πιιλάτος... ἀπεκρίθη Ἴη- 
 σοὺς (xviii. 34—36). The words of others are given in direct not 
 in oblique oration. The first chapter (19—51), and indeed the 
 first half of the Gospel, abounds in illustrations. 
 
 (6) This simple co-ordination of sentences and avoidance of 
 relatives and dependent clauses. involves a good deal of repeti- 
 tion ; and even when repetition is not necessary we find it em- 
 ployed for the sake of close connexion and emphasis. This con- 
 stant repetition is very impressive. A good example of it is where 
 
CHARACTERISTICS. xlvii 
 
 the predicate (or part of the predicate) of one sentence becomes 
 the subject (or part of the subject) of the next; or where the 
 subject is repeated ; "Eye εἰμι ὁ ποιμὴν ὁ καλός᾽ ὁ ποιμὴν ὁ καλὸς 
 τ. Ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ τίθησιν ὑπὲρ τ. προβάτων (ΣΧ. 11); τὸ φώς ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ 
 φαίνει, καὶ ἡ σκοτία αὐτὸ οὐ κατέλαβεν (i. 5); ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὃ λόγος, καὶ 
 ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν & λόγος (i. 1). Comp. xiii. 20, 
 xv. 19, xvii. 9,16, ἄο. Sometimes instead of repeating the subject 
 S. John introduces an apparently superfluous demonstrative pro- 
 noun ; ὁ ὧν eis τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο (i. 18); ὁ δὲ 
 ζητῶν τὴν δόξαν τοῦ πέμψαντος αὐτὸν οὗτος ἀληθής ἐστιν (vil. 18). 
 Comp. v. 11, 39, xiv. 21, 26, xv. 5, ἄο. The personal pronouns 
 are frequently inserted for emphasis and repeated for the same 
 reason. This is specially true of Ἔγω in the discourses of Christ. 
 
 (c) Although 8. John connects his sentences so simply, and 
 sometimes merely places them side by side without conjunctions, 
 yet he very frequently points out a sequence in fact or in thought. 
 His two most characteristic particles are οὖν and iva. Οὖν occurs 
 almost exclusively in narrative, and points out that one fact is a 
 consequence of another, sometimes in cases where this would not 
 have been obvious ; ἦλθεν οὖν πάλιν eis τὴν Kava (iv. 46), because 
 of the welcome He had received there before; ἐζήτουν οὖν αὐτὸν 
 πιάσαι (Vii. 30), because of His claim to be sent from God. Comp. 
 vii. 40, 45, viii. 12, 21, &. &&—While the frequent use of οὖν 
 points to the conviction that nothing happens without a cause, 
 the frequent use of ἵνα points to the belief that nothing happens 
 without a purpose. S. John uses ἵνα not only where some other 
 construction would have been suitable, but also where another con- 
 struction would seem to be much more suitable; οὐκ εἰμὶ ἄξιος ἵνα 
 λύσω (1. 27); ἐμὸν βρῶμά ἐστιν ἵνα ποιήσω τὸ θέλημα (iv. 34); τοῦτό 
 ἐστιν τὸ ἔργον τοῦ θεοῦ ἵνα πιστεύητε (Vi. 29); τίς ἥμαρτεν.. «ἵνα 
 τυφλὸς γεννηθῇ ; (ix. 2). S. John is specially fond of this con- 
 struction to point out the working of the Divine purpose, as in 
 some of the instances just given (comp. v. 23, vi. 40, 50, x. 10, xi. 
 42, xiv. 16, &c. &.) and in particular of the fulfilment of prophecy 
 (xvill. 9, xix, 24, 28, 36). In this connexion an elliptical expres- 
 sion ἀλλ᾽ iva (=but this was done in order that) is not uncommon ; 
 οὔτε οὗτος ἥμαρτεν οὔτε οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ, GAN ἵνα φανερωθῇ κ.τ.λ. (ix. 
 
xlvili INTRODUCTION. 
 
 3; comp. xi. 52, xiv. 31, xv. 25, xviii. 28). Of the other very 
 numerous Greek particles he uses but few; chiefly καί (very fre- 
 quent), δέ, ὡς and καθώς (frequent), μέν (rather rare). 
 
 (dq) 8. John, full of the spirit of Hebrew poetry, frequently 
 employs that parallelism which to a large extent is the very 
 form of Hebrew poetry: ‘A servant is not greater than his 
 lord; neither one that is sent greater than he that sent him’ 
 (xiii. 16); ‘Peace I leave with you, My peace I give unto you... 
 Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be fearful’ (xiv. 
 27). Sometimes the parallelism is antithetic, and the second 
 clause denies the opposite of the first; ‘He confessed, and 
 denied not’ (i. 20); ‘I give unto them eternal life, and they 
 shall never perish’ (x. 28). Comp. iii. 11, v. 37, vi. 35, 55, 56, 
 xv. 20, xvi. 20. 
 
 (6) Another peculiarity, also of Hebrew origin, is minuteness 
 of detail. Instead of one word summing up the whole action, 
 S. John uses two or three stating the details of the action; 
 ἠρώτησαν αὐτὸν καὶ εἶπαν αὐτῷ (i. 25); ἐμαρτύρησεν Ἰωάννης λέγων 
 (i. 32); ἔκραξεν οὖν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ διδάσκων καὶ λέγων (Vil. 28). 
 The frequent phrase ἀπεκρίθη καὶ εἶπεν illustrates both this par- 
 ticularity and also the preference for co-ordinate sentences (qa). 
 ᾿Απεκρίθη καὶ εἶπεν occurs thirty-four times in 8. John, and only 
 two or three times in the Synoptists, who commonly write dzo- 
 κριθεὶς εἶπεν ΟΥ ἀπεκρίθη λέγων. 
 
 (7) In conclusion we may notice a few οὗ S. John’s favour- 
 ite words and phrases; μένειν especially in the phrases express- 
 ing abiding in one another; πιστεύειν εἴς τινα, ἀληθής, ἀληθινός, 
 ἀληθῶς, ἀλήθεια, σκοτία Of moral darkness, τὸ φῶς of spiritual 
 light, ζωή, ἀγάπη, ἀγαπᾷν, φανεροῦν, μαρτυρία, μαρτυρεῖν, ζωὴ aid- 
 νιος, παρρησίᾳ, τὸν λόγον τὸν ἐμὸν τηρεῖν, οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι Of the oppo- 
 nents of Christ; ὁ κόσμος, of those alienated from Christ. The 
 following words and phrases are used by S. John only; ὁ mapa- 
 κλητος of the Holy Spirit, ὁ λόγος of the Son, μονογενής of the Son, 
 ἐξελθεῖν ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ Or παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ ΟΥ̓ ἀπὸ θεοῦ of the Son, τιθέναι 
 τὴν Ψυχὴν αὑτοῦ of Jesus Christ, ὁ ἄρχων τοῦ κόσμου τούτου of 
 Satan, ἡ ἐσχάτη ἡμέρα, ἀμὴν ἀμήν. 
 
 These characteristics combined form a book which stands 
 
RELATION TO SYNOPTICS. xlix 
 
 alone in Christian literature, as its author stands alone among 
 Christian teachers; the work of one who for threescore years 
 and ten laboured as an Apostle. Called to follow the Baptist 
 when only a lad, and by him soon transferred to the Christ, he 
 may be said to have been the first who from his youth up was a 
 Christian. Who, therefore, could so fitly grasp and state in 
 their true proportions and with fitting impressiveness the great 
 verities of the Christian faith? He had had no deep-seated 
 prejudices to uproot, like his friend 8. Peter and others who 
 were called late in life. He had had no sudden wrench to 
 make from the past, like S. Paul. He had not had the trying 
 excitement of wandering abroad over the face of the earth, like 
 most of the Twelve. He had remained at his post at Ephesus, 
 directing, teaching, meditating; until at last when the fruit was 
 ripe it was given to the Church in the fulness of beauty which it 
 is still our privilege to possess and learn to love. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 ITS RELATION TO THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS. 
 
 The Fourth Gospel presupposes the other three; the Evan- 
 gelist assumes that the contents of his predecessors’ Gospels are 
 known to his readers. The details of Christ’s birth are summed 
 up in ‘the Word became flesh.’ His subjection to His parents 
 is implied by contrast in His reply to His mother at Cana. The 
 Baptism is involved in the Baptist’s declaration, ‘I have seen 
 (the Spirit descending and abiding on Him) and have borne 
 witness’ (i. 34). The Ascension is promised through Mary 
 Magdalene to the Apostles (xx. 17), but left unrecorded. _Chris- 
 tian Baptism is assumed in the discourse with Nicodemus, and 
 the Eucharist in that on the Bread of Life; but the reference 
 in each case is left to speak for itself to Christians familiar 
 with both those rites. §. John passes over their institution in 
 silence. 
 
 ST JOHN a 
 
1 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The differences between the Fourth Gospel and the three 
 first are real and very marked: but it is easy to exaggerate 
 them. They are conveniently grouped under two heads; (1) dif- 
 ferences as to the scene and extent of Christ’s ministry; (2) dif- 
 ferences as to the view given of His Person. 
 
 (1) With regard to the first, it is urged that the Synoptists 
 represent our Lord’s ministry as lasting for one year only, 
 including only one Passover and one visit to Jerusalem, with 
 which the ministry closes. S. John, however, describes the 
 ministry as extending over three or possibly more years, in- 
 cluding at least three Passovers and several visits to Jerusalem. 
 
 In considering this difficulty, if it be one, we must remember 
 two things: (a) that all four Gospels are very incomplete and 
 contain only a series of fragments; (Ὁ) that the date and dura- 
 tion of Christ’s ministry remain and are likely to remain un- 
 certain. (a) In the gaps in the Synoptic narrative there is 
 plenty of room for all that is peculiar to S. John. In the spaces 
 deliberately left by S. John between his carefully-arranged scenes 
 there is plenty of room for all that is peculiar to the Synoptists. 
 When all have been pieced together there still remain large 
 interstices which it would require at least four more Gospels to 
 fill (xxi. 25). Therefore it can be no serious difficulty that so 
 much of the Fourth Gospel has nothing parallel to it in the 
 other three. (Ὁ) The additional fact of the uncertainty as to 
 the date and duration of the Lord’s public ministry is a further 
 explanation of the apparent difference in the amount of time 
 covered by the Synoptic narrative and that covered by the 
 narrative of S. John. There is no contradiction between the 
 two. The Synoptists nowhere say that the ministry lasted for 
 only one year, although some commentators from very early 
 times have proposed to understand ‘the acceptable year of the 
 Lord’ (Luke iv. 19) literally. The three Passovers of S. John 
 (ii. 13, vi. 4, xi. 55; v. 1 being omitted as very doubtful) compel 
 us to give at least a little over two years to Christ’s ministry. But 
 S. John also nowhere implies that he has mentioned all the 
 Passovers within the period; and the startling statement of 
 Irenaeus (Haer. τι. xxii. 5) must be borne in mind, that our 
 
_ RELATION TO SYNOPTICS. li 
 
 Lord fulfilled the office of a Teacher until He was over forty 
 years old, “even as the Gospel and all the elders bear witness, 
 who consorted with John the disciple of the Lord in Asia, 
 (stating) that John had handed this down to them.” Irenaeus 
 makes the ministry begin when Christ was nearly thirty years 
 of age (Luke iii. 23); so that he gives it a duration of more than 
 ten years on what seems to be very high authority. All that 
 can be affirmed with certainty is that the ministry cannot have 
 begun earlier than A.D. 28 (the earlier alternative for the 
 fifteenth year of Tiberius; Luke iii. 1) and cannot have ended 
 later than A.D. 37, when Pilate was recalled by Tiberius shortly 
 before his death. Indeed as Tiberius died in March, and Pilate 
 found him already dead when he reached Rome, the recall 
 probably took place in a.D. 36; and the Passover of A.D. 36 
 is the latest date possible for the Crucifixion. Chronology is 
 not what the Evangelists aimed at giving us; and the fact that 
 S. John spreads his narrative over a longer period than the 
 Synoptists will cause a difficulty to those only who have mis- 
 taken the purpose of the Gospels. 
 
 (2) As to the second great difference between 5. John and 
 the Synoptists, it is said that, while they represent Jesus as 
 a great Teacher and Reformer, with the powers and authority 
 of a Prophet, who exasperates His countrymen by denouncing 
 their immoral traditions, ὃ. John gives us instead a mysterious 
 Personage, invested with Divine attributes, who infuriates the 
 hierarchy by claiming to be one with the Supreme God. It is 
 urged, moreover, that there is a corresponding difference in the 
 teaching attributed to Jesus in each case. The discourses in 
 the Synoptic Gospels are simple, direct, and easily intelligible, 
 inculcating for the most part high moral principles, which are 
 enforced and illustrated by numerous parables and proverbs. 
 Whereas the discourses in the Fourth Gospel are many and 
 intricate, inculcating for the most part deep mystical truths, 
 which are enforced by a ceaseless reiteration tending to obscure 
 the exact line of the argument, and illustrated by not a single 
 parable properly so called. 
 
 These important differences may be to a very great extent 
 
 d2 
 
lii INTRODUCTION. 
 
 explained by two considerations: (a) the peculiarities of S. 
 John’s own temperament; (0) the circumstances under which 
 he wrote. (a) The main features of S. John’s character, so far 
 as we can gather them from history and tradition, have been 
 stated above (chapter I. ii.), and we cannot doubt that they 
 have affected not only his choice of the incidents and discourses 
 selected for narration, but also his mode of narrating them. No 
 doubt in both he was under the guidance of the Holy Spirit 
 (xiv. 26): but we have every reason for supposing that such 
 guidance would work with, rather than against, the mental en- 
 dowments of the person guided. To what extent the substance 
 and form of his Gospel has been influenced by the intensity of 
 his own nature we cannot tell; but the intensity is there, both 
 in thought and language, both in its devotion and in its stern- 
 ness; and the difference from the Synoptists shews that some 
 influence has been at work. (6) The circumstances under 
 which S. John wrote will carry us still further. They are very 
 different from those under which the first Gospels were written. 
 Christianity had grown from infancy to manhood and believed 
 itself to be near the great consummation of the Lord’s return. 
 It was ‘the last time.’ Antichrist, who, as Jesus had foretold, 
 was to precede His return, was already present in manifold 
 shapes in the world (1 John ii. 18). In the bold speculations 
 which had mingled themselves with Christianity, the Divine 
 Government of the Father and the Incarnation of the Son were 
 being explained away or denied (1 John ii. 22, iv. 3). The 
 opposition, shewn from the first by ‘the Jews’ to the disciples 
 of the Teacher whom they had crucified, had settled down into 
 a relentless hostility. And while the gulf between Christianity 
 and Judaism had thus widened, that between the Church and 
 the world had also become more evident. The more the 
 Christian realised the meaning of being ‘born of God,’ the 
 more manifest became the truth, that ‘the whole world lieth in 
 the evil one’ (1 John v. 18,19). A Gospel that was to meet the 
 needs of a society so changed both in its internal and external 
 relations must obviously be very different from those which had 
 suited its infancy. And a reverent mind will here trace the 
 
RELATION TO SYNOPTICS. lili 
 
 Providence of God, in that an Apostle, and he the Apostle 
 S. John, was preserved for this crisis. It is scarcely too much 
 to say that, had a Gospel, claiming to have been written by him 
 near the close of the first century, greatly resembled the other 
 three in matter and form, we should have had reasonable 
 grounds for doubting its authenticity. (The special difficulty 
 with regard to the discourses as reported by the Synoptists and 
 by S. John is discussed in the introductory note to chap. iii.) 
 
 It must be remarked on the other side that, along with these 
 important differences as regards the things narrated and the 
 mode of narrating them, there are coincidences less conspicuous, 
 but not less real or important. 
 
 Among the most remarkable of these are the characters of 
 the Lord, of 8. Peter, of Mary and Martha, and of Judas. The 
 similarity in most cases is too subtle for the picture in the 
 Fourth Gospel to have been drawn from that in the Synoptic 
 account. It is very much easier to believe that the two pictures 
 agree because both are taken from life. 
 
 The invariable use by the Synoptists of the expression ‘Son 
 of Man’ is rigidly observed by S. John. It is always used by 
 Christ of Himself; never by, or of, any one else. See notes on 
 i. 51; and also on ii. 19 and xviii. 11 for two other striking 
 coincidences. 
 
 The student will find tabulated lists of minor coincidences in 
 Dr Westcott’s Jntroduction, pp. Ixxxii., lxxxiiii He sums up 
 thus: “The general conclusion stands firm. The Synoptists 
 offer not only historical but also spiritual points of connexion 
 between the teaching which they record and the teaching in the 
 Fourth Gospel; and S. John himself in the Apocalypse com- 
 pletes the passage from the one to the other.” 
 
liv INTRODUCTION. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 ITS RELATION TO THE FIRST EPISTLE. 
 
 The chronological relation of the Gospel to the First Epistle 
 of S. John cannot be determined with certainty. The Epistle 
 presupposes the Gospel in some shape or other: but as the 
 Gospel was given orally for many years before it was written, 
 it is possible that the Epistle may have been written first. 
 Probably they were written within a few years of one another. 
 whichever was written first of the two. The Epistle is a philo- 
 sophical companion to the Gospel; either an introduction or a 
 supplement to it. The Gospel is a summary of Christian Theo- 
 logy, the Epistle is a summary of Christian Ethics. The one 
 shews the Divine Life in the Person of Christ, the other shews it 
 in the Christian. 
 
 In comparing the Fourth Gospel with the Synoptists we 
 found great and obvious differences, accompanied by real but 
 less obvious correspondences. Here the opposite is rather the 
 case. The coincidences both in thought and expression be- 
 tween the Gospel and the First Epistle of 8. John are many 
 and conspicuous; but closer inspection shews some important 
 differences. 
 
 The object of the Gospel, as we have seen, is to create a con- 
 viction ‘that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.’ The object 
 of the Epistle is rather to insist that the Son of God is Jesus. 
 The Gospel starts from the historical human Teacher and 
 proves that He is Divine; the Epistle starts rather from the 
 Son of God and contends that He has come in the flesh. Again, 
 the Gospel is not polemical; the truth is stated rather than 
 error attacked. In the Epistle definite errors, especially those 
 of Cerinthus, are attacked. 
 
 The lesson of both is one and the same; faith in Jesus Christ 
 leading to fellowship with Him, and through fellowship with 
 Him to fellowship with the Father and with one another : or, to 
 sum up all in one word, Love, 
 
TEXT. lv 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 THE TEXT OF THE GOSPEL. 
 
 The authorities are abundant and various. It will suffice to 
 mention twelve of the most important; six Greek MSS. and 
 six Ancient Versions. 
 
 Greek Manuscripts. 
 
 CopEXx SINAITICUS (ἡ). 4th century. Discovered by Tisch- 
 endorf in 1859 at the monastery of 8. Catherine on Mount 
 Sinai, and now at St Petersburg. The whole Gospel. 
 
 CopEx ALEXANDRINUS (A). 5th century. Brought by Cyril 
 Lucar, Patriarch of Constantinople, from Alexandria, and after- 
 wards presented by him to Charles I. in 1628. In the British 
 Museum. The whole Gospel, excepting vi. 50—viii. 52. 
 
 CopEx Vaticanus (B). 4th century, but perhaps later than 
 the Sinaiticus. In the Vatican Library. The whole Gospel. 
 
 CopEx EpHrRAEMI (C). 5th century. A palimpsest: the 
 original writing has been partially rubbed out and the works of 
 Ephraem the Syrian have been written over it. In the National 
 Library at Paris. Eight fragments; i. 1—41; iii. 33—v. 16; 
 vi. 88—vli. 3; vill. 34—ix. 11; xi. 8—46; xiii. 8—xiv. 7; xvi. 
 21—xviill. 36; xx. 26—xxi. 25. 
 
 CopEX ΒΕΖΑΒ (D). 6th or 7th century. Given by Beza to 
 the University Library at Cambridge in 1581. Remarkable for 
 its interpolations and various readings. The whole Gospel, 
 excepting 1. 16—ili. 26: but xviii. 13—xx. 13 is by a later hand, 
 possibly from the original MS. 
 
 Copex Reetus Paristensis (L). 8th or 9th century. Nearly 
 related to the Vaticanus. At Tours. The whole Gospel, ex- 
 cepting xxi. 15—xxi. 25. 
 
 Ancient Versions. 
 
 Op Syriac (Curetonian). 2nd century. Four fragments; 
 i,— 42; lil. 5—vii. 85; vii. 37—viii. 53, omitting vii. 53—viii. 11; 
 xiv. 11—29, 
 
lvi INTRODUCTION. 
 
 VuteaTte Syriac (Peschito= ‘simple’ meaning perhaps ‘faith- 
 ful’). 3rd century. The whole Gospel. 
 
 HARCLEAN Syriac (a revision of the Philoxenian Syriac, which 
 is a servile translation of the 6th century). 7th century. The 
 whole Gospel. 
 
 ΟΠ Latin (Vetus Latina), 2nd century. The whole Gospel 
 in several distinct forms. 
 
 VuuteaTtE Latin (mainly a revision of the Old Latin by Je- 
 rome, A.D. 383—5). 4th century. The whole Gospel. 
 
 MempuHitic (Coptic, in the dialect of Lower Egypt). 3rd 
 century. The whole Gospel. 
 
 Besides many other MSS. of every degree of excellence, and 
 some other Ancient Versions, there is also the evidence of the 
 Fathers. We have considerable fragments of the commentaries 
 of Origen and Theodore of Mopsuestia, nearly the whole of that 
 of Cyril of Alexandria, and the Homilies of Chrysostom and 
 Augustine. In addition to these must be mentioned valuable 
 quotations from the Gospel in various Greek and Latin writers 
 in the second, third and fourth centuries. Quotations by 
 writers later than the fourth century are of little or no value. 
 By that time the corruption of the text was complete. The 
 Diocletian persecution had swept away a large majority of the 
 ancient copies, and a composite text emanating mainly from 
 Constantinople gradually took their place. 
 
 Our main authorities, therefore, are the most ancient MSS., 
 Versions, and Fathers. How are these authorities to be used? 
 Our object in each disputed case will be to ascertain the oldest 
 reading ; and unless strong arguments against the authenticity 
 of the earliest reading exist, its antiquity will be decisive in 
 its favour. But the date of a MS. is not the same thing as the 
 date of the text which it represents. Some MSS., as SBD, 
 contain a text which can be traced back to the end of the 
 second century. Others, as A, contain a text which is very 
 little older than the MS. itself. Very few readings in the 
 Gospels which are not supported by either B or δὲ or D are 
 likely to be the true reading. Of these three very ancient 
 authorities, B is the purest, D very much the most corrupt. 
 
TEXT. lvii 
 
 But in a very large number of disputed passages B and & will 
 be found to agree. In that case our choice is not difficult: it is 
 where these two separate, and where neither of them has a very 
 decided preponderance of support from other ancient authorities, 
 that serious doubt arises. As between BN on the one hand and A 
 with its common supporters on the other we need not hesitate. 
 It is easy in most cases to see how the reading of BN has been 
 softened or amplified into the reading of A; very difficult to see 
 what could have induced copyists to alter the smooth readings 
 of A into the harsher readings of BN, or why when A makes 
 the Evangelists agree the scribes of BN should make them 
 differ. All the probabilities shew that the text of A has been 
 developed out of a text very similar to that of BN, not the text 
 of BS manufactured by the mutilation of one similar toA. A 
 few simple examples will illustrate this. 
 
 In i. 26, 27 the text of BN stands thus ;— 
 
 ᾿Ἐγὼ βαπτίζω ἐν ὕδατι μέσος ὑμῶν στήκει ὃν ὑμεῖς οὐκ οἴδατε, 
 ὀπίσω μου ἐρχόμενος, οὗ οὐκ εἰμὶ [ἐγὼ] ἄξιος ἵνα λύσω κ.τ.λ. 
 
 The text of A stands thus ;— 
 
 Ἐγὼ βαπτίζω ἐν ὕδατι᾽ μέσος δὲ ὑμῶν ἕστηκεν ὃν ὑμεῖς οὐκ 
 οἴδατε. αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ ὀπίσω μου ἐρχόμενος, ὃς ἔμπροσθέν pov γέγο- 
 νεν, οὗ ἐγὼ οὐκ εἰμὶ ἄξιος ἵνα λύσω x.T.X. 
 
 (1) The insertion of δέ certainly makes the sentence less 
 harsh. (2) ἕστηκεν is a very common form, στήκει a rare one. 
 (3) αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ fills up the construction and assimilates the 
 passage to νυ. 30: and other MSS. shew the assimilation in 
 another form; οὗτός ἐστιν, ΟΥ αὐτός ἐστιν ὃν εἶπον. (4) The in- 
 sertion ὃς ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν assimilates the passage to vv. 15, 
 30. (5) The transposition of ἐγώ (omitted by 8) gives emphasis 
 to the Baptist’s self-humiliation. In all these cases the change 
 from BN to A is much more intelligible than the change from A 
 to BX. What could induce a copyist to omit δέ, to change 
 ἕστηκεν into στήκει, to create differences between this passage and 
 vv. 15, 30, to weaken the Baptist’s humility? The inference is 
 that BS have the earlier reading and A the derived or corrupted 
 reading. The following table contains evidence pointing in the 
 same direction :— 
 
lviii INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Reference. |Reading of BN. όμν.... of A. | Probable cause of corruption. 
 9. 
 
 1.8 ὄψεσθε ἴδετε Assimilation to i. 47. 
 iv. 46, vi. 14. omit ὃ Ἰησοῦς Insertion for clearness. 
 iv. 42. omit ὃ Χριστός Explanatory gloss. 
 vi. 40 τοῦ πατρός μου Ἰτοῦ πέμψαντός we Assimilation to vi. 39. 
 ix. 6 omit τοῦ τυφλοῦ Insertion for clearness. 
 ix. 14 ἐν ἡ ἡμέρᾳ ὅτε Simplification. 
 x. 27 ἀκούουσιν ἀκούει Grammatical correction. 
 xii. 7 ἄφες αὐτὴν iva | ἀφες αὐτήν... | To avoid a difficulty of 
 «τηρήσῃ «τετήρηκεν meaning. 
 
 Similarly in i. 43, xxi. 15, 16, 17, BS give John as the father 
 of S. Peter, while A gives Jonas in harmony with Matt. xvi. 17. 
 
 From the notes on the text at the head of the notes on each 
 chapter the student may collect many other instances; all 
 tending to shew that the change from BN to A is much more 
 probable than the converse change, and that therefore A is a 
 corruption of BN rather than BN of A. His attention is speci- 
 ally directed to i. 16, 18, iii. 15, 34, iv. 51, v. 3, 4, 16, 37, viii. 59, 
 x4, 11, x 12, 29,38, xi. 19, ‘xii 1,7, 13, xu 2, sav. Ὁ 10 τὰ 
 xvii. 22, xviii. 10, 29, 30, xix. 7, 26, 27, 29, xx. 16, xxi. 6. 
 
 It is admitted on all hands that the history of the text in the 
 second, third and fourth centuries is that of a gradual corrup- 
 tion. It is sometimes assumed that about the fourth century a 
 process of purification began, and that later texts are conse- 
 quently Jess corrupt than earlier ones. Of this supposed process 
 of purification there is absolutely no evidence whatever. The pro- 
 cess which shews itself with ever-increasing vigour in the fourth 
 century is that of eclecticism ; a picking-out from various sources 
 of those readings which reduced differences and difficulties to a 
 minimum. Whereas it is a recognised principle of textual cri- 
 ticism that the more dificult reading 1s the more likely to be the 
 true one. 
 
 It is easy to get a very exaggerated idea of the amount of 
 uncertainty which exists respecting the text of N.T. “If com- 
 parative trivialities, such as changes of order, the insertion or 
 omission of the article with proper names, and the like, are set 
 aside, the words in our opinion still subject to doubt can hardly 
 amount to more than a thousandth part of the N.T.” (Westcott 
 and Hort, The N.T. in Greek, τ. p. 561). Every reader of the 
 Greek Testament who can afford the time should study the work 
 just quoted. Those who cannot, should read Hammond’s Qut- 
 
LITERATURE. lix 
 
 lines of Textual Criticism, a short, clear, and interesting state- 
 ment of the main facts in a very inexpensive manual. Here, or 
 in Scrivener’s Introduction to the Criticism of N.T., or in Vol. 1. 
 of Alford’s Greek Testament, will be found information respect- 
 ing the less important MSS. sometimes cited in this volume. 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 THE LITERATURE OF THE GOSPEL. 
 
 It would be impossible to give even a sketch of this within 
 a small compass, so numerous are the works on S. John and his 
 writings. All that will be attempted here will be to give more 
 advanced students some information as to where they may look 
 for greater help than can be given in a handbook for the use of 
 schools. 
 
 Of the earliest known commentary, that of Heracleon (c. a.p. 
 150), only quotations preserved by Origen remain. Of Origen’s 
 own commentary (c. A.D. 225—235) only portions remain. Of 
 the Greek commentators of the fourth century, Theodorus of 
 Heraclea and Didymus of Alexandria, very little has come 
 down to us. But we have 3. Chrysostom’s 88 Homilies on the 
 Gospel, which have been translated in the Oxford ‘Library of 
 the Fathers.’ 8S. Augustine’s 124 Lectures (Tractatus) on 8. John 
 may be read in the ‘Library of the Fathers, or in the new 
 translation by Gibb, published by T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh. 
 But no translation can fairly represent the epigrammatic fulness 
 of the original. The Commentary of Cyril of Alexandria has been 
 translated by P. E. Pusey, Oxford, 1875. With Cyril the line 
 of great patristic interpreters of S. John ends. 
 
 The Catena Aurea of Thomas Aquinas (c. A.D. 1250) was 
 published in an English form at Oxford, 1841—45. It consists 
 of a ‘chain’ of comments selected from Greek and Latin authors. 
 Unfortunately Thomas Aquinas was the victim of previous 
 forgers, and a considerable number of the quotations from early 
 authorities are taken from spurious works, 
 
lz INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Of modern commentaries those of Cornelius ἃ Lapide (Van 
 der Steen) and Maldonatus in the sixteenth century and of 
 Lampe in the eighteenth must be mentioned. The last has 
 been a treasury of information for many more recent writers. 
 
 The following foreign commentaries have all been published 
 in an English form by T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh; Bengel, 
 Godet, Luthardt, Meyer, Olshausen, Tholuck. Of these the 
 works of Godet and Meyer may be specially commended. The 
 high authority of Dr Westcott pronounces the commentary of 
 Godet, “except on questions of textual criticism,” to be “unsur- 
 passed”—we may add, except by Dr Westcott’s own. 
 
 Among original English commentaries those of Alford, Dun- 
 well, McClellan, Milligan, Watkins, and Wordsworth are or are 
 becoming well known to all students. But immensely superior 
 to all preceding works is that by Dr Westcott, Murray, 1882. 
 
 Other works which give very valuable assistance are Ellicott’s 
 Historical Lectures on the Life of our Lord, Field’s Otiwm Nor- 
 vicense, Pars 111, Liddon’s Bampton Lectures, 1866, Lightfoot On 
 a Fresh Revision of the N.T., F. Ὁ. Maurice’s Gospel of St John, 
 Moulton’s edition of Winer’s Grammar*, Sanday’s Authorship 
 and Historical Character of the Fourth Gospel, and The Gospels 
 in the Second Century, and Westcott’s Introduction to the Study 
 of the Gospels, and Characteristics of the Gospel Miracles, and The 
 Gospel of the Risen Lord. 
 
 The present writer is bound to express his obligations, in 
 some cases very great, to most of the works mentioned above, 
 as well as to many others. It was originally intended that 
 Dr Sanday should undertake the present commentary, but press 
 of other work induced him to ask leave to withdraw after 
 having written notes on the greater part of the first chapter. 
 His successor has had the advantage of these notes and has 
 made large use of them, and throughout has in some measure 
 remedied the loss caused by Dr Sanday’s retirement by fre- 
 quently quoting from his work on the Fourth Gospel, now 
 unfortunately out of print. 
 
 * References to Winer in this volume are to Moulton’s edition, 1877. 
 
ANALYSIS, ]xi 
 
 ANALYSIS OF THE GOSPEL IN DETAIL. 
 
 I, 1—18. THE PROLOGUE. 
 1. The Word in His own nature (1—5). 
 2. His revelation to men and rejection by them (6—13). 
 8. His revelation of the Father (14—18), 
 
 I 19—XII. 50. THE MINISTRY, 
 a. I.19—II.11. The Testimony. 
 1, The Testimony of the Baptist (i. 19—37) 
 to the deputation from Jerusalem (19—28), 
 to the people (29—34), 
 to Andrew and John (35—37). 
 2, The Testimony of Disciples (i. 38—51), 
 3, The Testimony of the First Sign (ii, 1—11). 
 
 δ. 11. 13—XI.57. The Work- 
 1, The Work among Jews (ii. 13—iii. 36). 
 First cleansing of the Temple (13—22). 
 Belief without devotion (23—25). 
 The discourse with Nicodemus (iii. 1—21), 
 The baptism and final testimony of John (22—36). 
 2. The Work among Samaritans (iv. 1—42), 
 3. The Work among Galileans (iv. 483—54). 
 4. The Work and conflict among mixed multitudes (v.—ix.). 
 
 (a) Curist THE Source oF Lifts (v.). 
 The sign at the pool of Bethesda (1—9). 
 The sequel of the sign (10—16). 
 The discourse on the Son as the Source of Life (17— 
 47), 
 
]xii INTRODUCTION. 
 
 (8) Curist THE Support oF {7 Ὲ (vi.). 
 The sign on the land; feeding the 5000 (1—15). 
 The sign on the lake; walking on the water (16—21). 
 The sequel of the two signs (22—25). 
 The discourse on the Son as the Support of Life (26— 
 59). 
 Opposite results of the discourse (60—71). 
 (y) Curist THE Source or TruTH AND Lieut (vil. Viii.). 
 The controversy with His brethren (vii. 1—9). 
 The discourse at the F, of Tabernacles (10—39). 
 Opposite results of the discourse (40—52). 
 [The woman taken in adultery (vii. 53—viii. 11)]. 
 Christ’s true witness to Himself and against the Jews 
 (viii. 12—59). 
 Cunist THE Source oF TRUTH AND LIFE ILLUSTRATED 
 BY A SIGN (ix.). 
 The prelude to the sign (1—5). 
 The sign (6—12). 
 Opposite results of the sign (13—41). 
 (6) Curist 1s Love (x.). 
 
 Allegory of the Door of the Fold (1—9). 
 Allegory of the Good Shepherd (11—18). 
 Opposite results of the teaching (19—21). 
 The discourse at the F. of the Dedication (22—38). 
 Opposite results of the discourse (89—42), 
 
 Cunist 1s LovE ILLUSTRATED BY A SIGN (Xi.). 
 The prelude to the sign alah 
 The sign (83—44), 
 Opposite results of the sign (45—57). 
 
 ce. XII. The Judgment. 
 1. The Judgment of men (1—36). 
 
 The devotion of Mary (1—8). 
 The hostility of the priests (9—11). 
 The enthusiasm of the people (12—18). 
 The discomfiture of the Pharisees (19). 
 The desire of the Gentiles (20—33). 
 The perplexity of the multitude (84--- 80). 
 
ANALYSIS. lxiii 
 
 2, The Judgment of the Evangelist (37—43), 
 3. The Judgment of Christ (44—50). 
 ΧΙΠ.--ΧΧ, THE ISSUES OF THE MINISTRY. 
 d. XIII.—XVII, The inner Glorification of Christ in His last 
 Discourses. 
 1. His love in Humiliation (xiii. 1—30). 
 2. His love in keeping His own (xiii. 31—xv. 27). 
 Lheir union with Him illustrated by the allegory of 
 the Vine (xv. 1—11). 
 Their union with one another (12—17). 
 The hatred of the world to both Him and them (18—25). 
 3. The Promise of the Paraclete and of Christ’s Return (xvi.). 
 The World and the Paraclete (xvi. 1—11). 
 The disciples and the Paraclete (12—15). 
 The sorrow turned into joy (16—24). 
 Summary and conclusion (25—33). 
 4, The Prayer of the Great High Priest (xvii.). 
 The prayer for Himself (xvii. 1—5), 
 for the Disciples (6—19), 
 for the whole Church (20—26). 
 e. XVIII, XIX. The outer Glorification of Christ in His Passion. 
 The Betrayal (xviii. 1—11). 
 The Jewish or Ecclesiastical Trial (12—27). 
 The Roman or Civil Trial (xviii. 283—xix. 16), 
 The Death and Burial (xix. 17—42). 
 The crucifixion and the title on the cross (17—22). 
 The four enemies and the four friends (23—27). 
 Fhe two words, ‘I thirst,’ ‘It is finished’ (28—30). 
 The hostile and the friendly petitions (31—42). 
 f. XX. The Resurrection and threefold Manifestation of Christ. 
 The first Evidence of the Resurrection (1—10). 
 The Manifestation to Mary Magdalene (11—18). 
 The Manifestation to the Ten and others (19—23). 
 The Manifestation to 8. Thomas and others (24—29). 
 The Conclusion and Purpose of the Gospel (30, 31). 
 
 Ἐκ a Ne 
 
 oe τα 
 
Ixiv INTRODUCTION. 
 
 XXI. THE EPILOGUE OR APPENDIX. 
 
 1. The Manifestation to the Seven and the Miraculous Draught 
 of Fishes (1—14), 
 
 2. The Commission to 5. Peter and Prediction as to his Death 
 (15—19). 
 
 3. The inisunderstood Saying as to the Evangelist (20—23). 
 4. Concluding Notes (24, 25). 
 
EYATTEAION KATA IQANNHN 
 
 ¢€ ’ δ 
 1. VEv ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἣν πρὸς τὸν 
 ς ? 3 a 
 θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγοςς "Οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς 
 >’ A : fa! 
 tov θεόν. πάντα du αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, Kal χωρὶς αὐτοῦ 
 ΒΝ, TS\ “A A , 4) > A \ > \ ¢ 
 ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν ὃ γέγονεν. “ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν, Kal ἡ 
 ἕ \ 3 \ A ἣν aubook eee Bore nA / 
 ωὴ ἦν TO φῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων. "καὶ τὸ φῶς ἐν TH σκοτίᾳ 
 ’ 
 φαίνει, καὶ ἡ σκοτία αὐτὸ ov κατέλαβεν. 
 en , " θ ’ ΄ \ θ a 9 
 γένετο ἄνθρωπος, ἀπεσταλμένος παρὰ θεοῦ, dvo- 
 ἘΣ αν ἢ a ee 3 » / “ 
 μα αὐτῷ ᾿Ιωάννης" ᾿οὗτος ἦλθεν εἰς μαρτυρίαν, ἵνα 
 / a U “ “ 
 μαρτυρήσῃ περὶ τοῦ φωτός, ἵνα πάντες πιστεύσωσιν 
 9 “. oA 8 235 Owais on A ral 3 » , 
 δι’ αὐτοῦ. ὅ οὐκ ἦν ἐκεῖνος τὸ φώς, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα μαρτυρήσῃ 
 A Ld \ \ 5 e 
 περὶ τοῦ φωτός. “ἦν τὸ φῶς TO ἀληθινόν ὃ φωτίζει 
 > a 
 πάντα ἄνθρωπον ἐρχόμενον εἰς τὸν κόσμον. " ἐν TO 
 > rd >] fa! / 
 κόσμῳ ἦν, καὶ ὁ κόσμος OL αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ ὁ κόσμος 
 ee » ΝΜ ἘΠ. .Κ \ τὰ \ εν 5 - AR 
 αὐτὸν οὐκ ἔγνω. ™ εἰς τὰ ἴδια ἦλθεν, καὶ οἱ ἴδιοι αὐτὸν 
 ? / » A 
 ov παρέλαβον. “ὅσοι δὲ ἔλαβον αὐτόν, ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς 
 f A , A 
 ἐξουσίαν τέκνα θεοῦ γενέσθαι, τοῖς πιστεύουσιν εἰς τὸ 
 bd 2 -οῴθἤ15 ἃ > 2 ς Vf T&4° 3 , 
 ὄνομα αὐτοῦ, * ot οὐκ ἐξ αἱμάτων οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος 
 \ OA aN \ a 
 σαρκὸς οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος ἀνδρὸς ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ θεοῦ ἐγεννή- 
 θησαν. 
 14 es , \ / a 
 Kai ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν, 
 eee / fal A 
 καὶ ἐθεασάμεθα τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, δόξαν ws μονογενοῦς 
 \ Δ , , AS 7 155 ,ὔ 
 Tapa πατρὸς, πλήρης χάριτος καὶ ἀληθείας. "Ἰωάννης 
 ST JOHN A 
 
2 EYAITEAION Irs 
 
 a \ b) a \ t , ὰ a i ea." 
 μαρτυρεῖ περὶ αὐτοῦ Kal κέκραγεν λέγων Οὗτος ἦν ὃν 
 , / 
 εἶπον, .Ὃ ὀπίσω μου ἐρχόμενος ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγο- 
 a 4 lal / ,’ 
 νεν, OTL πρῶτός μου ἦν. “OTL ἐκ TOD πληρώματος av- 
 nw “ U ᾽ rt 
 τοῦ ἡμεῖς πάντες ἐλάβομεν, Kal χάριν ἀντὶ χάριτος" 
 ὅτι ὁ νόμος διὰ Μωυσέως ἐδόθη, ἡ χάρις καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια 
 \>? rn Yet ἣν 18 \ 50. lees ’ 
 διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐγένετο. “θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώ- 
 ς ἡ a \ 
 mote’ μονογενὴς θεὸς ὁ ὧν εἰς TOV κόλπον TOU πατρὸς 
 ἐκεῖνος al Ma ΤΟ. yee 
 τ᾿ Kal αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ μαρτυρία τοῦ Ἰωάννου, ἕ ὅτε ἀπ- 
 ἐστείλαν πρὸς αὐτὸν οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι ἐξ Ἱεροσολύμων ἱερεῖς 
 ” Kal 
 ς , \ > > / \ ς / e 
 ὡμολόγησεν καὶ οὐκ ἠρνήσατο, καὶ ὡμολόγησεν OTL 
 
 καὶ Aeveltas iva ἐρωτήσωσιν αὐτὸν, Σὺ τίς él; 
 
 ¢ / 
 "Eye οὐκ εἰμὶ ὁ Χριστός. “Kal ἠρώτησαν αὐτόν, Τί 
 
 \ / ¢ 
 οὖν; Ἡλίας εἶ σύ; καὶ λέγει, Οὐκ εἰμί. “O° προ- 
 , bel. J , \ > / 4 22 5 3 x. A 
 φήτης εἶ σύ; Kat ἀπεκρίθη, Ov. εἶπαν οὖν αὐτῷ, 
 / A “-“ / la / 
 Tis εἶ, ἵνα ἀπόκρισιν δῶμεν τοῖς πέμψασιν ἡμᾶς" τί 
 a 3 9 3 \ \ n Loan 
 λέγεις περὶ σεαυτοῦ; “ἔφη. “Eye φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ 
 aS Ev / \ SO , Ad 3 Ἥ . 
 ἐρήμῳ, Εὐθύνατε τὴν ὁδὸν κυρίου, καθὼς εἶπεν “Hoaias 
 ε ἢ 24 \ es , 5 > A 
 ὁ προφήτης. “καὶ ἀπεσταλμένοι ἦσαν ἐκ τῶν Dapi- 
 / . 25 \ > / - Ἂν \ 3 x A , > 
 caiwv’ * Kal ἠρώτησαν αὐτὸν Kai εἶπαν αὐτῷ, Τί οὖν 
 
 βαπτίζεις, εἰ σὺ οὐκ εἶ ὁ Χριστὸς οὐδὲ ᾿Ηλίας οὐδὲ 6 
 
 a ᾽ 
 προφήτης; “᾿ἀπεκρίθη αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιωάννης λέγων, “Eyo 
 , e “Ὁ « δ a 
 
 βαπτίζω ἐν ὕδατι μέσος ὑμῶν στήκει, ὃν ὑμεῖς οὐκ οἵ- 
 
 Ὦχ 5 ᾽ / 2 > we of ee 
 date, ὁ ὀπίσω μου ἐρχόμενος, ov οὐκ εἰμὶ [ἐγὼ] ἄξιος 
 ἵνα λύσω αὐτοῦ τὸν ἱμάντα τοῦ ὑποδήματος. “ταῦτα 
 ἐν Βηθανίᾳ ἐγένετο πέραν τοῦ ᾿Ιορδάνου, ὅπου ἦν 6 
 εν a ἐ Ύ ρ ρ ω) 
 > / / 
 Iwavyns βαπτίζων. 
 
 fal / \ aA / 
 
 “TH ἐπαύριον βλέπει τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν ἐρχόμενον πρὸς 
 ΙΝ Ν / ” ς > Ν a na ¢ ” \ 
 αὐτόν, Kal λέγει, Ἴδε ὁ ἀμνὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ αἴρων τὴν 
 a 2 
 ἁμαρτίαν τοῦ κόσμου. “οὗτός ἐστιν ὑπὲρ οὗ ἐγὼ εἶπον, 
 
 \ «Ὁ / / 
 Ὀπίσω μου ἔρχεται ἀνὴρ ὃς ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν, 
 
 Y 
 
I. 45 KATA IQANNHN 3 
 
 t/ (a Κα 53 31 3 \ b v SOF ’ 95. Δ΄ 
 OTL πρῶτος μοῦ ἢν. καἀγω οὐκ ἤδειν αὐτόν, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα 
 A A / x La) . 
 φανερωθῇ τῷ ᾿Ισραήλ, διὰ τοῦτο ἦλθον ἐγὼ ἐν ὕδατι 
 , 32 tage. 7 3 , “ 
 βαπτίζων. καὶ ἐμαρτύρησεν ᾿Ιωάννης λέγων ὅτι 
 / A 4 a 
 Τεθέαμαι τὸ πνεῦμα καταβαῖνον ws περιστερὰν ἐξ ov- 
 κ᾿ ἀνθ τὴν Ge) ὅπ, ΣΙ ΤῊΝ γ δὴ oy 
 pavod, kal ἔμεινεν ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν. “Kaya οὐκ dew αὐτόν, 
 7 eat 
 ἀλλ᾽ ὁ πέμψας με βαπτίζειν ἐν ὕδατι, ἐκεῖνός μοι εἶπεν, 
 a Set x 18 \ A a \ £ πον 
 φ᾽ ὃν ἂν ἴδῃς τὸ πνεῦμα καταβαῖνον καὶ μένον ἐπ 
 οι ς _ AY 2 > ξ ἢ 3 r δ᾿ 84 > 
 αὐτόν, οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ βαπτίζων ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ. ™“Ka- 
 U4 φ ¢ e lel 
 γὼ ἑώρακα, Kal μεμαρτύρηκα OTL οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ 
 θεοῦ. 
 Τῇ ἐπαύριον πάλιν εἱστήκει ᾿Ιωάννης καὶ ἐκ τῶν 
 al ’ ἴω a? a 
 μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ δύο. “Kal ἐμβλέψας τῷ Inood περιπα- 
 a , Μ σιν \ A fa) 
 τοῦντι λέγει, Ἴδε ὁ ἀμνὸς τοῦ θεοῦ. 
 "Kai ἤκουσαν οἱ δύο μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ λαλοῦντος, καὶ 
 ’ “ A a a 
 ἠκολούθησαν τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ. *“atpadels δὲ 6 ᾿Ἰησοῦς καὶ 
 θ , >, x > lal / > a 39 ’ 
 εασάμενος αὐτοὺς ἀκολουθοῦντας λέγει αὐτοῖς, “Τί 
 rn e A 3 > A ¢ / \ / 
 ζητεῖτε; of δὲ εἶπαν αὐτῷ, “Ραββί, (ὃ λέγεται μεθερ- 
 , , a , Ἴδα ἃ ἐδ μῆνις 
 μηνευόμενον Διδάσκαλε, ποῦ μένεις; * λέγει αὐτοῖς; 
 > A , 
 Ἔρχεσθε καὶ ὄψεσθε. ἦλθαν οὖν Kai εἶδαν ποῦ μένει, 
 \ 3 5: ὦ ey \ MeO: ae sy ie 5 ¢ 
 Kal παρ᾽ αὐτῷ ἔμειναν τὴν ἡμέραν ἐκείνην" ὥρα ἣν ὡς 
 = / ς 2 \ / , “π 
 δεκάτη. “nv ᾿Ανδρέας ὁ ἀδελφὸς Σίμωνος Πέτρου εἷς 
 a tal uf \ > 
 ἐκ τῶν δύο τῶν ἀκουσάντων παρὰ ‘Iwavvov καὶ ἀκολου- 
 , 2 A χονῦε 1 e A \ 25 \ 
 θησάντων αὐτῷ: “εὑρίσκει οὗτος πρῶτον τὸν ἀδελφὸν 
 x is > Ζ \ δ᾽ / ? A E ¢ / \ 
 τὸν ἴδιον Σίμωνα καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, Εὑρήκαμεν τὸν 
 ΄, A / / " 
 Μεσσίαν (ὁ ἐστι μεθερμηνευόμενον Χριστός). “ἤγαγεν 
 3 \ \ \ 3 la) 3 / 3 A ς 3 “Ὁ 
 αὐτὸν πρὸς τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν. ἐμβλέψας αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς 
 = 
 εἶπεν, Σὺ εἶ Σίμων ὁ vids ᾿Ιωάννου᾽ od κληθήσῃ Ky- 
 A es / / 
 φᾶς (ὃ ἑρμηνεύεται [létpos). 
 44 A A / 
 Τῇ ἐπαύριον ἠθέλησεν ἐξελθεῖν εἰς THY T'adidarar. 
 \ © +i A a > 
 καὶ εὑρίσκει Φίλιππον καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ἰησοῦς, ᾿Ακο- 
 , : Ξ a 
 λούθει μοι. “Hv δὲ ὁ Φίλιππος. ἀπὸ Βηθσαϊδά, ἐκ τῆς 
 Α2 
 
4 ΕΥ̓ΑΓΓΈΛΙΟΝ 1.45 
 
 πόλεως ᾿Ανδρέου καὶ Ilétpov. “εὑρίσκει Φίλιππος τὸν 
 td 5. ed Oe 7 > 
 Ναθαναὴλ, καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, “Ov ἔγραψεν Μωυσῆς ἐν 
 a / ’ “ εν lal 
 τῷ νόμῳ Kal οἱ προφῆται εὑρήκαμεν, ᾿Ιησοῦν υἱὸν τοῦ 
 s A 
 Ἰωσὴφ tov ἀπὸ Ναζαρέτ. “ καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ Na- 
 . / 
 Oavanr, Ἔκ Ναζαρὲτ δύναταί τι ἀγαθὸν εἶναι; λέγει 
 A 3 ᾽ lal 
 αὐτῷ ὁ Φίλιππος, Ἔρχου καὶ ἴδε. “εἶδεν ᾿Ιησοῦς 
 , \ \ \ 4 \ 
 τὸν Ναθαναὴλ ἐρχόμενον πρὸς αὐτὸν καὶ λέγει περὶ 
 nw A“ yy 
 αὐτοῦ, Ἴδε ἀληθῶς ᾿Ισραηλείτης ἐν ᾧ δόλος οὐκ ἔστιν. 
 >. ’ 3 
 9 λέγει αὐτῷ Ναθαναήλ, Πόθεν με γινώσκεις ; ὦπε- 
 > “ Ψ τὰ a fal 
 κρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, IIpo τοῦ σε Φίλιππον 
 lal ΝΜ € \ a 3 
 φωνῆσαι ὄντα ὑπὸ τὴν. συκῆν εἶδόν σε. ” ἀπεκρίθη 
 ’ a / ς / = a a 
 αὐτῷ Ναθαναήλ, ῬῬαββί, σὺ εἶ ὁ vids τοῦ θεοῦ, σὺ 
 \ 3 a? / ᾽ a 
 βασιλεὺς εἶ τοῦ Ἰσραήλ. “arexpibn ᾿ΙἸησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν 
 Ψ ~ f 3 / A A 
 αὐτῷ, Ὅτι εἶπόν σοι ὅτι εἶδόν σε ὑποκάτω τῆς συκῆς, 
 ; / / 7 52 ‘5/7 Were. ah \ 
 πιστεύεις; μείζω τούτων ὄψη. “Kal λέγει αὐτῷ, ᾿Αμὴν 
 ΤΣ , oe ” \ 4 \ ᾽ , \ 
 ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὄψεσθε τὸν οὐρανὸν ἀνεῳγότα καὶ 
 } “ a ᾽ 
 τοὺς ἀγγέλους τοῦ θεοῦ ἀναβαίνοντας καὶ καταβαίνον- 
 τας ἐπὶ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. 
 2, 1K \ RY CA aA / ’ » as 5) K A 
 al TH ἡμέρᾳ τῇ τρίτῃ γάμος ἐγένετο ἐν Kava 
 fal / \ φ ς ’ A 2 a ᾽ “ Q? 
 τῆς Γαλιλαίας, καὶ ἦν ἡ μήτηρ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ ἐκεῖ. *é- 
 / \ i ΠῚ Ν lal \ e \ » lal > \ / 
 κλήθη δὲ καὶ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸν γά- 
 / al rn 
 μον. “καὶ ὑστερήσαντος οἴνου λέγει ἡ μήτηρ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ 
 \ Sor 3 .. ὦ ἀπ ὺν 9. Ale a 
 πρὸς αὐτόν, Οἶνον οὐκ ἔχουσιν. “λέγει αὐτῇ ὁ Ἰησοῦς, 
 / \ \ / Yj 7 
 Τί ἐμοὶ καὶ coi, γύναι; οὔπω ἥκει ἡ ὥρα μου. λέγει 
 ς / > fal “ / [7 Δ / ¢. ss 
 ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ τοῖς διακόνοις, “Ὁ τι av λέγη ὑμῖν, 
 / Φ a 
 ποιήσατε. “ἦσαν δὲ ἐκεῖ λίθιναι ὑδρίαι ἕξ κατὰ τὸν 
 \ “Ὁ lal , 
 καθαρισμὸν τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων κείμεναι, χωροῦσαι ava με- 
 Ν δύ a - Ἴ 7 Bee ey Ἢ a , 
 Tpntas δύο ἢ τρεῖς. ‘Eyer αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, l'euicate 
 \ a / 85 τ ey. as Ne ὁ ἐν y 8 \ 
 τὰς ὑδρίας ὕδατος. Kal ἐγέμισαν αὐτὰς ἕως ἄνω. *Kai 
 λέ ’ an "A λή lal ἈΝ / “a > 
 έγει αὐτοῖς, ᾿Αντλήσατε νῦν καὶ φέρετε τῷ ἀρχιτρι- 
 / ΣᾺ Ἃ 9 ¢ eee ee. ἢ 
 κἈλίνῳ. οἱ δὲ ἤνεγκαν. “ὡς δὲ ἐγεύσατο ὁ ἀρχιτρίκλι- 
 
II. 21 KATA IQANNHN ὃ 
 
 \ oe 3 7 κ᾿ AS Ὁ 3 ΔῈ 
 νος τὸ ὕδωρ οἶνον γεγενημένον, καὶ οὐκ ἤδει πόθεν ἐστίν, 
 e > tf n 
 of δὲ διάκονοι ἤδεισαν οἱ ἠντληκότες TO ὕδωρ, φωνεῖ 
 \ ; eis y ὦν / 908 δ 
 τὸν νυμφίον ὁ ἀρχιτρίκλινος, “Kal λέγει αὐτῷ, Πᾶς 
 - “- 7 
 ἄνθρωπος πρῶτον τὸν καλὸν οἶνον τίθησιν, καὶ ὅταν με- 
 A ‘ \ \ τ 
 θυσθῶσιν τὸν ἐλάσσω" σὺ τετήρηκας τὸν καλὸν οἶνον 
 eh a ς 
 ἕως ἄρτι. "“᾿ταύτην ἐποίησεν ἀρχὴν τῶν σημείων ὃ 
 A A \ 
 Ἰησοῦς ἐν Κανᾶ τῆς Γαλιλαίας καὶ ἐφανέρωσεν τὴν 
 δόξαν αὐτοῦ" καὶ ἐπίστευσαν εἰς αὐτὸν οἱ μαθηταὶ 
 αὐτοῦ. 
 / , 
 Μετὰ τοῦτο κατέβη εἰς Καφαρναοὺμ αὐτὸς καὶ 
 e ἤ ’ lal xX δ ’ \ \ e θ \ 53 la) 
 ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ Kal οἱ ἀδελφοὶ Kai οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, 
 a \ 
 Kal ἐκεῖ ἔμειναν οὐ πολλὰς ἡμέρας. 
 13 ἀπο aa \ , St Ἰουδαξ PAL ok 
 Kal ἐγγὺς nv τὸ πάσχα τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων, καὶ ἀνέβη 
 ’ e / £3 aA 
 εἰς ᾿Ιεροσόλυμα ὃ ᾿Ιησοῦς. 
 φ A A , \ 
 * Kai εὗρεν ἐν TO ἱερῷ τοὺς πωλοῦντας Boas Kal 
 πρόβατα καὶ περιστερὰς Kal τοὺς κερματιστὰς καθη- 
 μένους. “Kal ποιήσας φραγέλλιον ἐκ σχοινίων πάντας 
 3 oie a / 
 ἐξέβαλεν ἐκ τοῦ ἱεροῦ, TA Te πρόβατα Kal τοὺς βόας, 
 Ν A tal 5. \ / \ \ 
 καὶ τῶν κολλυβιστῶν ἐξέχεεν TA κέρματα Kal τὰς Tpa- 
 a. FF A XN a 
 metas ἀνέστρεψεν, “Kal τοῖς Tas περιστερὰς πωλοῦσιν 
 5 Yj a A A a 
 εἶπεν, “Apate ταῦτα ἐντεῦθεν, μὴ ποιεῖτε τὸν οἶκον TOD 
 πατρός μου οἶκον ἐμπορίου. "ἐμνήσθησαν οἱ μαθηταὶ 
 » A f , A rat 
 αὐτοῦ OTL γεγραμμένον ἐστίν, ‘O ζῆλος τοῦ οἴκου σου 
 / 
 καταφάγεταί με. 
 > A Ἷ A 
 *°AmexplOncay οὖν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι καὶ εἶπαν αὐτῷ, 
 A Cn A a 
 Ti σημεῖον δεικνύεις ἡμῖν, ὅτι ταῦτα ποιεῖς; * ἀπε- 
 li > A \ = J a / \ \ 
 κρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Λύσατε τὸν ναὸν 
 fa! \ 
 τοῦτον, Kal ἐν τρισὶν ἡμέραις ἐγερῶ αὐτόν. “εἶπαν 
 3 ξ Ἶ ὃ - T / Np ie + bd 
 οὖν ot ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, Τεσσεράκοντα καὶ ἕξ ἔτεσιν ᾧκο- 
 t ec \ Φ a 
 δομήθη ὁ ναὸς οὗτος, καὶ σὺ ἐν τρισὶν ἡμέραις ἐγερεῖς 
 / “ A A “ 
 αὐτόν; “ἐκεῖνος δὲ ἔλεγεν περὶ τοῦ ναοῦ τοῦ σώμα- 
 
6 EYATTEAION — IT. 21 
 
 b a 22 ΟΥ̓ > ae > a > ΄ ΠΣ 
 τος αὐτοῦ. “ὅτε οὖν ἡγέρθη ἐκ νεκρῶν, ἐμνήσθησαν οἱ 
 3 a la) a 
 μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ὅτι τοῦτο ἔλεγεν᾽ Kal ἐπίστευσαν τῇ 
 ne \ A / a = a fa 
 γραφῃ καὶ τῷ λόγῳ ὃν εἶπεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς. 
 ¢ > a aA 
 Ὡς δὲ ἦν ἐν τοῖς Ἱεροσολύμοις ἐν τῷ πάσχα ἐν 
 τῇ ἑορτῇ, πολλοὶ ἐπίστευσαν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ, θεω- 
 A ᾽ “Ὁ a “ 
 ροῦντες αὐτοῦ τὰ σημεῖα ἃ ἐποίει. “αὐτὸς δὲ ᾿Ἰησοῦς 
 οὐκ ἐπίστευεν αὐτὸν αὐτοῖς, διὰ τὸ αὐτὸν γινώσκειν 
 5 ᾽ 
 πάντας" “καὶ ὅτι οὐ χρείαν εἶχεν ἵνα τις μαρτυρήσῃ 
 περὶ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου" αὐτὸς γὰρ ἐγίνωσκεν τί ἦν ἐν τῷ 
 ἀνθρώπῳ. 
 3 Hy δὲ ἄνθρωπος ἐκ τῶν Φαρισαίων, Νικόδημος 
 “ ΕῚ A wv a Ἢ ὃ 7 Ee >r.0 \ 
 ὄνομα αὐτῷ, ἄρχων τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων. "οὗτος ἦχθεν πρὸς 
 Θ᾽ ἡ \ \ 5 7 Hae ΟΣ / Μ A ee 
 αὐτὸν νυκτὸς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “PaBBi, οἴδαμεν ὅτι ἀπὸ 
 θεοῦ ἐλήλυθας διδάσκαλος" οὐδεὶς γὰρ δύναται ταῦτα 
 : A , a a ’ = ? 
 Ta σημεῖα ποιεῖν ἃ σὺ ποιεῖς, ἐὰν μὴ ἡ ὁ θεὸς μετ᾽ av- 
 a 8. 9 , > a \ s aes > \ > \ 
 tov. “ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, ᾿Αμὴν ἀμὴν 
 \ / A fal 
 λέγω σοι, ἐὰν μή Tis γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν, od δύναται ἰδεῖν 
 τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ. “λέγει πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁ Νικόδη- 
 A aA / 
 μος, Πῶς δύναται ἄνθρωπος γεννηθῆναι γέρων ὦν; μὴ 
 A A ΄ 
 δύναται εἰς τὴν κοιλίαν τῆς μητρὸς αὐτοῦ δεύτερον 
 εἰσελθεῖν καὶ γεννηθῆναι; "ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς, ᾿Αμὴν 
 > \ / aS, / An > “ὃ \ U 
 ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἐξ ὕδατος καὶ πνεύ- 
 > / ’ “-“ > » / A 
 ματος, ov δύναται εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ 
 A lal \ 
 θεοῦ. “τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς σάρξ ἐστιν, 
 καὶ τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος πνεῦμά ἐστιν. 
 7 un θαυμάσῃς ὅτι εἶπόν σοι, Δεῖ ὑμᾶς γεννηθῆναι 
 Μ 8. Χἃ a A / a \ \ \ 
 ἄνωθεν. “τὸ πνεῦμα ὅπου θέλει πνεῖ, καὶ THY φωνὴν 
 » ΄-΄ὦ ’ ’ ᾽ > >] s , Μ \ “Ὁ 
 αὐτοῦ ἀκούεις, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ οἶδας πόθεν ἔρχεται καὶ ποῦ 
 > a a 
 ὑπάγει" οὕτως ἐστὶν πᾶς ὁ γεγεννημένος ἐκ TOD πνεύμα- 
 tos. "ἀπεκρίθη Νικόδημος καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Ids δύ- 
 a ͵ ’ > \ 3 
 vatat ταῦτα γενέσθαι; "ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν 
 
III. 25 KATA IQANNHN 7 
 
 a a \ 
 αὐτῷ, Σὺ εἶ ὁ διδάσκαλος τοῦ ᾿Ισραὴλ καὶ ταῦτα ov 
 " 11).5 \ ’ x / “ a U5 A 
 γινώσκεις; “ἀμὴν αμὴν λέγω Got OTL ὃ οἴδαμεν λαλου- 
 Δ a \ \ / 
 μεν Kal ὃ ἑωράκαμεν μαρτυροῦμεν, Kal THY μαρτυρίαν 
 eu A ᾽ ᾿ ει ne ee 5 Cin \ ? 
 ἡμῶν ov λαμβάνετε. “EL τὰ ἐπίγεια εἶπον ὑμῖν καὶ οὐ 
 a A a \ r 
 πιστεύετε, πῶς ἐὰν εἴπω ὑμῖν τὰ ἐπουράνια πιστεύ- 
 » "15 \ δ \ > BéB ? \ > \ 2 ©. ΘᾺ 
 cere; “καὶ οὐδεὶς ἀναβέβηκεν εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν εἰ μὴ ὁ ἐκ 
 A > A / ¢ e\ a > / ς > > A 
 τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβάς, ὃ vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὁ ὧν ἐν τῷ 
 -“ \ \ A / \ f 
 οὐρανῷ. “Kat καθὼς Μωυσῆς ὕψωσεν τὸν ὄφιν ἐν τῇ 
 δ μὰ “ ε ΓῺ ὃ εἴν ἃ εν a) θ ἢ 15 “7 
 ἐρήμῳ, οὕτως ὑψωθῆναι δεῖ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, “ἵνα 
 / b] a vy / 
 πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων ἐν αὐτῷ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον. "οὕτως yap 
 e 7 \ \ 
 ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε TOY υἱὸν τὸν μονο- 
 : = 7 A « ͵ - aX oe 
 γενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται 
 \ > \ τι 
 ἀλλ᾽ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον. “ov γὰρ ἀπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν 
 e\ > \ / “ ΄ \ / 3 ’ “ 
 υἱὸν εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἵνα κρίνῃ τὸν κόσμον, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα 
 rn ς > “ id ; 
 σωθῇ ὁ κόσμος δι’ αὐτοῦ. “ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν οὐ 
 / ε ace \ , / 
 KplveTar’ ὁ μὴ πιστεύων ἤδη κέκριται, OTL μὴ πεπίσ- 
 bf] \ f aA aA a a a 
 τευκεν εἰς TO ὄνομα τοῦ μονογενοῦς υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ. 
 / } e / / A 
 αὕτη δέ ἐστιν ἡ κρίσις, ὅτι TO φῶς ἐλήλυθεν εἰς τὸν 
 \ > / A 
 κόσμον καὶ ἠγάπησαν οἱ ἄνθρωπο: μᾶλλον TO σκότος, 
 mas, a. 5 \ 9 A wie aes 2004 ee 
 ἢ τὸ φώς" ἣν γὰρ αὐτῶν πονηρὰ Ta ἔργα. “πᾶς γὰρ 6 
 A , a \ a ᾿ \ 
 φαῦλα πράσσων μισεῖ TO φῶς καὶ οὐκ ἔρχεται πρὸς TO 
 A Ω“ ἈΝ A A » " am, 21 ¢ \ A \ 
 φώς, iva μὴ ἐλεγχθῇ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ" “ὁ δὲ ποιῶν τὴν 
 1X 40 Μ X \ A “ θῆ 5 A \ 
 ἀλήθειαν ἔρχεται πρὸς TO φώς, ἵνα φανερωθῃ αὐτοῦ τὰ 
 / A ; 
 ἔργα, ὅτι ἐν θεῷ ἐστιν εἰργασμένα. 
 \ a 3 es A \ e ’ A 
 “Μετὰ ταῦτα ἦλθεν ὁ ᾿Τησοῦς Kai of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ 
 3 \ 3 / A i 3 A / ’ 5 A \ 
 εἰς τὴν ᾿Ιουδαίαν γῆν, καὶ ἐκεῖ διέτριβεν μετ᾽ αὐτῶν Kal 
 "" , 5 \ / 
 ἐβαπτιζεν. “ἦν δὲ καὶ ᾿Ιωάννης βαπτίζων ἐν Αἰνὼν 
 > \ a / 4 Vv. an 
 ἐγγὺς τοῦ Σαλείμ, ὅτι ὕδατα πολλὰ ἦν ἐκεῖ, Kal Tape- 
 / \ \ 9 / 
 γίνοντο καὶ ἐβαπτίζοντο “ovmw yap nv βεβλημένος 
 > x Υ. 4.5 1 252 7 > , 3 
 εἰς τὴν φυλακὴν Ιωάννης. ~éyéveto οὖν ἕήτησις ἐκ 
 A a ᾽ ῇ Ν 4 
 τῶν μαθητῶν ᾿Ιωάννου μετὰ ᾿Ιουδαίου περὶ καθαρισμοῦ. 
 
8 EYATTEAION III. 26 
 
 ’ / 8, ’ ¢ 
 "ὁ καὶ ἦλθον πρὸς τὸν ᾿Ιωάννην καὶ εἶπον αὐτῷ, ‘PaBBi, 
 \ a oe 3 4 ’ 
 ὃς ἦν μετὰ σοῦ πέραν τοῦ ᾿Ιορδάνου, ᾧ σὺ μεμαρτύρη- 
 / > 
 Kas, ἴδε οὗτος βαπτίζει Kal πάντες ἔρχονται πρὸς av- 
 , 27? / ἢ , . τὰς . , v 
 τόν. “ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ιωάννης καὶ εἶπεν, Ov δύναται ἀν- 
 , ᾽ / >\ \ 5 / > “a > 
 θρωπος λαμβάνειν οὐδέν, ἐὰν μὴ ἢ διδομένον αὐτῷ ἐκ 
 A a 3 e a a / s 
 τοῦ οὐρανοῦ. “αὐτοὶ ὑμεῖς μοι μαρτυρεῖτε ὅτι εἶπον, 
 Ἔ ᾽ ε \ 
 Οὐκ εἰμὶ ἐγὼ ὁ Χριστός, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι ἀπεσταλμένος εἰμὶ 
 » δ» “Ἂν oe κ᾽ \ , / : 
 ἔμπροσθεν éxeivov. “oO ἔχων τὴν νύμφην νυμφίος ἐσ- 
 Vinge ie \ , a / © e \ v Ge , 
 tiv’ ὁ δὲ φίλος τοῦ νυμφίου, ὁ ἑστηκὼς καὶ ἀκούων 
 » A A \ \ a / / 
 αὐτοῦ, χαρᾷ χαίρει διὰ τὴν φωνὴν τοῦ νυμφίου. αὕτη 
 = ς A PES ok / 80 > a a φ 
 οὖν ἡ χαρὰ ἡ ἐμὴ πεπλήρωται. ὃ“ ἐκεῖνον δεῖ αὐξάνειν, 
 ΑΕ 1 9 κ᾿ gl¢ » ᾽ , 8. 0. t 
 ἐμὲ δὲ ἐλαττοῦσθαι. “ὁ ἄνωθεν ἐρχόμενος ἐπάνω πάν- 
 Ὁ A \ A 
 των ἐστίν. ὁ ὧν ἐκ τῆς γῆς ἐκ τῆς γῆς ἐστὶν Kal ἐκ τῆς 
 “Ὁ na nw , “ , 
 γῆς λαλεῖ. ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ἐρχόμενος ἐπάνω πάντων 
 ε A a \ 
 ἐστίν: *S ἑώρακεν Kal ἤκουσεν τοῦτο μαρτυρεῖ, καὶ THY 
 fal > lel 
 μαρτυρίαν αὐτοῦ οὐδεὶς λαμβάνει. “ὁ λαβὼν αὐτοῦ 
 \ / > μ “ ς A \ 3 θή > 
 τὴν μαρτυρίαν ἐσφράγισεν ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἀληθής ἐστιν. 
 “Ov γὰρ ἀπέστειλεν 6 θεός, τὰ ῥήματα τοῦ θεοῦ λαλεῖ" 
 ‘ »“ 5 ¢ \ ᾿] 
 οὐ γὰρ ἐκ μέτρου δίδωσιν τὸ πνεῦμα. “ὁ πατὴρ ἀγαπᾷ 
 A Φ ΔΕ 
 τὸν υἱόν, καὶ πάντα δέδωκεν ἐν τῇ χειρὶ αὐτοῦ. “ὁ πισ- 
 , » Ν ὌΝ » \ 3. Ἂ ¢ Ν 5 A A 
 τεύων εἰς τὸν υἱὸν ἔχει ζωὴν aidwov' ὁ δὲ ἀπειθῶν TO 
 en » yy ζ / 3 ce ae \ a θ A / 129 
 vid οὐκ ὄψεται ζωήν, ἀλλ᾽ ἡ ὀργὴ τοῦ θεοῦ μένει ἐπ᾿ 
 αὐτόν. 
 4 1¢ , eg € , ad v ς Φ a 
 Ὡς οὖν ἔγνω ὁ κύριος ὅτι ἤκουσαν οἱ Φαρισαῖ- 
 ied 3 A / \ “ Ν / a 
 ot ὅτι ᾿Ιησοῦς πλείονας μαθητὰς ποιεῖ καὶ βαπτίζει ἢ 
 > ἴω 
 Ἰωάννης, "(καίτοιγε ᾿Ιησοῦς αὐτὸς οὐκ ἐβάπτιζεν ἀλλ᾽ 
 ν 5 la) A > - 
 οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ,) “ἀφῆκεν τὴν ᾿Ιουδαίαν καὶ ἀπῆλθεν 
 > \ 
 πάλιν εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν. “ἔδει δὲ αὐτὸν διέρχεσθαι 
 ὃ \ a > 7 5» 5 > , A 
 ia τῆς Σαμαρείας. “ἔρχεται οὖν εἰς πόλιν τῆς Lapa- 
 7 , , A “Δ 
 ρείας λεγομένην Συχάρ, πλησίον τοῦ χωρίου ὃ ἔδωκεν 
 Ἰακὼβ Ἰωσὴφ τῷ υἱῷ αὐτοῦ. “ἦν δὲ ἐκεῖ ) τοῦ 
 Ἴακ np τῷ υἱῷ αὐτοῦ. “ἦν δὲ ἐκεῖ πηγὴ τοῦ 
 
IV. 21 KATA IQANNHN 9 
 
 3 , e = 3 A \ b] a « ,ὔ 
 Ἰακώβ. ὁ οὖν ᾿Ιησοῦς κεκοπιακὼς ἐκ τῆς ὁδοιπορίας 
 ἐκαθέζε “ ps, A Lot A * ς [τὰ TI” 
 TO οὕτως ἐπὶ TH πηγῇ ὥρα ἦν ws Extn.  ἔρ- 
 \ 3 a if > a e/ , 
 χέται γυνὴ ἐκ τῆς Σαμαρείας ἀντλῆσαι ὕδωρ. λέγει 
 tal a a e \ a 
 αὐτῇ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Ads μοι πεῖν. *ot yap μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ 
 3 f > \ , “ \ >’ U 
 ἀπεληλύθεισαν εἰς THY πόλιν, Wa τροφὰς ἀγοράσωσιν. 
 9 / 5 5» A 4 \ ¢ > ~ A ys. 
 λέγει οὖν αὐτῷ ἡ γυνὴ ἡ Σαμαρεῖτις, Πῶς σὺ "Jov- 
 δαῖος ὧν παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ πεῖν αἰτεῖς γυναικὸς Σαμαρείτιδος 
 ¥ Sheet a ᾿ A ͵ 10 9 
 οὔσης ; [ov yap συγχρῶνται ᾿Ιουδαῖοι Lapapeitais.| ™a- 
 / b] fal \ Φ Φ.. σα δ. . \ \ 
 πεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῇ, Ei ἤδεις τὴν δωρεὰν 
 lal a ς 7 A 
 Tov θεοῦ, καὶ τίς ἐστιν ὁ λέγων cot, Ads μοι πεῖν, od 
 A v "ἊΝ \ Χδ " “δ A ly ) 
 ἂν ἤτησας αὐτὸν καὶ ἔδωκεν ἄν σοι ὕδωρ ζῶν. "᾿λέγει 
 ᾿ς wa We / , wv Ὑ » \ \ , 
 αὐτῷ ἡ γυνή, Κύριε, οὔτε ἄντλημα ἔχεις, καὶ τὸ φρέαρ 
 eect Ἷ ἢ ΓΝ » ἡ χ \ a 494 JN \ 
 ἐστὶ βαθύ: πόθεν οὖν ἔχεις τὸ ὕδωρ TO ζῶν; “un σὺ 
 , 3 fa \ ¢ lal 3 , / «Ὁ ” i \ 
 μείζων εἰ τοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν ᾿Ιακώβ, ὃς ἔδωκεν ἡμῖν τὸ 
 ’ A “ 
 φρέαρ, καὶ αὐτὸς ἐξ αὐτοῦ ἔπιεν καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ 
 A , ’ A 88..." / » an \ s 
 Ta θρέμματα αὐτοῦ; “ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν 
 ; eee a ς / 3 a “ ΙΑ μ“ 
 αὐτῇ, Ilds ὁ πίνων ἐκ τοῦ ὕδατος τούτου διψήσει 
 , oe dA δ᾽ ὰ Jide’ ὁ δὲ ς᾽.» Ss Sala 
 πάλιν" “os 6 ἂν πίῃ ἐκ τοῦ ὕδατος οὗ ἐγὼ δώσω αὐτῷ, 
 - a , - 
 ov μὴ διψήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, ἀλλὰ TO ὕδωρ ὃ δώσω 
 A A / 
 αὐτῷ γενήσεται ἐν αὐτῷ πηγὴ ὕδατος ἁλλομένου εἰς 
 \ sue 15 7 \ 2. ἣν id / , , 
 ζωὴν αἰώνιον. eyes πρὸς αὐτὸν ἡ γυνή, Κύριε, δός 
 a / 
 μοι τοῦτο τὸ ὕδωρ, ἵνα μὴ διψῶ μηδὲ διέρχωμαι ἐνθάδε 
 a a / \ 
 ἀντλεῖν. “λέγει αὐτῇ, Ὕπαγε φώνησον τὸν ἄνδρα 
 Se 3 , ¢ \ 
 σοῦ καὶ ἐλθὲ ἐνθάδε. "ἀπεκρίθη ἡ γυνὴ καὶ εἶπεν, 
 Ὁ ς» A “Ὁ 2 
 Οὐκ ἔχω ἄνδρα. λέγει αὐτῇ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Karas εἶπας 
 Α \ 
 ὅτι "Ανδρα οὐκ ἔχω" “πέντε yap ἄνδρας ἔσχες, καὶ 
 νῦν ὃν ἔχεις οὐκ ἔστιν σου ἀνήρ' τοῦτο ἀληθὲς εἴρηκας. 
 19 έ 3 Aye , Ku θ A th / 4 
 ἔγει αὐτῷ ἡ γυνή, Κύριε, θεωρῶ ὅτι προφήτης εἶ σύ. 
 A a , 
 ot πατέρες ἡμῶν ἐν TO ὄρει τούτῳ προσεκύνησαν᾽ Kal 
 Ε a , “ ΒΔ 6 , 2 Ν ε , “ 
 ὑμεῖς λέγετε OTL ἐν ἱΙἱεροσολύμοις ἐστὶν ὁ τόπος, ὅπου 
 A ὃ a 21~ ἡ Die Es (SD a / / 
 προσκυνεῖν δεῖ. “Λέγει αὐτῇ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Πίστευέ μου, 
 
10 EYATTEAION IV. 2a 
 
 / id Μ A 6 ΝΜ > eed ΄ ” 
 γύναι, OTL ἔρχεται ὥρα OTE οὔτε ἐν τῷ ὄρει τούτῳ οὔτε 
 / a id nA 
 ἐν ἹἱἹεροσολύμοις προσκυνήσετε TO πατρί. “ὑμεῖς Tpoc- 
 a ἃ a la) “Δ 
 κυνεῖτε ὃ οὐκ οἴδατε, ἡμεῖς προσκυνοῦμεν ὃ οἴδαμεν, 
 “ ς , + δὲ 7 > Po aoe νὸν 
 ὅτι ἡ σωτηρία ἐκ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων ἐστίν “ἀλλὰ ἔρχεται 
 7 a ld 
 ὥρα καὶ νῦν ἐστίν, ὅτε οἱ ἀληθινοὶ προσκυνηταὶ προσ- 
 / f 
 κυνήσουσιν TO πατρὶ ἐν πνεύματι Kal ἀληθείᾳ καὶ yap 
 ὁ πατὴρ τοιούτους ζητεῖ τοὺς προσκυνοῦντας αὐτόν. 
 a Ὁ al 5 
 “crvedua ὁ θεός" καὶ τοὺς προσκυνοῦντας αὐτὸν ἐν 
 , τυ ὲν θ / ὃ a a 25~ 7 ee. et 
 πνεύματι καὶ ἀληθείᾳ Set προσκυνεῖν. “λέγει αὐτῷ ἡ. 
 é 4 
 ͵ 3 “ / " ς , oe 
 γυνή, Οἶδα ὅτι Μεσσίας ἔρχεται, ὁ λεγόμενος Χριστός 
 ‘dA ἔλθ > lal > Xx ἊΝ ἃ a ¢/ 26 2 > fol 
 ὅταν ἔλθη ἐκεῖνος, ἀναγγελεῖ ἡμῖν ἅπαντα. “᾿λέγει αὐτῇ 
 ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Eyo εἰμι, ὁ λαλῶν σοι. 
 e “ , 
 "Kal ἐπὶ τούτῳ ἦλθαν of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐθαύ- 
 ¢ \ A , 7 δ \ 7 3 
 μαΐον ὅτι μετὰ γυναικὸς ἐλάλει: οὐδεὶς μέντοι εἶπεν, 
 A a A b] a % 
 Ti ζητεῖς; ἢ Τί λαλεῖς μετ᾽ αὐτῆς ; “ἀφῆκεν οὖν τὴν 
 ς / a ς \ \ > aA 3 \ / \ 
 ὑδρίαν αὐτῆς ἡ γυνὴ καὶ ἀπῆλθεν eis τὴν πόλιν, Kab 
 7 a ’ 29 a ” 7 a ΑΝ 4 
 λέγει τοῖς ἀνθρώποις, * Δεῦτε ἴδετε ἄνθρωπον Os εἶπέν 
 ἃ - ae , 
 μοι πάντα ἃ ἐποίησα᾽ μήτι οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ Χριστός ; 
 80 9er > A / Nay \ ee ah 
 ἐξῆλθον ἐκ THs πόλεως, Kal ἤρχοντο πρὸς αὐτόν. 
 81» Ν ee ee ε See 
 Ev τῷ μεταξὺ ἠρώτων αὐτὸν οἱ μαθηταὶ λέγον- 
 / 2 ¢ a a 
 tes, Ραββί, φάγε. “o δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, "Eyo βρῶσιν 
 » al «Ὁ ς a 3 15 33 » 3 ς 
 ἔχω φαγεῖν ἣν ὑμεῖς οὐκ οἴδατε. “ἔλεγον οὖν οἱ μα- 
 θηταὶ πρὸς ἀλλήλους, Μήτις ἤνεγκεν αὐτῷ φαγεῖν; 
 34 / > cad € a > \ a | Spe) “ , 
 *rEeyes αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Ἔμὸν βρῶμά ἐστιν ἵνα ποιή- 
 \ A a / 4 \ / 3 a 
 ow τὸ θέλημα τοῦ πέμψαντός με Kal τελειώσω αὐτοῦ 
 a ld 
 τὸ ἔργον. “οὐχ ὑμεῖς λέγετε OTL ETL τετράμηνός ἐστιν 
 Ν ¢ \ Μ ’ \ , ¢ ..f 3 / % 
 καὶ ὁ θερισμὸς ἔρχεται; ἰδοὺ λέγω ὑμῖν, ᾿Επάρατε τοὺς 
 ᾿ \ ar \ θ ; \ , “ , 
 ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν καὶ θεάσασθε τὰς χώρας, ὅτι λευκαί 
 \ »Μ «ς \ 
 εἰσιν πρὸς θερισμὸν ἤδη. “ὁ θερίζων μισθὸν λαμβάνει 
 καὶ συνάγει καρπὸν εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον, ἵνα καὶ ὁ σπείρων 
 ς a / ans τὰ , 81 » \ , ς ͵ 
 ὁμοῦ χαίρῃ καὶ ὁ θερίζων. “ἐν γὰρ τούτῳ ὁ λόγος 
 
IV. 51 KATA 1lQANNHN τῇ 
 
 ᾿ " - \ ε / e 
 ἐστὶν ἀληθινός, OTL ἄλλος ἐστὶν ὁ σπείρων καὶ ἄλλος ὁ 
 ε / e A 
 θερίζων. “eyo ἀπέστειλα ὑμᾶς θερίζειν ὃ οὐχ ὑμεῖς 
 U , e an 
 κεκοπιάκατε᾽ ἄλλοι κεκοπιάκασιν, καὶ ὑμεῖς εἰς τὸν KO- 
 A , bd \ a / 
 πον αὐτῶν εἰσεληλύθατε. “ex δὲ τῆς πόλεως ἐκείνης 
 Vex us 3 4. "ἃ τὴ ae A \ \ 
 πολλοὶ ἐπίστευσαν εἰς αὐτὸν τῶν Σαμαρειτῶν διὰ τὸν 
 A \ / (a * ΄ 
 λόγον τῆς γυναικὸς μαρτυρούσης ὅτι Εἰἶπέν μοι πάντα 
 Ὧν, 9 [ 40 ¢ 3 3 θ \ oN ε Ss Pe 
 ἃ ἐποίησα. “ws οὖν ἦλθον πρὸς αὐτὸν of Σαμαρεῖται, 
 ἠρώτων αὐτὸν μεῖναι παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς" καὶ ἔμεινεν ἐκεῖ δύο 
 A / 
 ἡμέρας. “καὶ πολλῷ πλείους ἐπίστευσαν διὰ τὸν λό- 
 1 πὴ 4 2 A Nea PRY Jas 55 17 \ \ 
 γον αὐτοῦ, “τῇ τε γυναικὶ ἔλεγον ὅτι Οὐκέτι διὰ τὴν 
 ες 3 \ 
 σὴν λαλιὰν πιστεύομεν" αὐτοὶ yap ἀκηκόαμεν, Kal ol- 
 Φ > A ¢ \ fal 
 δαμεν ὅτι οὗτός ἐστιν ἀληθῶς ὁ σωτὴρ τοῦ κόσμου. 
 οὖ 4 ς , a A 
 “Mera δὲ tas δύο ἡμέρας ἐξῆλθεν ἐκεῖθεν εἰς τὴν 
 \ \ 3 a Uy 7 
 Γαλιλαίαν. “avtos γὰρ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐμαρτύρησεν, ὅτι προ- 
 , 3 A A AS \ 3 " 45 ef 5 
 φήτης ἐν τῇ ἰδίᾳ πατρίδι τιμὴν οὐκ ἔχει. “ὅτε οὖν 
 \ / \ e a 
 ἦλθεν εἰς τὴν Ἰαλιλαίαν, ἐδέξαντο αὐτὸν of Γαλιλαῖοι, 
 / / > / S - 
 πάντα ἑωρακότες ὅσα ἐποίησεν ἐν ἱἹἹεροσολύμοις ἐν τῇ 
 A x \ 3 > \ e / 
 ἑορτῇ" καὶ αὐτοὶ yap ἦλθον εἰς τὴν ἑορτήν. “Ἦλθεν οὖν 
 \ A A 7 
 πάλιν eis τὴν Kava τῆς ΤἸ'αλιλαίας, ὅπου ἐποίησεν τὸ 
 ivf 5 ἣν oe \ 4“ £ ey 3 , » 
 ὕδωρ οἶνον. καὶ ἦν τις βασιλικὸς οὗ ὁ υἱὸς ἠσθένει ἐν 
 / 2 3 pf. / a 7 Ἂν 
 Καφαρναούμ. “οὗτος ἀκούσας ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἥκει ἐκ τῆς 
 \ 
 Ιουδαίας εἰς τὴν Τ᾿αλιλαίαν, ἀπῆλθεν πρὸς αὐτόν, καὶ 
 > ; σ a Nee RO: > A \ Cire sf 
 ἠρώτα iva καταβῇ καὶ ἰάσηται αὐτοῦ τὸν υἱόν ἤμελλεν 
 \ 3 t 48 9 να ξκ9 a \ oi: 7 3 \ 
 yap ἀποθνήσκειν. “εἶπεν οὖν ὁ “Inaods πρὸς αὐτόν, Kav 
 A \ 7 \ 
 μὴ σημεῖα καὶ τέρατα ἴδητε, ov μὴ πιστεύσητε. ““λέ- 
 \ ς ΓΑ I 
 yee πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁ βασιλικός, Κύριε, κατάβηθι πρὶν 
 > a \ / 50~ 7 Sant sey κ9 nA 
 ἀποθανεῖν τὸ παιδίον μου. δ᾿ λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς, 
 Te ee er ee, ς 
 Ilopevov' ὁ υἱὸς σου ζῇ. ἐπίστευσεν ὃ ἄνθρωπος τῷ 
 I «ὃ 3 » 3 a \ , 
 λόγῳ ov εἶπεν αὐτῷ ᾿Ιησοῦς, καὶ ἐπορεύετο. “ἤδη δὲ 
 an e A A ξ 
 αὐτοῦ καταβαίνοντος οἱ δοῦλοι αὐτοῦ ὑπήντησαν αὐ- 
 A > ig / f € A 3 A A 
 τῷ [Kal ἀπήγγειλαν] λέγοντες ὅτε ‘O παῖς αὐτοῦ ζῇ. 
 
12 EYATTEAION IV. 52 
 
 529 50 3 \ ’ peers - a , 
 ἐπύθετο οὖν THY ὥραν Tap αὐτῶν ἐν % κομψότερον 
 » “. ’ and 3 4 
 ἔσχεν. εἶπον οὖν αὐτῷ ὅτι ᾿Εἰχθὲς ὥραν ἑβδόμην ἀφῆ- 
 “ΠΑ, ς , Ν 
 κεν αὐτὸν ὁ πυρετός. ™ éyvw οὖν ὁ πατὴρ ὅτι ἐκείνῃ 
 mf ᾽ Φ 53 > A τ ee | a ¢ ΘῈ al \ 
 τῇ ὥρᾳ ἐν ἡ εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ ‘Inaods, ὁ vids σου ζῇ. καὶ 
 > 7 LEN A. 6 sa Albin ey kak Sie 0 
 ἐπίστευσεν AUTOS καὶ ἢ οἰκία αὐτοῦ OAH. “τοῦτο πάλιν 
 / - 5 ’ ᾿Ξ ὖν n \ > lal > 
 δεύτερον σημεῖον ἐποίησεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐλθὼν ἐκ τῆς Ἴου- 
 / 2 \ / 
 Salas eis τὴν Γαλιλαίαν. 
 1 \ a ML Ve \ ᾽ , 
 9 ‘Mera ταῦτα ἣν ἑορτὴ τῶν lovdaiwy, καὶ ἀνέβη 
 3 a ’ ς / 2m” a € / 
 Ἰησοῦς εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα. *éotw δὲ ἐν τοῖς ‘lepooodv- 
 ΕῚ \ a a ΄ id > dl 
 pots ἐπὶ τῇ προβατικῇ κολυμβηθρα ἡ ἐπιλεγομένη 
 ε onan LAN ὃ , , gl τὴν 3°? , 
 Εβραϊστὶ Βηθεσδά, πέντε στοὰς ἔχουσα. ἐν ταύταις 
 / al a > A 
 κατέκειτο πλῆθος τῶν ἀσθενούντων, τυφλῶν, χωλών, En- 
 aA. x 5 7? δέ ” θ > a A, iQ \ 
 ρῶν. ἦν δέ τις ἄνθρωπος ἐκεῖ τριάκοντα καὶ ὀκτὼ 
 + ” > a > / ᾽ μοι δ ἢ a ? \ δι. A 
 ἔτη ἔχων ἐν TH ἀσθενείᾳ αὐτοῦ" “τοῦτον ἰδὼν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς 
 \ \ 7 \ »” 
 κατακείμενον, καὶ γνοὺς OTL πολὺν ἤδη χρόνον ἔχει, 
 , 41 A " ε A , 72 ’ 9. ὦ 
 λέγει αὐτῷ, Θέλεις ὑγιὴς γενέσθαι; “ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ 
 ¢ 5 A Ud ” ’ ” “ “ 
 ὁ ἀσθενῶν, Κύριε, ἄνθρωπον οὐκ ἔχω ἵνα ὅταν ταραχ- 
 > \ ; x 2 
 θῇ τὸ ὕδωρ βάλῃ pe εἰς τὴν κολυμβήθραν ἐν ᾧ δὲ 
 fal / / 
 ἔρχομαι ἐγώ, ἄλλος πρὸ ἐμοῦ καταβαίνει. “λέγει av- 
 a cys a 5» 9. \ / / \ 
 τῷ ὁ ᾿Ἰησοῦς, "Ἔγειρε, ἄρον tov κράβαττόν σου καὶ 
 A 3 φ \ ς 
 περιπάτει. “καὶ εὐθέως ἐγένετο ὑγιὴς ὁ ἄνθρωπος, 
 a / 
 Kal ἦρεν τὸν κράβαττον αὐτοῦ, Kal περιεπάτει. 
 3 \ , » ) , ἀῶ 10» 
 Hy δὲ σαββατον ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ. “" ἔλεγον 
 3 lal lal / / / 
 οὖν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι τῷ τεθεραπευμένῳ, Σάββατόν ἐστιν, 
 3 Μ / x2 \ , 33 +2 ,ὔ 
 καὶ οὐκ ἔξεστίν cot ἄραι τὸν κράβαττον. "ἀπεκρίθη 
 a , ς a Se ν “- 
 αὐτοῖς, Ὃ ποιήσας με ὑγιῆ, ἐκεῖνός μοι εἶπεν, “Apov 
 \ 3.3 / 
 τὸν κράβαττον σου καὶ περιπάτει. "ἠρώτησαν οὖν 
 S07 / 2 cay ε “ἂν 3 
 αὐτόν, Τίς ἐστιν ὁ ἄνθρωπος ὁ εἰπών σοι, ἾΑρον 
 \ ἢ .. 1s δὲ > θ \ > ΣΝ ͵ 4 a 
 καὶ περιπάτει; Oo δὲ ἰαθεὶς οὐκ ἤδει Tis ἐστιν ὃ 
 a rates, » " > a 14 \ 
 yap ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐξένευσεν ὄχλου ὄντος ἐν TO τόπῳ. “peTa 
 
 * Verse 4 omitted on the best MS. authority. 
 
V. 27 KATA IQANNHN 13 
 
 a ¢. ῸΒ A “Ὁ ΙΕ a Χ 3 
 ταῦτα εὑρίσκει αὐτὸν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ καὶ εἶπεν 
 2 κα » ey oN , i L oy ee “ \ 
 αὐτῷ, Ἴδε ὑγιὴς yéyovas’ μηκέτε ἁμάρτανε, ἵνα μὴ 
 ay: , , 15 Ὁ WAG ¢ v θ Ν 
 χεῖρόν σοί τι γένηται. “ἀπῆλθεν ὁ ἀνθρωπος καὶ 
 - 4 ? A Ἢ ῇ 
 ἀνήγγειλεν τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις ὅτι ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐστιν ὁ ποιήσας 
 > \ «ς A 
 αὐτὸν ὑγιῆ. 
 fal ΘΙ A ‘ 3 a la 
 16 Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἐδίωκον οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, ὅτι 
 A > f > / 
 ταῦτα ἐποίει ἐν σαββάτῳ. 
 3 a / a e / 
 OQ δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἀπεκρίνατο αὐτοῖς, Ὃ πατήρ μου 
 “ " > ͵ ἈΠ ΤΌ 7.3 , 18 5 ἃ A 3 
 ἕως ἄρτι ἐργάξεται, κἀγὼ ἐργάζομαι. ιὰ τοῦτο οὖν 
 A 1 / Loa Ἐ be a 2 a v4 > 
 μᾶλλον ἐζήτουν αὐτὸν ot ᾿Ιουδαῖοι ἀποκτεῖναι, ὅτι οὐ 
 \ / 4 
 μόνον ἔλυεν τὸ σάββατον, ἀλλὰ καὶ πατέρα ἴδιον ἔλεγεν 
 \ / Μ e \ [4] lel A 19 95 / A 
 tov θεόν, ἴσον ἑαυτὸν ποιῶν τῷ θεῷ. “ἀπεκρίνατο οὖν 
 6.» A \ ». 3 A 9 \ 3 \ / ς A od 
 ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ ἔλεγεν αὑτοῖς, ᾿Αμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὐ 
 , « e\ a > fol - lal 2Q7 pn’ , 7 
 δύναται ὁ υἱὸς ποιεῖν ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ οὐδέν, ἐὰν μή τι βλέπῃ 
 , A “ΟΝ wees. an A A 
 TOV πατέρα TroLovYTa’ ἃ γὰρ ἂν ἐκεῖνος ποιῇ, ταῦτα καὶ 
 Care. Ue ͵ a 20 ¢ \ \ n \ εν \ 
 ὁ υἱὸς ὁμοίως ποιεῖ. “ὁ yap πατὴρ φιλεῖ τὸν υἱὸν Kal 
 οἱ a ow lal 
 πάντα δείκνυσιν αὐτῷ ἃ αὐτὸς ποιεῖ, Kal μείζονα τού- 
 ὃ ξ ae τι “ ¢ A θ {ζ 21 ΟΓὶ᾽ 
 των δείξει αὐτῷ ἔργα, ἵνα ὑμεῖς θαυμάζητε. “᾿ὥσπερ 
 \ id x , \ A f 
 yap ὃ πατὴρ ἐγείρει τοὺς νεκροὺς Kal ζωοποιεῖ, οὕτω Kal 
 ἐς e\ «Ὁ θέ an 22 Ἰδὲ \ ς \ / 
 
 ὁ υἱὸς ovs θέλει ζωοποιεῖ. “ovdé yap ὁ πατὴρ κρίνει 
 / 5 \ A / A / A A ἣ 
 οὐδένα, ἀλλὰ τὴν κρίσιν πᾶσαν δέδωκεν τῷ vid, “ἵνα 
 
 U A \ \ A \ ς 
 πάντες τιμῶσιν τὸν υἱὸν καθὼς τιμῶσιν τὸν πατέρα. ὁ 
 A \ [Δ A \ / / 
 μὴ τιμῶν τὸν υἱὸν οὐ τιμᾷ τὸν πατέρα τὸν πέμψαντα 
 
 ΜῈ «ἢ 54. 53 \ 2 Ἂ / ς a “ ς \ , 
 αὐτόν. “apnv ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ὁ τὸν λόγον μου 
 > , \ , A UA / 54 \ uP 
 ἀκούων Kal πιστεύων τῷ πέμψαντί με ἔχει ζωὴν αἰώ- 
 Ν 3 / 2 ΨΜ > \ / > 
 νίον, καὶ εἰς κρίσιν οὐκ ἔρχεται ἀλλὰ μεταβέβηκεν EK 
 A ! > \ ἢ 259 =\ aN ῃ con 4 
 τοῦ θανάτου eis τὴν ζωήν. “aunv ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι 
 , ] A ἢ e , 
 ἔρχεται ὥρα καὶ νῦν ἐστίν, ὅτε οἱ νεκροὶ ἀκούσουσιν 
 A e fo) or an a 
 τῆς φωνῆς TOV υἱοῦ TOD θεοῦ καὶ οἱ ἀκούσαντες ζήσου- 
 260 “ἡ \ ¢ \ 7 fal , 
 σιν. “ὥσπερ γὰρ ὁ πατὴρ ἔχει ζωὴν ἐν ἑαυτῷ, οὕτως 
 
 αἰ, 27 
 
 ν a ta » \ » 5 e A Ny 29) γ 
 καὺ τῷ VIM ἔδωκεν ζωὴν ἔχειν ἐν εαυτῳ" ΄ καὶ ἐξουσίαν 
 
14 ‘EYATTEAION V. 27 
 
 »” 9 a / al ¢/ ΕΝ > , / 
 ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ κρίσιν ποιεῖν, ὅτι υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου ἐστίν. 
 28 \ / a “ Ψ “ > ι / e 
 μὴ θαυμάζετε τοῦτο, OTL ἔρχεται ὥρα, ἐν ἣ πάντες οἱ 
 a / > 4 lal lal la 
 ἐν τοῖς μνημείοις ἀκούσουσιν τῆς φωνῆς αὐτοῦ, “Kal 
 / e \ 5 
 ἐκπορεύσονται οἱ τὰ ἀγαθὰ ποιήσαντες εἰς ἀνάστασιν 
 e \ lal , 
 ζωῆς, οἱ τὰ φαῦλα πράξαντες εἰς ἀνάστασιν κρίσεως. 
 πῦον > 4 a Pe, a 297 \ 
 ov δύναμαι ἐγὼ ποιεῖν ἀπ᾽ ἐμαυτοῦ οὐδέν. καθὼς 
 \ ¢ ε / 
 ἀκούω κρίνω, καὶ ἡ κρίσις ἡ ἐμὴ δικαία ἐστίν, ὅτι οὐ 
 A \ / .. See > \ \ a / 
 ζητῶ TO θέλημα τὸ ἐμὸν ἀλλὰ TO θέλημα TOD πέμψαν- 
 / 
 TOS με. 
 
 851} \ 5 \ A s: 33 la) e / 
 
 ἂν ἐγὼ μαρτυρῶ περὶ ἐμαυτοῦ, ἡ μαρτυρία μου 
 
 b) ” ᾽ θ 75. δὲ πὲ ΕΣ Gna 3 n a is κα 
 
 οὐκ ἔστιν ἀληθής" “ἄλλος ἐστὶν ὁ μαρτυρῶν περὶ ἐμοῦ, 
 
 \ 5 / ᾽ ῇ ec / “Ὁ - \ 
 
 Kal oda OTL ἀληθῆς ἐστιν ἡ μαρτυρία ἣν μαρτυρεῖ περὶ 
 ἐμοῦ. 
 
 88: a 5 wo ’ \ , 
 μεῖς ἀπεστάλκατε πρὸς ᾿Ιωάννην, καὶ μεμαρτύ- 
 eee να OES EN OA ᾽ Nuns ’ \ 
 
 ρηκεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ “ἐγὼ δὲ ov Tapa ἀνθρώπου τὴν pap- 
 ΕῚ \ fa! 7 an an 
 τυρίαν λαμβάνω, ἀλλὰ ταῦτα λέγω iva ὑμεῖς σωθῆτε. 
 35 a 4s ¢ , ς \ / € a ὃ \ 
 ἐκεῖνος nV ὃ λύχνος ὁ καιόμενος Kal φαίνων, υμεῖς δὲ 
 ’ > an lal \ ’ lal 
 ἠθελήσατε ἀγαλλιαθῆναι πρὸς ὥραν ἐν τῷ φωτὶ αὑτοῦ. 
 es ee ee \ / / na? , : \ 
 ἐγὼ δὲ ἔχω τὴν μαρτυρίαν μείζων τοῦ Iwavvov' τὰ 
 \ 7 “Ὁ / ς 5 “ 3.5 ὧν 
 γὰρ ἔργα ἃ δέδωκέν μοι ὁ πατὴρ ἵνα τελειώσω αὐτά, 
 a a a aA ς “ 
 αὐτὰ τὰ ἔργα ἃ ποιῶ, μαρτυρεῖ περὶ ἐμοῦ ὅτι ὁ πατήρ 
 . \ ς / , ’ A 
 pe ἀπέσταλκεν᾽ “Kal ὁ πέμψας με πατήρ, ἐκεῖνος με- 
 a ’ nr / > 
 μαρτύρηκεν περὶ ἐμοῦ. οὔτε φωνὴν αὐτοῦ πώποτε aKn- 
 3 fa / A 
 κόατε, οὔτε εἶδος αὐτοῦ ἑωράκατε, “καὶ τὸν λόγον 
 ral 5 , lal li “Ὁ 3 2 
 αὐτοῦ οὐκ ἔχετε ἐν ὑμῖν μένοντα, OTL ὃν ἀπέστειλεν 
 A « a > 39 eS 
 ἐκεῖνος, τούτῳ ὑμεῖς οὐ πιστεύετε. “EpavvaTe Tas γρα- 
 ¢e lal a al , 
 φάς, ὅτι ὑμεῖς δοκεῖτε ἐν αὐταῖς ζωὴν αἰώνιον ἔχειν, καὶ 
 lal e lal a. 
 ἐκεῖναί εἰσιν αἱ μαρτυροῦσαι περὶ ἐμοῦ" “Kal ov θέλετε 
 a , "» \ 4 , A 
 ἐλθεῖν πρός με ἵνα ζωὴν ἔχητε. “᾿δόξαν παρὰ ἀνθρώ- 
 ᾽ , 42 5 . w Cc oA “ \ 5 , 
 πων οὐ λαμβάνω, “αλλὰ ἔγνωκα ὑμᾶς OTL τὴν ἀγάπην 
 
 a A ᾽ » > ε a 48." " ae , θ > a 
 
 τοῦ θεοῦ οὐκ ἔχετε ἐν ἑαυτοῖς. “᾿ἐγὼ ἐλήλυθα ἐν τῷ 
 
VI. 12. KATA IQANNHN 15 
 
 ai A , \ ᾽ , , ἄν τὶ 
 ὀνόματι τοῦ πατρός μου, καὶ οὐ λαμβάνετέ με’ ἐὰν 
 a , A / A , 
 ἄλλος ἔλθῃ ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τῷ ἰδίῳ, ἐκεῖνον λήμψεσθε. 
 A an A ΄ \ 3 ’ 
 “mas δύνασθε ὑμεῖς πιστεῦσαι, δόξαν παρὰ ἀλλήλων 
 ΄ \ a 4 A 
 λαμβάνοντες, καὶ τὴν δόξαν τὴν Tapa Tod μόνου θεοῦ 
 a a f \ f ς A 
 ov ζητεῖτε; “μὴ δοκεῖτε OTL ἐγὼ κατηγορήσω υὑμὼν 
 ξ A ε A A 
 πρὸς τὸν πατέρα᾽ ἔστιν ὁ κατηγορῶν ὑμῶν Μωυσῆς, 
 ΕῚ a ¢ a ’ / 46>? \ > ,ὔ M A 
 εἰς ὃν ὑμεῖς ἡλπίκατε. “ev yap ἐπιστεύετε Μωυσῇ, 
 b] A a 7 
 eOTOGIETE av ἐμοῖ περὶ γὰρ ἐμοῦ ἐκεῖνος ἔγραψεν͵ 
 “ei δὲ τοῖς ἐκείνου γράμμασιν οὐ πιστεύετε, πῶς τοῖς 
 ἐμοῖς ῥήμασιν πιστεύσετε; 
 ᾽ A / A 
 6 ‘Mera ταῦτα ἀπῆλθεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς πέραν τῆς θα- 
 Ὁ A > 
 λάσσης τῆς Γαλιλαίας τῆς Τιβεριάδος" "ἠκολούθει δὲ 
 ee ΚΡ / “ > ’ \ a a 3 / ΜῈ ΣΝ 
 avT@ οχλος πολύς, OTL ἐθεώρουν τὰ σημεῖα ἃ ἐποίει ἔπι 
 A ᾽ ἡ ἄτι \ 9 \ ow 3 a \ 
 τῶν ἀσθενούντων. “ἀνῆλθεν δὲ εἰς TO ὄρος Ἰησοῦς, Kat 
 b] a 3 / \ A A 2 a Pe τ ὦ \ 
 ἐκεῖ ἐκάθητο μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ. “ἦν δὲ ἐγγὺς 
 Ν al 
 τὸ πάσχα ἡ ἑορτὴ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων. “ἐπάρας οὖν τοὺς 
 b) > a 7 
 ὀφθαλμοὺς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ θεασάμενος ὅτι πολὺς ὄχλος 
 » \ 
 ἔρχεται πρὸς αὐτόν, λέγει πρὸς Φίλιππον, oder ayo- 
 , ͵ A 
 ράσωμεν ἄρτους ἵνα φάγωσιν οὗτοι; “τοῦτο δὲ ἔλεγεν 
 , Neri aa \ ” so” a 
 πειράζων αὐτόν. αὐτὸς yap. ἤδει τί ἔμελλεν ποιεῖν. 
 “5 if ᾽ A 
 ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ Φίλιππος, Διακοσίων δηναρίων ap- 
 > > a 2 a 
 Tol οὐκ ἀρκοῦσιν αὐτοῖς ἵνα ἕκαστος βραχύ τι λάβῃ. 
 8 7] 3 A Φ ΡῚ A A > ] a > / e 
 λέγει αὐτῷ εἷς ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ, ᾿Ανδρέας ὁ 
 > \ / / € 
 ἀδελφὸς Σίμωνος Πέτρου, “Ἔστιν παιδάριον ὧδε ὃς 
 Μ / , 
 ἔχει πέντε ἄρτους κριθίνους καὶ δύο ὀψάρια ἀλλὰ 
 A / A 
 ταῦτα Ti ἐστιν εἰς τοσούτους ; “εἶπεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ἸΠοιή- 
 \ » Qn 
 gate τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ἀναπεσεῖν. ἦν δὲ χόρτος πολὺς 
 ΕῚ a t 3 9 
 ἐν τῷ τόπῳ. ἀνέπεσαν οὖν οἱ ἄνδρες τὸν ἀριθμὸν ὡς 
 πεντακισχίλιοι. "ἔλαβεν οὖν τοὺς ἄρτους ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ 
 3 a 
 εὐχαριστήσας διέδωκεν τοῖς ἀνακειμένοις᾽ ὁμοίως Kab 
 > A 3 7 ; 
 ἐκ τῶν ὀψαρίων ὅσον ἤθελον. “as δὲ ἐνεπλήσθησαν, 
 
16 -EYATTEAION VI 
 
 An an ΕῚ a / \ , 
 λέγει τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, Συναγάγετε τὰ περισσεύ- 
 6 5. 18 μ 
 σαντα κλάσματα, ἵνα μή τι ἀπόληται. ~ συνήγαγον 
 / = 
 οὖν, καὶ ἐγέμισαν δώδεκα κοφίνους κλασμάτων ἐκ τῶν 
 A / “Ὁ A 
 πέντε ἄρτων τῶν κριθίνων, ἃ ἐπερίσσευσαν τοῖς βεβρω- 
 Σιν τὰ ” 2O/ ae , a 
 κόσιν. “oi οὖν ἄνθρωποι ἰδόντες ὃ ἐποίησεν σημεῖον 
 Μ 4 vw / > 3 A « / ¢ > / 
 ἔλεγον ὅτι Οὗτός ἐστιν ἀληθῶς ὁ προφήτης ὁ ἐρχό- 
 4 ᾽ “ 
 μενος εἰς τὸν κόσμον. ““Ιησοῦς οὖν γνοὺς ὅτι μέλ- 
 \ ¢ 
 λουσιν ἔρχεσθαι καὶ ἁρπάζειν αὐτὸν ἵνα ποιήσωσιν 
 ’ \ 2s 
 βασιλέα, ἀνεχώρησεν πάλιν εἰς TO ὄρος αὐτὸς μόνος. 
 e -“ἅ» 
 ᾿ς δὲ ὀψία ἐγένετο, κατέβησαν οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ 
 ᾿ς Ὡς \ , 17 δ τ ἐν a > a " 
 ἐπὶ τὴν θάλασσαν, “καὶ ἐμβάντες εἰς πλοῖον ἤρχοντο 
 / Lal / > , \ / vw 
 πέραν τῆς θαλάσσης εἰς Καφαρναούμ. καὶ σκοτία ἤδη 
 3 / \ ” > Uy \ > \ c a 18 σ΄ 
 ἐγεγόνει καὶ οὔπω ἐληλύθει πρὸς αὐτοὺς ὁ ‘Incods, 7H 
 / 3 , / / 19 
 τε θάλασσα ἀνέμου μεγάλου πνέοντος διηγείρετο. "“ἐλη- 
 / ἢ , 
 λακότες οὖν ὡς σταδίους εἴκοσι πέντε ἢ τριάκοντα 
 a > a fal δ. Ὁ a é 
 θεωροῦσιν τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν περιπατοῦντα ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης 
 ee \ A , , as 10) 20 ¢ 
 Kal ἐγγὺς τοῦ πλοίου γινόμενον, Kal ἐφοβήθησαν. “ὁ 
 a , a eg 
 δὲ λέγει αὐτοῖς, ᾿Εγώ εἰμι μὴ φοβεῖσθε. “ ἤθελον οὖν 
 A 3 \ > \ A \ ’ / b] / \ a 
 λαβεῖν αὐτὸν εἰς TO πλοῖον, καὶ εὐθέως ἐγένετο TO πλοῖον 
 lal «Ὁ -“ἰ 
 ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς εἰς ἣν ὑπῆγον. 
 A ΝΜ ς / / 
 Τῇ ἐπαύριον ὁ ὄχλος ὁ ἑστηκὼς πέραν τῆς θαλάσ- 
 s A , bs ᾽ ? ᾽ “Ὁ > Y= \ 
 ons εἶδον ὅτι πλοιάριον ἄλλο οὐκ HV ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ EV, καὶ 
 A = -“ a ? rr 
 ὅτι οὐ συνεισῆλθεν τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἰς τὸ 
 a \ συ; 9 lal \ 
 πλοῖον ἀλλὰ μόνοι οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ἀπῆλθον “ἀλλα 
 ἦλθεν πλοιάρια ἐκ Τιβεριάδος ἐγγὺς τοῦ τόπου ὅπου 
 ἔφαγον τὸν ἄρτον εὐχαριστήσαντος τοῦ κυρίου. ““ὅτε 
 s 5 ei A > n ’ »” > a IAL ς 
 οὖν εἶδεν ὁ ὄχλος ὅτι ᾿Ιησοῦς οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκεῖ οὐδὲ οἱ 
 \ ᾽ A eee ar FON > \ , \ 
 μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, ἐνέβησαν αὐτοὶ εἰς Ta πλοιάρια, Kal 
 ἦλθον εἰς Καφαρναοὺμ ζητοῦντες τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν. ™xal 
 / Ὁ “ s ’ a 
 εὑρόντες αὐτὸν πέραν τῆς θαλάσσης εἶπον αὐτῷ, 
 / / ka , 
 ‘PaBBi, πότε ὧδε γέγονας ; 
 
VI. 40 KATA IQANNHN 17 
 
 tal 3 ἴω \ 53 > 
 ***AmexplOn αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν, ᾿Αμὴν ἀμὴν 
 A A 3 7 an 3 pe / 
 λέγω ὑμῖν, ζητεῖτέ με, οὐχ OTL εἴδετε σημεῖα, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε 
 3 VA : a 7 \ > t θ 275 / 6 
 ἐφάγετε ἐκ τῶν ἄρτων Kal ἐχορτάσθητε. “ἐργάζεσθε 
 A \ = / > ᾿ \ a \ 
 μὴ τὴν βρῶσιν τὴν ἀπολλυμένην, ἀλλὰ THY βρῶσιν τὴν 
 a ε eN\ σι. 9 Cc A 
 μένουσαν εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον, ἣν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὑμῖν 
 , } im \ ε \ ᾽ , ς ἢ 28 5 
 δώσει' τοῦτον yap ὁ πατὴρ ἐσφράγισεν ὁ θεός. *el- 
 Ψ \ p ay 4 / al “ 7 ‘A \ 
 πον οὐν πρὸς αὐτόν, Τί ποιώμεν, ἵνα ἐργαζώμεθα τὰ 
 » ae ee 1 ted ee a ci ᾿νε 
 ἔργα τοῦ θεοῦ; “ἀπεκρίθη ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, 
 rn 4 a “ 7 : e 
 Τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ ἔργον τοῦ θεοῦ, va’ πιστεύητε εἰς ὃν 
 ’ a 5 ΜῈ 2 a / > a 
 ἀπέστειλεν ἐκεῖνος. “εἶπον οὖν αὐτῷ, Τί οὖν ποιεῖς 
 a 7 \ ’ 4 
 σὺ σημεῖον, iva ἴδωμεν Kal πιστεύσωμέν σοι; τί épyatn ; 
 / ¢ a \ U 2 “Ὁ / 
 ‘ol πατέρες ἡμῶν TO μάννα ἔφαγον ἐν TH ἐρήμῳ, καθώς 
 , / lal ’ fal al 
 ἐστιν γεγραμμένον, ΓΑρτον ἐκ Tov οὐρανοῦ ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς 
 a 3° 9 > > al ¢ > “ ΣΑΣ \ 3 \ 
 φαγεῖν. “εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ᾿Αμὴν ἀμὴν 
 / CoA O 5) M ΓΝ δ con x ” > a 
 λέγω ὑμῖν, Ov Μωυσῆς ἔδωκεν ὑμῖν τὸν ἄρτον ἐκ Tod 
 3 a. > Ψ ht / δίὼ Ἐς ὧν \ A > 
 οὐρανοῦ" ἀλλ᾽ ὃ πατήρ μου δίδωσιν ὑμῖν τὸν ἄρτον ἐκ 
 ἴω 3 n \ 3 33 ¢ \ 4 A a 
 τοῦ οὐρανοῦ Tov ἀληθινόν. “ὁ yap ἄρτος τοῦ θεοῦ 
 5 ¢ / > fa) 3 al \ \ \ A 
 ἐστιν ὁ καταβαίνων ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ ζωὴν διδοὺς TO 
 , 34 5 3 ᾿ > ἢ , ' δὸ 
 κόσμῳ. “εἶπον οὖν πρὸς αὐτόν, Κύριε, πάντοτε δὸς 
 fa \ ” a 35 3 δὲ ἧς Ἦν a tas A 
 ἡμῖν τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον. “εἶπεν δὲ αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, 
 > eee ec A a og τὰ , \ SAN ᾽ 
 Eyo εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος τῆς ζωῆς ὁ ἐρχόμενος πρὸς ἐμὲ οὐ 
 , \ ς / 5 xX > \ 
 μὴ πεινάσῃ Kal ὁ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμὲ οὐ μὴ διψήσει 
 , 36 2 » * δὰ πάν ef Sve ἢ , Nin ge 
 πώποτε. “ἀλλ᾽ εἶπον ὑμῖν OTL καὶ ἑωράκατέ με Kal οὐ 
 , 37. a ὟΝ Sis / ε \ ks ie Os 0 ᾿ 
 πιστεύετε. “πᾶν ὃ δίδωσίν μοι ὁ πατὴρ πρὸς ἐμὲ ἥξει 
 ἡ \ > L , > δ τὰν t ” Ee SRee 
 Kal TOV ἐρχόμενον πρὸς με ov μὴ ἐκβάλω ἔξω: “ὅτι 
 , > \ a ’ fal > ~ a \ , 
 καταβέβηκα ἀπὸ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, οὐχ ἵνα ποιῶ τὸ θέλημα 
 , 3 \ \ , A A 
 TO ἐμόν, ἀλλὰ TO θέλημα τοῦ πέμψαντός pe. “τοῦτο 
 ἐν τος \ UA a / ee eX ΄ 
 δέ ἐστιν τὸ θέλημα τοῦ πέμψαντός με, ἵνα πᾶν ὃ δέδωκέν 
 \ 3 / 3 b) a 2 \ ? , Fe iS a 
 μοι μὴ ἀπολέσω ἐξ αὐτοῦ, αλλὰ ἀναστήσω αὐτὸ ἐν TH 
 / ς 7 40 a \ / a t 
 ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ. “TovTO γάρ ἐστιν τὸ θέλημα TOD πατρός 
 “ A ς A xX \ / ’ \ 
 μου, ἵνα πᾶς ὃ θεωρῶν τὸν υἱὸν Kal πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν 
 
 ST JOHN B 
 
18 EYATTEAION VI. 40 
 » \ ΑΝ, \ 3 μ“ > aN > Ae A. 5 
 ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον καὶ ἀναστήσω αὐτὸν ἐγὼ ἐν TH ἐσ- 
 / cf Jf 
 χατῃ NEP. 
 4}} , ΓῚ € > ὃ an \ ’ A [2 53 
 γόγγυζον οὖν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι περὶ αυτοῦ, ὅτι εἶπεν, 
 9 / ’ « » ς \ > a » “Ὁ 42 a 
 Eyo εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος ὁ καταβὰς ἐκ Tov οὐρανοῦ. “Kal 
 4 ’ δι > a ¢ e ’ , » 
 ἔλεγον, Οὐχ οὗτός ἐστιν ᾿Ιησοῦς ὁ υἱὸς ᾿Ιωσήφ, οὗ 
 ¢ - \ / \ / a r 
 ἡμεῖς οἴδαμεν TOV πατέρα Kal THY μητέρα; πῶς νῦν 
 NA / a la! cd 
 λέγει, “Ore ἐκ Tod οὐρανοῦ καταβέβηκα; “ἀπεκρίθη 
 la \ 3 5 A 3 5 / 
 ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Μὴ γογγύζετε μετ᾽ ἀλλήλων. 
 4 Ἰὃ Α Σ , 264 a , Ψ \ 4 \ ¢ 
 οὐδεὶς δύναται ἐλθεῖν πρός με, ἐὰν μὴ ὁ πατὴρ ὁ 
 / « / 3 / ’ 8 5 / 3 \ 5 
 πέμψας με ἑλκύσῃ αὐτόν, κἀγὼ ἀναστήσω αὑτὸν ἐν 
 nr? / ABO aie , Ἴ a , 
 τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ" “ἔστιν γεγραμμένον ἐν τοῖς προφήταις, 
 U fal rn ςε > Ug 
 Καὶ ἔσονται πάντες διδακτοὶ θεοῦ. πᾶς ὁ ἄκουσας 
 a A \ , i, AG ὌΝ 
 Tapa Tov πατρὸς Kal μαθὼν ἔρχεται πρός ewe’ “οὐχ OTL 
 Ve 3 rn al 
 TOV πατέρα ἑώρακέν τις, εἰ μὴ ὁ ὧν Tapa τοῦ θεοῦ, 
 & \ / > \ ’ \ 7 ς΄ lal ς 
 οὗτος ἑώρακεν τὸν πατέρα. “ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, O 
 4 \ / 4 > ς / lal 
 πιστεύων ἔχει ζωὴν αἰώνιον. “éyw εἰμι ὁ ἀρτος τῆς 
 A e ς a 7 al \ / 
 ζωῆς. “ot πατέρες ὑμῶν ἔφαγον ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ τὸ μάννα 
 / ἐξ ¢ lal ’ n 
 καὶ ἀπέθανον" “ovtos ἐστιν ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ 
 / “ » 3 A , \ Sen , 
 καταβαίνων, iva tis ἐξ αὐτοῦ φάγῃ καὶ μὴ ἀποθάνῃ. 
 51 » / > Ce Ὁ ς A ς > a > a Lae 
 ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ζῶν ὁ ἐκ Tov οὐρανοῦ καταβὰς 
 al / t > \ 
 ἐάν τις φάγη ἐκ τούτου Tov ἄρτου, ζήσεται εἰς τὸν 
 +A \ Ὁ » \ a > \ 4 ς / 
 αἰῶνα. καὶ 6 ἄρτος δὲ ὃν ἐγὼ δώσω, ἡ σάρξ μου 
 / e \ lal lal ΄ lal / 
 ἐστίν, ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου ζωῆς. “᾿ἐμάχοντο οὖν πρὸς 
 “ = J 2 
 ἀλλήλους οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι λέγοντες, Πῶς δύναται οὗτος 
 « "“ “ “ 3 3 A 
 ἡμῖν δοῦναι τὴν σάρκα φαγεῖν; “eimrev οὖν αὐτοῖς ὁ 
 3 a > \ > \ / Cla .΄᾿ἈἉ Ν U \ 
 Incovs, ᾿Αμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἐὰν μὴ φάγητε τὴν 
 la) ς» n ? a 
 σάρκα τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, καὶ πίητε αὐτοῦ TO αἷμα, 
 = | \ » 
 οὐκ ἔχετε ζωὴν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς. “O τρώγων μου τὴν σάρκα 
 \ \ ’ ’ 
 καὶ πίνων μου τὸ αἷμα ἔχει ζωὴν αἰώνιον, κἀγὼ ἀναστή- 
 ΓΝ πὰς , δ ἘΣ αν χὰ ͵ > ΄ 
 σω αὐτὸν τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ. “ὴ γὰρ σάρξ μου ἀληθής 
 
 > A \ \ φΦ / > / > U 56 ¢ 
 ἐστιν βρώσις, καὶ TO αἷμά μου ἀληθής ἐστιν πόσις. ο 
 
' 
 
 VI. 71 KATA IQANNHN. 19 
 
 ͵ Ι \ “Ὁ \ 
 τρώγων μου τὴν σάρκα Kal πίνων μου τὸ αἷμα ἐν ἐμοὶ 
 / > Ἂς ἡ , a 57 θ \ > / 4 ες - 
 μένει κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ. “Kalas ἀπέστειλέν με ὁ ζῶν πατήρ 
 - A \ 7 \ ε ἤ > nr 
 κἀγὼ ζῶ διὰ τὸν πατέρα, Kal ὃ τρώγων με κἀκεῖνος 
 ͵ iy. ἀν 55 .δ΄ὸ.ἱ....5 ἔξ. ὦ ς 3 > a 
 ζήσει Ov ἐμέ. “δοὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ἐξ οὐρανοῦ κατα- 
 , ? \ ΝΜ ς / ἂν ip Roy. ἃ wt - ΄ 
 Bas οὐ καθὼς ἔφαγον οἱ πατέρες καὶ ἀπέθανον" ὁ τρώ- 
 a / ᾽ \ , A 
 γων τοῦτον τὸν ἄρτον ζήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα. 
 a an / 
 °Tadra εἶπεν ἐν συναγωγῇ διδάσκων ἐν Καφαρναούμ. 
 A a 3 “ 
 STToAAot οὖν ἀκούσαντες ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ 
 5 , 9 c , ᾽ = 7] / - a 
 εἶπον, Σκληρός ἐστιν ὁ λόγος οὗτος" Tis δύναται αὐτοῦ 
 . ͵ 81 _>O.\ . ἐν» a > e an , 
 ἀκούειν; “evdas δὲ ὁ ᾿Τησοῦς ἐν ἑαυτῷ ὅτι γογγύζουσιν 
 ᾽ lal 3 5 “ lal ¢ A 
 περὶ τούτου οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Τοῦτο ὑμᾶς 
 / 62 > \ > val \ εν a > / 
 σκανδαλίζει; “éav οὖν θεωρῆτε τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώ- 
 7 3 \ , \ a 
 που ἀναβαίνοντα ὅπου ἦν TO πρότερον; “τὸ πνεῦμά 
 > \ a e \ ’ ’ al EN fF ee ee 
 ἐστιν τὸ ζωοποιοῦν, ἡ σὰρξ οὐκ ὠφελεῖ οὐδέν" Ta ῥήματα 
 “ὉΟ > \ / «ς -“ ΄- , > \ , b] 
 
 ἃ ἐγὼ λελάληκα ὑμῖν πνεῦμα ἐστιν καὶ ζωὴ ἐστιν. 
 Ψ > > «ς “Ὁ ε > / » 
 “arr εἰσὶν ἐξ ὑμῶν τινες οἱ οὐ πιστεύουσιν. ἤδει 
 
 \ a > ἴω / \ 
 yap ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὁ “Inaods τίνες εἰσὶν of μὴ πιστεύοντες 
 \ / ᾽ ς , ΓΟ, 65 \ » \ 
 καὶ Tis ἐστιν ὁ παραδώσων αὐτόν. “Kai ἔλεγεν, Διὰ 
 “ "“ Cy “ 5 \ / > -“ / 
 τοῦτο εἴρηκα ὑμῖν, ὅτι οὐδεὶς δύναται ἐλθεῖν πρός με 
 \ ~~ S A a U 
 ἐὰν μὴ ἢ δεδομένον αὐτῷ ἐκ TOU πατρός. 
 ’ , al “ 3 A A 
 "Ex τούτου πολλοὶ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ ἀπῆλθον 
 3 ΝΒ / \ 5 Is > “ φ 
 εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω καὶ οὐκέτι μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ περιεπάτουν. “ εἷ- 
 3 | Fade a lal \ « nr / 
 πεν οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς τοῖς δώδεκα, Μὴ καὶ ὑμεῖς θέλετε 
 e / > / ἢ [4] 
 ὑπάγειν; “ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ Σίμων Πέτρος, Κύριε, πρὸς 
 , > , θ af NR A > / » . 69 \ 
 τίνα ἀπελευσόμεθα; ῥήματα ζωῆς αἰωνίου ἔχεις" © καὶ 
 ς a , 7 / 
 ἡμεῖς πεπιστεύκαμεν καὶ ἐγνώκαμεν OTL σὺ εἶ ὁ ἅγιος 
 le! 0 a 70 > fi) b } - ς | lal O > 2 ΑἾΨΆ Ὁ a 
 τοῦ θεοῦ. “᾿ ἀπεκρίθη αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Οὐκ ἐγὼ ὑμᾶς 
 \ , ? ΄ ς A , , 
 τοὺς δώδεκα ἐξελεξάμην ; καὶ ἐξ ὑμῶν εἷς διάβολός 
 5 71 \ \ > / . 
 ἐστιν. “édeyev δὲ τὸν ᾿Ιούδαν Σίμωνος ᾿Ισκαριώτου 
 ᾿Ρ : \ »” , Bed Sy va ΕῚ A 
 οὗτος yap ἔμελλεν παραδιδόναι αὐτὸν, εἷς ἐκ τῶν 
 δώδεκα. 
 B2 
 
20 EYATTEAION VIL. 
 
 ἢ \ / δος oe ἴω \ rn ᾽ A 
 7 ᾿Καὶ περιεπάτει ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς peta ταῦτα ἐν τῇ 
 ᾽ Ὁ -“ f 
 Γαλιλαίᾳ" ov yap ἤθελεν ἐν τῇ ᾿Ιουδαίᾳ περιπατεῖν, ὅτι 
 ἐ ‘ [2 
 2 / ’ \ oe) lal 3 an 9. 9 \ > \ 
 ἐζήτουν αὐτὸν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι ἀποκτεῖναι. “ἦν δὲ ἐγγὺς 
 « tal ¢ με x \ 
 ἡ ἑορτὴ τῶν lovdaiwy ἡ σκηνοπηγία. ° εἶπον οὖν πρὸς 
 \ 3 \ ’ a a Ul 
 αὐτὸν ot ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ, Μετάβηθι ἐντεῦθεν καὶ ὕπαγε 
 ἢ io ἢ “ \ ae , , 
 εἰς τὴν ᾿Ιουδαίαν, ἵνα καὶ οἱ μαθηταί σου θεωρήσουσιν 
 / «Δ » -“ 
 τὰ ἔργα σου ἃ ποιεῖς" “οὐδεὶς γάρ τι ἐν κρυπτῷ ποιεῖ 
 \ na 5 Ν ΡῚ , > > lal ral 
 καὶ ζητεῖ αὐτὸς ἐν παρρησίᾳ εἶναι. εἰ ταῦτα ποιεῖς, 
 / \ A , ree A \ ς 5 \ 
 φανέρωσον σεαυτὸν τῷ κόσμῳ. “οὐδὲ yap οἱ ἀδελφοὶ 
 mn / ἊΝ a c 3 “-“ 
 αὐτοῦ ἐπίστευον εἰς αὐτόν. “λέγει οὖν αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, 
 ς \ a 9 \ v U ς \ \ Ὧν. / 
 Ο καιρὸς ὁ ἐμὸς οὔπω πάρεστιν, ὁ δὲ καιρὸς ὁ ὑμέτερος 
 / / a 
 πάντοτέ ἐστιν ἕτοιμος. ‘ov δύναται ὁ κόσμος μισεῖν 
 ¢ a a ef x A \ ’ a cf 
 ὑμᾶς, ἐμὲ δὲ μισεῖ, OTL ἐγὼ μαρτυρῶ περὶ αὐτοῦ ὅτι τὰ 
 / na U ι al > / ᾽ 4, 
 ἔργα αὐτοῦ πονηρά ἐστιν. ὑμεῖς ἀνάβητε εἰς τὴν 
 Ξ ᾽ / \ \ , / ς 
 ἑορτήν" ἐγὼ οὐκ ἀναβαίνω εἰς τὴν ἑορτὴν ταύτην, ὅτι ὁ 
 a ’ \ 5 - 
 ἐμὸς καιρὸς οὔπω πεπλήρωται. “ταῦτα εἰπὼν αὐτοῖς 
 ἔμεινεν ἐν τῇ Γαλιλαίᾳ. 
 ¢ A \ , 
 "Ὡς δὲ ἀνέβησαν οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ εἰς THY ἑορτήν, 
 τότε καὶ αὐτὸς ἀνέβη, οὐ φανερῶς ἀλλὰ ὡς ἐν κρυπτῷ. 
 ε καὶ αὐτὸς ἀνέβη, οὐ φανερῶς ρυπτῷ. 
 "ee Ὁ | 5 A Ie? 95 ἷχ ᾽ a e¢ aA \ ay 
 οἱ οὖν ‘lovodaios ἐζήτουν αὐτὸν ἐν TH ἑορτῇ, Kal ἔλεγον, 
 fal rf \ \ » “ .“ 
 Ποῦ ἐστιν ἐκεῖνος; ” καὶ γογγυσμὸς περὶ αὐτοῦ Hy 
 Ta / > 
 πολὺς ἐν τοῖς ὄχλοις. οἱ μὲν ἔλεγον ὅτι ᾿Αγαθός 
 5 Ὁ \ 
 ἐστιν ἄλλοι ἔλεγον, Οὔ ἀλλὰ πλανᾷ τὸν ὄχλον. 
 18 ᾽ὃ \ , / ὌΝ εὖ \ ’ A ὃ \ \ 
 οὐδεὶς μέντοι παρρησίᾳ ἐλάλει περὶ αὐτοῦ διὰ τὸν 
 [ 
 , a a / 
 φόβον τῶν ᾿Ἰουδαίων. 
 4» “ al Pee > n > Ἁ 
 “Ἤδη δὲ τῆς ἑορτῆς μεσούσης ἀνέβη ᾿Ιησοῦς εἰς τὸ 
 ΄ “- e? a / 
 ἱερὸν καὶ ἐδίδασκεν. "ἐθαύμαζον οὖν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι λέ- 
 A a φ \ / 
 yovtes, Πῶς οὗτος γράμματα oidev μὴ μεμαθηκώς; 
 18..." Θ 3 > a 3] a \ ἣν Ἥ 2% ὃ 
 ἀπεκρίθη οὖν αὐτοῖς ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν, ἐμὴ δι- 
 ὃ \ > " 5] \ > \ al 7 / 5 ee ὃ, 
 ayn οὐκ ἔστιν ἐμὴ ἀλλὰ TOD πέμψαντός pe “ἐάν τις 
 θέλῃ τὸ θέλ TOU ῖ ώ .: περὶ τῆς δι- 
 ἐλῃ τὸ θέλημα αὐτοῦ ποιεῖν, γνώσεται περὶ τῆς 
 
VII. 32 KATA IQANNHN. 21 
 
 δαχῆς, πότερον ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐστὶν ἢ ἐγὼ ἀπ᾽ ἐμαυτοῦ 
 -“ 6 wn Ὁ lal 
 λαλῶ. “6 ad’ ἑαυτοῦ λαλῶν τὴν δόξαν τὴν ἰδίαν ζητεῖ" 
 id δὲ “Ὁ εὖ δό lal iL 3 , ᾿ 
 ὁ δὲ ζητῶν τὴν δόξαν τοῦ πέμψαντος αὐτόν, οὗτος 
 1X. θ , 2 \ ἰὸὃ / ? EL « ’ ” ὅδ... 
 ἀληθῆς ἐστιν καὶ ἀδικία ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν. οὐ 
 Μ A £6 Rese \ / ὲ \ it) \ 5 e a 
 ωυσῆς ἔδωκεν ὑμῖν TOY νόμον ; καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐξ ὑμῶν 
 a \ / / -“ > aA 
 ποιεῖ TOV νόμον. TL με ζητεῖτε ἀποκτεῖναι; “ἀπεκρίθη 
 Εν , ” ; , a An 
 ὁ ὄχλος, Δαιμόνιον ἔχεις" Tis σε ζητεῖ ἀποκτεῖναι; 
 o1 3 / , a) \ 3 3 a a »Μ 3 / 
 ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Ev ἔργον ἐποί- 
 \ / ’ \ A A 
 noa καὶ πάντες θαυμάζετε. “'διὰ τοῦτο Μωυσῆς δέδω- 
 id A δ / = 7 lal 
 KEV ὑμῖν τὴν περιτομὴν, οὐχ OTL ἐκ τοῦ Μωυσέως ἐστίν, 
 3 3\19 a 4 NaS , , Υ 
 ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τῶν πατέρων, καὶ ἐν σαββάτῳ περιτέμνετε ἄν- 
 23. > \ , " 2 
 θρωπον. “et περιτομὴν λαμβάνει ἄνθρωπος ἐν σαβ- 
 B , “ \ x 67 ς M / » 4 Xa v6 
 ato ἵνα μὴ λυθῇ ὁ νόμος Μωυσέως, ἐμοὶ χολᾶτε ὅτι 
 ὅλ, ” θ ε ἌΝ / 5 BB / ,. 24 \ , 
 ὅλον ἄνθρωπον ὑγιῆ ἐποίησα ἐν σαββάτῳ ;™ un κρίνετε 
 baer > \ \ ' / / 4 
 κατ᾽ ὄψιν, ἀλλὰ THY δικαίαν κρίσιν κρίνετε. “ὃ ἔλεγον 
 3 5 lad ς A , Lee > «“ 
 οὖν τινες ἐκ τῶν ᾿Ιεροσολυμιτῶν, Οὐχ οὗτός ἐστιν ὃν 
 nan ’ A : εἴ 7 al 
 ζητοῦσιν ἀποκτεῖναι; “καὶ ide παρρησίᾳ λαλεῖ, καὶ 
 Ἰδὲ > a λέ / x θ A 4 i ie 
 οὐδὲν αὐτῷ λέγουσιν. μήποτε ἀληθῶς ἔγνωσαν οἱ ap- 
 er Of ᾽ ε , 27 5 \ a y 
 NOVTES OTL οὗτός ἐστιν a Χριστός; "᾿αλλὰ τοῦτον οἴδα- 
 , ᾽ fre 162 38 . ὦ ” 59... 
 μεν πόθεν ἐστίν: ὁ δὲ Χριστὸς ὅταν ἔρχηται, οὐδεὶς 
 “ / > 7 22:2. Κ “Ἕ > A € A 
 γινώσκει πόθεν ἐστίν. “ἔκραξεν οὖν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ δι- 
 / ¢ 3 -“ \ / 3 \ yy \ 7 
 δάσκων ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ λέγων, Kapé οἴδατε καὶ οἴδατε 
 , , 2.» A ’ / 3 
 πόθεν εἰμί: καὶ ἀπ᾽ ἐμαυτοῦ οὐκ ἐλήλυθα, ἀλλ᾽ ἔστιν 
 > \ e / « “ 3 one \ 5 
 ἀληθινὸς ὁ πέμψας με, ὃν ὑμεῖς οὐκ οἴδατε" ἢ ἐγὼ οἶδα 
 3 / 7 > 3 an > a / 3 / 
 αὐτόν, OTL παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ εἶμι κἀκεῖνός με ἀπέστειλεν. 
 30 δ ῳο" Φ aid 8 , J \ IN -h δι. “4 Sued 
 ἐζήτουν οὖν αὐτὸν Tiacat’ Kal οὐδεὶς ἐπέβαλεν ἐπ 
 ΠΝ \ a “ v U ἘΝ ᾽ an 81>? 
 αὐτὸν THY χεῖρα, OTL οὔπω ἐληλύθει ἡ ὥρα αὐτοῦ. “ἐκ 
 na 9 \ Ἄν" δαὶ ,ὔ 3 3 , \ »,. 
 τοῦ ὄχλου δὲ πολλοὶ ἐπίστευσαν εἰς αὐτόν, καὶ ἔλεγον, 
 « \ a7 » \ , a / τς 
 ὁ Χριστὸς ὅταν ἔλθῃ μὴ πλείονα σημεῖα ποιήσει ὧν 
 e > , 32 9 e a Ἄν 
 οὗτος ἐποίησεν; “ἤκουσαν οἱ Φαρισαῖοι τοῦ ὄχλου 
 , - > f e 
 γογγύζοντος περὶ αὐτοῦ ταῦτα. Kal ἀπέστειλαν οἱ 
 
22 EYATTEAION VIL 32 
 
 a an ᾳ / 7 s 
 ἀρχιερεῖς Kal ot Φαρισαῖοι ὑπηρέτας, ἵνα πιάσωσιν 
 on" 33 5 4 ers “ἊΨ A » 
 αὐτόν. “εἶπεν οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Ἔτι χρόνον μικρὸν μεθ 
 ΡΝ be VR: ; \ \ / ἢ 34 , 
 ὑμῶν εἰμὶ καὶ ὑπάγω πρὸς Tov πέμψαντά με. “᾿ζητή- 
 , / / 3... 3 \ « al 
 σετέ με Kal οὐχ εὑρήσετέ pe Kal ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγὼ ὑμεῖς 
 A 5 35 e lal \ e 
 ov δύνασθε ἐλθεῖν. “εἶπον οὖν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι πρὸς ἑαυ- 
 μ A Φ UA / “ ¢ val ? 
 τούς, Ποῦ οὗτος μέλλει πορεύεσθαι, OTL ἡμεῖς οὐχ 
 ς Ud > U \ 9 \ \ a έ / 
 εὑρήσομεν αὐτόν ; μὴ εἰς τὴν διασπορὰν τῶν Ἑλλήνων 
 \ / / 
 μέλλει πορεύεσθαι καὶ διδάσκειν τοὺς “Ελληνας ; “τίς 
 ’ e a S / / \ ’ ς / 
 ἐστιν ὁ λόγος οὗτος ὃν εἶπεν, Ζητήσετέ με, καὶ οὐχ εὑρή- 
 id a 3 / a 
 σετέ pe’ καί, Ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγὼ ὑμεῖς ov δύνασθε ἐλθεῖν ; 
 dl Py δὲ A 2 Ud ς / a tr Ἂ e “Ὁ 
 ν δὲ τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ μεγάλῃ τῆς ἑορτῆς 
 e / Lo nm A ” / > / lao 
 εἱστήκει ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ ἔκραξεν λέγων, ᾿Εάν τις διψᾷ, 
 ¢ , > , 
 ἐρχέσθω πρός με καὶ πινέτω “O πιστεύων εἰς ELE, 
 s e \ A ᾽ a 
 καθὼς εἶπεν ἡ γραφή, ποταμοὶ ἐκ τῆς κοιλίας αὐτοῦ 
 eo? a a 39 A Ave ἠξ \ - 
 ῥεύσουσιν ὕδατος ζῶντος. “τοῦτο δὲ εἶπεν περὶ τοῦ 
 a 90» / ς / > 
 πνεύματος οὗ ἔμελλον λαμβάνειν οἱ πιστεύσαντες ELS 
 » υ Ν al f nr 
 αὐτόν οὔπω yap ἦν πνεῦμα, ὅτι ᾿Ιησοῦς οὔπω ἐδο- 
 / 
 Eac On. 
 40) a z > Uy A , 4 
 Ex τοῦ ὄχλου οὖν ἀκούσαντες τῶν λόγων τούτων 
 lé Φ “Ὁ ¢€ 
 ἔλεγον, Οὗτός ἐστιν ἀληθῶς ὃ προφήτης. “ ἄλλοι 
 5) Ἐν ς 4 e \ 
 ἔλεγον, Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ Χριστός. οἱ δὲ ἔλεγον, Μὴ yap 
 A ' \ y 42 5 ¢ \ 
 ἐκ τῆς Γαλιλαίας ὁ Χριστὸς ἔρχεται; “οὐχ ἡ γραφὴ 
 a4 “ > a é A ὃ \ ’ \ B Ox \ 
 εἶπεν, OTL ἐκ τοῦ σπέρματος Δαυείδ, καὶ ἀπὸ Βηθλεὲμ 
 n ! 3 ͵, " ς ἢ 43 , 
 τῆς κώμης ὅπου ἦν Δαυείδ, ἔρχεται ὁ Χριστός ; “΄σχίσ- 
 an ὃ. ἡ 4 \ ΝΜ 
 μα οὖν ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ ὄχλῳ δι’ αὐτόν. “τινὲς δὲ ἤθέλον 
 lal / / 3 » > » 
 ἐξ αὐτῶν πιάσαι αὐτόν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐδεὶς ἔβαλεν ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν 
 τὰς χεῖρας. 
 3 3 ς« ε , ? a \ 
 “Ἦλθον οὖν οἱ ὑπηρέται πρὸς τοὺς ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ 
 Φαρισαίους, καὶ εἶπον αὐτοῖς ἐκεῖνοι, Διατί οὐκ ἠγάγετε 
 » , Ν 40 ᾽ / e «ς / ’ / / 
 αὐτὸν; “ἀπεκρίθησαν οἱ ὑπηρέται, Οὐδέποτε ἐλάλησεν 
 ed 7 47 5 / 2 > a ς 
 οὕτως ἄνθρωπος. “ἀπεκρίθησαν οὖν αὐτοῖς οἱ Φαρι- 
 
WILE 13 KATA IQANNHN 23 
 
 caiot, Μὴ καὶ ὑμεῖς πεπλάνησθε; “μή tis ἐκ τῶν 
 ἀρχόντων ἐπίστευσεν εἰς αὐτὸν ἢ ἐκ τῶν Φαρισαίων : 
 ἀλλὰ ὁ ὄχλος οὗτος ὁ μὴ γινώσκων τὸν νόμον ἐπά- 
 ρατοί εἰσιν. “reyes Νικόδημος πρὸς αὐτούς, ὁ ἐλθὼν 
 πρὸς αὐτόν πρότερον, εἷς ὧν ἐξ αὐτῶν, “Μὴ ὁ νόμος 
 ἡμῶν κρίνει τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐὰν μὴ ἀκούσῃ πρῶτον παρ᾽ 
 αὐτοῦ καὶ γνῷ τί ποιεῖ; “ἀπεκρίθησαν καὶ εἶπαν αὐ- 
 τῷ, Μὴ καὶ σὺ ἐκ τῆς Γαλιλαίας εἶ; ἐραύνησον καὶ ἴδε 
 ὅτι ἐκ τῆς Γαλιλαίας προφήτης οὐκ. ἐγείρεται. [Kat 
 ἐπορεύθησαν ἕκαστος εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ. 
 
 8 ᾿ Ἰησοῦς δὲ ἐπορεύθη εἰς τὸ ὄρος τῶν ᾿Ελαιῶν. "ὄρθρου 
 δὲ πάλιν παρεγένετρ εἰς τὸ ἱερόν, [καὶ πᾶς ὁ λαὸς ἤρχετο πρὸς 
 αὐτόν᾽ καὶ καθίσας ἐδίδασκεν αὐτούς.] ὅ ἄγουσιν δὲ οἱ γραμματεῖς 
 καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι γυναῖκα ἐπὶ μοιχείᾳ κατειλημμένην, καὶ στήσαντες 
 αὐτὴν ἐν μέσῳ “λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, Διδάσκαλε, αὕτη ἡ γυνὴ κατείληπ- 
 ται ἐπαυτοφώρῳ μοιχευομένη. “ἐν δὲ τῷ νόμῳ Μωυσῆς ἡμῖν 
 ἐνετείλατο τὰς τοιαύτας λιθάζειν᾽ σὺ οὖν τί λέγεις ; “[τοῦτο δὲ ἔλεγον 
 πειράζοντες αὐτόν, ἵνα ἔχωσιν κατηγορεῖν αὐτοῦ.]} ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς 
 κάτω κύψας τῷ δακτύλῳ κατέγραφεν εἰς τὴν γῆν. ‘ds δὲ ἐπέμενον 
 ἐρωτῶντες αὐτόν, ἀνέκυψεν καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, .“Ο ἀναμάρτητος ὑμῶν 
 πρῶτος én αὐτὴν βαλέτω λίθον. “καὶ πάλιν κατακύψας ἔγραφεν 
 εἰς τὴν γῆν. “οἱ δὲ ἀκούσαντες ἐξήρχοντο εἷς καθ᾽ εἷς, ἀρξάμενοι 
 ἀπὸ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων᾽ καὶ κατελείφθη μόνος καὶ ἡ γυνὴ ἐν μέσῳ 
 οὖσα. “ἀνακύψας δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῇ, Γύναι ποῦ εἰσιν ; 
 οὐδείς σε κατέκρινεν; ἡ δὲ εἶπεν, Οὐδείς, κύριε. “elev δὲ ὁ 
 ᾿Ιησοῦς, Οὐδὲ ἐγώ σε κατακρίνω᾽ πορεύου, ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν μηκέτι 
 ἁμάρτανε.7 
 
 "Πάλιν οὖν αὐτοῖς ἐλάλησεν ὁ ᾿Τησοῦς λέγων, Eyo 
 εἰμι τὸ φῶς τοῦ κόσμου' ὁ ἀκολουθῶν μοι οὐ μὴ περι- 
 πατήσῃ ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ, GAN ἕξει τὸ φῶς τῆς ζωῆς. 
 "εἶπον οὖν αὐτῷ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι, Σὺ περὶ σεαυτοῦ μαρτυ- 
 
24 EYATTEAION VIII. 13 
 
 pansy / ’ ” ἢ ἢ 14? / 
 pels’ ἡ μαρτυρία σου οὐκ ἔστιν ἀληθής. “arrexpiOn 
 a 9 a x \ A \ 
 Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Kav ἐγὼ μαρτυρῶ περὶ ἐμαυ- 
 n ¢ - ef = ͵ 
 τοῦ, ἀληθής ἐστιν ἡ μαρτυρία μου ὅτι οἶδα πόθεν 
 x4 θ \ Ὧν oe U so vad δὲ b ἴὃ 50 yy 
 ἦλθον Kal ποῦ ὑπάγω" ὑμεῖς δὲ οὐκ οἴδατε πόθεν Ep- 
 a , Cte \ , / 2 
 χομαι ἢ ποῦ ὑπάγω. “ὑμεῖς κατὰ τὴν σάρκα κρίνετε 
 > \ > / JOE 16 i a / δὲ > , ¢ U 
 ἐγὼ οὐ κρίνω οὐδένα. “Kal ἐὰν κρίνω δὲ ἐγώ, ἡ κρίσις 
 πον. αν", 5 θ (ha ὦ > δὰ, 2 ϑς κ᾽ \ Am sie 
 ῃ ἐμὴ ἀληθινὴ EoTLVY* OTL MOVOS οὐκ εἰμί, ANN ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ 
 ἊΝ Lal « 
 πέμψας με πατήρ. “Kal ἐν τῷ νόμῳ δὲ τῷ ὑμετέρῳ 
 / “ “ ’ Υ € if ’ ’ > 
 γέγραπται ὅτι δύο ἀνθρώπων ἡ μαρτυρία ἀληθής ἐστιν. 
 a a a \ 
 Séyo εἰμι ὁ μαρτυρῶν περὶ ἐμαυτοῦ, καὶ μαρτυρεῖ περὶ 
 a , 19 » > 3 lal “ 
 ἐμοῦ ὁ πέμψας με πατήρ. “ἔλεγον οὖν αὐτῷ, 1]οῦ 
 2 \ ς t te 6 +1 a Ov 3) ἫΝ 18 
 ἐστὶν ὁ πατήρ σου; ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς, Οὔτε ἐμὲ οἴδατε 
 οὔτε τὸν πατέρα μονυ᾽ εἰ ἐμὲ ἤδειτε, καὶ τὸν πατέρα μου 
 ᾽ a \ ’ > , a 
 ἂν ἤδειτε. “᾿ταῦτα τὰ ῥήματα ἐλάλησεν ἐν τῷ γαζοφυ- 
 a fal ’ \ > / ’ ΄ 
 λακίῳ διδάσκων ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐπίασεν αὑτόν, 
 «ς 3 “ 
 ὅτι οὔπω ἐληλύθει ἡ ὥρα αὐτοῦ. 
 Ρ 2 a >’ 4 , \ , , 
 "1 Kimev οὖν πάλιν αὐτοῖς, ᾿Εγὼ ὑπάγω καὶ ζητήσετέ 
 “ > e a . > \ 
 με, καὶ ἐν TH ἁμαρτίᾳ ὑμῶν ἀποθανεῖσθε: ὅπου ἐγὼ 
 “΄. a 2 »») 5 e 5 
 ὑπάγω ὑμεῖς οὐ δύνασθε ἐλθεῖν. ““ἔλεγον οὖν οἱ ‘lov- 
 a , 3 ma, Ve ! vA λέ "O > \ 
 δαῖοι, Μήτι ἀποκτενεῖ ἑαυτὸν, ὅτι λέγει, “Ὅπου ἐγὼ 
 “-. a 23 \ /. ’ “ 
 ὑπάγω ὑμεῖς οὐ δύνασθε ἐλθεῖν ; “Kat ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, 
 val a \ Aa / ae a > 
 ‘Tuels ἐκ τῶν κάτω ἐστέ, ἐγὼ EK TOV ἄνω εἰμί ὑμεῖς EK 
 fal ’ a ἡ > an U 
 τούτου TOU κόσμου ἐστέ, ἐγὼ οὐκ εἰμὶ ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου 
 , "4 τ 53 δ΄ A ad 3 θ a 6 > a c 
 τούτου. elroy οὖν ὑμῖν ὅτι ἀποθανεῖσθε ἐν ταῖς ἁμαρ- 
 fal ν “ > , > ’ 
 τίαις ὑμῶν" ἐὰν yap μὴ πιστεύσητε OTL ἐγὼ εἶμι, ἀπο- 
 an a ¢ a 25 »- ῳ 5 a 
 θανεῖσθε ἐν ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις ὑμῶν. ~édNEYOV οὖν αὐτῷ, 
 \ 7 an 3 , a ¢ ἽἽ la) Τὴ ’ 3" “ \ 
 Σὺ τίς εἶ; εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Τὴν ἀρχὴν 6 τι Kal 
 n -“ «ς Lal a \ 
 λαλῶ ὑμῖν. “πολλὰ ἔχω περὶ ὑμῶν λαλεῖν Kal κρίνειν" 
 ’ Ἁ a » » 
 ἀλλ᾽ ὁ πέμψας με ἀληθής ἐστιν, κἀγὼ ἃ ἤκουσα παρ 
 nr fal A ἥν 4 / 
 αὐτοῦ, ταῦτα λαλῶ εἰς τὸν κόσμον. “οὐκ ἔγνωσαν ὅτι 
 a 239 3 ey 3 A / 
 τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῖς ἔλεγεν. “εἶπεν οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “Ὅταν 
 
BAIT, 43 KATA IQANNHN 25 
 
 « / \ eX “ > / / , “ > / 
 ὑψώσητε τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, τότε γνώσεσθε ὅτι ἐγώ 
 \ > A a , 
 εἶμι, καὶ am ἐμαυτοῦ ποιῶ οὐδέν, ἀλλὰ καθὼς ἐδίδαξέν 
 ε Ul A a 29 “ ἐξ ie A 
 με ὁ πατήρ, ταῦτα λαλῶ. “Kal ὁ πέμψας με μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ 
 » δὲ 44 » ᾽ “a / ’ “ » \ \ > \ ᾽ “Ὁ 
 ἐστίν οὐκ ἀφῆκέν με μόνον, OTL ἐγὼ τὰ ἀρεστὰ αὐτῷ 
 a , 30 a 3 A A : \ 5 / 
 ποίω TAVYTOTE. “ταῦτα αὐτοῦ λαλοῦντος ποόλλοι ἐπίσ- 
 > 3 , 
 τευσαν εἰς αὐτόν. 
 81 ἜΣ ἊΝ e T A ᾿ A , 
 Neyer οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς πρὸς τοὺς πεπιστευκότας 
 αὐ a T ὃ / v -E \ ς a Be > tal λό A 
 ὑτῷ Ἰουδαίους, Eav ὑμεῖς μείνητε ἐν TO λόγῳ TO 
 3 fal ix θ A θ / > /, 32 \ Ud θ \ 
 ἐμῷ, ἀληθῶς μαθηταί μου ἐστέ, “καὶ γνώσεσθε τὴν 
 \ « > / > ’ « - Ul 
 ἀλήθειαν, καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια ἐλευθερώσει ὑμᾶς. ““άπεκρί- 
 \ peed / 3 U > \ , \ 
 θησαν πρὸς αὐτόν, Σπέρμα ᾿Αβραάμ ἐσμεν, καὶ οὐδενὶ 
 , Ρ A \ / ᾽ 
 δεδουλεύκαμεν πώποτε πῶς σὺ λέγεις ὅτι ᾿Ελεύθεροι 
 / 0 a 34 9 6 ᾽ -“ ers a ᾽ \ Ε] \ 
 γενήσεσθε; “᾿ἀπεκρίθη αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ἀμὴν ἀμὴν 
 7 Cc oA f a ¢ A \ ε a 
 λέγω ὑμῖν, OTL πᾶς ὁ ποιῶν THY ἁμαρτίαν δοῦλός ἐστιν 
 lol) « / 85 ¢ \ an ’ / > lal > / 3 \ 
 τῆς ἁμαρτίας. “ὁ δὲ δοῦλος ov μένει ἐν TH οἰκίᾳ εἰς τὸν 
 Steir ἂν δ, τῷ ἐν , 2 A 2A 36> \ @: TGA. sO % Jer ta 
 αἰῶνα" ὁ υἱὸς μένει εἰς TOV αἰῶνα. “ἐὰν οὖν ὁ υἱὸς ὑμᾶς 
 , / , 
 ἐλευθερώσῃ, ὄντως ἐλεύθεροι ἔσεσθε. “οἶδα ὅτι σπέρ- 
 3 / 2 e 3 \ WE 3 ° “ 
 μα ᾿Αβραὰμ éote’ adda ζητεῖτε με ἀποκτεῖναι, ὅτι 
 ε 645 5: ’ οι) ear ee A ας BSF cs 
 ὁ λόγος ὁ ἐμὸς ov χωρεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν. “A ἐγὼ ἑώρακα 
 a A ¢ a «Ὁ ’ 
 Tapa τῷ πατρὶ λαλῶ" Kal ὑμεῖς οὖν ἃ ἠκούσατε παρὰ 
 rn a / \ 53 a 
 τοῦ πατρὸς ποιεῖτε. “atrexpiOnoay καὶ εἶπαν αὐτῷ, 
 τ \ ¢ “Ὁ ᾽ / 9 / ’ “- Cs fal 
 O πατὴρ ἡμῶν ᾿Αβραὰμ ἐστιν. λέγει αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Τησοῦς, 
 , rn 3 , \ V4 a 
 Ee τέκνα tod ᾿Αβρααμ ἐστε, τὰ ἔργα τοῦ ᾿Αβραὰμ 
 a A \ oF Ψ a a 
 ἐποιεῖτε. “viv δὲ ζητεῖτέ με ἀποκτεῖναι, ἄνθρωπον ὃς 
 \ 3 Ὁ. Ἂν / « "Μ \ A A 
 τὴν ἀλήθειαν ὑμῖν λελάληκα, HY ἤκουσα παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ" 
 ἴω 3 \ 3 3 / 41 ¢ A a Niu ὧν 
 τοῦτο ᾿Αβραὰμ οὐκ ἐποίησεν. “ὑμεῖς ποιεῖτε τὰ ἔργα 
 a \ ς a ἊΨ ’ A. € a 
 τοῦ πατρὸς ὑμῶν. εἶπον αὐτῷ, Ἡμεῖς ἐκ πορνείας οὐκ 
 , é 4 \ / 
 éyevunOnpev’ ἕνα πατέρα ἔχομεν τὸν θεόν. “εἶπεν 
 Ε] - ξ 2 a : eS \ \ ς a ον ἢ bd A x 
 αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Ei ὁ θεὸς πατὴρ ὑμῶν ἦν, nyaTrate av 
 ee SS \ \ 3 a θ nm eA θ Νω εΣ ‘< )δὲ \ 
 ἐμέ ἐγὼ yap ἐκ Tov θεοῦ ἐξῆλθον Kal ἥκω" οὐδὲ yap 
 a / 2 3 - ὦ / 
 ἀπ᾽ ἐμαυτοῦ ἐλήλυθα, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκεῖνός με ἀπέστειλεν. “διατί 
 
26 EYATTEAION VIII. 43 
 
 \ \ \ > \ > / ᾿ “ ,’ / 
 τὴν λαλιὰν τὴν ἐμὴν οὐ γινώσκετε; OTL οὐ δύνασθε 
 5 / \ / \ > J / 44 ¢ nr > nm \ a 
 ἀκούειν TOV λόγον τὸν ἐμόν. “ὑμεῖς Ex τοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ 
 3 \ \ \ 5 / fal \ «ες “Ὁ 
 διαβόλου ἐστὲ καὶ τὰς ἐπιθυμίας τοῦ πατρὸς ὑμῶν 
 a - > / 53 3 
 θέλετε ποιεῖν. ἐκεῖνος ἀνθρωποκτόνος ἦν ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς καὶ ἐν 
 “Ὁ 5 / 5 « ¢/ >] » > “ > > “Ὁ 
 τῇ ἀληθείᾳ οὐχ ἕστηκεν, ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν ἀλήθεια ἐν αὐτῷ. 
 [ 7 
 / ΠΥ. lal ᾽ Ὁ 5." al ¢ / 
 ὅταν λαλῇ TO ψεῦδος, ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων λαλεῖ, OTL ψεύστης 
 5 \ \ ε \ 5 la) 45 > \ Ae 7 \ > ’ 
 ἐστὶν καὶ ὁ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ. “ἐγὼ δὲ ὅτι τὴν ἀλήθειαν 
 , ᾽ κᾶν Pre ν᾿ στὸ νι , \ 
 λέγω, οὐ πιστεύετέ μοι. “Tis ἐξ ὑμῶν ἐλέγχει με περὶ 
 « / * > ? 10 / ὃ | lal 5 , 7 
 ἁμαρτίας; εἰ ἀλήθειαν λέγω, διατί ὑμεῖς οὐ πιστεύετε 
 - ΕΣ an 2 a θ a δ ἘὰΡ a Q a 2 {. ἃ Ἀ 
 μοι; “ὁ ὧν ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ τὰ ῥήματα τοῦ θεοῦ ἀκούει" διὰ 
 “ ς a > 4 ud a a 
 τοῦτο ὑμεῖς οὐκ ἀκούετε OTL ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ οὐκ ἐστέ. 
 ’ δ Ὁ al \ = Ἂ a 
 “ἀπεκρίθησαν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι καὶ εἶπαν αὐτῷ, Οὐ καλῶς 
 Ψ a J , % \ 
 λέγομεν ἡμεῖς ὅτι Σαμαρείτης εἶ ov Kat δαιμόνιον 
 » .. aap 6 "ἢ n -E \ 5 t ᾽ » 
 ἔχεις; “ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς, Kya δαιμόνιον οὐκ ἔχω, 
 > + 5 a A / \ - “ >’ / , 
 ἀλλὰ τιμῶ τὸν πατέρα μου, καὶ ὑμεῖς ἀτιμάζετέ με. 
 580» δ δὲ ᾽ A \ SJ a ar € A \ 
 ἐγὼ δὲ οὐ ζητῶ τὴν δόξαν μου ἔστιν ὁ ζητῶν Kat 
 / ΠΝ τι , ἘΣ Η͂Ν ἐν, <9 0 a | eee , 
 κρίνων. ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω υμῖν, ἐὰν τις τὸν ἐμὸν λόγον 
 > \ / > \ 7A 5 
 τηρήσῃ, θάνατον οὐ μὴ θεωρήσῃ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα. “"εἶπον 
 > a er a a 2 / «“ U » 
 αὐτῷ οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, Nov ἐγνώκαμεν ὅτι δαιμόνιον ἔχεις. 
 > / \ e A \ \ / 
 A Bpadp ἀπέθανεν καὶ οἱ προφῆται, καὶ σὺ λέγεις, "Eav 
 Ν ῇ ’ \ / 
 τις τὸν λόγον μου τηρήσῃ, οὐ μὴ γεύσηται θανάτου εἰς 
 \ 7A 53 \ \ / 3 a \ ξ ee) , 
 τὸν αἰῶνα. “un σὺ μείζων εἶ τοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν ABpaap, 
 id al > / ὦ 
 ὅστις ἀπέθανεν ; καὶ οἱ προφῆται ἀπέθανον" τίνα σεαυτὸν 
 a δά > / ᾽ a 2D \ eee, , > , 
 ποιεῖς ; “᾿ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς, "Kav ἐγὼ δοξάσω ἐμαυτόν, 
 ¢ , NW Se . ¢ , ε ͵ 
 ἡ δόξα μου οὐδέν ἐστιν ἔστιν ὁ πατήρ μου ὁ δοξάζων 
 a ¢ a / “Ὕ \ ς a > 55 \ ’ > / 
 με, Ov ὑμεῖς λέγετε ὅτι θεὸς ἡμῶν ἐστιν, “Kat οὐκ ἐγνω- 
 5 , > \ \ 5 > ne a yy “ 5 5 
 κατε αὐτόν, ἐγὼ δὲ οἶδα αὐτόν" κἂν εἴπω ὅτι οὐκ οἶδα 
 » / » Γ ¢ lal , 5 > \ = ΕἸ \ 
 αὐτόν, ἔσομαι ὅμοιος ὑμῖν ψεύστης" ἀλλὰ οἶδα αὐτὸν 
 Ν Ν ’ fal a 56? Χ ε ‘\ «ς - 
 καὶ τὸν λόγον αὐτοῦ τηρῶ ““Αβραὰμ ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν 
 > U ¢ 18 \ «ς / \ ’ / \ 16 \ 
 ἠγαλλιάσατο ἵνα LON τὴν ἡμέραν τὴν ἐμὴν, καὶ ELOEV καὶ 
 ὌΨΙ 577 2 ©? 5 \ af ἢ 
 ἐχάρη. "᾿εἶπον οὖν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι πρὸς αὑτὸν, Πεντήκοντα 
 
IX. 14 KATA IQANNHN i 
 
 -- 
 
 7 Ὑ 5 Ἂ “5 \ Las eon ae > - 
 ἔτη οὔπω ἔχεις καὶ ᾿Αβραὰμ ἑώρακας ; “εἶπεν αὐτοῖς 
 2 lal > x ΕἸ A / ¢ a \ Ἄ \ / 
 Ιησοῦς, ᾿Αμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, πρὶν ᾿Αβρααμ γενέσθαι 
 ΦΟΣ χὴ ᾽ 89 > 3 , “ , 2? a! et 
 ἐγώ εἰμι. ἦραν οὖν λίθους ἵνα βάλωσιν ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν 
 fal , ~ ΟΣ “ 
 ᾿Ιησοῦς δὲ ἐκρύβη καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ἐκ τοῦ ἱεροῦ. 
 0 1 \ ΄ re » θ \ 5) a 
 Kai παράγων εἶδεν ἄνθρωπον τυφλὸν ἐκ γενετῆς. 
 9 \ > / 3 Ν e θ \ > lal / € 
 καὶ ἠρώτησαν αὐτὸν οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ λέγοντες, Ῥαβ- 
 f 3 e lal 3 fal 
 Bi, τίς ἥμαρτεν, οὗτος ἢ οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ, ἵνα τυφλὸς 
 A φι5 / ? na v το “ v 
 γεννηθῇ ; “ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς, Οὔτε οὗτος ἥμαρτεν οὔτε 
 ς rn ’ nr >] eT yg A + + an aes 
 οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα φανερωθῇ τὰ ἔργα Tov θεοῦ ἐν 
 ΕῚ A 4¢ a ne 3 / ἣν ΝΕ j a / / 
 αὐτῷ. “ἡμᾶς δεῖ ἐργάζεσθαι τὰ ἔργα τοῦ πέμψαντός 
 “ CLs > fires. TS \ “ "ἢ \ δύ 
 με ἕως ἡμέρα ἐστίν ἔρχεται νὺξ ὅτε οὐδεὶς δύναται 
 : , θ 56 ᾽ ΥΡΝ 3 A ee: nf 
 ἐργάζεσθαι. “ὅταν ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ ὦ, PAS εἰμὶ TOU κοσ- 
 μου. 
 8 A tN Ὁ αν \ v5 / A tes 
 Ταῦτα εἰπὼν ἔπτυσεν χαμαὶ καὶ ἐποίησεν πηλὸν ἐκ 
 a x 
 τοῦ πτύσματος, Kal ἐπέχρισεν αὐτοῦ τὸν πηλὸν ἐπὶ 
 ἜΤ. fie ph Ne 2 a / > \ 
 τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς, ‘Kal εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Ὕπαγε νίψαι εἰς τὴν 
 , a , Ae , Ε , 
 κολυμβήθραν τοῦ Σιλωάμ, ὃ ἑρμηνεύεται ἀπεσταλμένος. 
 a = s / 
 ἀπῆλθεν οὖν καὶ ἐνίψατο, καὶ ἦλθεν βλέπων. 
 \ a νον \ 
 "Οἱ οὖν γείτονες καὶ οἱ θεωροῦντες αὐτὸν TO πρό- 
 e/ / > + 3 Φ > ς 
 τερον OTL προσαίτης ἦν ἔλεγον, Οὐχ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ 
 ’ \ Aig = Oi t »” / δεν Δ 
 καθήμενος καὶ προσαιτῶν ; “ἄλλοι ἔλεγον OTL Οὗτός 
 / a / 
 €oTiv’ ἄλλοι ἔλεγον, Οὐχί, ἀλλ᾽ ὅμοιος αὐτῷ ἐστίν. 
 ἜΜ ΔΑ » “ 3 , > 10 » 3 δά χύνς a 
 ἐκεῖνος ἔλεγεν ὅτι “Kyo εἰμι. ““ἔλεγον οὖν αὐτῷ, Iles 
 e na ¢ 
 ἠνεώχθησάν σου οἱ ὀφθαλμοί; "ἀπεκρίθη ἐκεῖνος, “O 
 » e lal 
 ἄνθρωπος ὁ λεγόμενος ᾿Ιησοῦς πηλὸν ἐποίησεν καὶ 
 > / / \ > \ \ 5 / “ “ 
 ἐπέχρισέν μου τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς καὶ εἶπέν μοι ὅτι “Ὕπαγε 
 > “ 5 
 εἰς TOV Σιλωὰμ καὶ νίψαι. ἀπελθὼν οὖν καὶ νυψάμενος 
 SD tek 29 9» A A “-“ 4 > 
 ἀνέβλεψα. "εἶπαν αὐτῷ, [lod ἐστιν ἐκεῖνος ; λέγει, Οὐκ 
 οἶδα. 
 “"Ayovow αὐτὸν πρὸς τοὺς Φαρισαίους, τόν ποτε 
 , 147 \ , δ OR et \ \ 5) ͵ 
 τυφλόν. “nv δὲ σάββατον ἐν 7 ἡμέρᾳ τὸν πηλὸν ἐποί- 
 
28 EYATTEAION ΙΧ ΨῊ 
 
 « 2: lal \ - ? lal 4. > , 
 ησεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ ἀνέῳξεν αὐτοῦ τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς. 
 15 ͵ὕ = " , 5 J \ \ c ral Cal ,’ , 
 
 πάλιν οὖν ἠρώτων αὐτὸν καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι πῶς ἀνέ- 
 \ 2 ᾽ ral \ / / 
 βλεψεν. ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Πηλὸν ἐπέθηκέν pov ἐπὶ 
 , \ , 
 τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς, Kal ἐνιψάμην, καὶ βλέπω. “édeyov 
 A / / ᾽ 2 
 οὖν ἐκ τῶν Φαρισαίων τινές, Οὐκ ἔστιν οὗτος παρὰ 
 -“ v / \ / » rn 
 θεοῦ ὁ ἄνθρωπος, ὅτι TO σάββατον οὐ τηρεῖ. ἄλλοι 
 » a A v ¢ \ lal 
 ἔλεγον, Πῶς δύναται ἄνθρωπος ἁμαρτωλὸς τοιαῦτα ση- 
 - a / 3 ’ a 7 / s 
 μεῖα ποιεῖν; Kal σχίσμα ἦν ἐν αὐτοῖς. “Eeyovow οὖν 
 A a , \ / / \ 3 a Υ̓ v , 
 τῷ τυφλῷ πάλιν, Σὺ τί λέγεις περὶ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι ἤνοιξέ σου 
 ς L ld 
 τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς; ὁ δὲ εἶπεν ὅτε ἸΠροφήτης ἐστίν. 
 18 ΕῚ > 7 . ς Ἴ ὃ » \ » fal e/ “, 
 οὐκ ἐπίστευσαν οὖν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι περὶ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι ἦν 
 \ \ ee) 4 “ “ ῇ a 
 τυφλὸς καὶ ἀνέβλεψεν, ἕως ὅτου ἐφώνησαν τοὺς γονεῖς 
 > OA re a, ῃ 19 "τ ὧν ᾽ \ , 
 αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἀναβλέψαντος, “Kal ἠρώτησαν αὐτοὺς λέ- 
 e / » ες ey « A e\ δ a , “ 
 γοντες, Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς ὑμῶν, ὃν ὑμεῖς λέγετε ὅτι 
 \ / A 3 / f 
 τυφλὸς ἐγεννήθη; πῶς οὖν βλέπει ἄρτι; “ἀπεκρίθησαν 
 > a ’ “ 7 Ἵ ΜῈ. 
 οὖν οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ καὶ εἶπαν, Οἴδαμεν ὅτι οὗτός ἐστιν 
 εν Εἰ hie Δ \ Ὰ A A 
 ὁ υἱὸς ἡμῶν Kal ὅτι τυφλὸς ἐγεννήθη “mas δὲ νῦν 
 ᾽ ΚΑΤ ἢ pe ost ὃ. “ἃ \ 
 βλέπει οὐκ οἴδαμεν" ἢ Tis ἤνοιξεν αὐτοῦ τοὺς ὀφθαλ- 
 \ ¢ a ’ Ξ 8 \ 
 μοὺς ἡμεῖς οὐκ οἴδαμεν" αὐτὸν ἐρωτήσατε, ἡλικίαν ἔχει" 
 90.4 \ ¢e la / la lal 
 αὐτὸς περὶ ἑαυτοῦ λαλήσει. “ταῦτα εἶπαν οἱ γονεῖς 
 3 a ¢ > A A ? / ὡ ὟΝ \ , 
 αὐτοῦ ὅτι ἐφοβοῦντο τοὺς ᾿Ιουδαίους" ἤδη yap συνετέ- 
 © % a “ 47 ’ \ ¢ , 
 θειντο οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι ἵνα ἐάν τις αὐτὸν ὁμολογήσῃ Χρισ- 
 VA \ »"» -“" 
 τόν, ἀποσυνάγωγος γένηται. “διὰ τοῦτο οἱ γονεῖς 
 > la > 4 « / » >? \ > , 
 αὐτοῦ εἶπαν ὅτι ἩἩλικίαν ἔχει, αὐτὸν ἐρωτήσατε. 
 / \ Μ / “Ὁ = 
 “ἐφώνησαν οὖν τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐκ δευτέρου ὃς ἦν τυφλὸς 
 \ “- > a \ , A >. ς lal » 
 καὶ εἶπαν αὐτῷ, Δὸς δόξαν τῷ θεῷ ἡμεῖς οἴδαμεν ὅτι 
 2 Ἐν way θ ς ἢ > 25 5» , > 
 οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἁμαρτωλός ἐστιν. ““ἀπεκρίθη οὖν 
 lal > € / 
 ἐκεῖνος, Ei ἁμαρτωλός ἐστιν οὐκ olda’ ἕν οἷδα ὅτι 
 \ a U πὰ 3 A 
 τυφλὸς ὧν ἄρτι βλέπω. “εἶπον οὖν αὐτῷ, Τί ἐποίησέν 
 a " , \ > θ , 27? / > 
 σοι; Tas ἤνοιξέν σου τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς : “ἀπεκρίθη av- 
 κι 3 ti Υ , \ > > , ᾿ 
 τοῖς, Εἶπον ὑμῖν ἤδη καὶ οὐκ ἠκούσατε τί. παλιν 
 
X. 2 KATA IQANNHN 29 
 
 / 5 , \ + 4 an nan 
 θέλετε ἀκούειν; μὴ καὶ ὑμεῖς θέλετε αὐτοῦ μαθηταὶ 
 / 28 > , \ > 
 γενέσθαι; "“ἐλοιδόρησαν αὐτὸν καὶ εἶπον, Σὺ μαθητὴς 
 Ἐν κα / < ς A \ fa) 
 εἰ ἐκείνου" ἡμεῖς δὲ TOD Μωυσέως ἐσμὲν μαθηταί. *1- 
 al ” cA lal / la) 
 μεῖς οἴδαμεν ὅτι Μωυσεῖ λελάληκεν ὁ θεός, τοῦτον δὲ 
 ᾽ Υδ ‘9 4 / 30 2 ‘0 εν θ \ 4 
 οὐκ οἴδαμεν πόθεν ἐστίν. “᾿ἀπεκρίθη ὁ ἄνθρωπος καὶ εἷ- 
 3 δ, Ὁ ΩΣ Nic ‘ / ε a 
 πεν αὐτοῖς, Ev τούτῳ yap τὸ θαυμαστόν ἐστιν ὅτι ὑμεῖς 
 > v / 3 ig \ ᾧ NN 3 , 
 οὐκ οἴδατε πόθεν ἐστίν, Kal ἤνοιξεν μου τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς. 
 A ’ > , 3 Ja δ, 
 "οἴδαμεν ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἁμαρτωλῶν οὐκ ἀκούει, GAN ἐὰν τις 
 \ 4 a is / 3 
 θεοσεβὴς ἢ καὶ τὸ θέλημα αὐτοῦ ποιῇ τούτου ἀκούει. 
 82 5 ois 3 ᾽ so “ " / aA \ 
 ἐκ τοῦ αἰῶνος οὐκ ἠκούσθη OTL ἤνοιξέν τις ὀφθαλμοὺς 
 a / 33 » \ 5 @ \ a ᾽ 
 τυφλοῦ yeyevynpévov. “εἰ μὴ ἦν οὗτος παρὰ θεοῦ, οὐκ 
 207 A δέ 84 9 θ ὙΦ Sate 
 ἠδύνατο ποιεῖν οὐδέν. “᾿αἀπεκρίθησαν Kal εἶπαν αὐτῷ, 
 ᾽ ς / \ > , e/ \ \ ὃ ὃ 4 
 Ev ἁμαρτίαις σὺ ἐγεννήθης ὅλος, καὶ σὺ διδάσκεις 
 aA 3 2% 555» 3 - Ὁ 
 nds; καὶ ἐξέβαλον αὐτὸν ἔξω. ©” Hxovcev ᾿Ιησοῦς ὅτι 
 5." oo. ΝΜ Ν ¢ \ Bek a \ 
 ἐξέβαλον αὐτὸν ἔξω, καὶ εὑρὼν αὐτὸν εἶπεν, Σὺ πισ- 
 , > \ ἘᾺΝ a Me S6ies / 2 aA \ 7) 
 τεύεις εἰς τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ; “᾿ ἀπεκρίθη ἐκεῖνος, Καὶ τίς 
 if > 37 x ’ - 
 ἐστιν, κύριε, ἵνα πιστεύσω εἰς αὐτόν ; “᾿εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῷ 
 Ὁ 5 a ND eae eae: Noe A \ a 
 ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Καὶ ἑώρακας αὐτὸν, καὶ ὁ λαλῶν μετὰ σοῦ 
 A Si aes 38 κὰν , ! Σ \ r 
 ἐκεῖνός ἐστιν. “ὁ δὲ ἔφη, Πιστεύω, κύριε" καὶ προσεκύ- 
 VNTEV αὐτῷ. 
 aK \ s e 9 a Ei 7 3 \ ’ \ [2 
 αἱ εἶπεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Kis κρίμα ἐγὼ εἰς τὸν κόσμον 
 A s “ «ς \ / A 
 τοῦτον ἦλθον, ἵνα οἱ μὴ βλέποντες βλέπωσιν καὶ οἱ 
 4 \ ΄ 40 7 2 a 
 βλέποντες τυφλοὶ γένωνται. ἤκουσαν ἐκ τῶν Φαρι- 
 / a > ’ ἴω Aa 
 σαίων ταῦτα οἱ μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ ὄντες, καὶ εἶπον αὐτῷ, Μὴ 
 \ e an ΄ 3 41 3 3 a Rae a » 
 καὶ ἡμεῖς τυφλοί ἐσμεν; “εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Ex 
 ν 53 ΘΕ FY " ε Folia ΠΕΣ \ , “ 
 τυφλοὶ ἦτε, οὐκ ἂν εἴχετε ἁμαρτίαν' νῦν δὲ λέγετε ὅτι 
 “4 angeths / e tal 4 
 Βλέπομεν" ἡ ἁμαρτία ὑμῶν μένει. 
 10 1A NE WN s Coa € Nie , 5 Ν 
 μὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὁ μὴ εἰσερχόμενος διὰ 
 aA ΄ > \ > \ A / 3 \ > / 
 τῆς θύρας εἰς τὴν αὐλὴν τῶν προβάτων adda avaBai- 
 n: A , \ \ ὙᾺΣ ΤΟΣ ἘΝ 
 νων ἀλλαχόθεν ἐκεῖνος κλέπτης ἐστὶν καὶ λῃστής" “ὁ δὲ 
 \ od ’ “ 3 i 
 εἰσερχόμενος διὰ τῆς θύρας ποιμήν ἐστιν τῶν προβάτων. 
 
30 EYATTEAION X. 3 
 
 “τούτῳ ὁ θυρωρὸς ἀνοίγει, καὶ τὰ πρόβατα τῆς φωνὴ 
 τούτῳ ὁ θυρωρὸς γεί, po ἧς ης 
 ᾽ a ,’ \ Α / / “ ᾽ / 
 αὐτοῦ ἀκούει, καὶ τὰ ἴδια πρόβατα φωνεῖ κατ᾽ ὄνομα 
 a” 9 , > / 4d δι Y > / ” 
 
 καὶ ἐξάγει αὐτά. “ὅταν Ta ἴδια πάντα ἐκβάλῃ, ἔμπροσ- 
 
 lal \ a lal 
 
 θεν αὐτῶν πορεύεται, Kal τὰ πρόβατα αὐτῷ ἀκολουθεῖ, 
 ¢/ ” \ \ ’ oF 5 3 ΄ \ >] \ ’ 
 
 ὅτι οἴδασιν THY φωνὴν αὐτοῦ" "ἀλλοτρίῳ δὲ οὐ μὴ ἀκο- 
 
 2 / » ’ a / >] 
 λουθήσουσιν ἀλλὰ φεύξονται ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι οὐκ οἴδασιν 
 A ᾽ / \ fs 6 , \ , 
 
 τῶν ἀλλοτρίων τὴν φωνήν. “ταύτην τὴν παροιμίαν 
 
 a £3 Piste a "d 2 «Ὁ 
 
 εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς" ἐκεῖνοι δὲ οὐκ ἔγνωσαν τίνα ἦν ἃ 
 5 / 5 lal 
 
 ἐλαλει AUTOLS. 
 
 3 > U 3 - ἘῸΝ na 3 4 
 Εἶπεν οὖν πάλιν αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ᾿Αμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω 
 a / > ¢ / A 4 “ / 
 ὑμῖν, ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ θύρα τῶν προβάτων. *TavTes ὅσοι 
 a ΄ \ / ’ , > 
 ἦλθον πρὸ ἐμοῦ κλέπται εἰσὶν καὶ λῃσταί, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ 
 
 " mon \ , gisele, > ee, eee *.. Sones 
 
 ἤκουσαν αὐτῶν τὰ πρόβατα. ὅ ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ θύρα; du ἐμοῦ 
 
 Dif > / / \ ’ ’ \ > 
 
 ἐάν τις εἰσέλθη σωθήσεται Kal εἰσελεύσεται Kal ἐξε- 
 
 , \ \ cas 10.¢ , 5:45 νὰ 
 λεύσεται καὶ νομὴν εὑρήσει. “ὁ κλέπτης οὐκ ἔρχεται 
 , was Raest \ 5 vs 
 εἰ μὴ ἵνα κλέψη Kal θύσῃ καὶ ἀπολέσῃ ἐγὼ ἦλθον iva 
 \ 
 ζωὴν ἔχωσιν καὶ περισσὸν ἔχωσιν. 
 1}. > ς \ ¢ Pi τὰ Ὁ x ς \ \ 
 γώ εἶμι ὁ ποιμὴν ὁ καλός" ὁ ποιμὴν ὁ καλὸς THY 
 Ε fal / «ς Ν Lad ς 
 ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ τίθησιν ὑπὲρ τῶν προβάτων" “ὁ μισ- 
 Ἦ Δ ἢ 3 7 
 θωτὸς καὶ οὐκ ὧν ποιμήν, οὗ οὐκ ἔστιν τὰ πρόβατα ἴδια, 
 a ’ > Ld ’ 
 
 θεωρεῖ τὸν λύκον ἐρχόμενον Kal ἀφίησιν τὰ πρόβατα 
 \ , ᾿ Verse , ¢ ἢ Seals \ Vea 
 καὶ φεύγει καὶ ὁ λύκος ἁρπάζει αὐτά, Kal σκορπίζει 
 150 ἊΣ δ \ ᾽ ᾿ a \ a , 
 ὅτι μισθωτός ἐστιν, καὶ οὐ μέλει αὐτῷ περὶ τῶν προβά- 
 
 ἄπ ee ε \ € 
 
 TOV. “ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ποιμὴν ὃ καλός, καὶ γινώσκω τὰ ἐμὰ 
 \ , / \ 
 
 Kal γινώσκουσί pe τὰ ἐμά. “καθὼς γινώσκει με ὃ πα- 
 
 > \ / \ 
 
 τὴρ κἀγὼ γινώσκω τὸν πατέρα, Kal THY ψυχήν μου 
 
 «ς \ lal 
 
 τίθημι ὑπὲρ τῶν προβάτων. “Kail ἄλλα πρόβατα ἔχω, 
 τ 7 al >] rn / ~ n ΄ al 
 ἃ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ τῆς αὐλῆς ταύτης" κἀκεῖνα δεῖ με aya- 
 lal \ a lal 
 γεῖν, Kal τῆς φωνῆς μου ἀκούσουσιν, Kal γενήσεται μία 
 
 , ? r 17 \ rn a 
 ποίμνη, εἷς ποιμήν. “Ova τοῦτό με ὁ πατὴρ ἀγαπᾷ ὅτι 
 
 2 \ / \ / “ “ U > , 
 ἐγὼ τίθημι τὴν ψυχήν pov, ἵνα πάλιν λάβω avTnv. 
 
X. 34 KATA IQANNHN ΕἾ: 
 lal % 3 \ / 
 τ οὐδεὶς αἴρει αὐτὴν ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ ἐγὼ τίθημι αὐτὴν 
 by Τὰ] -“ 3 / 7 ° ᾽ \ 3 / 
 ἀπ᾽ ἐμαυτοῦ. ἐξουσίαν ἔχω θεῖναι αὐτήν, καὶ ἐξουσίαν 
 an ὃ / \ \ » 
 ἔχω πάλιν λαβεῖν αὐτήν ταύτην τὴν ἐντολὴν ἔλαβον 
 a / 
 Tapa τοῦ πατρός μου. 
 , / an? \ 
 Σχίσμα πάλιν ἐγένετο ἐν τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις διὰ τοὺς 
 , . > “Ὁ 
 λόγους τούτους. “ἔλεγον δὲ πολλοὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν, Δαιμό- 
 ” \ , δ , anther τ. , 21 0 
 νιον ἔχει καὶ palvEeTal’ TL αὐτοῦ ἀκούετε: ~ adXAOL 
 5). A a Ga ’ ” / = \ 
 ἔλεγον, Ταῦτα Ta ῥήματα οὐκ ἔστιν δαιμονιζομένου" μὴ 
 , A ’ \ > a 
 δαιμόνιον δύναται τυφλῶν ὀφθαλμοὺς ἀνοΐξαι ; 
 22719 7 \ je / > Ἄν, Ε r 
 γένετο δὲ Ta ἐγκαίνια ἐν τοῖς “Ἱεροσολύμοις. 
 \ > 
 χειμὼν nv “ἢ 
 A lal Lal 4 
 στοᾷ τοῦ Σολομῶνος. “᾿ἐκύκλωσαν οὖν αὐτὸν οἱ Ἴου- 
 ὃ “-“ \ EX > a “Ἢ / \ \ ς a 
 atot καὶ ἔλεγον αὐτῷ, “Ἕως πότε τὴν ψυχὴν ἡμῶν 
 αἴρεις ; εἰ σὺ εἶ ὁ Χριστός, εἰπὲ ἡμῖν παρρησίᾳ. “'ἀπε- 
 Ρ Ξ 5 Aik p τ αὐ ἘΠῚ δε ’ 
 κρίθη αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Εἶπον ὑμῖν, καὶ ov πιστεύετε. 
 
 \ / ς a A a “ 
 καὶ περιεπάτει ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ ἐν τῇ 
 
 \ «Ὁ εὖ A “~ Αι rn 
 Ta ἔργα ἃ ἐγὼ ποιῶ ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ πατρός μου 
 A al \ “ ? \ ¢e an ’ 
 ταῦτα μαρτυρεῖ περὶ ἐμοῦ" “adda ὑμεῖς οὐ πιστεύετε, 
 2 \ a / a a \ , 
 OTL οὐκ ἐστὲ ἐκ τῶν προβάτων τῶν ἐμῶν. “τὰ πρό- 
 \ \ A A » , ’ \ / 
 Bata τὰ ἐμὰ τῆς φωνῆς μου ἀκούουσιν, Kayo γινώσκω 
 5 , \ 9 a / 28 >) ¥ , ’ aA \ 
 αὐτά, Kal ἀκολουθοῦσίν μοι, “κἀγὼ δίδωμι αὐτοῖς ζωὴν 
 3 5 \ >] / A 
 αἰώνιον, καὶ οὐ μὴ ἀπόλωνται Els TOV αἰῶνα, Kal οὐχ 
 / ’ \ e ’ « 
 ἁρπάσει τις αὐτὰ ἐκ τῆς χειρός prov. “ὁ πατήρ μου ὃ 
 δέδωκέ , ἢ ἐστίν" b οὐδεὶς δύ 
 ἐδωκέν μοι πάντων μεῖζον ἐστίν: καὶ οὐδεὶς δύναται 
 « / » A \ lal 7 
 ἁρπάζειν ἐκ τῆς χειρὸς τοῦ πατρός. “ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ 
 81 ! ἂν ΕῚ aA 
 ἕν ἐσμεν. ἐβάστασαν πάλιν λίθους οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι ἵνα 
 Υ ᾿- , 5» » 4 "» -“ \ 
 λιθάσωσιν αὐτόν. “᾿ ἀπεκρίθη αὐτοῖς ὁ Inoods, Πολλὰ 
 », A ΨΨὉ € on 5 “. Lie \ an ’ A 
 ἔργα καλὰ ἔδειξα ὑμῖν ἐκ τοῦ πατρός" διὰ ποῖον αὐτῶν 
 \ Ὁ nr 
 ἔργον ἐμὲ λιθάξετε; “᾿άπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ οἱ ᾿Ἰουδαῖοι, 
 \ A \ 
 Ilept καλοῦ ἔργου ov λιθάζομέν σε ἀλλὰ περὶ βλασφη- 
 ἣ 4 \ “Δ A 
 μίας, καὶ ὅτι σὺ ἄνθρωπος ὧν ποιεῖς σεαυτὸν θεόν. 
 84 5" / - a (NS) a 3 ya 4 > 
 ἀπεκρίθη αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Οὐκ ἔστιν γεγραμμένον ἐν 
 
32 EYATTEAION X. 34 
 
 a f e a “ > \ ἊΨ 0 fp Ἐπ ..ὄ Se ΄ 
 τῷ νόμῳ ὑμῶν OTL ἐγὼ εἶπα, θεοί ἐστε; “EL ἐκείνους 
 53 \ “Ὁ ξ a al 5 / > 
 εἶπεν θεούς, πρὸς ods ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ ἐγένετο, Kal οὐ 
 
 ͵ A ¢ ae 36" « \ ¢ / \ ’ / 
 δύναται λυθῆναι ἡ γραφή" “ovo πατὴρ ἡγίασεν καὶ απέ- 
 
 ᾽ \ / ¢ a / ¢/ a 
 
 στείλεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον, ὑμεῖς λέγετε OTL Βλασφημεῖς, 
 
 “ 3 e\ n a > PP feet > a a fal 
 
 ὅτι εἶπον, Υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ εἰμι; “Et οὐ ποιῶ Ta ἔργα τοῦ 
 
 \ ͵ , ! a \ 
 
 πατρός Mov, μὴ πιστεύετέ pou “εἰ δὲ ποιῶ, κἂν ἐμοὶ μὴ 
 a + / No, a \ 
 
 πιστεύητε, τοῖς ἔργοις πιστεύετε' ἵνα γνῶτε καὶ γινώ- 
 
 ¢ \ © 3 1 3 a 
 σκητε OTL ἐν ἐμοὶ ὁ πατήρ, κἀγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί. 
 
 3 A ἅς Ἂν , n~ + 
 
 ἢ) ήτουν οὖν πάλιν αὐτὸν πιάσαι, καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ἐκ 
 
 a \ 3. τἰα 40 4. δι δ , , a? 
 
 τῆς χειρὸς αὐτῶν. “Kal ἀπῆλθεν πάλιν πέραν τοῦ ‘lop- 
 aN Ld / = > / a 
 δάνου εἰς τὸν τόπον ὅπου ἦν ᾿Ιωάννης τὸ πρῶτον 
 x a 41 \ 
 βαπτίζων, καὶ ἔμεινεν ἐκεῖ. “καὶ πολλοὶ ἦλθον πρὸς 
 » f 3 , \ 4 
 αὐτὸν καὶ ἔλεγον ὅτι ᾿Ιωάννης μὲν σημεῖον ἐποίησεν 
 
 ἊΝ / / XN ἊΨ 3 ? / \ f > A 
 οὐδέν, πάντα δὲ ὅσα εἶπεν ᾿Ιωάννης περὶ τούτου ἀληθῆ 
 > 42 \ Oe ee ἢ SiN ba. Se) ὡς 
 ἣν. καὶ πολλοὶ ἐπίστευσαν εἰς αὕτον EKEL. 
 
 ͵7 5 al / > 
 11 Ἢν δέ τις ἀσθενῶν Λάζαρος ἀπὸ Βηθανίας, ἐκ 
 
 a , / \ / a 3 A 3 ae 
 τῆς κώμης Μαρίας καὶ Μάρθας τῆς ἀδελφῆς αὐτῆς. 
 ο 5 \ ͵ en ὦ / \ , , (a3 , 
 ἦν δὲ Μαρία ἡ ἀλείψασα τὸν κύριον μύρῳ καὶ ἐκμά- 
 
 \ ἢ ᾽ a a \ Ye ©) ess Ἢ 
 ἕασα τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ ταῖς θριξὶν αὐτῆς, ἧς ὁ ἀδελφὸς 
 , > e 
 Adfapos ἠσθένει. “ἀπέστειλαν οὖν ai ἀδελφαὶ πρὸς 
 a a 5 a b) ͵ 
 αὐτὸν λέγουσαι, Κύριε, ἴδε ὃν φιλεῖς ἀσθενεῖ. “ἀκούσας 
 
 \ γεν la) > e/ ς a / 5 ” ἈΝ 
 δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν, Αὕτη ἡ ἀσθένεια οὐκ ἔστιν πρὸς 
 
 Αι. οὐξ \ A / n “ vA A 
 θάνατον ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῆς δόξης Tod θεοῦ, ἵνα δοξασθῇ ὁ 
 
 e\ nr θ lal ὃ 5 5 -“ 5? / δὲ ¢ > lal “ἢ 
 
 υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ δι’ αὐτῆς. *nyata δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς τὴν 
 κ , A \ \ 
 Μάρθαν καὶ τὴν ἀδελφὴν αὐτῆς Kai τὸν Adfapov. “ὡς 
 
 53 ΕΣ vA τ a ry \ » 3 ἅμ. “δ / 
 οὖν ἤκδυσεν OTL ἀσθενεῖ, τότε μὲν ἔμεινεν ἐν ᾧ ἦν τόπῳ 
 
 U \ “ / al al 
 δύο ἡμέρας. "ἔπειτα μετὰ τοῦτο λέγει τοῖς μαθηταῖς, 
 " > \ ΕἾ δ ᾿ ἢ 8\ / ἈΝ ς 
 Αγωμεν εἰς τὴν Ιουδαίαν πάλιν. “λέγουσιν αὐτῷ οἱ 
 
 ς , na / -“ 
 μαθηταί, Ῥαββί, νῦν ἐζήτουν σε λιθάσαι οἱ ᾿Ἰουδαῖοι, 
 
 \ , ef 3: τα Ὁ ἃ ἢ ᾽ A 3 ΜῈ ἢ 
 καὶ πάλιν ὑπάγεις ἐκεῖ; "ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς, Οὐχὶ δώδεκα 
 φ. ᾽ a ¢ , De “ a ra , 
 ὧραί εἰσιν τῆς ἡμέρας ; ἐάν τις περιπατῇ ἐν TH ἡμέρᾳ, 
 
XI. 28 KATA IQANNHN. 33 
 
 » ͵ “ \ An ee ΘΥ͂, , , Ξ 
 οὐ προσκόπτει, ὅτι τὸ φῶς τοῦ κόσμου τούτου βλέπει 
 A A / 
 ®éay δέ τις περιπατῇ ἐν TH νυκτί, προσκόπτει, OTL TO 
 φώς οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν αὐτῷ. "᾿ταῦτα εἶπεν, καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο 
 
 a ¢ A 
 λέγει αὐτοῖς, Λάζαρος ὁ φίλος ἡμῶν κεκοίμηται ἀλλὰ 
 ? 
 ’ > A 
 πορεύομαι iva ἐξυπνίσω αὐτόν. “eitrov οὖν αὐτῷ οἱ 
 θ / , 3 / θή τὴν ἀκτῇ δὲ 
 μαθηταί, Κύριε, εἰ κεκοίμηται, σωθήσεται. “εἰρήκει δὲ 
 35 rn \ a θ / >] Ὡς 2 a δὲ ξὃ vA 
 ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς περὶ τοῦ θανάτου αὐτοῦ" ἐκεῖνοι δὲ ἔδοξαν OTL 
 A Ἀ fa) df / 
 περὶ τῆς κοιμήσεως τοῦ ὕπνου λέγει. “TOTE οὖν εἶπεν 
 3 a ς 3] a / A 1a > ‘Q 15 \ 
 αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς παρρησίᾳ, Λάζαρος ἀπέθανεν, “Kal 
 / > δ la) ¢/ / {74 3 » > A, ’ \ 
 χαίρω ou ὑμᾶς, ἵνα πιστεύσητε, OTL οὐκ ἤμην ἐκεῖ; ἀλλὰ 
 " \ is 16. 5 > A ¢ , 
 ἄγωμεν πρὸς αὐτόν. “εἶπεν οὖν Θωμᾶς ὁ λεγόμενος 
 A an / \ 4 a 
 Δίδυμος τοῖς συμμαθηταῖς, "Aywpev καὶ ἡμεῖς iva 
 3’ Lal 
 ἀποθάνωμεν μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ. 
 A Ὁ “ΠΝ / / 
 ΤΡ λθὼν οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εὗρεν αὐτὸν τέσσαρας ἤδη 
 ey ” ἢ A / 18 3 δὲ ε Β θ Pd \ 
 ἡμέρας ἔχοντα ἐν TO μνημείῳ. “nv δὲ ἡ Βηθανία ἐγγὺς 
 “ , «ς \ / , . 9 
 τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων ὡς ἀπὸ σταδίων δεκαπέντε “πολλοὶ 
 \ \ , 
 δὲ ἐκ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων ἐληλύθεισαν πρὸς τὴν Μάρθαν καὶ 
 ’ \ A nw 
 Μαριάμ, iva παραμυθήσωνται αὐτὰς περὶ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ. 
 20 ἐ > , ς 4 “ 2 A yA ¢ , 
 ἡ ovv Μάρθα ὡς ἤκουσεν ὅτι ᾿Ιησοῦς ἔρχεται, ὑπήν- 
 CNS / Noss a » > , 21 9 
 τησεν αὐτῷ Μαρία δὲ ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ ἐκαθέζετο. “εἶπεν 
 be ς / \ 3 A / a L 3 Ἃ 
 οὖν ἡ Μάρθα πρὸς ᾿Ιησοῦν, Κύριε, εἰ ἧς ὧδε, οὐκ ἂν 
 > A 3 4 > 
 ἀπέθανεν ὁ ἀδελφός pov. “'καὶ viv οἶδα ὅτι ὅσα ἂν 
 
 A ¢ 
 
 \ / / / 5 
 αἰτήσῃ τὸν θεόν, δώσει σοι 6 θεός. ““λέγει αὐτῇ ὁ 
 
 a“ 
 
 5 lal 3 «ς , / A 
 Ἰησοῦς, ᾿Αναστήσεται ὁ ἀδελφός σου. “᾿ἀλέγει αὐτῷ ἡ 
 
 M t θ Οἱὸ “ 3 , > A 3 , > 
 ἄρθα, Οἶδα ὅτι ἀναστήσεται ἐν TH ἀναστάσει ἐν TH 
 > ’ ¢ 3 95 3 AN io ΘΑ A 3 / 2 «ς 
 ἐσχατῃ ἡμέρᾳ. “εἶπεν αὐτῇ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ᾿Εγὼ εἰμι ἡ 
 > , ἣν ks ’ 3 
 ἀνάστασις καὶ ἡ ζωή ὁ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμὲ κἂν ἀποθάνῃ 
 μ“ 26 Ν a ec a 2 δι 3 \ 
 ζησεται, “Kal πᾶς ὁ ζῶν Kal πιστεύων εἰς ἐμὲ οὐ μὴ 
 Ρ] > \ IA an / 3 an 
 ἀποθάνῃ εἰς TOV αἰῶνα “᾿πιστεύεις τοῦτο; λέγει AUTO, 
 ἢ t Sieg trees Re ¢ ¢ ς 
 Nai, κύριε" ἐγὼ πεπίστευκα ὅτι σὺ εἶ ὁ Χριστὸς ὃ υἱὸς 
 an a ¢ > \ , A b] na 
 τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἐρχόμενος. “Kal τοῦτο εἰποῦσα 
 
 ST JOHN C 
 
34 ~EYATTEAION XI. 28 
 
 » ,’ 
 ἀπῆλθεν καὶ ἐφώνησεν Μαριὰμ τὴν ἀδελφὴν αὐτῆς λάθρα 
 ᾽ a ς ͵ , \ a 29 > , 
 εἰποῦσα, Ὃ διδάσκαλος πάρεστιν καὶ φωνεῖ σε. “ἐκείνη 
 ere ν a θ \ oor \ > +s 850 Ὁ 
 ὡς ἤκουσεν, ἠγέρθη ταχὺ καὶ ἤρχετο πρὸς αὐτὸν. “οὔπω 
 la) > lal 
 δὲ ἐληλύθει ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἰς THY κώμην, GAN ἦν ἔτι ἐν TO 
 / 4 tan Sa NL Ge ἢ :: ce ΠΝ A 
 τόπῳ ὅπου ὑπήντησεν αὐτῷ ἡ Μάρθα. “oi οὖν ᾿Ιουδαῖοι 
 
 © MW ᾽ ᾽ A > A Stet \ Ud 
 οἱ ὄντες μετ᾽ αὐτῆς ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ καὶ παραμυθούμενοι 
 > / 50. / \ \ “ J “ Le \ 
 αὐτήν, ἰδόντες τὴν Μαριὰμ ote ταχέως ἀνέστη Kat 
 sen > A 
 ἐξῆλθεν, ἤἠκολούθησαν αὐτῇ, δόξαντες ὅτι ὑπάγει εἰς TO 
 a A , > a 82 ¢ > \ ¢€ “- 
 μνημεῖον ἵνα κλαύσῃ ἐκεῖ. “ἡ οὖν Μαριὰμ ὡς ἦλθεν 
 ὅπου ἦν ᾿Ιησοῦς ἰδοῦσα αὐτὸν ἔπεσεν αὐτοῦ πρὸς τοὺς 
 ἐδ λέ 3. a Κύ pyr a > 4 
 πόδας, λέγουσα αὐτῷ, Κύριε, εἰ ἧς ὧδε, οὐκ ἄν μου 
 ς 5 
 ἀπέθανεν ὁ ἀδελφός. 
 a 2 ς 3 
 Θ᾽] ησοῦς οὖν ὡς εἶδεν αὐτὴν κλαίουσαν καὶ τοὺς 
 , Snes , / > μ“ 
 συνελθόντας αὐτῇ ᾿Ιουδαίους κλαίοντας, ἐνεβριμήσατο 
 a , Sin Sie a / 34 \ 3 an 
 τῷ πνεύματι Kal ἐτάραξεν ἑαυτόν, “Kal εἶπεν, Lod 
 7 ’ / / > tal U 54 Pe 
 τεθείκατε αὐτόν ; λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, Κύριε, ἔρχου καὶ ἴδε. 
 5 ᾽ A f. s 3 a 
 > eSaxpucev ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς. “ἔλεγον οὖν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, “Ide 
 A ’ An 53 be 
 πῶς ἐφίλει αὐτόν. “τινὲς δὲ ἐξ αὐτῶν εἶπον, Οὐκ 
 \ a a 
 ἐδύνατο οὗτος ὁ ἀνοίξας τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς τοῦ τυφλοῦ 
 lal “ Ν ka ee f 38°? a 5 , 
 ποιῆσαι ἵνα καὶ οὗτος μὴ ἀποθάνῃ; “Ἰησοῦς οὖν παλιν 
 a xe 
 ἐμβριμώμενος ἐν ἑαυτῷ ἔρχεται εἰς TO μνημεῖον. ἦν δὲ 
 / ow 5. τὰ ΡΣ ee ΓΤ, ς᾽ a 
 σπήλαιον, καὶ λίθος ἐπέκειτο ET αὐτῷ. “λέγει ὁ Ἰησοῦς, 
 oy. ἐδ 3 rn 
 “Apate τὸν λίθον. λέγει αὐτῷ ἡ ἀδελφὴ τοῦ τετελευτη- 
 f / / ov vy - a , 3 
 κότος Μάρθα, Κύριε, ἤδη ὄζει τεταρταῖος yap ἐστιν. 
 40 7 Sn ΤΕῸΝ a 3 53 / es a8 , 
 λέγει αὐτῇ ὁ ᾿ΙἸησοῦς, Οὐκ εἶπόν σοι ὅτι ἐὰν πιστεύσῃς 
 “ a 3 \ 
 ὄψῃ τὴν δόξαν Tod θεοῦ; “ἦραν οὖν Tov λίθον. ὁ δὲ 
 3 a τοὶ \ 3 \ 4 \ 3 I / ᾽ 
 Ιησοῦς ἦρεν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ἄνω καὶ εἴπεν, Ilatep, ev- 
 - ᾽ / , 
 χαριστῶ σοι ὅτι ἤκουσάς μου. “ἐγὼ δὲ ἤδειν OTL πάν- 
 ͵ ᾽ ὡς ἀξ \ \ et: \ a 
 τοτέ μου ἀκούεις" ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸν ὄχλον τὸν περιεστῶτα 
 ο 
 εἶπον, ἵνα πιστεύσωσιν ὅτι σύ με ἀπέστειλας. “Kab 
 rn > \ A / 5 / A / ὃ lal 
 ταῦτα εἰπὼν φωνῇ μεγάλῃ ἐκραύγασεν, Aalape, δεῦρο 
 
ΧΙ. 57 KATA IQANNHN. 35 
 
 Ψ 4 a ς \ 
 ἔξω. “᾿ἐξῆλθεν ὁ τεθνηκὼς δεδεμένος τοὺς πόδας καὶ 
 \ a / \ > a 
 τὰς χεῖρας κειρίαις, καὶ ἡ ὄψις αὐτοῦ σουδαρίῳ περιε- 
 ͵ , Tine Lies A , ἊΝ .»ν»ν 
 δέδετο. λέγει αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Λύσατε αὐτὸν καὶ ἄφετε 
 > 
 αὐτὸν ὑπάγειν. 
 3 a 7 
 “ἸΠολλοὶ οὖν ἐκ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων, οἱ ἐλθόντες πρὸς 
 a \ A 
 τὴν Μαριὰμ καὶ θεασάμενοι ἃ ἐποίησεν, ἐπίστευσαν eis 
 3 > a > a 
 αὐτόν. “τινὲς δὲ ἐξ αὐτῶν ἀπῆλθον πρὸς τοὺς Φαρι- 
 ! a \ a 
 σαίους καὶ εἶπον αὐτοῖς ἃ ἐποίησεν ᾿Ιησοῦς. “cuvn- 
 ΕῚ - \ ¢ lal / 
 γαγον οὖν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι συνέδριον, καὶ 
 a a ¢ U a 
 ἔλεγον, Τί ποιοῦμεν ; ὅτι οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος πολλὰ ποιεῖ 
 A ania ΓΟ of 
 σημεῖα. “ἐὰν ἀφῶμεν αὐτὸν οὕτως, πάντες πιστεύσουσιν 
 / ς a A 
 εἰς αὐτόν, Kal ἐλεύσονται οἱ Ῥωμαῖοι καὶ ἀροῦσιν ἡμῶν 
 δ \ s \ \ 4 49 Φ , 2 ᾽ A 
 καὶ τὸν τόπον καὶ τὸ ἔθνος. “εἷς δέ τις ἐξ αὐτῶν 
 o \ 3 »“ cal nr 
 Καϊάφας, ἀρχιερεὺς ὧν τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἐκείνου, εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, 
 a *Q/ ΑΝ / 
 Ὑμεῖς οὐκ οἴδατε οὐδέν, “᾿ οὐδὲ λογίζεσθε ὅτι συμφέρει 
 ς “ 4 - v 5 / « \ A a \ A 
 ὑμῖν ἵνα els ἄνθρωπος ἀποθάνῃ ὑπὲρ τοῦ λαοῦ Kal μὴ 
 ’ a ἘΣ, la! 
 ὅλον TO ἔθνος ἀπόληται. “TodTO δὲ ad ἑαυτοῦ οὐκ 
 εἶπεν, ἀλλὰ ἀρχιερεὺς ὧν τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἐκείνου ἐπρο- 
 ,ὔ wv > fal ’ / ¢ \ fal 
 φήτευσεν OTL ἤμελλεν ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀποθνήσκειν ὑπὲρ τοῦ 
 » ἘΣ ΣΌΝ, Δ τ ea UK ny , 53. 3 ὦ Νὰ Ξε 
 ἔθνους, “Kal οὐχ ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἔθνους μόνον, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα καὶ τὰ 
 τέκνα τοῦ θεοῦ τὰ διεσκορπισμένα συναγάγῃ εἰς ἕν. 
 ἘΠῚ δι ον (5 / > A Ch > ᾿ς “ > / 
 ἀπ᾽ ἐκείνης οὖν τῆς ἡμέρας ἐβουλεύσαντο iva ἀποκτεί- 
 a / 
 νωσιν αὐτόν. ““Ἰησοῦς οὖν οὐκέτι παρρησίᾳ περιεπάτει 
 -“ / \ 5 A 5 Lal \ 
 ἐν τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις, ἀλλὰ ἀπῆλθεν ἐκεῖθεν εἰς THY χώραν 
 > \ a > / > 5 \ / / ’ A 
 ἐγγὺς τῆς ἐρήμου, εἰς ᾿Εφραὶμ λεγομένην πόλιν, κἀκεῖ 
 a a \ 
 διέτριβεν μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν. “ἦν δὲ ἐγγὺς TO πάσχα 
 lal \ 3.48 
 τῶν lovdaiwv' καὶ ἀνέβησαν πολλοὶ εἰς ‘lepooddupa ἐκ 
 τῆς χώρας πρὸ τοῦ πάσχα, ἵνα ayvicwow ἑαυτούς. 
 δ ἐζήτουν οὖν τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν καὶ ἔλεγον μετ᾽ ἀλλήλων ἐν 
 ate, it ines l Τί ὃ a, eee ὁ κόρον ea, 2b BN 
 τῷ ἱερῷ ἑστηκότες, Τί δοκεῖ ὑμῖν; ὅτε οὐ μὴ EXON εἰς τὴν 
 ἂς τα , 51 ἃ , δὰ ς » ΝΥ \ ε a 
 ἑορτήν; “Sedmxeroav δὲ οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς Kal οἱ Φαρισαῖοι 
 C2 
 
36 EYATTEAION ΧΙ. 57 
 
 “f ͵ an lal , ivf ͵ 
 ἐντολὰς ἵνα ἐάν τις γνῷ ποῦ ἐστὶν μηνύσῃ, ὅπως πιάσω- 
 σιν αὐτόν. 
 
 a Va e “ fal / 
 
 12 "Ὁ οὖν Ἰησοῦς πρὸ ἕξ ἡμερῶν τοῦ πάσχα ἦλθεν 
 > / 4 ΑΝ ' \ v > a 
 εἰς Βηθανίαν, ὅπου ἦν Λάζαρος, ὃν ἤγειρεν ἐκ νεκρῶν 
 Ἰησοῦς. 
 
 > lal lal lal e / 
 ?’Erolnoav οὖν αὐτῷ δεῖπνον ἐκεῖ, καὶ ἡ Μάρθα διη- 
 Ul ¢ \ / - 53 “Ὁ ’ / x 2 lal 
 κόνει, ὁ δὲ Λάξαρος εἷς ἦν τῶν ἀνακειμένων σὺν αὐτῷ. 
 A yd “ / a 
 ϑὴ οὖν Μαρία λαβοῦσα λίτραν μύρου νάρδου πιστικῆς 
 \ / a? “ \ / 
 πολυτίμου ἤλειψεν τοὺς πόδας τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ καὶ ἐξέμαξεν 
 a \ 5 a \ / ,’ “ « Ν ’ / 3 
 ταῖς θριξὶν αὐτῆς τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ. ἡ δὲ οἰκία ἐπλη- 
 / 2 lal 5 lal a / 4 / s > / € 
 ρώθη ἐκ τῆς ὀσμῆς τοῦ μύρου. “λέγει οὖν ᾿Ιούδας ὁ 
 5 Φ > A A 3 rete / Sa: &X 
 Ἰσκαριώτης, εἷς ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ, ὁ μέλλων αὐτὸν 
 5 uf A \ / 3 ’ ͵ 
 παραδιδόναι, "Διατί τοῦτο τὸ μύρον οὐκ ἐπραθη τρια- 
 
 / ὃ / eRe >. 6.9 δὲ a 
 
 κοσίων δηναρίων καὶ ἐδόθη πτωχοῖς ; “εἶπεν δὲ τοῦτο 
 τ “ \ an a + ea τε Ψ., Ὁ / 
 οὐχ OTL περὶ TOV πτωχῶν ἔμελεν AUTH, ἀλλ᾿ OTL κλέπτης 
 \ \ , 
 ἦν καὶ τὸ γχωσσόκομον ἔχων τὰ βαλλόμενα ἐβαάσταζεν. 
 5 3 ¢ » AROS, ets “ > \ Cpe 
 εἶπεν οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, "Ades αὐτήν, ἵνα εἰς τὴν ἡμέραν 
 a fa) / ae! \ Ν 
 τοῦ ἐνταφιασμοῦ μου τηρήσῃ αὐτό. “τοὺς πτωχοὺς γὰρ 
 > an / 
 πάντοτε ἔχετε μεθ᾽ ἑαυτῶν, ἐμὲ δὲ οὐ πάντοτε ἔχετε. 
 
 ddl Oy 5S δ᾿ ΟΜ \ b] A 3 ὃ / “ ΕῚ a 
 
 γνω οὖν ὁ ὄχλος πολὺς ἐκ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων ὅτι ἐκεῖ 
 bl] / λυ > \ \ 3 al / 5] > ἫΝ \ 
 ἐστίν, καὶ ἦλθον ov διὰ τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν μόνον, adr ἵνα Kal 
 
 a ͵ A 
 τὸν Λάζαρον ἴδωσιν, ὃν ἤγειρεν ἐκ νεκρῶν. "“ἐβουλεύ- 
 A Ἂ 
 σαντο δὲ οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς ἵνα καὶ τὸν Λάξαρον ἀποκτείνωσιν, 
 j1¢/ \ 3 3 Ἂ ς A lal 2 . 2 / 
 OTL πολλοὶ δι’ αὐτὸν ὑπῆγον τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων Kai ἐπί- 
 Ν nr 
 στευον εἰς τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν. 
 
 ‘ an \ \ 
 
 “TH ἐπαύριον ὄχλος πολὺς ὁ ἐλθὼν εἰς τὴν ἑορτήν, 
 ᾽ , “ yj 3 n 9) 1¢ , 18 >» 
 ἀκούσαντες ὅτι ἔρχεται ᾿Ιησοῦς εἰς ᾿Ιεροσόλυμα, *€da- 
 βον τὰ βαΐα τῶν φοινίκων καὶ ἐξῆλθον εἰς ὑπάντησιν 
 
 S| . 2 , 79] “ ir / ςι / 
 αὐτῷ, καὶ ἐκραύγαζον, ‘Ocavva, εὐλογημένος ὁ ἐρχόμενος 
 
 3 A. Je \ a? 
 ἐν ὀνόματι Κυρίου, καὶ ὁ βασιλεὺς τοῦ Ἰσραήλ. “evpav 
 
 \ eS lal ᾽ / > / 5 ᾽ ᾽ / > 
 δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ὀνάριον ἐκάθισεν ἐπ᾽ αὐτό, καθὼς ἐστιν 
 
XIT. 29 KATA IQANNHN. Eva 
 
 f 15 \ A ane 
 γεγραμμένον," Mn φοβοῦ, θυγάτηρ Σιών᾽ ἰδού, ὁ βασιλεύς 
 “ ¥ A an 
 σου ἔρχεται καθήμενος ἐπὶ πῶλον ὄνου. “ταῦτα οὐκ 
 » ¢ \ > A 3 A Ἢ Stk 2 / 
 ἔγνωσαν ot μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ TO πρῶτον, GAN ὅτε ἐδοξάσθη 
 5 fa) / / if, a An 
 Ἰησοῦς, τότε ἐμνήσθησαν ὅτι ταῦτα ἦν ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ γεγραμ- 
 , \ a / 3 A 3 
 μένα καὶ ταῦτα ἐποίησαν αὐτῷ. "ἐμαρτύρει οὖν ὁ 
 ΕΣ ς x ᾽ 5 fal v4 \ , 3 , 
 ὄχλος ὁ WY μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ, OTe τὸν Λάζαρον ἐφώνησεν 
 ἴον / ᾿ v een A 
 ἐκ TOU μνημείου Kal ἤγειρεν αὐτὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν "διὰ 
 n Ne, Εν er 7 a 
 τοῦτο καὶ ὑπήντησεν αὐτῷ ὁ ὄχλος, OTL ἤκουσαν τοῦτο 
 ’ Γι \ a 
 αὐτὸν πεποιηκέναι TO σημεῖον. 
 9 φ 5 A Ss \ A 
 "Οἱ οὖν Φαρισαῖοι εἶπαν πρὸς ἑαυτούς, Θεωρεῖτε ὅτι 
 ’ 2 a SINpAL (ay ς , ἥν τ ἢ Ὧν φῆ ὦ ΨΡΟΝ 
 οὐκ ὠφελεῖτε οὐδέν" ἴδε ὁ κόσμος ὀπίσω αὐτοῦ ἀπῆλθεν. 
 2053 δ ὩΣ / A 
 “Ἦσαν δὲ “EXAnvés tives ἐκ τῶν ἀναβαινόντων 
 "» / ἝΞ. ΝΕ Ὁ . 3 aA 
 iva προσκυνήσωσιν ἐν τῇ ἑορτῇ" “οὗτοι οὖν προσῆλθον 
 / A \ “ \ A 
 Φιλίππῳ τῷ ἀπὸ Βηθσαϊδὰ τῆς Tadiralas, καὶ ἠρώτων 
 \ / / / \ a a / 
 αὐτὸν λέγοντες, Κύριε, θέλομεν τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν ἰδεῖν. ™ép- 
 I \ ͵ aA? ΓᾺΡ 
 χεται Φίλιππος καὶ λέγει τῷ ᾿Ανδρέᾳ᾽ ἔρχεται ᾿Ανδρέας 
 Ν I / a 3 A ¢ na 
 καὶ Φίλιππος καὶ λέγουσιν τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ. *6 δὲ Ἰησοῦς 
 - / 3 Γ mk: ral 
 ἀποκρίνεται αὐτοῖς λέγων, ᾿Ελήλυθεν ἡ ὥρα iva δοξασ- 
 om © eX Coles / 24 5 \ 3 \ , ate WN \ 
 θῇ ὁ vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. “᾿ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἐὰν μὴ 
 ΓΞ , \ ᾽ \ A ’ , ΓΝ 
 ὁ κόκκος τοῦ σίτου πεσὼν εἰς τὴν γῆν ἀποθάνῃ, αὐτὸς 
 \ \ , 5 e 
 μόνος μένει ἐὰν δὲ ἀποθάνῃ, πολὺν καρπὸν φέρει. “ὁ 
 a \ \ 5 la) > / 3 πα {Ae fal 
 φιλών τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ἀπολλύει αὐτὴν᾽ καὶ ὁ μισῶν 
 a an / / > \ 2A 
 τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ἐν TH κόσμῳ τούτῳ, εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον 
 A > \ > 
 φυλάξει αὐτήν. “éav ἐμοί τις διακονῇ, ἐμοὶ ἀκολου- 
 Ar \ ς , ς δι 
 θείτω καὶ ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγώ, ἐκεῖ καὶ ὁ διάκονος ὁ ἐμὸς 
 A ’ \ ¢ 
 ἔσται ἐάν τις ἐμοὶ διακονῇ, τιμήσει αὐτὸν ὃ πατήρ. 
 2 κα ¢ r , \ 1 γεν, 33) 4 Π ἢ 
 νῦν ἡ ψυχή μου τετάρακται, καὶ τί εἴπω; Ἰ]άτερ, 
 r / ΡῚ A ¢/ , > \ \ an 3 
 σῶσόν με ἐκ τῆς ὥρας ταύτης. ἀλλὰ διὰ τοῦτο ἦλθον 
 > \ “ , 28 D , ἢ \ oo 
 εἰς τὴν ὥραν ταύτην. ™Ilarep δόξασόν cov τὸ ὄνομα. 
 5 3 rn “ \ 
 ἦλθεν οὖν φωνὴ ἐκ Tod οὐρανοῦ, Καὶ ἐδόξασα καὶ 
 ς \ Ψ / 
 πάλιν δοξάσω. “do οὖν ὄχλος ὁ ἑστὼς καὶ ἀκούσας 
 
38 EYAPTEAION XII. 29 
 
 »- \ / ἡ ϑ ” ᾿ a 
 ἔλεγεν βροντὴν γεγονέναι. ἄλλοι ssi Αγγελος αὐτῷ 
 / ’ / > a \ 3 Sy ee 
 λελάληκεν. “ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν, Ov δι’ ἐμὲ 
 ς \ “ / > \ » ¢€ lal Siu / > \ 
 ἢ φωνὴ αὕτη γέγονεν ἀλλὰ Ov ὑμᾶς. νυν κρίσις ἐστὶν 
 τοῦ κόσμου τούτου, νῦν ὁ ἄρχων τοῦ κόσμου τούτου 
 Ξ \ A n a 
 ἐκβληθήσεται ἔξω" “Kaye ἐὰν ὑψωθῶ ἐκ τῆς γῆς, πάν- 
 / \ lal / 
 Tas ἑλκύσω πρὸς ἐμαυτόν. “τοῦτο δὲ ἔλεγεν σημαίνων 
 / “ δ" > / 
 ποίῳ θανάτῳ ἤμελλεν ἀποθνήσκειν. 
 34? A Θ > 9.5 ee hol ε As μ5 ἢ 5 
 mexpiOn οὖν αὐτῷ ὁ ὄχλος, “Ἡμεῖς ἠκούσαμεν ἐκ 
 al ¢ lal a 
 τοῦ νόμου ὅτι 6 Χριστὸς μένει εἰς TOV αἰῶνα, Kal πῶς 
 al id Ὁ la) 5 
 λέγεις σὺ ὅτι Δεῖ ὑψωθῆναι τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ; 
 a ¢ BN n > 5.4 3 ~ 
 τίς ἐστιν οὗτος ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου; “εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς 
 cy 3 fal 5 ¥ , \ an 2 S lal > / 
 ὁ Ἰησοῦς, "Ett μικρὸν χρόνον τὸ φῶς ἐν ὑμῖν ἐστίν. 
 al \ A / f A 
 περιπατεῖτε ὡς TO φῶς ἔχετε, ἵνα μὴ σκοτία ὑμᾶς κατα- 
 4 lal a / fal 
 λάβῃ Kal ὁ περιπατῶν ἐν TH σκοτίᾳ οὐκ οἶδεν ποῦ 
 ΠΆΡΙΣ 86 “ \ na oo ἢ > \ A “ 
 ὑπάγει. “ws τὸ φῶς ἔχετε, πιστεύετε εἰς τὸ φώς, ἵνα 
 / a 3 al 
 viol φωτὸς γένησθε. ταῦτα ἐλάλησεν ᾿Ιησοῦς, καὶ 
 ΕῚ Ν " / 3 > " A 
 ἀπελθὼν ἐκρύβη ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν. 
 37 “ δὲ ᾽ an lal / 7 
 Τοσαῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ σημεῖα πεποιηκότος ἔμπροσθεν 
 ἡ ὦ ᾽ ΡΝ > ee -) SBC ς , ¢ " 
 αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰς αὐτόν" “iva ὁ λόγος Ησαΐου 
 an / aA ὧδ 5 / / Σ / 
 τοῦ προφήτου πληρωθῇ, Ov εἶπεν, Κύριε, Tis ἐπίστευσεν 
 a3 νει (ἡὰ Nae / ͵ , ᾽ , 
 τῇ ἀκοῇ ἡμῶν; καὶ ὁ βραχίων Κυρίου τίνι ἀπεκαλύφθη; 
 39 Ν lal >] 3 r / 7 / 3 
 διὰ τοῦτο οὐκ ἠδύναντο πιστεύειν, ὅτε πάλιν εἴπεν 
 aA lal \ 
 Ἡσαΐας, “Τετύφλωκεν αὐτῶν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς καὶ 
 3 / ᾽ Lal \ δί ἴα \ 16 al 3 θ 
 ἐπώρωσεν αὐτῶν τὴν καρδίαν, ἵνα μὴ ἴδωσιν τοῖς οφθαλ- 
 pois καὶ νοήσωσιν τῇ καρδίᾳ Kal στραφώσιν, καὶ ἰάσομαι 
 ? / 41 a = ς she ¢/ ~ 5%, \ / 
 αὐτούς. “ταῦτα εἶπεν ‘Hoaias ὅτι εἶδεν τὴν δόξαν 
 4 A A Vint \ ᾽ A, 426 , Ν᾿ ΤΑΙ 
 αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐλάλησεν περὶ αὐτοῦ" “ὅμως μέντοι καὶ ἐκ 
 “ ’ “ \ 2 / > > / ’ \ \ 
 TOV ἀρχόντων πολλοὶ ἐπίστευσαν εἰς AUTOV, αλλὰ διὰ 
 5» 
 τοὺς Φαρισαίους οὐχ ὡμολόγουν, ἵνα μὴ ἀποσυνάγωγοι 
 43? / \ \ , a 
 γένωνται. “ἠγάπησαν yap τὴν δόξαν τῶν ἀνθρώπων 
 a \ a a 
 μᾶλλον ἤπερ τὴν δόξαν τοῦ θεοῦ. 
 
XIII. 8 KATA IQANNHN. 39 
 
 a \ τ 
 “Ἰησοῦς δὲ ἔκραξεν καὶ εἶπεν, ‘O πιστεύων εἰς ἐμέ, 
 3 [2 > δον 3 \ > \ Li / e 45 Rye 
 οὐ πιστεύει εἰς ἐμέ, ἀλλὰ εἰς TOV πέμψαντά pe “Kal ὁ 
 a \ » A 
 θεωρῶν ἐμὲ θεωρεῖ τὸν πέμψαντά pe. “ἐγὼ φῶς εἰς 
 \ / / vA lal ς , > 3 \ > a 
 τὸν κόσμον ἐλήλυθα, iva πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμὲ ἐν TH 
 / \ f 47 \ 37 >’ / a e / 
 σκοτίᾳ μὴ μείνῃ. “Kal ἐάν τις μου ἀκούσῃ τῶν ῥημά- 
 \ \ / b] \ > / ΡΩΝ |e ’ \ 5 
 των καὶ μὴ φυλάξῃ, ἐγὼ ov κρίνω avtov’ ov yap ἦλθον 
 “ ͵ \ ἢ ϑη 4 ἢ \ / 48 ¢ 
 iva κρίνω τὸν κόσμον, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα σώσω τὸν κόσμον. “ὁ 
 3 a SUN, \ \ , SIEM ¢ , 4 \ 
 ἀθετῶν ἐμὲ καὶ μὴ λαμβάνων τὰ ῥήματά pou ἔχει τὸν 
 [hes / a / - a 
 κρίνοντα αὐτόν ὁ λόγος ὃν ἐλάλησα, ἐκεῖνος κρινεῖ av- 
 \ Η As D re, 49 ¢/ BLN? is > a ᾽ 
 τὸν ἐν τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ. “ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐξ ἐμαυτοῦ οὐκ 
 > > al / 
 ἐλάλησα, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ πέμψας με πατὴρ αὐτός μοι ἐντολὴν 
 
 πὸ 5 ee / ς 
 "καὶ οἶδα ὅτι ἡ ἐντολὴ 
 
 / f) 25 \ / / 
 δέδωκεν τί εἴπω Kal Ti λαλήσω 
 a \ 2a ! Δ > a 
 αὐτοῦ ζωὴ ai@vios ἐστιν. ἃ οὖν ἐγὼ λαλῶ, καθὼς εἴ- 
 ¢ / / a 
 PNKEV μοι ὁ πατήρ, οὕτως λαλῶ. 
 18 "Πρὸ δὲ τῆς ἑορτῆς τοῦ πάσχα εἰδὼς ὁ ᾿Τησοῦς 
 “ ἊΝ 2 δι Ὁ e/ 7 a 3 a t 
 OTL ἦλθεν αὐτοῦ ἡ ὥρα iva μεταβῇ ἐκ Tod κόσμου 
 \ \ 4 5 
 τούτου πρὸς τὸν πατέρα, ἀγαπήσας τοὺς ἰδίους τοὺς ἐν 
 / ᾽ / 2 / 
 τῷ κόσμῳ, εἰς τέλος ἠγάπησεν αὐτούς" "καὶ δείπνου 
 7 A / Yj 
 γινομένου, τοῦ διαβόλου ἤδη βεβληκότος εἰς τὴν Kap- 
 δί σ΄ ὃ al 5 \ Ἵ "ὃ ΠΣ Ἵ / 
 lav ἵνα παραδοῖ αὐτὸν ᾿Ιούδας Σίμωνος ᾿Ισκαριώτης, 
 / ᾿ ΝἝ 6 \ A 
 εἰδὼς “ὅτι πάντα ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ ὁ πατὴρ εἰς τὰς χεῖρας, 
 δ Or 3 \ θ ΟΣ» θ \ \ \ θ \ € / 
 καὶ ὅτι ἀπὸ θεοῦ ἐξῆλθεν καὶ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ὑπάγει, 
 A / 
 ἐγείρεται ἐκ τοῦ δείπνου “καὶ τίθησιν τὰ ἱμάτια, Kab 
 ͵ ee % 
 λαβὼν λέντιον διέξωσεν Eavtov' "εἶτα βάλλει ὕδωρ εἰς 
 A v , A 
 τὸν νυπτῆρα, Kal ἤρξατο νίπτειν τοὺς πόδας τῶν μαθη- 
 A i , a » f Le ὃ a , 67 
 τῶν καὶ ἐκμάσσειν τῷ λεντίῳ ᾧ Hv διεζωσμένος. "ἔρ- 
 , A ἢ , Ἀ , 2 A , , 
 χεται οὖν πρὸς Σίμωνα Πέτρον λέγει αὐτῷ, Κύριε, σύ 
 / \ / > A 
 μου νίπτεις τοὺς πόδας ; ᾿ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν 
 Φ n SO > \ a 4 3 7ὃ ” / \ \ 
 αὐτῷ, Ὃ ἐγὼ ποιῶ σὺ οὐκ οἶδας ἄρτι, γνώσῃ δὲ μετὰ 
 A anus 4 -αἃ ͵ > Ee: \ 
 ταῦτα. “λέγει αὐτῷ Ilétpos, Οὐ μὴ νέψης μου τοὺς 
 , > \ 7 dele > / > A 2 A. 3 \ A 
 πόδας εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα. ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ἰησοῦς αὐτῷ, ᾿Εἰὰν μὴ 
 
40 ΕΥ̓ΑΓΓΈΛΙΟΝ | XIIL. 8 
 
 , ᾽ » , 2 > a G07 2 A ͵ 
 νίψω σε, οὐκ ἔχεις μέρος μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ. “λέγει αὐτῷ Σί- 
 ͵ / \ \ / / > \ \ 
 μων Πέτρος, Κύριε, μὴ τοὺς πόδας μου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ 
 τὰς χεῖρας καὶ τὴν κεφαλήν. “λέγει αὐτῷ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “O 
 ‘4 > / 
 λελουμένος οὐκ ἔχει χρείαν εἰ μὴ τοὺς πόδας νίψασθαι, 
 ἀλλ᾽ ἔστιν καθαρὸς ὅλος" καὶ ὑμεῖς καθαροί ἐστε, ἀλλ᾽ 
 SLY / S125, x! \ / ae Ae \ 
 οὐχὶ πάντες. "ἤδει γὰρ τὸν παραδιδόντα αὐτόν" διὰ 
 fa} ἊΨ 6 r eee. / a) 
 τοῦτο εἶπεν ὅτι Οὐχὶ πάντες καθαροί ἐστε. 
 7 τ \ a 
 “Ore οὖν ἔνιψεν τοὺς πόδας αὐτῶν Kal ἔλαβεν Ta 
 e a / a 
 ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ Kal ἀνέπεσεν πάλιν, εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Γινώ- 
 ͵ ῃ ee ἢ ¢ san Ny, c it cm 
 σκετε τί πεποίηκα ὑμῖν; “ὑμεῖς φωνεῖτέ pe, Ὃ διδάσ- 
 Awe , Ν \ a , oe ak , 14 » 
 καλος, καὶ ὁ κυριος᾽ καὶ καλως λέγετε, εἰμὺ γάρ. “εἰ 
 3 > x », ς Ὁ \ / ¢ , ἐσ. / 
 οὖν ἐγὼ ἔνυψα ὑμῶν τοὺς πόδας ὁ κύριος καὶ ὁ διδάσ- 
 a } 
 καλος, Kal ὑμεῖς ὀφείλετε ἀλλήλων νίπτειν τοὺς πόδας. 
 ἍΞ 6. ἢ \ 7 Ἂμ “ \ 5. Ἐπ es , 
 ὑπόδειγμα γὰρ ἔδωκα ὑμῖν, ἵνα καθὼς ἐγὼ ἐποίησα 
 a a a \ ἘΣ ΝΝ 
 ὑμῖν καὶ ὑμεῖς ποιῆτε. “any ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὐκ 
 Μ rn / a / 3 fa) O\ ’ / 
 ἔστιν δοῦλος μείζων τοῦ κυρίου αὐτοῦ, οὐδὲ ἀπόστολος 
 fa) > an 
 μείζων τοῦ πέμψαντος αὐτόν. “εἰ ταῦτα οἴδατε, μακά- 
 A U ¢ A 
 ριοί ἐστε ἐὰν ποιῆτε αὐτά. “ou περὶ πάντων ὑμῶν λέγω" 
 ET ats / ¢ \ “ 
 ἐγὼ οἶδα τίνας ἐξελεξάμην" ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα ἡ γραφὴ πληρωθῇ, 
 a A ᾿] 
 Ὃ τρώγων μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ τὸν ἄρτον ἐπῆρεν ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ τὴν 
 a 3 7 Cor \ fal 
 πτέρναν αὐτοῦ. “am ἄρτι λέγω ὑμῖν πρὸ τοῦ γενέ- 
 / / > 
 σθαι, ἵνα πιστεύσητε ὅταν γένηται OTL ἐγὼ εἰμι. “᾿άμὴν 
 > \ / « lal a / v he > \ 
 ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὁ λαμβάνων ἂν τινα πέμψω ἐμὲ λαμ- 
 “ \ \ Uy ΄ 
 βάνει: ὁ δὲ ἐμὲ λαμβάνων λαμβάνει τὸν πέμψαντά με. 
 21 a ? \ > aA 5 , fal , z 
 Ταῦτα εἰπὼν ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐταράχθη τῷ πνεύματι Kal 
 > \ 9 > \ ? \ / Cc oa “ Φ > 
 ἐμαρτύρησεν καὶ εἶπεν, ᾿Αμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτε εἷς ἐξ 
 κ / ἣν ΄ 
 ὑμῶν παραδώσει pe. ““ἔβλεπον οὖν εἰς ἀλλήλους οἱ 
 9 
 μαθηταί, ἀπορούμενοι περὶ τίνος λέγει. “HY ἀνακεί- 
 lal a P “ [4] U rn 
 μενος εἷς ἐκ TOV μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ κόλπῳ TOD 
 Ε] a «Ὁ 2 ' Fe | va) 24 / 5 / / 
 Ιησοῦ, ὃν ἠγάπα ὁ Ἰησοῦς" “vever οὖν τούτῳ Σίμων 
 / > A > 
 Πέτρος καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, Eire τίς ἐστιν περὶ οὗ λέγει. 
 
XIV. 1 KATA IQANNHN. 41 
 
 25 9 \ a ΝΣ δὲ αν \ a ΚΤ Ν 
 ἀναπεσὼν ἐκεῖνος οὕτως ἐπὶ τὸ στῆθος τοῦ Inoov 
 λέ bd] a Ku / 5 " 96? “ τ Ἢ] aA 
 eyes αὐτῷ, Κύριε, τὶς ἐστιν; “αποκρίνεται ὁ ᾿Ἰησοῦς, 
 Ἢ iat 5 a ’ \ B ͵ \ 7 \ ὃ , ΕῚ an 
 UKELVOS ἐστιν @ EY ἄψω TO ψωμίον καὶ δώσω αὐτῷ. 
 3 \ Ἶ ͵ \ / > 
 βάψας οὖν τὸ ψωμίον λαμβάνει καὶ δίδωσιν ᾿Ιούδᾳ 
 
 21 \ \ \ / , 
 καὶ μετὰ τὸ Ψωμίον, τότε 
 
 Σέμωνος ᾿Ισκαριώτου. 
 A a ¢ a / lal 
 εἰσῆλθεν eis ἐκεῖνον 6 Σατανᾶς. λέγει οὖν αὐτῷ 
 ἐ 
 | rn Ὃ lal / / 28 a δὲ ὃ \ 
 ησοῦς, ποιεῖς ποίησον τάχιον. “τοῦτο δὲ οὐδεὶς 
 tal \ / 3 3 a 
 ἔγνω τῶν ἀνακειμένων πρὸς τί εἶπεν αὐτῷ" τινὲς γὰρ 
 ae Se NN r ’ 5 T "ὃ “ χέ 
 ἐδόκουν, “ἐπεὶ τὸ γλωσσόκομον εἶχεν ᾿Ιούδας, ὅτι λέγει 
 a a / @ / fy 
 αὐτῷ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “Ayopacov ὧν χρείαν ἔχομεν εἰς τὴν 
 A a A fal 0 \ 3 
 ἑορτήν, ἢ τοῖς πτωχοῖς ἵνα τι δῷ. “λαβὼν οὖν τὸ 
 rn al > Ame  Ἐ59 \ / 
 ψωμίον ἐκεῖνος ἐξῆλθεν εὐθύς" ἦν δὲ νύξ. 
 Γι “Ὁ δεῖν lal lal 
 "Ore οὖν ἐξῆλθεν, λέγει ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Νῦν ἐδοξάσθη ὁ 
 lal / \ Ld ‘ / A 
 υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, καὶ ὁ θεὸς ἐδοξάσθη ἐν αὐτῷ. “lei 
 3 a ς \ 
 ὁ θεὸς ἐδοξάσθη ἐν αὐτῷ, καὶ ὁ θεὸς δοξάσει αὐτὸν ἐν 
 τ δὴν κι \ 3A» ὃ , ΓΝ. 9870 , Ν \ 
 αὐτῷ, καὶ εὐθὺς δοξάσει αὐτόν. εκνία, ἔτι μικρὸν 
 a / / 4 rn 
 μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν εἰμί. ἕξητήσετέ με, καὶ καθὼς εἶπον τοῖς 
 \ “- 
 Ἰουδαίοις ὅτι “Ὅπου ἐγὼ ὑπάγω ὑμεῖς οὐ δύνασθε 
 a Ν ¢ an 7 wv 4 \ 
 ἐλθεῖν, καὶ ὑμῖν λέγω ἄρτι. “ἐντολὴν καινὴν δίδωμι 
 Cam “ 3 a Te m5 aie εἰν ῶο 
 ὑμῖν, ἵνα ἀγαπᾶτε ἀλλήλους, καθὼς ἠγάπησα ὑμᾶς 
 mies a ᾽ ͵ 35? , 
 ἵνα καὶ ὑμεῖς ἀγαπᾶτε ἀλλήλους. “ἐν τούτῳ γνώσονται 
 \ / \ 
 πάντες OTL ἐμοὶ μαθηταί ἐστε, ἐὰν ἀγάπην ἔχητε ἐν 
 5 a / / a A 
 ἀλλήλοις. “Λέγει αὐτῷ Σίμων Πέτρος, Κύριε, ποῦ 
 / 3 ἴον ied « 
 ὑπάγεις; ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς, “Ὅπου ὑπάγω, οὐ δύνασαί 
 A A , / Ν᾽ 
 μοι νῦν ἀκολουθῆσαι, ἀκολουθήσεις δὲ ὕστερον. “ἽἽλέγει 
 A , ,ὔ ͵ a 
 αὐτῷ Ilérpos, Κύριε, διατί οὐ δύναμαί σοι ἀκολουθῆσαι 
 ov \ , οὶ, τ A 67 38 2 , 
 ἄρτι; τὴν ψυχήν μου ὑπὲρ σοῦ θήσω. “ἀποκρίνεται 
 lal x / «ς \ lal / 
 ᾿Ιησοῦς, Τὴν ψυχήν cov ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ θήσεις ; ἀμὴν ἀμὴν 
 ᾽ \ ~ 7 , Lo 
 λέγω σοι, οὐ μὴ ἀλέκτωρ φωνήσῃ ἕως οὗ ἀρνήσῃ με 
 / 
 τρίς. ; 
 1 \ ͵ Gime : , 
 14 "Μὴ ταρασσέσθω ὑμῶν ἡ καρδία: πιστεύετε εἰς 
 
42 EYAFTEAION XIV. 1 
 
 \ , \ 5) 5. Ν , 22 a oi a 
 τὸν θεόν, καὶ εἰς ἐμὲ πιστεύετε. “EV TH οἰκίᾳ τοῦ 
 , \ ey ae te ae ae rae rr 
 πατρός μου μοναὶ πολλαί εἰσιν εἰ δὲ μή, εἶπον ἂν ὑμῖν 
 ἐ ΕΝ ΟΥ̓͂Ν \ \ , 
 OTL πορεύομαι ἑτοιμάσαι τόπον ὑμῖν “καὶ ἐὰν πο- 
 a , “Ὁ 
 ρευθῶ καὶ ἑτοιμάσω τόπον ὑμῖν, πάλιν ἔρχομαι καὶ 
 , id fal Ν 5 , ~ vA a) AyD \ 
 παραλήμψομαι ὑμᾶς πρὸς ἐμαυτόν, ἵνα ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγὼ 
 εἶ Ὁ a 5 4 Δ δεν eS ’ " Ν egy 
 Kal ὑμεῖς ἦτε. “καὶ ὅπου ἐγὼ ὑπάγω οἴδατε τὴν ὁδόν. 
 | Lal Lal « 
 λέγει αὐτῷ Θωμᾶς, Κύριε, οὐκ οἴδαμεν ποῦ ὑπάγεις" 
 A 18 \ 580 2 > W ’ a ¢ Ἴ “ ig ©? , ᾽ 
 TOS οἴδαμεν τὴν ὁδόν; “λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Eyo εἰμι 
 AS Cy ae Aes "Ὁ Soe i as ” \ 
 ἡ ὁδὸς Kal ἡ ἀλήθεια καὶ ἡ ζωή" οὐδεὶς ἔρχεται πρὸς 
 / > fa! / \ \ 
 τὸν πατέρα εἰ μὴ δι’ ἐμοῦ. ‘el ἐγνώκειτέ με, καὶ TOV 
 pe \ ae ἢ 
 πατέρα μου ἐγνώκειτε ἄν καὶ ἀπ᾽ ἄρτι γινώσκετε 
 aN Ar ick , a Sa ἢ 5. κα 
 αὐτὸν καὶ ἑωράκατε αὐτόν. λέγει αὐτῷ Φίλιππος, 
 a δὰ on 4 \ b] A i.e / 
 Κύριε, δεῖξον ἡμῖν τὸν πατέρα, καὶ ἀρκεῖ ἡμῖν. “λέγει 
 ; > 
 5 i: 22) 3 a , / ae [4] > / \ > 
 αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Τοσούτῳ χρόνῳ μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν εἰμί, καὶ οὐκ 
 ” / Λ « e AQ > \ σὺ \ 
 ἔγνωκάς pe Φίλιππε; ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακε TOV πα- 
 / " a \ / a Κι Ἂν \ , Α ἢ 2 
 Tépa’ πῶς σὺ λέγεις, Δεῖξον ἡμῖν τὸν πατέρα; “ou 
 A \ \ \ / 
 πιστεύεις OTL ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρὶ Kal ὁ πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί 
 «Ὁ <a > a » 
 ἐστιν; τὰ ῥήματα ἃ ἐγὼ λέγω ὑμῖν ἀπ᾽ ἐμαυτοῦ οὐ 
 G2. € \ \ γα > ss , nr \ > A 
 λαλῶ" ὁ δὲ πατὴρ ὁ ἐν ἐμοὶ μένων ποιεῖ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ. 
 7 \ aA \ \ ς 
 Ἰπιστεύετέ μοι OTL ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρὶ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἐν 
 > Ἄς > \ / 3. A ΠᾺΡ 2 \ / / 129 5 Ν 
 ἐμοί εἰ δὲ μή, διὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτὰ πιστεύετέ μοι. “ἀμὴν 
 5 \ 7 ς Qn 4 le > > I 4 \ ” \ b] \ 
 ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὃ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμέ, TA ἔργα ἃ ἐγὼ 
 a >) nr / A / , 
 ποιῶ, κἀκεῖνος ποιήσει, καὶ μείζονα τούτων ποιήσει" 
 / \ x 
 OTL ἐγὼ πρὸς τὸν πατέρα πορεύομαι. “Kal 6 TL ἂν 
 A / a / “ 
 αἰτήσητε ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί μου, τοῦτο ποιήσω, ἵνα δοξασ- 
 ATL \ > al fi... 24. 39 ee / > a 
 θῇ ὁ πατὴρ ἐν τῷ υἱῷ “éav τι αἰτήσητέ [με] ἐν τῷ 
 ὀνόματί μου, ἐγὼ ποιήσω. 
 15? \ > AF Ν > \ \ pepe. , 
 Eav ἀγαπᾶτέ pe, Tas ἐντολὰς Tas ἐμὰς τηρήσετε. 
 Ts ei ae ’ \ / Ay se , 
 Kay@® ἐρωτήσω τὸν πατέρα καὶ ἄλλον παράκλητον 
 lal «ς A \ xa 7 \ a 
 δώσει ὑμῖν, ἵνα ἢ μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, “TO πνεῦμα 
 lal 5 / A iq / τι a dA 5 
 τῆς ἀληθείας, ὃ ὁ κόσμος οὐ δύναται λαβεῖν, ὅτι οὐ 
 
XIV. 31 KATA IQANNHN. 43 
 
 = 2 Gian , ᾽ 
 θεωρεῖ αὐτὸ οὐδὲ γινώσκει αὐτό. ὑμεῖς γινώσκετε αὐτό, 
 ¢ ᾽ cA is \ > Cian > / 18 ’ 2 / 
 ὅτι παρ᾽ ὑμῖν μένει Kal ἐν ὑμῖν ἐστίν. “ove ἀφήσω 
 ς a > ΕΝ eager \ Ἑ a 19 ἡ \ \ 
 ὑμᾶς ὀρφανούς" ἔρχομαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς. “ETL μικρὸν Kal 
 , a ς - τε ἐν “ 
 ὁ κόσμος με οὐκέτι θεωρεῖ, ὑμεῖς δὲ θεωρεῖτέ με, OTL 
 ai. x A eines , ic ΑΘ ΤΩΝ " 7 ἢ 
 ἐγὼ ζῶ καὶ ὑμεῖς ζήσετε. “ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ γνώ- 
 A ἢ εὖ “Ὁ ς a \ 
 σεσθε ὑμεῖς ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί μου Kal ὑμεῖς ἐν ἐμοὶ 
 2 να > Ce 21 ¢ ” \ > / \ A 
 κἀγὼ ἐν ὑμῖν. Oo ἔχων τὰς ἐντολάς μου Kal τηρῶν 
 a A ς \ a 
 αὐτάς, ἐκεῖνός ἐστιν ὁ ἀγαπῶν pe’ ὁ δὲ ἀγαπῶν με 
 \ na / = 5 \ 9 7 
 ἀγαπηθήσεται ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρός μου καγὼ ἀγαπήσω 
 a / 2 Ys 2 AN 
 αὐτὸν καὶ éudavicw αὐτῷ ἐμαυτόν. ™“éyer αὐτῷ 
 5 , 3 ccs / K ’ / / ef Cs 
 Ἰούδας, οὐχ ὁ ᾿Ισκαριώτης, Κύριε, τί γέγονεν ὅτι ἡμῖν 
 , 2 , \ τὰν 18 “ἢ . 23 2 
 μέλλεις ἐμφανίζειν σεαυτὸν Kal οὐχὶ TO κόσμῳ; ~ aTrE- 
 ’ la! ᾽ A 2 , 5 “Ὁ \ 
 κρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Eay tis ἀγαπᾷ pe, Tov 
 ς > / 3 / 
 λόγον μου τηρήσει, καὶ ὁ πατήρ μου ἀγαπήσει αὑτόν, 
 ἃ ’ ‘ \ ᾽ ὁ. νὰ 
 καὶ πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐλευσόμεθα καὶ μονὴν παρ᾽ αὐτῷ ποιη- 
 a / 2 a. 
 σόμεθα. “ὁ μὴ ἀγαπῶν με τοὺς λόγους μου οὐ τηρεῖ 
 =! ς , A 3 / > ” aN ? \ a 
 καὶ ὁ λόγος ὃν AKOVETE οὐκ ἐστιν ἐμὸς AANA TOU 
 πέμψαντος με πατρός. 
 ἴω an a ε 
 Ταῦτα λελάληκα ὑμῖν Tap ὑμῖν μένων “ὁ δὲ 
 / \ A ek «Ὁ ,ὔ ¢ \ 3 
 παράκλητος, TO πνεῦμα TO ἅγιον ὃ πέμψει ὁ πατὴρ ἐν 
 ΛΕ: al A / ς 
 τῷ ὀνόματί μου, ἐκεῖνος ὑμᾶς διδάξει πάντα καὶ ὑπο- 
 , ¢ [2] \ la) al 
 μνήσει ὑμᾶς πάντα ἃ εἶπον ὑμῖν. “εἰρήνην ἀφίημι ὑμῖν, 
 a \ 
 εἰρήνην τὴν ἐμὴν δίδωμι ὑμῖν: ov καθὼς ὃ κόσμος 
 / > \ / Ear ee \ / ς A ε 
 δίδωσιν ἐγὼ δίδωμι ὑμῖν. μὴ ταρασσέσθω ὑμῶν ἡ 
 δὴ δὲ ὃ / 28.2 ἢ “ ἀν ΟὟ ὁ ἃ ξ΄. ὦ 
 καρδία, μηδὲ δειλιάτω. “ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐγὼ εἶπον ὑμῖν, 
 e 7 \ id a A 
 Tray καὶ ἔρχομαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς. εἰ ἠγαπᾶτέ με, ἐχάρητε 
 x ef , / / 
 ἂν ὅτι πορεύομαι πρὸς τὸν πατέρα, OTL ὁ πατὴρ μείζων 
 na Ces / 
 μου ἐστίν. “Kai νῦν εἴρηκα ὑμῖν πρὶν γενέσθαι, ἵνα 
 “ 7 , SOL Sines \ , ᾽ 
 ὁταν YEVNTAL πιστευσήητε. οὐκέτι πολλὰ λαλήσω μεθ 
 ὑμῶν" ἔρχεται γὰρ ὁ τοῦ κόσμου ἄρχων, καὶ ἐν ἐμοὶ 
 ’ » Ἰδέ 31 x “ An € / / 3 A 
 οὐκ ἔχει οὐδέν, “adn ἵνα γνῷ ὁ κόσμος ὅτι ἀγαπῶ 
 
44 ΓΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ. XIV. 31 
 
 \ / \ \ > \ » / ς ῇ 
 τὸν πατέρα, καὶ καθὼς ἐντολὴν ἔδωκέν μοι ὁ πατήρ, 
 (A an / n 
 οὕτως ποιῶ. ἐγείρεσθε, ἄγωμεν ἐντεῦθεν. 
 15 PR t > Ψ ΟΝ δ... , jae 7 
 γώ εἰμι ἡ ἄμπελος ἡ ἀληθινή, καὶ ὁ πατήρ 
 ς / 2 a » \ / 
 μου ὃ γεωργός ἐστιν. "πᾶν κλῆμα ἐν ἐμοὶ μὴ φέρον 
 ’ / \ A \ 
 καρπόν, αἴρει αὐτό, Kal πᾶν τὸ καρπὸν φέρον, καθαίρει 
 ᾿ν νὰν \ / / 3 "ὃ ς a / 
 αὐτὸ iva καρπὸν πλείονα φέρῃ. “ἤδη ὑμεῖς καθαροί 
 \ \ , \ Sie / 
 ἐστε διὰ τὸν λόγον ὃν λελάληκα ὑμῖν. “μείνατε ἐν 
 ΕῚ A ¢ a \ \ A , 
 ἐμοί, κἀγὼ ἐν ὑμῖν. καθὼς TO κλῆμα οὐ δύναται καρπὸν 
 7 ΕῚ a \ Ν / a > / “ 
 φέρειν ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ ἐὰν μὴ μένῃ ἐν τῇ ἀμπέλῳ, οὕτως 
 50Ὸ.ΧΝ ¢ lal > A, 8 > \ / 5 95 i > cpt 
 οὐδὲ ὑμεῖς ἐὰν μὴ ἐν ἐμοὶ μένητε. "ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ἄμπελος, 
 4 A \ / ¢ / A 
 ὑμεῖς τὰ κλήματα. ὃ μένων ἐν ἐμοὶ κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ, 
 = , Ἁ μ “ \ > n > δύ θ 
 οὗτος φέρει καρπὸν πολύν, ὅτι χωρὶς ἐμοῦ οὐ δύνασθε 
 A 207 62\ , 7, Die ws rots , ” ς 
 ποιεῖν οὐδέν. “ἐὰν μή τις μένῃ ἐν ἐμοί, ἐβλήθη ἔξω ὡς 
 A \ U \ ’ 
 TO κλῆμα Kal ἐξηράνθη, καὶ συνάγουσιν αὐτὰ Kai εἰς 
 Ξ , \ / 79N , σι, “cain \ 
 πῦρ βάλλουσιν, καὶ καίεται. "ἐὰν μείνητε ἐν ἐμοὶ Kal 
 ᾿ uk / > id an / « Δ, , > ,ὔ 
 τὰ ῥήματά μου ἐν ὑμῖν μείνῃ, ὃ ἐὰν θέλητε αἰτήσασθε, 
 | we a 5 , 
 καὶ γενήσεται ὑμῖν. “ἐν τούτῳ ἐδοξάσθη ὁ πατήρ μου, 
 ~ \ \ 7 \ , b \ , 
 ἵνα καρπὸν πολὺν φέρητε καὶ γένησθε ἐμοὶ μαθηταί. 
 \ / / ς , ᾿ \ e [4] ’ / < 
 καθὼς ἠγάπησέ pe ὁ πατήρ, Kayo ὑμᾶς ἠγάπησα 
 a > U a a \ \ 
 Muelvate ἐν TH ἀγάπῃ TH ἐμῇ. ἐὰν Tas ἐντολάς μου 
 A Ave sw 1 \ Q a 
 τηρήσητε, μενεῖτε ἐν TH ἀγάπῃ μου καθὼς ἐγὼ τοῦ 
 \ \ \ μ / > ἴω A 
 πατρὸς Tas ἐντολὰς TETNPNKA καὶ μένω αὐτοῦ ἐν TH 
 ’ 
 ἀγάπη. 
 la) a “A set 8 nr > 
 “Tadra λελάληκα ὑμῖν iva ἡ χαρὰ ἡ ἐμὴ ἐν ὑμῖν ἢ 
 ig “ lal 
 καὶ ἡ χαρὰ ὑμῶν πληρωθῇ. 
 / ¢ 7 > A 
 1 Αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἐντολὴ ἡ ἐμή, ἵνα ἀγαπᾶτε ἀλλήλους 
 \ > , ς a 18 / / 3 / 2 \ 
 καθὼς ἠγάπησα ὑμᾶς. “μείζονα ταύτης ἀγάπην οὐδεὶς 
 », “ ‘ \ ᾽ al an Ὁ \ a 
 ἔχει ἵνα τις τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ θῇ ὑπὲρ τῶν φίλων 
 nr 4 ( lal Λ [4] « 
 αὐτοῦ. “vpeis φίλοι μου ἐστέ, ἐὰν ποιῆτε ἃ ἐγὼ ἐντέλ- 
 Co 5 ’ / an a 
 λομαι ὑμῖν. “οὐκέτι λέγω ὑμᾶς δούλους, OTL ὁ δοῦλος 
 >? 3 / a > al ¢ a \ 
 οὐκ οἷδεν τί ποιεῖ αὐτοῦ ὁ κύριος" ὑμᾶς δὲ εἴρηκα 
 
XVI. 3 KATA IQANNHN. 4: 
 
 \ f a ΄ 
 φίλους, OTL πάντα ἃ ἤκουσα παρὰ τοῦ πατρός μου 
 - ’ «ς a / - 
 ἐγνώρισα ὑμῖν. “ovy ὑμεῖς με ἐξελέξασθε, ἀλλ᾽ ἐγὼ 
 5 , eS a \ » «ς an 4 ς - ¢ t 
 ἐξελεξάμην ὑμᾶς, καὶ ἔθηκα ὑμᾶς iva ὑμεῖς ὑπάγητε 
 , ἈΠ \ e a ᾿ς * 7 7 
 καὶ καρπὸν φέρητε καὶ ὁ καρπὸς ὑμῶν μένῃ" ἵνα ὅ τι 
 3 / ἰδὲ Ἂν τυ / A a 
 ἂν αἰτήσητε Tov πατέρα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί μου δῷ ὑμῖν. 
 ἴω ς A "4 3 a 53 I 
 "ταῦτα ἐντέλλομαι ὑμῖν, ἵνα ἀγαπᾶτε ἀλλήλους. 
 ς -“ a / f \ A 
 Ki ὁ κόσμος ὑμᾶς μισεῖ, γινώσκετε OTL ἐμὲ πρῶτον 
 Αἱ 9.» A ἢ 5 ς EN 
 ὑμῶν μεμίσηκεν. “El ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου ἦτε, ὁ κόσμος ἂν 
 Ξ εν a ΟῚ 
 τὸ ἴδιον ἐφίλει: ὅτι δὲ ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου οὐκ ἐστέ, GAN 
 > \ 2 / ς A 3 fa! / \ an rn 
 ἐγὼ ἐξελεξάμην ὑμᾶς ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου, διὰ τοῦτο μισεῖ 
 a / 2 “ / 
 ὑμᾶς ὁ κόσμος. ~“uvnwoveveTe TOU λόγου οὗ ἐγὼ εἶπον 
 δ΄ “κι ’ Μ ὃ lal / rn / = -“ 2 τὰ \ 
 ὑμῖν, Οὐκ ἔστιν δοῦλος μείζων τοῦ κυρίου αὐτοῦ. εἰ ἐμὲ 
 7 AY NG. κῶν ἢ A ἌΝ , Say 
 ἐδίωξαν, καὶ ὑμᾶς διώξουσιν᾽ εἰ τὸν λόγον μου ἐτήρη- 
 ©. 4s ͵ ᾽ \ a 
 σαν, Kal TOV ὑμέτερον τηρήσουσιν. “᾿αἀλλὰ ταῦτα πάντα 
 > ¢ lal \ lj 7 
 ποιήσουσιν εἰς ὑμᾶς διὰ TO ὄνομά μου, OTL οὐκ οἴδασιν 
 \ , 2 » SOB \ = 
 Tov πέμψαντά pe. “et μὴ ἦλθον Kal ἐλάλησα αὐτοῖς, 
 ¢ 5) 4 A \ / ’ 
 ἁμαρτίαν οὐκ εἴχοσαν᾽ viv δὲ πρόφασιν οὐκ ἔχουσιν 
 A 6 3 A 93¢ >) \ -“ 
 περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν. “ὁ ἐμὲ μισῶν καὶ τὸν 
 A bd * \ / 2 a δ 
 πατέρα μου μισεῖ. “el τὰ ἔργα μὴ ἐποίησα ἐν αὐτοῖς ἃ 
 ΕῚ \ 7 2 / « / 2 By fa \ 
 οὐδεὶς ἄλλος ἐποίησεν, ἁμαρτίαν οὐκ εἴχοσαν. νῦν δὲ 
 , \ Z \ \ 
 καὶ ἑωράκασιν Kal μεμισηκασιν Kal ἐμὲ Kal TOV πατέρα 
 >. Ψ " a e¢ / ¢ > A / 3 A 
 μου “ἀλλ᾽ iva πληρωθῇ ὁ λόγος ὁ ἐν TO νόμῳ αὐτῶν 
 / “ > / ὃ / 26°7 δὲ » θ 
 γεγραμμένος ὅτι ἐμίσησαν με δωρεάν. “όταν δὲ ἔλθῃ 
 «Ὁ > \ , δ᾽» δὰ \ An 
 ὁ παράκλητος ὃν ἐγὼ πέμψω ὑμῖν παρὰ τοῦ πατρός, 
 a fal 3 / a \ a \ 
 TO πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας ὃ παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκπορεύε- 
 an \ ΓΕ. ps a \ 
 ται, ἐκεῖνος μαρτυρήσει περὶ ἐμοῦ" “Kal ὑμεῖς δὲ μαρ- 
 a if > al an , 
 TUPELTE, OTL ATT ἀρχῆς MET ἐμοῦ ἐστέ. 
 16 'Ταῦτα λελάληκα ὑμῖν ἵνα μὴ σκανδαλισθῆτε. 
 ἜΡΙΝ / 
 ᾿ἀποσυναγώγους ποιήσουσιν ὑμᾶς" ἀλλ᾽ ἔρχεται ὥρα 
 a A ς« - , δ ὦ ἢ ῃ 7 
 ἵνα πᾶς ὁ ἀποκτείνας ὑμᾶς δόξῃ λατρείαν προσφέρειν 
 A A A J 5" Yj \ 
 τῷ θεῷ. “καὶ ταῦτα ποιήσουσιν ὅτι οὐκ ἔγνωσαν τὸν 
 
46 ΕὙΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ XVI. 3. 
 
 5 / 5 Ἁ lal ἡ a 
 πατέρα οὐδὲ ἐμέ. “ἀλλὰ ταῦτα λελάληκα ὑμῖν ἵνα ὅταν 
 3 ἘΠῚ ΝΜ + TC. , πον ΜῊΝ JA > \ 7. 
 ἔλθῃ ἡ ὥρα αὐτῶν μνημονεύητε αὐτῶν, OTL ἐγὼ εἶπον 
 ΠΡΉΗΜ, Ὶ a N quit. an > ’ A ’ εν “ a VE al 
 ὑμῖν. ταῦτα δὲ ὑμῖν ἐξ ἀρχῆς οὐκ εἶπον, ὅτι μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν 
 v ἃ. o. δὲ ς , \ \ / , \ b) \ 
 ἤμην. °vov δὲ ὑπάγω πρὸς Tov πέμψαντά με, Kal οὐδεὶς 
 a A A Be > (4 rn 
 ἐξ ὑμῶν ἐρωτᾷ pe, lod ὑπάγεις ; “ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι ταῦτα λελά- 
 Coe ¢ Ud / ς a 
 Anka ὑμῖν, ἡ λύπη πεπλήρωκεν ὑμῶν τὴν καρδίαν. 
 ’ \ / "4 “Ὁ an 
 ᾿ἀλλ᾽ ἐγὼ τὴν ἀλήθειαν λέγω ὑμῖν, συμφέρει ὑμῖν ἵνα 
 » \ 3 7 “Ν \ \ ? UA ς E Ε 
 ἐγὼ ἀπέλθω. ἐὰν γὰρ μὴ ἀπέλθω, ὁ παράκλητος οὐκ 
 + , \ CA EAN \ A , sie 
 ἐλεύσεται πρὸς ὑμᾶς" ἐὰν δὲ πορευθῶ, πέμψω αὐτὸν 
 \ en 8 \ 216 \ 3 A Saas, \ , 
 πρὸς ὑμᾶς. “καὶ ἐλθὼν ἐκεῖνος ἐλέγξει τὸν κόσμον 
 / \ \ 
 περὶ ἁμαρτίας Kal περὶ δικαιοσύνης καὶ περὶ κρίσεως. 
 / / ἐᾷ ? 
 περὶ ἁμαρτίας μέν, OTL οὐ πιστεύουσιν εἰς ἐμέξ “περὶ 
 “. \ \ / ς / 
 δικαιοσύνης δέ, OTL πρὸς τὸν πατέρα ὑπάγω Kal οὐκέτι 
 a = ἣν / 4 e a , 
 θεωρεῖτέ we’ “᾿περὶ δὲ κρίσεως, OTL ὁ ἄρχων τοῦ κόσμου 
 / 
 τούτου κέκριται. 
 lj ε -“ 7 5 
 τ, πολλὰ ἔχω ὑμῖν λέγειν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ δύνασθε 
 U v7 os 2S δὲ »"ἔ θ > aA \ ἴω an 
 βαστάζειν ἄρτι “ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ ἐκεῖνος, τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς 
 3 ,ὔ e / ¢ [2] > \ > U A > 
 ἀληθείας, ὁδηγήσει ὑμᾶς εἰς τὴν ἀλήθειαν πᾶσαν. οὐ 
 > an 5 “ὦ Ψ Ig 
 γὰρ λαλήσει ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ, GAN’ ὅσα ἀκούσει λαλήσει, καὶ 
 A. 3 [? > Awe oA 14 5» a oe ὃ , (ed 
 τὰ ἐρχόμενα ἀναγγελεῖ ὑμῖν. “éxetvos ἐμὲ δοξάσει, ὅτι 
 9 nr 9 “ 7 \ 3 Ask ἘΝ 15 , [7 
 ἐκ τοῦ ἐμοῦ λήμψεται, καὶ ἀναγγελεῖ ὑμῖν. “πάντα ὅσα 
 n Le a 
 ἔχει ὁ πατὴρ ἐμά ἐστιν' διὰ τοῦτο εἶπον ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ 
 5» fa) / \ > a c¢ n 
 ἐμοῦ λαμβάνει καὶ ἀναγγελεῖ vuiv. 
 16 \ \ ’ 7 θ lawns d \ / \ 
 Μικρὸν καὶ οὐκέτι θεωρεῖτέ με, Kal πάλιν μικρὸν 
 Ν ” , BL le 3 > a A ΕΣ a 
 καὶ ὄψεσθέ pe. “εἶπον οὖν ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ 
 Ι ἴω «Ὁ ib Ὁ 
 πρὸς ἀλλήλους, Τί ἐστιν τοῦτο ὃ λέγει ἡμῖν, Μικρὸν καὶ 
 5 Riso J \ , \ Ἂν ἣν / A 
 ov θεωρεῖτέ με, καὶ πάλιν μικρὸν Kal ὄψεσθέ με; Kal 
 / . 
 ὅτι Ὕπάγω πρὸς τὸν πατέρα; ᾿“ἔλεγον οὖν, Τί ἐστιν 
 τοῦτο ὃ λέγει τὸ μικρόν; οὐκ οἴδαμεν τί λαλεῖ. "᾿ ἔγνω 
 ΕῚ an ¢/ 10 ee: > n \ = 5 a \ \ 
 Ιησοῦς ὅτι ἤθελον αὐτὸν ἐρωτᾷν, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ἹΤερὶ 
 rn > > / / * 
 τούτου ζητεῖτε μετ᾽ ἀλλήλων ὅτι εἶπον, Μικρὸν Kal ov 
 
XVI. 33 KATA IQANNHN, 47 
 
 yl τ \ , \ \ ΩΣ 7, δδ΄.5. ἢ 
 θεωρεῖτέ με, καὶ πάλιν μικρὸν καὶ ὄψεσθέ με; "ἀμὴν 
 > \ , Can “ , \ θ , ς a ς \ 
 ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι κλαύσετε Kal θρηνήσετε ὑμεῖς, ὁ δὲ 
 , , Τα δ" Ἶ θ / θ > δ ve , 
 κοσμος χαρησεταῖ' ὑμεῖς λυπηθήσεσθε, ἀλλ΄ ἡ λύπη 
 Le X 9 
 ὑμῶν εἰς χαρὰν γενήσεται. ™n γυνὴ ὅταν τίκτῃ λύπην 
 Ψ i = θ ef EL NEY Ὁ δὲ , \ 
 ἔχει, OTL ἦλθεν ἡ ὥρα αὐτῆς" ὅταν δὲ γεννήσῃ τὸ παι- 
 δί ἈΠῸ / aA θ / ὃ \ \ \ ef 
 lov, οὐκέτι μνημονεύει τῆς θλίψεως διὰ THY χαρὰν ὅτι 
 / > \ / A ral 
 ἐγεννήθη ἄνθρωπος εἰς τὸν κόσμον. “Kal ὑμεῖς οὖν νῦν 
 \ , » 5 ἢ δὲ ὅ ΓΝ \ , 
 μὲν λύπην ἔχετε᾽ πάλιν O€ ὄψομαι ὑμᾶς, καὶ χαρήσεται 
 (53 - « / Ἀ \ \ ¢e A 2 \ ’ Ὁ > > 
 ὑμῶν ἡ καρδία, Kal THY χαρὰν ὑμῶν οὐδεὶς ἀρεῖ ἀφ 
 A \ » if lal ¢e / \ 5 
 ὑμῶν. “καὶ ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐμὲ οὐκ ἐρωτήσετε 
 a7 2 \ 3 \ / ee » pM ὁ \ , 
 οὐδέν. ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, av τι αἰτήσητε τὸν πατέρα 
 δι ας A > / 
 δώσει ὑμῖν ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί pov. “é&ws ἄρτι οὐκ ἠτήσατε 
 50 ..Χ 5] Phy ers lf / = > a \ / A ἢ 
 οὐδὲν ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί pov’ αἰτεῖτε, καὶ λήμψεσθε, ἵνα ἡ 
 δι τα a > Pe 
 χαρὰ ὑμων ἢ πεπληρωμεένη. 
 a / “ a 
 “Ταῦτα ἐν παροιμίαις λελάληκα ὑμῖν' ἔρχεται ὥρα 
 ὅτε οὐκέτι ἐν παροιμίαις λαλήσω ὑμῖν, ἀλλὰ παρρησίᾳ 
 τον 7 μὲν, ρρησίᾳ 
 \ rn a a > » / Si pak / 
 περὶ τοῦ πατρὸς ἀπαγγελῶ ὑμῖν. “Ev ἐκείνῃ TH ἡμέρᾳ 
 νι Δεν 3 / / > / \ > / 6 A / 
 EV τῷ OVOMATL μου αἰτήσεσθε, καὶ οὐ λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐγὼ 
 \ ς [2 a ’ 
 ἐρωτήσω τὸν πατέρα περὶ vudv' “altos yap ὁ πατὴρ 
 tal A / [4 a \ ᾽ 
 φιλεῖ ὑμᾶς, ὅτι ὑμεῖς ἐμὲ πεφιλήκατε καὶ πεπιστεύκατε 
 7 \ \ A A A 2 ay A 
 ὅτι ἐγὼ παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐξῆλθον. "᾿“ἐξῆχθον ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς 
 1 ᾽ , ᾿ 4 ἢ 
 καὶ ἐλήλυθα εἰς τὸν κόσμον" πάλιν ἀφίημι τὸν κόσμον 
 \ \ an 
 καὶ πορεύομαι πρὸς τὸν πατέρα. 
 *® Aéyouow of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, Ἴδε νῦν é f 
 ἄγου palnral αὐτοῦ, “1é6e νὸν év παρρησίᾳ 
 λαλεῖς, καὶ παροιμίαν οὐδεμίαν λέγεις. “viv οἴδαμεν 
 U \ > / A 
 ὅτι οἶδας πάντα καὶ ov χρείαν ἔχεις ἵνα τίς σε ἐρωτᾷ: 
 ΕῚ / / “ 3 \ fal b] lal Ssi.-3 
 ἐν τούτῳ πιστεύομεν OTL ἀπὸ θεοῦ ἐξῆλθες. “d7re- 
 ῃ Sete 9 Pee, , 32? ᾽ν» 
 κρίθη αὐτοῖς ᾿Ιησοῦς, "Apts πιστεύετε; “ἰδοὺ ἔρχεται 
 [κή \ ay fF vf lal “ 3 \ 
 ὥρα καὶ ἐλήλυθεν ἵνα σκορπισθῆτε ἕκαστος εἰς τὰ 
 “ > \ , ΠΤ ae \ ᾽ EN , “ ε 
 ἴδια κἀμὲ μόνον ἀφῆτε: καὶ οὐκ εἰμὶ μόνος, ὅτι ὁ 
 \ 5. ἡ D ra . “ 33 a , Cun “4 ? 
 πατὴρ MET ἐμοὺ ἐστιν. “ταῦτα λελαληκα υμῖν ἵνα ἐν 
 
48 EYATTEAION XVI. 33 
 
 a7 A Ὁ » ᾽ A , κ᾿ ” eo: \ 
 ἐμοὶ εἰρήνην ἔχητε. ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ θλῖψιν ἔχετε: ἀλλὰ 
 cr \ / \ / 
 θαρσεῖτε, ἐγὼ νενίκηκα τὸν κόσμον. 
 ig 4B a > / ras a 14 8 U \ 
 avta ἐλάλησεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Kal ἔπάρας τοὺς 
 ΕῚ > fa) > \ \ s ’ 
 ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν εἶπεν, Ilatep, ἐλή- 
 Fee / , 7 
 λυθεν ἡ wpa’ δόξασόν σου Tov υἱόν, ἵνα ὁ vids δοξάσῃ 
 2 ee, ἃς Wie , ͵ ͵ “ 
 σε, “καθὼς ἔδωκας αὐτῷ ἐξουσίαν πάσης σαρκός, ἵνα 
 a ἊΝ , aa ὃ , 3 a \ 3. ἐν + A 
 πᾶν ὃ δέδωκας αὐτῷ δώσῃ αὐτοῖς ζωὴν αἰώνιον. “αὕτη 
 ¢ , / / 
 δέ ἐστιν ἡ αἰώνιος ζωή, ἵνα γινώσκουσίν σε TOV μόνον 
 > “ὍΔ > J 3 ο 
 ἀληθινὸν θεὸν καὶ ὃν ἀπέστειλας ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστόν. 
 ree. Ὁ 7 δ᾽. εἰς a a ’ ἡ » “A 
 ἐγώ σε ἐδόξασα ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, τελειώσας TO ἔργον ὃ 
 ᾿ ty ae / 
 δέδωκάς μοι iva ποιήσω" " καὶ νῦν δόξασόν. με σύ, πάτερ, 
 \ ASA / > » \ a \ ἊΨ 
 παρὰ σεαυτῷ Τῇ δόξῃ ἣ εἶχον πρὸ τοῦ τὸν κόσμον εἶναι 
 : ἣν 
 παρὰ σοί. BMF 
 6? 7 1 ἂν a 5 ’ “Ὁ ξδ 
 Edavépwoa σου τὸ ὄνομα τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ods ἔδω- 
 a / το \ \ 2 \ 
 KaS μοι ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου. σοὶ ἦσαν Kal ἐμοὶ αὐτοὺς 
 \ ᾿ , ᾿ A y 
 ἔδωκας, Kal τὸν λόγον σου τετήρηκαν᾽ ‘VOY ἔγνωκαν 
 ε 8. , \ ee ᾿ / 
 ὅτι πάντα boa’ δέδωκάς μοι παρὰ σοῦ εἰσίν “ὅτι τὰ 
 a A aA »” / / Ψ “Ὁ Ν τ \ », 
 ῥήματα ἃ ἔδωκάς μοι δέδωκα αὐτοῖς, καὶ αὐτοὶ ἔλαβον, 
 A f Ν lal A 
 καὶ ἔγνωσαν ἀληθῶς ὅτι Tapa σοῦ ἐξῆλθον, Kal ἐπίσ- 
 Ἶ , easy . ὅτι. “ἢ \ A 
 τευσαν OTL σύ με ἀπέστειλας. ἐγὼ περὶ αὐτῶν ἐρωτῶ" 
 λιν \ an ΠΥ τὸ 3 A 3 AN a , ᾿ 
 οὐ περὶ τοῦ κόσμου ἐρωτῶ, ἀλλὰ περὶ ὧν δέδωκάς μοι, 
 Pere." \ / , \ 
 ὅτι σοί εἰσιν, Kal τὰ ἐμὰ πάντα σά ἐστιν Kal Ta σὰ 
 5 Ul \ / > ] - 11 \ 5... as ie a 
 ἐμά, καὶ δεδόξασμαι ἐν αὐτοῖς. “Kal οὐκέτι εἰμὶ ἐν TO 
 e ra.” A / > / 3 \ 
 κόσμῳ, καὶ οὗτοι ED τῷ κόσμῳ εἰσίν, κάγω πρός σε 
 z e/ , "5 nw ’ ’ 
 ἔρχομαι. πάτερ ἅγιε, τήρησον αὐτοὺς ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί 
 ® 525 , “ > 4 Bids ese? 124 
 σου ᾧ δέδωκάς μοι, wa ὦσιν ἕν καθὼς ἡμεῖς. “OTE 
 ~ , \ a 
 ἤμην μετ᾽ αὐτῶν, ἐγὼ ἐτήρουν αὐτοὺς ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί σου 
 , \ / 2 tal 
 ᾧ δέδωκάς μοι, καὶ ἐφύλαξα, καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐξ αὐτῶν ἀπώ- 
 > A 4 e\ ἴω 3 / “ « \ - 
 λετο εἰ μὴ ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας, Wa ἡ γραφὴ πληρωθῇ. 
 18 fal \ ’ 5, \ lal lal > » , 
 νῦν δὲ πρός σε ἔρχομαι, Kal ταῦτα λαλῶ EV TO κόσμῳ, 
 δ \ Ν \ Sa Ἂ 7 3 
 ἵνα ἔχωσιν τὴν χαρὰν τὴν ἐμὴν πεπληρωμένην ἐν ἑαυ- 
 
XVIII. 3 KATA IQANNHN. 49 
 
 A 14> \ , as) es \ , Wee , 
 τοῖς. "“᾿ἐγὼ δέδωκα αὐτοῖς τὸν λόγον σου, καὶ ὁ κόσμος 
 / ’ \ 5 fal / 
 ἐμίσησεν αὐτούς, ὅτι οὐκ εἰσὶν ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου καθὼς 
 A > ’ A ied / 
 ἐγὼ οὐκ εἰμὶ ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου. “οὐκ ἐρωτώ ἵνα ἄρῃς 
 ’ J A ul 9 a &: > \ “- 
 αὐτοὺς ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου, GAN’ ἵνα τηρήσῃς αὐτοὺς ἐκ τοῦ 
 lal fa) / > ee” > 
 πονηροῦ. “ἐκ Tov κόσμου οὐκ εἰσὶν καθὼς ἐγὼ οὐκ 
 ἰμὶ ἐ ῦ κόσμου. "ἁγίασον αὐτοὺς ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ; 
 εἰμὶ ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου. Υ ὑτοὺς ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ 
 ς , ¢ \ J Κ i 13 ν αὶ ee, 
 ὁ λόγος ὁ σὸς ἀλήθειά ἐστιν. “᾿καθὼς ἐμὲ ἀπέστειλας 
 hd / \ 
 εἰς TOV κόσμον, κἀγὼ ἀπέστειλα αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸν κόσμον᾽ 
 Ἐπ ὡδὴ CON » κα τ: Ὁ τὰν , 5) , “ 3 \ 
 καὶ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν ἐγὼ ἁγιάζω ἐμαυτόν, ἵνα ὦσιν καὶ 
 ’ Ae. € / 5 bi / 
 αὐτοὶ ἡγιασμένοι ἐν ἀληθείᾳ. 
 5 A 
 Ou περὶ τούτων δὲ ἐρωτῶ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ περὶ 
 A / \ κ ὅν τρῶς > ay eee 
 TOV πιστευόντων διὰ τοῦ λόγου αὐτῶν εἰς ἐμέ “ἵνα 
 / ἃ s \ / 2 \ \ / 
 πάντες ἕν ὦσιν, καθὼς σύ, πατήρ, ἐν ἐμοὶ Kayo ἐν col, 
 \ a 5 7, ες ’ 7 
 ἵνα καὶ αὐτοὶ ἐν ἡμῖν ὦσιν, ἵνα ὁ κόσμος πιστεύῃ ὅτι 
 ͵ ER, es ee \ , “A ͵ ἢ 
 σύ με ἀπέστειλας. “Kayo τὴν δόξαν ἣν δέδωκάς μοι, 
 525 5 cies “ 3 er \ re ee a ee 
 ἔδωκα αὐτοῖς, ἵνα wow ἕν, καθὼς ἡμεῖς ἕν᾽ “ἐγὼ ἐν 
 ’ lal \ ἢ 9 ’ ἕξων Ss / Ρ] “ / 
 αὐτοῖς, καὶ σὺ ἐν ἐμοί, iva ὦσιν τετελειωμένοι εἰς ἕν, ἵνα 
 / ¢ / , 
 γινώσκῃ ὁ κόσμος ὅτι σύ με ἀπέστειλας καὶ ἠγάπησας 
 + \ ἡ ei ee, o4 , AN / , 
 αὐτοὺς καθὼς ἐμὲ ἠγάπησας. “Πατήρ, ὃ δέδωκάς μοι, 
 / 7 ad Re Te / ? a 3 4 3 wer ὦ 
 θέλω ἵνα ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγώ, κακεῖνοι ὦσιν μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ" ἵνα 
 A \ , \ Ἂν. ἢ a / / eel 
 θεωρῶσιν τὴν δόξαν τὴν ἐμήν, ἣν δέδωκάς μοι OTL ἡγά- 
 / \ A , 
 πησάς με πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου. 
 Al \ δί Xi 2e / 5 »Μ > \ δέ 
 ατὴρ δίκαιε, καὶ ὁ κόσμος σε οὐκ ἔγνω, ἐγὼ δέ σε 
 » ΜΝ 7 
 ἔγνων, καὶ οὗτοι ἔγνωσαν ὅτι σύ με ἀπέστειλας" “"καὶ 
 ’ / ΕῚ al ‘ ͵ 4 Ὁ 
 ἐγνώρισα αὐτοῖς τὸ ὄνομά σου καὶ γνωρίσω, ἵνα ἡ 
 3 / \ J , / 4 3 \ - 
 ἀγάπη ἣν ἠγάπησάς με ἐν αὐτοῖς ἢ κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτοῖς. ο. 
 1 rat \ 3 ral lal \ A ΄-“ 
 18 ‘Taira εἰπὼν ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐξῆλθεν σὺν τοῖς μαθηταῖς 
 2 lal , fal al a 
 αὐτοῦ πέραν τοῦ χειμάρρου τῶν Κέδρων, ὅπου ἦν κῆπος, 
 » a > fal > \ 4 6 \ 5 ~ οΥ͂ \ 
 εἰς ὃν εἰσῆλθεν αὐτὸς Kal οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ. “Ader δὲ 
 x 3 Uy e \ \ / 
 καὶ ᾿Ιούδας ὁ παραδιδοὺς αὐτὸν τὸν τόπον, ὅτι πολλά- 
 / > a 5 a \ A a τι A ¢ 
 Kis συνήχθη ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐκεῖ μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ. ὅὁ 
 
 ST JOHN D 
 
50 EYATTEAION XVIII. 3 
 
 τ ᾿] , \ \ a \ 2 a > / 
 οὖν Ἰούδας λαβὼν τὴν σπεῖραν καὶ EK τῶν ἀρχιερέων 
 a 7 la lal “Ὁ 
 καὶ τῶν Φαρισαίων ὑπηρέτας ἔρχεται ἐκεῖ μετὰ φανῶν 
 al > \ / 
 καὶ λαμπάδων καὶ ὅπλων. “Ἰησοῦς οὖν εἰδὼς πάντα τὰ 
 [δὰ \ / ’ a 
 ἐρχόμενα ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν, ἐξῆλθεν καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, Τίνα 
 a fal a \ lal 
 ζητεῖτε; "ἀπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ, ᾿Ιησοῦν tov Ναζωραῖον. 
 a a \ 
 λέγει αὐτοῖς ᾿Ιησοῦς, Eye εἰμι. εἱστήκει δὲ καὶ ᾿Ιούδας 
 A ¢ 5 4 a 
 ὁ παραδιδοὺς αὐτὸν μετ᾽ αὐτῶν. “ὡς οὖν εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, 
 > / > 3 Lal ᾽ Ν ’ 7, \ ” , 
 Eyo εἰμι, ἀπῆλθαν εἰς Ta ὀπίσω Kal ἔπεσαν χαμαί. 
 7 ‘ s Ψ / 3 / Ti a Ὁ e δὲ 
 πάλιν οὖν ἐπηρώτησεν αὐτούς, Τίνα ζητεῖτε; οἱ δὲ 
 a « fa) ty s 
 εἶπον, Ἰησοῦν tov Ναζωραῖον. “ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ἰησοῦς, Ei- 
 Φ' a ΄ 4 * > s al 
 πον ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι εἰ οὖν ἐμὲ ζητεῖτε, ἄφετε 
 ¢ / 9“ “ε , «Ὁ 5 “ 
 τούτους ὑπάγειν. “ἵνα πληρωθῇ ὁ λόγος ὃν εἶπεν OTL 
 Οὺς δέδωκάς μοι, οὐκ ἀπώλεσα ἐξ αὐτῶν οὐδένα. "Σέ- 
 / 
 μων οὖν Ilétpos ἔχων μάχαιραν εἵλκυσεν αὐτὴν Kat 
 7 lal / rn fa) 
 ἔπαισεν τὸν TOD ἀρχιερέως δοῦλον Kal ἀπέκοψεν αὐτοῦ 
 / U nA 
 τὸ ὠτάριον TO δεξιόν. ἦν δὲ ὄνομα τῷ δούλῳ Μάλχος. 
 11 5s » ¢ | lal Lal I] / B / \ / > 
 εἶπεν οὖν ὁ ᾿ΙΓησοῦς τῷ Ilérp@, Βάλε τὴν μάχαιραν εἰς 
 \ \ \ / € ͵ 
 τὴν θήκην. τὸ ποτήριον ὃ δέδωκέν μοι ὁ πατήρ, οὐ μὴ 
 πίω αὐτό: 
 12°H 3 a“ \ c / \ e e , 
 οὖν σπεῖρα καὶ ὃ χιλίαρχος Kal οἱ ὑπηρέται 
 a > / A \ > na \ yy > 
 τῶν ‘lovdaiwy συνέλαβον τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν καὶ ἔδησαν av- 
 fee IS τὰ on \ oo a ὦ 5 \ \ 
 τόν, "καὶ ἤγαγον πρὸς Ανναν πρώτον᾽ ἦν yap πενθερὸς 
 a “ « “ n 
 τοῦ Καϊάφα, ὃς ἦν ἀρχιερεὺς τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἐκείνου. 
 - a >? 
 iv δὲ Καϊάφας 6 συμβουλεύσας τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις ὅτι 
 / e wv 3 a ς \ a a 
 συμφέρει ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ἀποθανεῖν ὑπὲρ τοῦ aod. 
 ἸῬΗκολούθει δὲ τῷ Ἰησοῦ Σίμων Πέτρος καὶ ἄλλος 
 / ς \ \ 8 al se \ a ’ 
 μαθητής. ὁ δὲ μαθητὴς ἐκεῖνος ἦν γνωστὸς τῷ apy- 
 ἴω \ Lal “Ὁ 3 nr , \ " \ nw 
 ἱερεῖ καὶ συνεισῆλθεν τῷ “Inood eis τὴν αὐλὴν τοῦ 
 , , 16 ¢ \ 4 e / \ a Ud »” 
 ἀρχιερέως, “ὁ δὲ ἸΙέτρος εἱστήκει πρὸς τῇ θύρᾳ ἔξω. 
 es 3 ς \ ¢ ” ε \ lal ’ 
 ἐξῆλθεν οὖν ὁ μαθητὴς ὁ ἄλλος ὁ γνωστὸς τοῦ ἀρχιε- 
 , \ s a r ΄ 
 pews καὶ εἶπεν τῇ θυρωρῷ, καὶ εἰσήγαγεν τὸν Πέτρον. 
 
XVIII. 30 KATA IQANNHN. SI 
 
 A e / ¢ 7 Ν \ \ 
 “eyes οὖν τῷ Πέτρῳ ἡ παιδίσκη ἡ θυρωρός, Μὴ καὶ ov 
 an a Pee (9. Me 2 a 
 ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν εἶ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τούτου; λέγει ἐκεῖνος, 
 e ἴω \ aK / 
 Οὐκ εἰμί. "δεἱστήκεισαν δὲ of δοῦλοι καὶ οἱ ὑπηρέται 
 / n 5 er , 4 
 ἀνθρακιὰν πεποιηκότες, OTL ψῦχος ἦν, καὶ ἐθερμαίνοντο 
 A e \ \ f 
 ny δὲ καὶ ὁ Πέτρος μετ᾽ αὐτῶν ἐστὼς Kal θερμαινόμενος. 
 1ge¢ 5 9 τ 2 / \ Ἴ a \ A θ 
 Ο οὖν ἀρχιερεὺς ἠρώτησεν τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν περὶ τῶν μαθη- 
 an A nn ᾽ A ς > 
 τῶν αὐτοῦ, Kal περὶ τῆς διδαχῆς αὐτοῦ. “ἀπεκρίθη 
 3 “Ὁ Ἶ A °-E \ ‘a x K tr Ka TO , ὲ > Ἢ 
 αὐτῷ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ᾿Ε"γὼ παρρησίᾳ λελάλη ὦ κόσμῳ" ἐγὼ 
 fs 207 5) A \ ’ AL Ole Aa ee 
 πάντοτε ἐδίδαξα ἐν συναγωγῇ Kal ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, ὅπου 
 - \ “Ὁ 
 πάντες οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι συνέρχονται, καὶ ἐν κρυπτῷ ἐλά- 
 : n Ul \ , 
 Anoa οὐδέν. “Ti με ἐρωτᾷς ; ἐρώτησον τοὺς ἀκηκοότας, 
 7, / 5» aS 18 e vo «Δ 5 > vA 
 τί ἐλάλησα αὐτοῖς" ἴδε οὗτοι οἴδασιν ἃ εἶπον ἐγώ. 
 © an a ’ ’ e \ ces ς 
 “ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ εἰπόντος, εἷς παρεστηκὼς τῶν ὑὕπηρε- 
 fal Ly a Sa 7 
 τῶν ἔδωκεν ῥάπισμα τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ εἰπών, Οὕτως ἀποκρίνῃ 
 a ’ σοι 23 5 6 5 A Ἢ a Ei -“ Xr , 
 τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ; “ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Ei κακῶς ἐλά- 
 / a a A 
 λησα, μαρτύρησον περὶ τοῦ κακοῦ" “et δὲ καλῶς, τί με 
 3 3 / 3 > \ ew / \ 
 δέρεις; ἀπέστειλεν οὖν αὐτὸν ὁ “Avvas δεδεμένον πρὸς 
 “- \ / 
 Καϊάφαν τὸν ἀρχιερέα. 
 lie) \ / »» x \ U 
 Ἣν δὲ Σίμων Πέτρος ἑστὼς καὶ θερμαινόμενος. 
 fo > par. \ \ 3 A a τ a fs 
 εἶπον οὖν αὐτῷ, Mn καὶ od ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ εἶ; 
 5 , να Sun εἶ 5 Side? 265 7 a 5) 
 ἠρνήσατο ἐκεῖνος καὶ εἶπεν, Οὐκ εἰμί, "““λέγει εἷς ἐκ 
 an ὃ mr “ > / Ἁ x Φ > / 
 τῶν δούλων τοῦ ἀρχιερέως, συγγενὴς ὧν οὗ ἀπέκοψεν 
 5 A 
 Πέτρος τὸ ὠτίον, Οὐκ ἐγὼ σε εἶδον ἐν TO κήπῳ μετ᾽ 
 ’ a 
 αὐτοῦ; “πάλιν οὖν ἠρνήσατο Ilérpos, καὶ εὐθέως ἀλέκ- 
 τωρ ἐφώνησεν. 
 sv > \ A \ nr “7 \ 
 *"Ayovaw οὖν τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἀπὸ τοῦ Καϊάφα eis τὸ 
 / ate les \ hes \ ee. eee jm > \ 
 πραιτώριον" ἦν δὲ πρωΐ" Kal αὐτοὶ οὐκ εἰσῆλθον εἰς TO 
 4 “ Ἁ An 5 2 ΔΨ 4 \ 
 πραιτώριον, ἵνα pn μιανθῶσιν ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα φάγωσιν τὸ 
 A 5 \ ‘ 
 πάσχα. “᾿ἐξῆλθεν οὖν ὁ Ilinatos ἔξω πρὸς αὐτούς, καί 
 7 \ a 4 
 φησιν, Τίνα κατηγορίαν φέρετε κατὰ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου 
 ; . 302 , \ 4 ee eee. e 
 τούτου; “ἀπεκρίθησαν καὶ εἶπαν αὐτῷ, ΕΠ μὴ ἦν οὗτος 
 
 D2 
 
52 EYATTEAION XVIII. 30 
 
 A Ul / . 
 κακὸν ποιῶν, οὐκ ἄν σοι παρεδώκαμεν αὐτόν. 5) elarev 
 an \ ς “ \ \ \ 
 οὖν αὐτοῖς ὁ Πἱλάτος, Λάβετε αὐτὸν ὑμεῖς Kal κατὰ TOV 
 al Ὁ ς A 
 νόμον ὑμῶν κρίνατε αὐτόν. εἶπον αὐτῷ οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, 
 a > al > 4 2° ς la) 
 Ἡμῖν οὐκ ἔξεστιν ἀποκτεῖναι ovdéva’ ™ iva ὁ λόγος τοῦ 
 ΕῚ fal θῃ «Ὁ 53 ᾿ / θ / ΕΣ 
 Ιησοῦ πληρωθῇ, ὃν εἶπεν σημαίνων ποίῳ θανάτῳ ἡμεὰ- 
 fal 3 \ 
 Nev ἀποθνήσκειν. “᾿Εἰσῆλθεν οὖν πάλιν εἰς TO πραιτώ- 
 4 / Ν » / \ > ral \ 3 
 ρίον ὁ Πιλάτος, καὶ ἐφώνησεν τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν καὶ εἶπεν 
 a ¢ \ ἴω 7 ,’ 
 αὐτῷ, Σὺ εἶ ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων ; “᾿ἀπεκρίθη 
 Qn lal \ Qn Δ Vv 
 Ἰησοῦς, ᾿Απὸ σεαυτοῦ σὺ τοῦτο λέγεις, ἢ ἄλλοι σοι 
 ral » 3 I 4 
 εἶπον περὶ ἐμοῦ; “ἀπεκρίθη ὁ ἸΠλάτος, Myre ἐγὼ 
 >] afr » ἈΝ ” \ x ..ἢ t 9 n / 
 Ἰουδαῖός εἰμι; τὸ ἔθνος TO σὸν Kal οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς παρέ- 
 ! > ra i aio , . 883 ἢ > a ¢ 
 δωκάν σε ἐμοί τί ἐποίησας ; “ἀπεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς, Ἢ 
 an > 
 βασιλεία ἡ ἐμὴ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου ToOUTOU' εἰ ἐκ 
 Qn 7 / 53 ς / ¢ ’ / ς ¢ / DS 
 τοῦ κόσμου τούτου ἦν ἡ βασιλεία ἡ ἐμή, οἱ ὑπηρέται ἂν 
 ΕΝ va) 39 / “ \ a Arts / d 
 οἱ ἐμοὶ ἠγωνίζοντο, ἵνα py παραδοθῶ τοῖς Τουδαίοις 
 lal \ c / € > A ᾽ ” 5 ἴω 37 9 
 νῦν δὲ ἡ βασιλεία ἡ ἐμὴ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐντεῦθεν. εἶπεν 
 5 ἄπ Ὁ / Ψ “ \ 3 
 οὖν αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰ]λάτος, Οὐκοῦν βασιλεὺς εἶ ov; ἀπεκρίθη 
 ¢ 3° “ Σὺ / “ ͵ ᾿] 5 \ > la 
 ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Lv λέγεις OTL βασιλεύς εἰμι. ἐγὼ εἰς τοῦτο 
 Ρ] nr , \ 
 γεγέννημαι Kal εἰς τοῦτο ἐλήλυθα εἰς τὸν κόσμον, ἵνα 
 γ a ix θ fee a ¢ Ἃ > a 1X θ / 
 μαρτυρήσω τῇ ἀληθείᾳ: πᾶς ὁ ὧν ἐκ τῆς ἀληθείας, 
 “ 7 a A 38 7 > lal ¢ , 7 
 ἀκούει μου τῆς φωνῆς. “λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰ]λάτος, Tt 
 > / ἣν lal ’ Ul nr 
 ἐστιν ἀλήθεια; Kat τοῦτο εἰπὼν πάλιν ἐξῆλθεν πρὸς 
 Ν 7 » a 3 \ 
 τοὺς ᾿Ιουδαίους, καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, “Eye οὐδεμίαν ev- 
 ͵, > > A a Ὁ 39 Κ δὲ 460 ᾿ι Ἂν Ω - 
 ρίσκω ἐν αὐτῷ αἰτίαν. “ὃ ἔστιν δὲ συνήθεια ὑμῖν, ἵνα ἕνα 
 ce na » / » n , : / > 5» , 
 ὑμῖν ἀπολύσω ἐν τῷ Tacya’ βούλεσθε οὖν ἀπολύσω 
 ¢ lal \ / Lal > ὃ / s 40 > / 5 
 ὑμῖν τὸν βασιλέα τῶν “lovdaiwv; “ἐκραύγασαν οὖν 
 / n » 
 πάλιν πάντες, λέγοντες, Μὴ τοῦτον, ἀλλὰ τὸν Βαραβ- 
 a 3 πον a re 
 Bav. ἦν δὲ ὁ BapaBBas λῃστής. 
 1 , ¢ td -“ 
 19 ‘Tore οὖν ἔλαβεν ὁ ἸΠλάτος τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, καὶ 
 / 5 \ ς al / 
 ἐμαστίγωσεν. “καὶ οἱ στρατιῶται πλέξαντες στέφανον 
 ἐξ ἀκανθῶν ἐπέθηκαν αὐτοῦ τῇ κεφαλῇ, καὶ ἱμά 
 n ὑτοῦ τῇ κεφαλῇ, Kal ἱμάτιον 
 
XIX. 1s KATA IQANNHN. 53 
 
 lal QA 4 ‘ 
 πορφυροῦν περιέβαλον αὐτόν, καὶ ἤρχοντο πρὸς αὐτὸν 
 al = > , 
 "καὶ ἔλεγον, Χαῖρε, ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων᾽ καὶ ἐδί- 
 A , 4 a ! ς 
 δοσαν αὐτῷ ῥαπίσματα. “kal ἐξῆλθεν πάλιν ἔξω ὁ 
 a U (gS aela) 3 SN 4 es 
 Πιλάτος Kal λέγει αὐτοῖς, Ἴδε ἄγω ὑμῖν αὐτὸν ἔξω, iva 
 ΝΥ “ ΩΝ ͵ ἈΠῸ ἢ Ὁ, > » "μ᾽ 5 gen θ 
 γνῶτε ὅτι οὐδεμίαν αἰτίαν εὑρίσκω ἐν αὐτῷ. "ἐξῆλθεν 
 53 ¢ 3 an ” A \ ) , LA \ 
 οὖν ὁ ᾿Ἰησοῦς ἔξω, φορῶν τὸν ἀκάνθινον στέφανον καὶ 
 \ fa) e t \ be ? a ὃ Nin (Εἰ ὧν 
 τὸ πορφυροῦν ἱμάτιον. καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, ᾿Ιδοὺ ὁ ἄν- 
 \ e n \ ee ξ 7 
 θρωπος. “ὅτε οὖν εἶδον αὐτὸν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ ὑπηρέ- 
 , 
 ται, ἐκραύγασαν λέγοντες, Σταύρωσον, σταύρωσον. λέγει 
 5.1 we ; , 2A €). a \ ἢ : 
 αὐτοῖς ὁ Τ]Πλάτος, Λάβετε αὐτὸν ὑμεῖς καὶ σταυρώσατε 
 / > A 3 / 
 ἐγὼ yap οὐχ εὑρίσκω ἐν αὐτῷ αἰτίαν. ᾿ἀπεκρίθησαν 
 7A a ς a \ 
 αὐτῷ ot ᾿Ἰουδαῖοι, Ἡμεῖς νόμον ἔχομεν, καὶ κατὰ τὸν 
 7 > , b] An 6 e\ γε ae \ > / 
 νόμον ὀφείλει ἀποθανεῖν, ὅτι υἱὸν θεοῦ ἑαυτὸν ἐποίησεν. 
 > e / nr Ἁ , A 
 °"Ore οὖν ἤκουσεν ὁἸΤΠλάτος τοῦτον τὸν λόγον, μᾶλλον 
 a \ / : 
 ἐφοβήθη, “καὶ εἰσῆλθεν εἰς TO πραιτώριον πάλιν καὶ 
 7 ὦ A / 5 / ¢ re A 9 / 
 λέγει TO ᾿Ιησοῦ, Ἰ]όθεν εἶ σύ; ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἀπόκρισιν 
 Ff an ’ a ¢e / 3 
 οὐκ ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ. "λέγει οὖν αὐτῷ ὁ Πιλάτος, ᾿Εμοὶ 
 > me 9 2 vA 5) 7, ” 3 nw ͵ 
 οὐ λαλεῖς ; οὐκ οἶδας OTL ἐξουσίαν ἔχω ἀπολῦσαί σε, 
 καὶ ἐξουσίαν ἔχω σταυρῶσαί σε; "ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ I 
 x P , sala ck al ate. 
 an μι s > / 3 2 “ 3 / > A 5 
 σοῦς, Οὐκ εἶχες ἐξουσίαν κατ᾽ ἐμοῦ οὐδεμίαν εἰ μὴ ἣν 
 / U a 
 δεδομένον σοι ἄνωθεν᾽ διὰ τοῦτο ὁ παραδοὺς μέ σοι 
 ἢ ε / » 12? , ε ἢ γ»ῳ," 
 μείζονα ἁμαρτίαν ἔχει. “ex τούτου ὁ ἸΤΠιλάτος ἐζήτει 
 ει a Ξε eer € ἊΝ 3 A ’ , Ne 
 ἀπολῦσαι αὐτόν οἱ δὲ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι ἐκραύγαξον λέγοντες, 
 3 \ a 5 / Oy la) 
 Eav τοῦτον ἀπολύσῃς, οὐκ εἶ φίλος τοῦ Καίσαρος" 
 A « , e \ A ’ I rn t 
 πᾶς ὁ βασίλεα ἑαυτὸν ποιῶν ἀντιλέγει τῷ Καίσαρι. 
 13 ¢ 3 ET Xa ,’ s A , , 7 
 ὁ οὖν Πιλᾶτος ἀκούσας τῶν λόγων τούτων ἤγαγεν 
 5 \ Ἢ la) \ 2 > \ / ’ / 
 ἔξω τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, καὶ ἐκάθισεν ἐπὶ βήματος εἰς τόπον 
 δι , ς “ A 
 λεγόμενον Λιθόστρωτον, “EBpaicri δὲ TaBBaba. “Hv 
 x \ fal 
 δὲ παρασκευὴ τοῦ πάσχα, ὥρα ἦν ws ἕκτη. καὶ λέγει 
 a 5 / Ν A 
 τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις, Ἴδε ὁ βασιλεὺς ὑμῶν. “éxpadvyacav 
 3 > a τὸ 5 a 
 οὖν ἐκεῖνοι, Apov, Gpov, σταύρωσον αὐτόν. λέγει αὐτοῖς 
 
54 EYATTEAION XIX. 15 
 
 ὁ Πιλάτος, Tov βασιλέα ὑμῶν σταυρώσω; ἀπεκρίθησαν 
 
 a > ” / 
 οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς, Οὐκ ἔχομεν βασιλέα εἰ μὴ Καίσαρα. “tore 
 > “ - 
 οὖν παρέδωκεν αὐτὸν αὐτοῖς ἵνα σταυρωθῇ. 
 s \ > lal a 
 “TlapéxaBov οὖν τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, καὶ βαστάζων αὐτῷ 
 \ \ Ie > \ , 7 Ud 
 τὸν σταυρὸν ἐξῆλθεν eis τὸν λεγόμενον Kpaviov τόπον, 
 ὃ λέγεται ᾿Εβραϊστὶ Τ᾽ολγοθᾶ, ᾿ ὅπου αὐτὸν ἐσταύρωσαν, 
 \ =) 5 “Ἴ»Ἴ Ff / > lal \ > lal / 
 καὶ μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἄλλους δύο ἐντεῦθεν καὶ ἐντεῦθεν, μέσον 
 a ¢ 
 δὲ τὸν Ιησοῦν. “ἔγραψεν δὲ καὶ τίτλον ὁ ΠΠλάτος καὶ 
 lo] fal s 7 9 - 
 ἔθηκεν ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ" ἦν δὲ γεγραμμένον, ᾿Ιησοῦς ὃ 
 Ναζωραῖος ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων. ““τοῦτον οὖν τὸν 
 / \ ᾽ , A 3 / e/ ’ \ > 
 τίτλον πολλοὶ ἀνέγνωσαν τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων, ὅτι ἐγγὺς ἦν 
 ς , a / d > 50 ¢ Ἵ ae ἢ Ἂν ὁ ΜῈ 
 ὁ τόπος τῆς πόλεως ὅπου ἐσταυρώθη ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς" καὶ ἦν 
 - « - 
 γεγραμμένον ᾿Ε)βραϊστί, Ῥωμαϊστί, “EXAnuicti. “ἔλεγον 
 4 Aa > - al 
 οὖν τῷ Πιλάτῳ οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων, Μὴ ypade, 
 Ὁ“ = / κ 
 ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων᾽" ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι ἐκεῖνος εἶπεν, βασι- 
 A > ᾽ « , ‘\ 
 revs εἰμι τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων. ™amexpiOn ὁ ἸΤίλάτος, Ὃ γέ- 
 : ; 
 γραφα, γέγραφα. 
 23 e s a ef 2 , \ 2 A 
 Οἱ οὖν στρατιῶται, ὅτε ἐσταύρωσαν τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, 
 ἔλαβον τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐποίησαν τέσσερα μέρη, 
 / \ a > 
 ἑκάστῳ στρατιώτῃ μέρος, καὶ τὸν χιτῶνα. ἦν δὲ ὁ 
 a \ edt ¢ 
 χιτὼν apados, ἐκ τῶν ἄνωθεν ὑφαντὸς δι’ ὅλου. "εἶπον 
 , ς, \ 
 οὖν πρὸς ἀλλήλους, Μὴ σχίσωμεν αὐτόν, adda λάχω- 
 \ Ε] aA , ΝΜ Ξ vA ¢ \ θῇ 
 μεν περὶ αὐτοῦ, τίνος ἔσται" ἵνα ἡ γραφὴ πληρωθῇ, 
 Διεμερίσαντο τὰ ἱμάτιά μου ἑαυτοῖς, καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν ἱματισ- 
 μόν μου ἔβαλον κλῆρον. οἱ μὲν οὖν στρατιῶται ταῦτα 
 ἐποίησαν. 
 25 TF , \ \ A a a ? a ε 
 Εἱστήκεισαν δὲ παρὰ τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἢ 
 μ“ > A 4 6 > \ Lal \ > “ / e 
 μήτηρ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἡ ἀδελφὴ τῆς μητρὸς αὐτοῦ, Μαρία ἡ 
 al A « a 
 τοῦ Κλωπᾶ καὶ Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνή. “Ἰησοῦς οὖν 
 a «Δ , 
 ἰδὼν τὴν μητέρα καὶ τὸν μαθητὴν παρεστῶτα ὃν ἠγάπα, 
 lal e Φ ᾿ a 
 λέγε: TH μητρί, Γύναι, ἴδε ὁ υἱός gov. “Elta λέγει τῷ 
 
XIX. 40 KATA IQANNHN. 55 
 
 a » ε , Coy tha ee Sea A “ 
 μαθητῇ, Ἴδε ἡ μήτηρ σου. καὶ ἀπ᾽ ἐκείνης τῆς ὥρας 
 ». Ν 
 ἔλαβεν αὐτὴν ὃ μαθητὴς εἰς τὰ ἴδια. 
 
 al es fal rf ‘ 
 ὁ Μετὰ τοῦτο εἰδὼς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ὅτι ἤδη πάντα τετέ- 
 4, aA « / / Ὁ lal 
 λεσται, iva τελειωθῇ ἡ γραφὴ, λέγει, Ano. “oxKevos 
 , > ‘ »“ἅμ 
 ἔκειτο ὄξους μεστόν᾽ σπόγγον οὖν μεστὸν τοῦ ὄξους 
 » lal A ’ 
 ὑσσώπῳ περιθέντες προσήνεγκαν αὐτοῦ τῷ στόματι. 
 7 ov © 3 fal a : / 
 ore οὖν ἔλαβεν τὸ ὄξος ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, εἶπεν, Τετέλεσται, Kal 
 ’ Ν x / A rn 
 κλίνας THY κεφαλὴν παρέδωκεν TO πνεῦμα. 
 31 e a aA 5) \ ee; “ \ , 
 Οἱ οὖν ᾿Ἰουδαῖοι, ἐπεὶ παρασκευὴ ἦν, ἵνα μὴ μείνῃ 
 " x rf a \ / μ᾽ a , > \ 
 ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ τὰ σώματα ἐν TH σαββάτῳ, HY γὰρ 
 “ / » 
 μεγάλη ἡ ἡμέρα ἐκείνου τοῦ σαββάτου, ἠρώτησαν τὸν 
 / “ A 5 a , \ τς A 
 Πιλάτον ἵνα κατεαγῶσιν αὐτῶν τὰ σκέλη καὶ ἀρθώσιν.. 
 A . lal \ 
 ὅξῆλθον οὖν οἱ στρατιῶται, καὶ TOD μὲν πρώτου κατέαξαν 
 an aA / b A 
 Ta σκέλη καὶ τοῦ ἄλλου τοῦ συνσταυρωθέντος αὐτῷ" 
 A ’ «ς 5 wv " \ 
 8 ἐπὶ δὲ τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν ἐλθόντες ὡς εἶδον ἤδη αὐτὸν τεθνη- 
 ͵ ’ 7 5) A A , 34 5 1 «ὦ A 
 κότα, οὐ κατέαξαν αὐτοῦ Ta σκέλη, “᾿αλλ᾽ εἷς TOV στρα- 
 a ’ 5 [οἱ \ \ »” \ 5“. 
 τιωτῶν λόγχῃ αὐτοῦ τὴν πλευρὰν ἔνυξεν, καὶ ἐξῆλθεν 
 Ἰθὺ @ \ ὃ 35 \ « e \ / 
 εὐθὺς αἷμα καὶ ὕδωρ. “Kai ὃ ἑωρακὼς μεμαρτύρηκεν, 
 \ > \ » Qn > \ ¢€ / \ > lal 5" 
 καὶ ἀληθινὴ αὐτοῦ ἐστὶν ἡ μαρτυρία, καὶ ἐκεῖνος οἶδεν 
 6 > a f “ δι ἐκ » , 898.» 2 
 OTL ἀληθῆ λέγει, ἵνα καὶ ὑμεῖς πιστεύσητε. ἐγένετο 
 Ἁ lal vA e \ “Ὁ fal 3 
 γὰρ ταῦτα, ἵνα ἡ γραφὴ πληρωθῇ, Octodv οὐ συντρι- 
 fal \ , Yj 
 βήσεται αὐτοῦ. “Kai πάλιν ἑτέρα γραφὴ λέγει, Ὄψον- 
 
 “Ὁ 7 
 
 Tat εἰς ὃν ἐξεκέντησαν. 
 Ν \ rn >. / ’ A 
 Mera δὲ ταῦτα ἠρώτησεν τὸν IliAatov ᾿Ιωσὴφ ἀπὸ 
 4 θ 7] Δ ἂ aA > a 7 \ ὃ A 
 Αριμαθαίας, ὧν μαθητὴς τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ κεκρυμμένος δὲ διὰ 
 τὸν φόβον τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων, ἵνα a ) σώμα τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ᾽ 
 υδαίων, ἵνα apn TO σώμ Ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦ 
 ἃ. πὸ, , 5 > \ A 
 καὶ ἐπέτρεψεν ὁ ἸΤλάτος" ἦλθεν οὖν καὶ ἦρεν TO σῶμα 
 A 39 > 
 αὐτοῦ. “ἦλθεν δὲ καὶ Νικόδημος ὁ ἐλθὼν πρὸς αὐτὸν 
 A \ a , , a 
 νυκτὸς TO πρῶτον, φέρων μίγμα σμύρνης Kal ἀλόης ὡς 
 / « f 40 » A fr A 
 λίτρας ἑκατὸν. “ἔλαβον οὖν TO σῶμα τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ, Kal 
 Μ » A 3 / A A 5 , \ ” 
 ἔδησαν αὐτὸ ὀθονίοις μετὰ τῶν ἀρωμάτων, καθὼς ἔθος 
 
56 EYATTEAION XIX. 40 
 
 ‘ n ? / an 
 ἐστὶν τοῖς Ιουδαίοις ἐνταφιάξειν. “nv δὲ ἐν τῷ τόπῳ 
 vA > / Lal \ > A / ral 
 ὅπου ἐσταυρώθη κῆπος, Kal ἐν τῷ κήπῳ μνημεῖον 
 9 : δέ 2 \ > LO ͵, AB 3, ae 9 ὃ \ Ἢ 
 καινόν, ἐν ᾧ οὐδέπω οὐδεὶς ἐτέθη" “ἐκεῖ οὖν διὰ τὴν 
 a 3 / \ Φ' a 
 παρασκευὴν τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων, ὅτι ἐγγὺς ἦν TO μνημεῖον, 
 ἔθηκαν τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν. 
 90 ᾽Τῇ δὲ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνὴ 
 Δ. “- 
 ἔρχεται πρωὶ σκοτίας ἔτι οὔσης εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον, καὶ 
 > a) 
 βλέπει τὸν λίθον ἠρμένον ἐκ τοῦ μνημείου. “τρέχει οὖν 
 \ » \ dé 4 \ \ \ ” 
 καὶ ἔρχεται πρὸς Σίμωνα Ἰ]έτρον καὶ πρὸς τὸν ἄλλον 
 τ « ἴω “ 
 μαθητὴν ὃν ἐφίλει ὁ Ἰησοῦς, καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, Ἦραν 
 a / οὐ la) 
 τὸν κύριον ἐκ τοῦ μνημείου, καὶ οὐκ οἴδαμεν ποῦ 
 a“ 3 ε 
 ἔθηκαν αὐτόν. “᾿Εξῆλθεν οὖν ὁ Ἰ]έτρος καὶ ὁ ἄλλος 
 3 ral 
 μαθητής, καὶ ἤρχοντο εἰς TO μνημεῖον. “ἔτρεχον δὲ οἱ 
 a \ / na 
 δύο ὁμοῦ" Kal ὁ ἄλλος μαθητὴς προέδραμεν τάχιον TOD 
 . 3 nA > \ n 5 
 Πέτρου καὶ ἦλθεν πρῶτος εἰς TO μνημεῖον, "καὶ Tapa- 
 5» , rd An 
 κύψας βλέπει κείμενα τὰ ὀθόνια, οὐ μέντοι εἰσῆλθεν. 
 a > al 
 SEoyerar οὖν Σίμων Πέτρος ἀκολουθῶν αὐτῷ, καὶ 
 an Lal x al \ a) Ud 
 εἰσῆλθεν εἰς TO μνημεῖον, Kal θεωρεῖ τὰ ὀθόνια κείμενα, 
 7 \ \ / me > \ A lal ’ lal ᾽ \ 
 καὶ TO σουδάριον, ὃ ἦν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτοῦ, ov μετὰ 
 A 9 ’ 7 ᾽ \ \ 5) 7 9 
 τῶν ὀθονίων κείμενον ἀλλὰ χωρὶς ἐντετυλύγμενον εἰς 
 a Dae Ἐ 
 ἕνα τόπον. ὅτότε οὖν εἰσῆλθεν Kal ὁ ἄλλος μαθητὴς ὁ 
 a a \ “4 \ / 
 ἐλθὼν πρῶτος εἰς TO μνημεῖον, καὶ εἶδεν Kal ἐπίστευσεν" 
 / ~ 
 ϑοὐδέπω γὰρ ἤδεισαν τὴν γραφήν, ὅτι δεῖ αὐτὸν ἐκ 
 a A 02 « 3 / \ 4 
 νεκρῶν ἀναστῆναι. “ἀπῆλθον οὖν πάλιν πρὸς αὐτοὺς 
 οἱ μαθηταί. 
 \ / ΕΝ 
 4 Mapla δὲ εἱστήκει πρὸς τῷ μνημείῳ ἔξω κλαίουσα. 
 3 »” / > \ a 12 \ Θ a 
 ὡς οὖν ἔκλαιεν, παρέκυψεν εἰς TO μνημεῖον, “Kal θεωρεῖ 
 , 2 , > a θ 4 “ \ a 
 δύο ἀγγέλους ἐν λευκοῖς καθεζομένους, Eva πρὸς τῇ 
 a 5 a , A Μ \ A 
 κεφαλῇ, καὶ Eva πρὸς τοῖς ποσίν, ὅπου ἔκειτο TO σώμα 
 an? a 43 f 2... 4-9 a Tv / , ‘ 
 τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ, "καὶ λέγουσιν αὐτῇ ἐκεῖνοι, Vuvas, τί κλαίεις; 
 a \ Ul , \ > s 
 λέγει αὐτοῖς ὅτι Ἦραν τὸν κύριόν pov, καὶ οὐκ οἶδα 
 
XX. 25 KATA IQANNHN. 57 
 
 a me 14 a > A > / 5) \ 
 ποῦ ἔθηκαν αὐτόν. “Ταῦτα εἰποῦσα ἐστράφη εἰς τὰ 
 a \ 3 a A 
 ὀπίσω, καὶ θεωρεῖ τὸν “Incodv ἑστῶτα, καὶ οὐκ ἤδει 
 “ 'ξς ὃ, A b / 15 s > «a ἼἼ la Je t , 
 ort ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐστίν. “λέγει αὐτῇ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Tuva, τί 
 
 A / A / ς / 
 κλαίεις ; τίνα ζητεῖς ; ἐκείνη δοκοῦσα ὅτι 6 κηπουρός 
 5 / ’ A / » \ 3 / 5 ff ’ 7] 
 ἐστιν, λέγει αὐτῷ, Κύριε, εἰ σὺ ἐβάστασας αὐτόν, εἰπέ 
 
 aA U ’ 5 \ > \ ’ A , ’ A“ 
 μοι ποῦ ἔθηκας αὐτόν, καγὼ αὐτὸν ἀρῶ. "λέγει αὐτῇ 
 lal la / 3 a ¢ 
 ᾿Ιησοῦς, Μαριάμ. στραφεῖσα ἐκείνη λέγει αὐτῷ ‘EBpa- 
 “ “δ / Ud / 3 Ae 
 ἰστί, Ῥαββουνί᾽ ὃ λέγεται, διδάσκαλε. “Aéyer αὐτῇ ὁ 
 ? A , “ v \ > V4 \ \ 
 Ἰησοῦς, Μή μου ἅπτου, οὔπω yap ἀναβέβηκα πρὸς τὸν 
 7 4 ͵ \ \ si τὸ / \ ’ \ 
 πατέρα᾽ πορεύου δὲ πρὸς τοὺς ἀδελφούς μου Kal εἰπὲ 
 a \ \ , , 
 αὐτοῖς, ᾿Αναβαίνω πρὸς τὸν πατέρα μου καὶ πατέρα 
 ς a \ θ , \ θ \ ς a 18 7 M \ 
 ὑμών καὶ θεόν pov καὶ θεὸν ὑμῶν. “Epyerar Μαριὰμ 
 \ 5 / A A f , 
 ἡ Μαγδαληνὴ ἀγγέλλουσα τοῖς μαθηταῖς, ὅτι ἑώρακα 
 \ a 5 a ie 
 TOV κύριον, Kal ταῦτα εἶπεν αὐτῇ. 
 U ? A ¢ , > / a ~ 
 “Οὔσης οὖν ὀψίας τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ τῇ μιᾷ caB- 
 a A “ = e 
 Batov, καὶ τῶν θυρῶν κεκλεισμένων ὅπου ἦσαν οἱ 
 tal ? / s > aA 
 μαθηταὶ διὰ τὸν φόβον τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων, ἦλθεν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς 
 \ ” > N , \ , > a >] / Care es 
 Kal ἔστη εἰς TO μέσον, Kal λέγει αὐτοῖς, Eipnvn ὑμῖν. 
 al / \ \ - \ 
 “καὶ τοῦτο εἰπὼν ἔδειξεν Kal τὰς χεῖρας καὶ τὴν 
 al , e U \ 
 πλευρὰν αὐτοῖς. ἐχάρησαν οὖν οἱ μαθηταὶ ἰδόντες τὸν 
 2] 5 3 ΓΗ͂Σ on EB? , @ as. θ \ 
 κύριον. “εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς πάλιν, Εἰρήνη ὑμῖν. καθὼς 
 ε / ’ \ / 6 a 2 \ A 
 ἀπέσταλκέν με ὁ πατήρ, Kayo πέμπω ὑμᾶς. “Kal τοῦτο 
 5 \ 3 , \ 7 5 nr A r ral 
 εἰπὼν ἐνεφύσησεν καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, Λάβετε πνεῦμα 
 aA \ / ’ al 
 ἅγιον. ™dv τινων ἀφῆτε Tas ἁμαρτίας, ἀφέωνται αὐτοῖς" 
 A , 
 ἄν τινων κρατῆτε, κεκράτηνται. 
 A aA Ui ς 
 “Θωμᾶς δὲ εἷς ἐκ τῶν δώδεκα, 6 λεγόμενος Δίδυμος, 
 a ff 5 > fal 5 ΜΝ 3 
 οὐκ ἦν pet αὐτῶν ὅτε ἦλθεν ᾿Ιησοῦς. “ἔλεγον οὖν 
 5 A SS fe , \ ΄ e \ 
 αὐτῷ οἱ ἄλλοι μαθηταί, Εωράκαμεν τὸν κύριον. ὁ δὲ 
 2 ’ a > \ \ 16 > “A \ ? A \ 
 εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Kav μὴ ἴδω ἐν ταῖς χερσὶν αὐτοῦ τὸν 
 “ a vA \ ’ \ ὃ , ? \ 
 τύπον TOV ἥλων Kal βάλω τὸν δάκτυλόν μου εἰς τὸν 
 Aa Ul \ , \ a > \ 
 τύπον τῶν ἥλων καὶ βάλω μου τὴν χεῖρα εἰς τὴν 
 
58 ΕΥ̓ΑΓΓΈΛΙΟΝ ΧΧ. 25 
 
 \ Sc. in ᾽ \ ͵ 26. Ἃ β΄ hes “ἃ 
 πλευρὰν αὐτοῦ, οὐ μὴ πιστεύσω. “Kai μεθ᾽ ἡμέρας 
 , Ss ‘4 e 9 “ \ A 
 ὀκτὼ πάλιν ἦσαν ἔσω οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ Θωμᾶς 
 ᾽ A / ΒΝ lal a “ 
 μετ᾽ αὐτῶν. ἔρχεται ὁ Ἰησοῦς τῶν θυρῶν κεκλεισ- 
 > ‘ / Ss , lad 
 μένων, Kai ἔστη εἰς TO μέσον καὶ εἶπεν, Εἰρήνη ὑμῖν. 
 [4] / \ 
 εἶτα λέγει TO Θωμᾷ, Φέρε τὸν δάκτυλόν σου ὧδε καὶ 
 » \ me ὦ \ / \ m.. ¥ \ / 
 ide Tas χεῖράς μου, Kal φέρε τὴν χεῖρά σου καὶ βάλε 
 \ ‘ / / 2 \ 
 εἰς τὴν πλευράν μου, Kal μὴ γίνου ἄπιστος ἀλλὰ 
 , 28 9 / a \ 5 ᾽ ac ’ , 
 πιστός. “ἀπεκρίθη Θωμᾶς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, ‘O κύριός 
 / A lal f 
 μου καὶ ὃ θεός pov. “λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “Ore 
 “ e 
 ἑώρακάς με, πεπίστευκας᾽ μακάριοι οἱ μὴ ἰδόντες καὶ 
 πιστεύσαντες. 
 Πολλὰ μὲν οὖν καὶ ἄλλα σημεῖα ἐποίησεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς 
 > , a a “Ὁ 2 ” / 2 a 
 ἐνώπιον τῶν μαθητῶν, ἃ οὐκ ἔστιν γεγραμμένα ἐν TH 
 / / 81 an \ / t/ , 
 βιβλίῳ τούτῳ. “᾿ταῦτα δὲ γέγραπται ἵνα πιστεύητε 
 [7 ’ a ᾿] \ ς \ «ς ον lal “-“ A vA 
 ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἐστὶν ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς Tov θεοῦ, καὶ ἵνα 
 A , ’ lal 
 πιστεύοντες ζωὴν ἔχητε EV τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ. 
 1 \ Lal 5 / e \ , > -“ 
 91 ‘Mera ταῦτα ἐφανέρωσεν ἑαυτὸν πάλιν ᾿Ιησοῦς 
 nw lal \ A / “ ,ὔ 
 τοῖς μαθηταῖς ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης τῆς Τιβεριάδος" 
 7 29 e rn 7 7 \ 
 ἐφανέρωσεν δὲ οὕτως. “ἦσαν ὁμοῦ Σίμων Πέτρος καὶ 
 a / \ \ ¢€ 9 \ 
 Θωμᾶς ὁ λεγόμενος Δίδυμος καὶ Ναθαναὴλ ὁ ἀπὸ 
 A a“ “ / A wv 
 Κανᾶ τῆς Γαλιλαίας καὶ οἱ τοῦ Ζεβεδαίου καὶ ἄλλοι 
 Ρ] fal - ’ rf / 8 7 5 - ἝΩ 
 ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ δύο. “λέγει αὐτοῖς Σίμων 
 » nw > / 
 Πέτρος, Ὕπάγω ἁλιεύειν. λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, ᾿Ερχόμεθα 
 Ν « “Ὁ \ "4 > a \ > / ’ \ rn 
 Kal ἡμεῖς σὺν σοί. ἐξῆλθον καὶ ἐνέβησαν εἰς TO πλοῖον, 
 \ > b / - \ > / JOE 4 of. \ w 
 καὶ ἐν ἐκείνῃ TH νυκτὶ ἐπίασαν οὐδέν. “πρωΐας δὲ ἤδη 
 Ἂς ν ᾽ , , 
 γινομένης ἔστη ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐπὶ τὸν αἰγιαλόν" οὐ μέντοι 
 " c ν ὦ ᾽ tes , enV 32 ᾽ μὰ 
 ἤδεισαν οἱ μαθηταὶ ὅτι ᾿1ησοῦς ἐστίν. “λέγει οὖν αὐτοῖς 
 > fal / / f », ᾿Ξ ᾽ ,ὔ 
 Inoods, ἸΠαιδία, μή τι προσφάγιον ἔχετε; ἀπεκρίθη- 
 al 2 - , bd \ 
 σαν αὐτῷ, Οὔ. “ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Βάλετε εἰς τὰ δεξιὰ 
 , rn / \ / \ « / » 2 
 μέρη TOV πλοίου TO δίκτυον, καὶ εὑρήσετε. ἔβαλον ov», 
 ’ \ lal / 7 
 Kal οὐκέτι αὐτὸ ἑλκύσαι ἴσχυον ἀπὸ TOD πλήθους τῶν 
 
XXI. 18 KATA IQANNHN. 59 
 
 5 , ον > ¢ \ > oA a > 7 
 ἰχθύων. λέγει οὖν ὁ μαθητὴς ἐκεῖνος ὃν ἠγάπα 6 
 ΕῚ rn A , ς ΄ ’ ᾿] / φ / 
 Ἰησοῦς τῷ Πέτρῳ, O κύριος ἐστιν. Σίμων οὐν Τ]έτρος, 
 J A , 
 ἀκούσας ὅτι ὁ κύριός ἐστιν, τὸν ἐπενδύτην διεζώσατο, 
 φ \ / \ yy e \ > \ , 
 ἣν yap γυμνὸς, καὶ ἔβαλεν €QUTOV εἰς τὴν θαλασσαν᾽ 
 Ὁ « a / 3 
 δοΐ δὲ ἄλλοι μαθηταὶ τῷ πλοιαρίῳ ἦλθον. οὐ γὰρ ἦσαν 
 \ n A 3 αἰ τ eR a 
 μακρὰν ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς ἀλλὰ ὡς ἀπὸ πηχῶν διακοσίων, 
 \ / “- > / φ 
 σύροντες τὸ δίκτυον τῶν ἰχθύων. “ὡς οὖν ἀπέβησαν 
 » \ A 3 » θ \ , % >] ͵ὔ 
 εἰς τὴν γῆν, βλέπουσιν ἀνθρακιὰν κειμένην καὶ ὀψάριον 
 ᾽ ἢ Ce Se 10~ 4 I. ca. B'S A > , 
 ἐπικείμενον καὶ ἄρτον. ““λέγει αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ᾿Ενέγ- 
 ? \ a 3 / e > ’ a 41. 3.» ὕΚ 
 κατε ἀπὸ τῶν ὀψαρίων ὧν ἐπιάσατε νῦν. ἀνέβη 
 yes 7 \ ΡΛ \ / > \ “ 
 Σίμων Πέτρος καὶ εἵλκυσεν τὸ δίκτυον εἰς τὴν γῆν 
 τὰ ὁ , G ς \ , Ay \ 
 μεστὸν ἰχθύων μεγάλων ἑκατὸν πεντήκοντα τριῶν" Kal 
 , ” 5) 5 / \ / 12 [4 
 τοσούτων ὄντων οὐκ ἐσχίσθη τὸ δίκτυον. λέγει 
 >] lal » -“ rf ’ , » \ \ > / 
 αὐτοῖς ᾿Ιησοῦς, Δεῦτε ἀριστήσατε. οὐδεὶς δὲ ἐτόλμα 
 a a 3 ‘ Ὧι Σ \ / 3 A 7 ¢/ (3 
 τῶν μαθητῶν ἐξετασαι αὐτόν, Xv Tis εἶ; εἰδότες ETL ὁ 
 εις, ἢ ω» ἂν > κα \ , \ 
 κύριος ἐστιν ἔρχεται ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ λαμβάνει τὸν 
 wv \ 616 » “- Ν \ ν᾿ . ¢ / 
 ἄρτον καὶ δίδωσιν αὐτοῖς, Kal TO ὀψάριον ὁμοίως. 
 14 A wv / ’ 4 > la) A a 
 τοῦτο ἤδη τρίτον ἐφανερώθη ᾿Ιησοῦς τοῖς μαθηταῖς 
 > \ > A 
 ἐγερθεὶς ἐκ νεκρῶν. 
 / > ἂν 7 A 
 “"Ore οὖν ἠρίστησαν, λέγει TO Σίμωνι Πέτρῳ ὁ 
 > a / 5 ’ 5 rf 7 
 Ἰησοῦς, Σίμων ᾿Ἰωάνου, ἀγαπᾷς pe πλέον τούτων; 
 7 ἐξ A \ s ef n 
 λέγει αὐτῷ Nai κύριε, σὺ oldas ὅτι φιλῶ σε. λέγει 
 a > ¥ 
 2» i) as Ie 16> / St) ἣν , ͵ 
 αὐτῷ, Βόσκε τὰ ἀρνία pov. "λέγει αὐτῷ πάλιν δεύ- 
 Ss / 5 , 5 -“ 4 7] > A N Ἁ 
 τερον, Σίμων ᾿Ιωάνου, ἀγαπᾷς με; λέγει αὐτῷ, Ναὶ 
 / Ξ \ lal 7] Ψ - 
 κύριε σὺ οἷδας ὅτε φιλῶ σε. λέγει αὐτῷ, ἸΠοίμαινε 
 ἢ pees 11 6 5. ὧς τ t Si Baal 
 τὰ προβάτιά μου. έγει αὐτῷ τὸ τρίτον, Σίμων ᾿Ιωάνου, 
 . . ͵ ς 7 “ 3 ee \ 
 φιλεῖς με; ἐλυπήθη ὁ Ἰ]έτρος, ὅτι εἶπεν αὐτῷ TO 
 / Ἂ a τὰ \ “4 ᾽ “Ὁ K / ΄ \ io = 
 τρίτον, φιλεῖς με; καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Κύριε, πάντα σὺ οἶδας 
 \ / [{ aA , ’ a 3 A / 
 σὺ γινώσκεις OTL φιλῶ σε. λέγει αὐτῷ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Booke 
 x : t JALAN 3 iN , “ > 
 τὰ προβάτιά μου. ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ὕτε ἧς 
 ͵ὔ rf / / li , 
 νεώτερος, ἐξζωννυες σεαυτὸν καὶ περιεπάτεις ὅπου ἤθελες" 
 
60 EYATTEAION KATA IQANNHN. XXI. τ 
 
 ¢ \ , ᾽ al \ na “ Vo 
 ὅταν δὲ γηράσῃς, ἐκτενεῖς τὰς χεῖράς σου, Kal ἄλλος σε 
 ei “ ’ θέ 19 A δὲ 2 , 
 ζώσει καὶ οἴσει ὅπου ov θέλεις. “TodDTO δὲ εἶπεν σημαί- 
 , Uy \ “ 
 νων ποίῳ θανάτῳ δοξάσει τὸν θεόν. καὶ τοῦτο εἰπὼν 
 λέγει αὐτῷ, ᾿Ακολουθει μοι. 
 / \ \ \ 
 °""’Emiotpadels ὁ Ilétpos βλέπει τὸν μαθητὴν ov 
 a ἴω “Ν νυν a 
 ἠγάπα 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀκολουθοῦντα, ὃς Kai ἀνέπεσεν ἐν TO 
 ᾿ a JA ta \«@ r s ε 
 δείπνῳ ἐπὶ τὸ στῆθος αὐτοῦ καὶ εἶπεν, Κύριε, τίς ἐστιν ὃ 
 aA a \ ς / / A 
 παραδιδούς σε; “᾿τοῦτον οὖν ἰδὼν ὁ Ilétpos λέγει TO 
 Le) e \ / 4 ᾽ a € 39 lal > 
 Ἰησοῦ, Κύριε, οὗτος δὲ τί; “eyes αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “Kav 
 3 vy / , μ bd 
 αὐτὸν θέλω μένειν ἕως ἔρχομαι, τί πρός σε; σὺ μοι ἀκο- 
 aA e e / \ > \ 
 λούθει. "“᾿ἐξῆλθεν οὖν οὗτος ὁ λόγος εἰς τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς 
 “ ε δὲν δ cr 5 ἢ μ χὰ. 5 5 
 ὅτι .ὋὋ μαθητὴς ἐκεῖνος οὐκ ἀποθνήσκει καὶ οὐκ εἶπεν 
 5» A c oF na e/ ’ > f = 3 39 \ > Ν 
 αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ὅτι οὐκ ἀποθνήσκει: ἀλλ᾽, ᾿Εὰν αὐτὸν 
 θέλω μένειν ἕως ἔρχομαι, τί πρός σε; 
 24 eo. ¥ ᾽ ε θ \ ε A \ ’ 
 Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ μαθητὴς ὁ μαρτυρῶν περὶ τούτων 
 Ss ῇ fal \ ” ef 3 \ ᾽ a φ 
 καὶ ὁ γράψας ταῦτα, καὶ οἴδαμεν ὅτι ἀληθὴς αὐτοῦ ἡ 
 / 
 μαρτυρία ἐστίν. 
 «Ὁ lal 
 *"Kaoti δὲ Kal ἄλλα πολλὰ ἃ ἐποίησεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, 
 e/ >A / θ᾽ “ a ee 3 \ Ud 
 ἅτινα ἐὰν γράφηται Kal ἕν, οὐὸ avToV οἰμαι τὸν κόσμον 
 / \ . Ψ 
 χωρήσειν τὰ γραφόμενα βιβλία. 
 
NOTES. 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 In the remarks on the results of textual revision prefixed to the Notes 
 on each Chapter, it is not intended to enter minutely into each 
 point, but to indicate generally the principal corrections, and 
 occasionally to state the grounds on which a reading is preferred. 
 
 ᾿Ιωάνην is preferred by the best recent editors to Ἰωάννην. The title 
 of the Gospel is found in very different forms in ancient authorities, 
 the earliest being the simplest; κατὰ ᾿Ιωάννην or -άνην (NBD). evayy. 
 x. Ἶ. (ACLX); later MSS. have τὸ x. I evayy.; and very many have 
 τὸ k.'I. ἅγιον evayy. On Evayy. κατά see notes on 5. Matthew, p. 80. 
 
 7. πιστεύσωσιν. Following the uncial MSS., the best editors add 
 ν ἐφελκυστικόν before consonants and vowels alike: πᾶσι and δυσί are 
 occasional exceptions, and perhaps γιγνώσκουσι (x. 14). Winer, 43. 
 
 16. ὅτι with NBC!DLX for καί of T. R. with AC*, perhaps to avoid 
 ὅτι thrice in three lines. 
 
 18. pov. Θεός (NBC!L) for ὁ μον. vids (AX, the secondary uncials, 
 and all cursives except 33). Thus no ancient Greek authority sup- 
 ports ὁ μον. υἷος, while μον. Θεός is supported by three great types, 
 Β, δὲ, CL. The earliest authorities for ὁ μ. vids, Lat. vet. and Syr. 
 vet,, are somewhat given to insert interpretations as readings. The 
 evidence of the Fathers is divided and complicated. 
 
 27. αὐτός ἐστιν is an addition to fill out the construction, and os 
 ἐμπ. μ. y. has been inserted (AC?) from vv. 15, 30: NBC1L omit both. 
 
 28. Βηθανίᾳ, with N'ABC!, for Βηθαβαρᾷ of T. R., supported (in 
 spite of Origen’s defence of it) by only a small minority. 
 
 43, *Iwdvvov or ᾿Ιωάνου (NBL, Lat. vet., Memph.) for "Iwva (AB), 
 which is a correction from Matt. xvi. 17. 
 
 52. Before ὄψεσθε omit ἀπ᾽ ἄρτι (Matt. xxvi. 64). 
 
62 S. JOHN. (i te 
 
 1—18. The Prologue or Introduction in three parts. 1—5: The 
 Word in His own nature. 6—13: His Revelation to men and rejec- 
 tion by them. 14—18: His Revelation of the Father. The three 
 great characteristics of this Gospel, simplicity, subtlety, sublimity, 
 are conspicuous in the prologue: the majesty of the first words is 
 marvellous, The Gospel of the Son of Thunder opens with a peal. 
 
 1—5. Tue Worp ΙΝ His own Nature. 
 
 ἐν ἀρχῇ. In the beginning. The meaning must depend on the 
 context. In Gen.i. 1 it is an act done ἐν ἀρχῇ; here it is a Being 
 existing ἐν ἀρχῇ, and therefore prior to all beginning. That was the 
 first moment of time; this is eternity, transcending time. 85. John 
 insists on this and repeats it in v. 2; the Λόγος in Gnostic systems 
 was produced in time. Thus we have an intimation that the later 
 dispensation is the confirmation and infinite extension of the first. 
 "Ev ἀρχῇ here equals πρὸ τοῦ τὸν κόσμον εἶναι xvii. 5. Cf. xvii. 24; Eph. 
 i. 4; and especially 6 ἦν dm’ ἀρχῆς in 1 Johni. 1, which seems clearly 
 to refer to this opening of the Gospel. Contrast ἀρχὴ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου 
 *I. Xp. Mark i. 1, which is the historical beginning of the public 
 ministry of the Messiah. Cf. John vi. 64. The ἀρχή here is prior to 
 all history. The context shews that ἀρχή cannot mean God, the 
 Origin of all. 
 
 ἦν. Note the difference between ἣν and ἐγένετο. Elva: is ‘to be’ 
 absolutely: γίγνεσθαι is ‘to come into being.” The Word did not 
 come into existence, but before the creation of the world was already 
 in existence. The generation of the Word or Son of God is thus 
 thrown back into eternity. Hence St Paul speaks of Him as mpwro- 
 τοκος πάσης κτίσεως (Col. 1, 15), ‘born prior to’ (not ‘first of’) ‘all 
 creation.’ Cf. Heb. i. 8, vii. 3; Rev. i. 8. On these passages is 
 based the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son: see Articles 
 1.andi. The Arians maintained that there was a period when the 
 Son was not (ἣν ὅτε οὐκ jv); but 5. John says distinctly that the Son, 
 or Word, was existing before time began, i.e. from all eternity. 
 
 ὁ λόγος. As early as the second century Sermo and Verbum were 
 rival translations of this term. Tertullian (fl. a.p. 198—210) gives 
 us both, but seems himself to prefer Ratio. Sermo first became un- 
 usual and finally was disallowed in the Latin Church. The Latin 
 versions without exception adopted Verbum, and from it comes our 
 translation ‘the Word,’ translations which have greatly affected 
 Western theology. None of these translations are at all adequate; 
 but neither Latin nor any modern language supplies anything really 
 satisfactory. Verbum and ‘the Word’ do not give even the whole of 
 one of the two sides of ὁ Aoyos. The other side, which Tertullian 
 tried to express by Ratio, is not touched at all. Foro λόγος means 
 not only ‘the spoken word,’ but ‘the thought’ expressed by the 
 spoken word; it is the spoken word as expressive of thought. Λόγος in 
 the sense of ‘reason’ does not occur anywhere in the N.T. 
 
 The word is a remarkable one; all the more so because §S. John 
 assumes that his readers will at once understand it. This points to 
 
1.1. NOTES. 63 
 
 the fact that his Gospel was written in the first instance for his own 
 disciples, who would be familiar with his teaching, in which the doc- 
 trine of the Logos was conspicuous. 
 
 But on what was this doctrine based? whence did 5. John derive 
 the expression? There can be little doubt that it has its origin in 
 the Targums, or paraphrases of the Hebrew Scriptures, in use in 
 Palestine, rather than in the mixture of Jewish and Greek philosophy 
 prevalent at Alexandria and Ephesus. (1) In the Old Testament we 
 find the Word or Wisdom of God personified, generally as an instru- 
 ment for executing the Divine Will, as if it were itself distinct from 
 that Will. We have the first faint traces of it in the ‘God said’ of 
 Gen. i. 3, 6, 9, 11, 14, &c. The personification of the Word of God 
 begins to appear in the Psalms; xxxili. 6, cvii. 20, cxix. 89, cxlvii. 15. 
 In Prov. viii. and ix. the Wisdom of God is personified in very strik- 
 ing terms. This Wisdom is manifested in the power and mighty 
 works of God; that God is love is a revelation yet to come. (2) In 
 the Apocrypha the personification is more complete than in the O.T. 
 In Ecclesiasticus (B.c. 150—100) i. 1—20; xxiv. 1—22; and in the 
 Book of Wisdom (B.c. 100) vi. 22 to ix. 18 we have Wisdom personi- 
 fied. In Wisd. xviii. 15 the ‘ Almighty Word’ of God (ὁ παντοδύναμός 
 σου λόγος) appears as an agent of vengeance. (3) In the Targums, or 
 Aramaic paraphrases of the O.T., the development is carried still fur- 
 ther. These, though not yet written down, were in common use 
 among the Jews in our Lord’s time; and they were strongly influ- 
 enced by the growing tendency to separate the Divine Essence from 
 immediate contact with the material world. Where Scripture speaks 
 of a direct communication from God to man, the Targums substituted 
 the Memra, or ‘Word of God.’ Thus in Gen. ili. 8, 9, instead of ‘ they 
 heard the voice of the Lord God,’ the Targums read ‘they heard the 
 voice of the Word of the Lord God;’ and instead of ‘God called unto 
 Adam’ they put ‘the Word of the Lord called unto Adam,’ and so on. 
 It is said that this phrase ‘the Word of the Lord’ occurs 150 times in 
 a single Targum of the Pentateuch. And Memra is not a mere 
 utterance or ῥῆμα; for this the Targums use pithgama: e.g. ‘The word 
 (pithgama) of the Lord came to Abram in prophecy, saying, Fear not, 
 Abram, My Word (Memra) shall be thy strength’ (Gen. xy. 1); ‘I 
 stood between the Word (Memra) of the Lord and you, to announce 
 to you at that time the word (pithgama) of the Lord’ (Deut. v. 5). 
 In what is called the theosophy of the Alexandrine Jews, which 
 was a compound of Judaism with Platonic philosophy and Oriental 
 mysticism, we seem to come nearer to a strictly personal view of 
 the Divine Word or Wisdom, but really move farther away from 
 it. Philo, the leading representative of this school (fl. a.p. 40—50), 
 summed up the Platonic ἰδέαι, or Divine archetypes of things, 
 in the single term λόγος. His philosophy contained various, and 
 not always harmonious elements; and therefore his conception of 
 the λόγος is not fixed or clear. On the whole his λόγος means 
 that intermediate agency, by means of which God created material 
 things and communicated with them. But whether this agency 
 is one Being or more, whether it is personal or not, we cannot be sure, 
 
64 S. JOHN. ΓΙ: 2— 
 
 and perhaps Philo himself was undecided. Certainly his λόγος is 
 very different from that of S. John; for it is scarcely a Person, and it 
 is not the Messiah. 
 
 To sum up, the personification of the Divine Word in the O.T. is 
 poetical, in Philo metaphysical, in 8. John historical. The Apo- 
 crypha and the Targums serve to bridge the chasm between the O.T, 
 and Philo: history fills the chasm which separates all from 5, John. 
 Between Jewish poetry and Alexandrine speculation on the one hand, 
 and the Fourth Gospel on the other, lies the historical fact of the 
 life of Jesus Christ, the Incarnation of the Logos. 
 
 The Logos of 5. John, therefore, is not ‘the thing uttered’ (ῥῆμα); 
 nor ‘the One spoken of’ or promised (ὁ Aeyouevos); nor ‘He who 
 speaks the word’ (ὁ Aéywv); nor a mere attribute of God (as σοφία or 
 vous). But the Logos is the Son of God, existing from all eternity, 
 and manifested in space and time in the Person of Jesus Christ, in 
 whom had been hidden from eternity all that God had to say to man, 
 and who was the living expression of the Nature and Will of God. 
 (Cf. the impersonal designation of Christ in 1 John 1. 1.) Human 
 thought had been searching in vain for some means of connecting the 
 finite with the Infinite, of making God intelligible to man and leading 
 man up to God. §. John knew that he possessed the key to the 
 hitherto insoluble enigma, Just as 5. Paul declared to the Athe- 
 nians the ‘ Unknown God’ whom they worshipped, though they knew 
 Him not, so S. John declares to all the Divine Word, who had been 
 so imperfectly understood. He therefore took the phrase which 
 human reason had lighted on in its gropings, stripped it of its philo- 
 sophical and mythological clothing, fixed it by identifying it with the 
 Person of Christ, and filled it with that fulness of meaning which he 
 himself had derived from Christ’s own teaching. 
 
 πρὸς τὸν θεόν. Πρός --' apud’ or the French ‘chez’; it expresses the 
 distinct Personality of the Λόγος, which ἐν would have obscured. We 
 might render ‘face to face with God,’ or ‘at home with God.’ So, 
 ‘His sisters, are they not all with us (πρὸς nuds)?’ Matt. xiii. 56. Cf. 
 1 Cor. xvi. 7; Gal. i. 18; 1 Thess. iii, 4; Philem. 13. Τὸν θεόν having 
 the article, means the Father. 
 
 θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. ‘O λόγος 15 the subject in all three clauses. The 
 absence of the article with θεός shews that θεός is the predicate 
 (though this rule is not without exceptions); and the meaning is that 
 the Logos partook of the Divine Nature, not that the Logos was iden- 
 tical with the Divine Person. In the latter case θεός would have had 
 the article. The verse may be thus paraphrased; the Logos existed 
 from all eternity, distinct from the Father, and equal to the Father.’ 
 ‘Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance.’ 
 
 2. οὗτος ἦν x.t.A. Takes up the first two clauses and combines 
 them, Such recapitulations are characteristic of S. John. οὗτος, 
 He or This (Word), illustrates 8. John’s habit of using a demonstra- 
 tive pronoun to sum up what has preceded, or to recall a previous 
 subject, with emphasis. Comp. v. 7, iii. 2, vi. 46, vii. 18. 
 
I. 4] NOTES. 65 
 
 3. πάντα. Less definite and more comprehensive than τὰ πάντα, 
 which we find 1 Cor. viii. 6; Col. 1. 16; Rom. xi. 36; Heb. ii. 10; 
 texts which should all be compared. See Lightfoot on Col. i. 16. 
 
 δι’ αὐτοῦ. The Universe is created ὑπὸ rod πατρὸς διὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ, by 
 the Father through the agency of the Son. See the texts just quoted. 
 
 ἐγένετο. Comp. the frequent ἐγένετο in Gen.i. Note the climax: 
 the sphere contracts as the blessing enlarges: existence for every- 
 thing, life for the vegetable and animal world, light for men. 
 
 χωρὶς αὐτοῦ «.t.A. Emphatic repetition by contradicting the 
 opposite of what has been stated: frequent in Hebrew. Cf. v. 20, 
 iii, 16, x. 5,18, xviii. 20, xx. 27; 1 John i. 5, 6, ii. 4, 10, 11, 27, 28; Rev. 
 ii. 13, iii. 9; Ps. lxxxix. 30, 31, 48, ἄο. ἄο. One of many instances 
 of the Hebrew cast of 5. John’s style. The technical name is ‘anti- 
 thetic parallelism.’ 
 
 οὐδὲ ἕν. No, not one; not even one: stronger than οὐδέν. Every 
 single thing, however great, however small, throughout all the realms 
 of space, came into being through Him. No event in the Universe 
 takes place without Him,—apart from His presence and power. Matt. 
 x. 29; Luke xii. 6. ‘Such a belief undoubtedly carries us into great 
 depths and heights...It gives solemnity and awfulness to the investi- 
 gations of science. It forbids trifling in them. It stimulates courage 
 and hope in them, It makes all superstitious dread of them sinful ” 
 (Maurice). 
 
 ὃ γέγονεν. That hath been made. The A. V. makes no dis- 
 tinction between the aorist and the perfect: éyévero refers to the 
 moment and fact of creation; γέγονεν to the permanent result of that 
 fact. Everything that has reached existence must have passed 
 through the Will of the Adyos: He is the Way to life. We find the 
 same thought in the Vedas; ‘the Word of Brahm has begotten all.’ 
 
 Contrast both ἐγένετο and γέγονεν with ἣν in vv. 1, 2. The former 
 denote the springing into life of what had once been non-existent; the 
 latter denotes the perpetual pre-existence of the Eternal Word. 
 
 Most early Christian writers and some modern critics put a full 
 stop at οὐδὲ ἕν, and join ὃ γέγονεν to what follows, thus; That which 
 hath been made in Him was life; i.e. those who were born again by 
 union with the Word felt His influence as life within them. This 
 seems harsh and not quite in harmony with the context; but it has 
 an overwhelming amount of support from the oldest versions and 
 MSS. Tatian (Orat. ad Graecos x1x.) has πάντα ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ χωρὶς 
 αὐτοῦ γέγονεν οὐδὲ ἕν. See last note on v. 5. 
 
 4. ἐν αὐτῷ ζωή. He was the well-spring of life, from which every 
 form of life—physical, intellectual, moral, spiritual, eternal,—flows. 
 
 Observe how frequently 5. John’s thoughts overlap and run into 
 one another. Creation leads on to life, and life leads on to light. 
 Without life creation would be unintelligible; without light all but 
 the lowest forms of life would be impossible. 
 
 ST JOHN 1 
 
66 S. JOHN. (I. 4— 
 
 ἦν. Two important MSS. (ND. with old Latin and old Syriac 
 Versions) have ἐστίν; but the weight of authority is against this 
 reading, which would not be in harmony with the context. The 
 Apostle is not contemplating the Christian dispensation, but a period 
 long previous to it. The group of authorities which supports ἐστίν 
 has a tendency to insert interpretations as readings. 
 
 Kal ἡ {wr ἦν τὸ φῶς. Not φώς, but τὸ Φῶς, the one true Light, 
 absolute Truth both intellectual and moral, free from ignorance and 
 free from stain. The Source of Life is the Source of Light: He gives 
 the power to know what is morally good. 
 
 τὸ φῶς τ. ἀν. Man shares life with all organic creatures: light, or 
 Revelation, is for him alone; but for the whole race, male and 
 female, Jew and Gentile (τῶν ἀνθρώπων). Luke ii, 82, What is spe- 
 cially meant is the communication of Divine Truth before the Fall. 
 
 5. φαίνει. The elementary distinction between φαίνειν, ‘to shine,’ 
 and φαίνεσθαι, ‘to appear,’ is not always observed by our translators. 
 In Acts xxvii. 20 φαίνειν is translated like φαίνεσθαι; in Matt. xxiv. 27 
 and Phil. ii. 15 the converse mistake is made. Here note the present 
 tense, the only one in the section. It brings us down to the Apostle’s 
 own day: comp. ἤδη φαίνει (1 John ii. 8). Now, as of old, the Light 
 shines, and shines in vain. In vv. 1, 2 we have the period preceding 
 Creation; in v. 3 the Creation; v.4 man before the Fall; v. 5 man 
 after the Fall. 
 
 kal ἡ σκοτία. Note the strong connexion between vv. 4 and 5, as 
 between the two halves of v. 5, resulting in both cases from a portion 
 of the predicate in one clause becoming the subject of the next clause, 
 Such strong connexions are very frequent in Κ΄, John. 
 
 ἡ σκοτία. All that the Divine Revelation does not reach, whether 
 by God’s appointment or their own stubbornness, ignorant Gentile 
 and unbelieving Jew. Σκοτία in a metaphorical sense for moral and 
 spiritual darkness is peculiar te S. Jolin; viii, 12, xii. 35, 46; 1 John 
 ib, 0. 8,9; 81; 
 
 οὐ κατέλαβεν. Did not apprehend: very appropriate of that which 
 requires mental and moral effort. Cf. Eph. iii. 18. The darkness 
 remained apart, unyielding and unpenetrated, The words ‘the 
 darkness apprehendeth not the light’ (ἡ σκοτία τὸ φῶς οὐ καταλαμ- 
 βάνει) are given by Tatian as a quotation (Orat. ad Graecos, x111.). 
 As he flourished ὁ. a.p, 150—170, this is early testimony to the 
 existence of the Gospel. We have here an instance of what has 
 been called the ‘tragic tone’ in S. John: he frequently states a 
 gracious fact, and in immediate connexion with it the very opposite of 
 what might have been expected to result from it. ‘The Light shines 
 in darkness, and (instead of yielding and dispersing) the darkness 
 shut it out.’ Cf. vv. 10 and 11; iii. 11, 19, 32, v. 39, 40, vi. 36, 43, 
 ἄς. ἈΚαταλαμβάνειν sometimes=‘to overcome,’ which makes good 
 sense here, as in xii. 35, 
 
re NOTES. 67 
 
 6—13. THe WorD REVEALED TO MEN AND REJECTED BY THEM. 
 
 6. ἐγένετο dv. The contrast between ἐγένετο and ἣν is care- 
 fully maintained and should be preserved in translation: not ‘there 
 was ἃ man’ but ‘there arose a man;’ ἄνθρωπος, ‘a human being,’ in 
 contrast to the Logos and also as an instance of that race which 
 was illuminated by the Logos (v. 4); comp. iii. 1. Note (as in v. 1) 
 the noble simplicity of language, and also the marked asyndeton 
 between vv. 5 and 6. Greek is so rich in particles that asyndeton is 
 generally remarkable. 
 
 ἀπεσταλμένος παρὰ θεοῦ. A Prophet. Cf. ‘I will send my messen- 
 ger,’ Mal. iii. 1; ‘1 will send you Elijah the prophet,’ iv. 5. John’s 
 mission proceeded, as it were, from the presence of God, the literal 
 meaning of παρά with the genitive. 
 
 ὄνομα αὐτῷ *Iwdvvns. The clause is a kind of parenthesis, like 
 Νικόδημος ὄνομα αὐτῷ, 111. 1. In the Fourth Gospel John is mentioned 
 twenty times and is never once distinguished as ‘the Baptist.’ The 
 other three Evangelists carefully distinguish ‘the Baptist’ from the 
 son of Zebedee: to the writer of the Fourth Gospel there is only one 
 John. This in itself is strong incidental evidence that he himself is 
 the other John. 
 
 7. οὗτος sums up the preceding verse as inv. 2. ἦλθεν refers to 
 we beginning of his public teaching: éyévero in v. 6 refers to his 
 irth. 
 
 eis μαρτυρίαν. For witness, not ‘for a witness;’ to bear witness, 
 not ‘to be a witness.’ What follows, ἵνα μ. π. τ. d., is the expansion 
 of els μαρτυρίαν. The words μαρτυρία and μαρτυρεῖν are very frequent 
 in 8. John’s writings (see on v. 34). Testimony to the truth is one of 
 his favourite thoughts; it is inseparable from the idea of belief in the 
 truth. Testimony and belief are correlatives. 
 
 _ Wa μαρτυρήσῃ. The subjunctive with ἵνα after a past tense, where 
 in classical Greek we should have the optative, prevails throughout 
 the N.T. The optative gradually became less and less used until it 
 almost disappeared. When the pronunciation of οἱ became very 
 similar to that of 7, it was found that a distinction not discernible in 
 speaking was not needed at all. On iva see next verse. 
 
 πιστεύσωσιν. Used absolutely without an object expressed: comp. 
 v. 51, iv. 41, 42, 48, 53, v. 44, vi. 36, 64, xi. 15, 40, xii. 39, xiv. 29, 
 X1x, 35, xx. 8, 29, 31. 
 
 δι’ αὐτοῦ. Through the Baptist, the Herald of the Truth. Cf. v. 
 33; Acts x. 37, xiii. 24. 
 
 8. ἐκεῖνος. A favourite pronoun with S. John, often used merely 
 to emphasize the main subject instead of denoting some one more 
 remote, which is its ordinary use. ‘It was not he who was the Light, 
 but &c.? Comp. ii. 21, v. 19, 35, 46, 47, vi. 29, viii. 42, 44, ix. 9, 11, 
 25, 36, &c. As in v. 3, though not quite in the same way, S. John 
 adds a negation to his statement to give clearness and incisiveness, 
 
 K 2 
 
68 S. JOHN. [Tas 
 
 τὸ φῶς. The Baptist was not τὸ φῶς but ὁ λύχνος ὁ καιόμενος Kal 
 φαίνων (v. 35); he was lumen illuminatum, not lwmen illuminans. At 
 the close of the first century it was still necessary for 5. John to 
 insist on this, At Ephesus, where this Gospel was written, 8. Paul 
 in his third missionary journey had found disciples still resting in 
 ‘John’s Baptism;’ Acts xix. 1—6. And we learn from the Clementine 
 Recognitions (I. ταν, Lx) that some of John’s disciples, perhaps the 
 Hemerobaptists, proclaimed their own master as the Christ, for Jesus 
 had declared John to be greater than all the Prophets. Translate 
 ‘the Light,’ not ‘that Light,’ as A.V. 
 
 ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα. No need to supply anything: ἵνα may depend on ἦν. 
 ‘John was in order to bear witness.’ If anything is supplied, it 
 should be ‘ came’ rather than ‘was sent.’ “Iva is one of the particles 
 of which 5. John is specially fond, not only in cases where another 
 particle or construction would have done equally well, but also where 
 iva is apparently awkward. This is frequently the case where the 
 Divine purpose is indicated, as here. Cf. iv. 34, 47, vi. 29, xi. 50, 
 xii, 23, xiii. 1, xv. 8, 12, 13, 17, and Winer, p. 425. For the elliptical 
 ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα comp. v. 31, ix. 3, xiii. 18, xiv. 31, xv. 25; 1 John ii. 19. - 
 
 9. ἦν τὸ φῶς κιτλ. Most Ancient Versions, Fathers, and Re- 
 formers take ἐρχόμενον with ἄνθρωπον, every man that cometh into 
 the world; a solemn fulness of expression and not a weak addition. 
 A number of modern commentators take épy. with ἣν ; the true Light, 
 which lighteth every man, was coming into the world. But ἣν and 
 épx. are somewhat far apart for this. There is yet a third way; 
 There was the true Light, which lighteth every man, by coming 
 into the world. Observe the emphatic position of ἦν. ‘There was 
 the true Light,’ even while the Baptist was preparing the way for 
 Him 
 
 τὸ ἀληθινόν. ’A\747s=veraz, ‘true’ as opposed to ‘lying :’ ἀληθινός 
 =verus, ‘true’ as opposed to ‘spurious.’ ᾿Αληθινός is just the old 
 English ‘very;’ e.g. in the Creed, ‘ Very God of very God’ is a trans- 
 lation of θεὸν ἀληθινὸν ἐκ θεοῦ ἀληθινοῦ. ᾿Αληθινός-ε" genuine,’ ‘ that 
 which comes up to its idea,’ and hence ‘perfect.’ Christ is ‘the 
 perfect Light,’ just as He is ‘the perfect Bread’ (vi. 32) and ‘the 
 perfect Vine’ (xv. 1); not that He is the only Light, and Bread, and 
 Vine, but that others are types and shadows, and therefore inferior. 
 All words about truth are characteristic of S. John. ᾿Αληθινός occurs 
 9 times in the Gospel, 4 times in the First Epistle, 10 times in the 
 Apocalypse; elsewhere only 6 times: ἀληθής, 14 times in the Gospel, 
 twice in the First Epistle, once in the Second; elsewhere 9 times. 
 ᾿Αλήθεια and ἀληθῶς are also very frequent. 
 
 πάντα ἄνθρωπον. The Light illumines every man, but not every 
 man is the better for it; that depends on himself. Moreover it illu- 
 mines ‘each one singly,’ not ‘all collectively’ (rdvra not πάντα). 
 God deals with men separately as individuals, not in masses. 
 
 10. Kal ὁ κόσμος. Close connexion obtained by repetition, as in 
 vv. 4 and 5; also the tragic tone, as in v. 5. Moreover, there is a 
 
1. 12] NOTES. 69 
 
 climax: ‘He was in the world;’ (therefore it should have known 
 Him;) ‘and the world was His creature;’ (therefore it should have 
 known Him;) ‘and (yet) the world knew Him not.’ Kai=xalro is 
 very frequent in 8. John, but it is best to translate simply ‘and,’ not 
 ‘and yet:’ cf. vv.5 and11. It is erroneous to suppose that καί ever 
 means ‘ but’ either in 5. John or elsewhere. ‘O κόσμος is another of 
 the expressions characteristic of S. John: it occurs nearly 80 times 
 in the Gospel, and 22 times in the First Epistle. 
 
 Observe that ὁ κόσμος has not exactly the same meaning vv. 9 and 
 10: throughout the New Testament it is most important to distinguish 
 the various meanings of κόσμος. Connected with κομεῖν and comere, 
 it means (1) ‘ornament; 1 Pet. iii. 3: (2) ‘the ordered universe,’ 
 mundus ; Rom. i. 20: (3) ‘the earth;’ v. 9; Matt. iv. 8: (4) ‘the 
 inhabitants of the earth;’ v. 29; iv. 42: (5) ‘the world outside the 
 Church,’ those alienated from God; xii. 31, xiv. 17 and frequently. 
 In this verse the meaning slips from (3) to (5). 
 
 αὐτόν. The masculine shews that S. John is again speaking of 
 Christ as ὁ Λόγος, not (as in v. 9) as τὸ Φῶς. 
 
 οὐκ ἔγνω. ‘Did not acquire knowledge’ of its Creator. Τιυγνώσκειν 
 is ‘to get to know, recognise, acknowledge.’ Cf. Acts xix. 15. 
 
 11. εἰς τὰ ἴδια. The difference between neuter and masculine 
 must be preserved: He came to His own inheritance; and His own 
 people received Him not. In the parable of the Wicked Husbandmen 
 (Matt. xxi. 33—41) τὰ ἴδια is the vineyard; οἱ ἔδιοι are the husband- 
 men, the Chosen people, the Jews. Or, as in xix. 27, we may render 
 εἰς τὰ ἴδια unto His own home: cf. xvi. 32, xix. 27; Acts xxi. 6; Esth. 
 v. 10, vi. 12. The tragic tone is very strong here, as in vv. 5 and 10. 
 
 παρέλαβον. A stronger word than ἔγνω. Παραλαμβάνειν is ‘to 
 take from the hand of another, accept what is offered.’ Mankind in 
 general did not recognise the Messiah; the Jews, to whom He was 
 specially sent, did not welcome Him. There is a climax again in 9, 
 10, 11;—7v—év τῷ κόσμῳ ἢν---εἰς τὰ ἴδια ἦλθε. 
 
 12. ἔλαβον. As distinguished from παρέλαβον, denotes the spon- 
 taneous acceptance of individuals, Jews or Gentiles. The Messiah 
 was not specially offered to any individuals as He was to the Jewish 
 nation: παρέλαβον would have been less appropriate here. 
 
 ἐξουσίαν. This word (from ἔξεστι) means ‘right, liberty, autho- 
 rity’ to do anything; potestas. Δύναμις, which is sometimes coupled 
 with it, is rather ‘capability, faculty’ for doing anything; potentia. 
 Δύναμις is innate, an absence of internal obstacles; ἐξουσία comes from 
 without, a removal of external restraints. We are born with a capa- 
 city for becoming the sons of God: that we have as men. He gives 
 us the right to become such: that we receive as Christians. 
 
 τέκνα θεοῦ. Both 8. John and 5. Paul insist on this fundamental 
 fact; that the relation of believers to God is a filial one. S. John 
 gives us the human side, the ‘new birth’ (iii. 3); S. Paul the Divine 
 
"0 S. JOHN. (I. 12— 
 
 side, ‘adoption’ (Rom. vill. 23; Gal. iv. 5). But τέκνα θεοῦ expresses 
 a closer relationship than vic@ecia: the one is natural, the other is 
 legal. Both place the universal character of Christianity in opposi- 
 tion to the exclusiveness of Judaism. Note γένεσθαι. Christ is from 
 all eternity the Son of God; men are enabled to become sons of God. 
 
 τοῖς mor. els. Epexegetic of αὐτοῖς ; ‘namely, to those who 
 believe on.’ Such epexegetic clauses are common in 8. John; comp. 
 111. 13, v. 18. vii. 50. The test of a child of God is no longer descent 
 from Abraham, but belief in His Son. The construction πιστεύειν 
 εἰς is characteristic of 5. John; it occurs about 35 times in the 
 Gospel and 3 times in the First Epistle; elsewhere in N. T. about 
 10 times. It expresses the very strongest belief; motion to and 
 repose upon the object of belief. It corresponds to 8. Paul’s πίστις, a 
 word which §S, John uses only once (1 John vy. 4), and 5. Paul about 
 140 times. On the other hand §. Paul very rarely uses πιστεύειν els. 
 Πιστεύειν τινί without a preposition has a weaker meaning, ‘to give 
 credence to,’ or ‘accept the statements of.’ 
 
 τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ. This is a frequent phrase in Jewish writings, both 
 in the O.and N. T. It is not a mere periphrasis. Names were so 
 often significant, given sometimes by God Himself, that a man’s 
 name served not merely to tell who he was, but what he was: it 
 was an index of character. So also of the Divine Name: τὸ ὄνομα 
 τοῦ Κυρίου is not a mere periphrasis for ὁ Κύριος ; it suggests His attri- 
 butes and His relations to us as Lord. The ‘name’ specially meant 
 here is perhaps that of Logos ; and the full meaning would be to give 
 entire adhesion to Him as the Incarnate Son, the expression of the 
 Will and Nature of God. 
 
 13. §. John denies thrice most emphatically that human genera- 
 tion has anything to do with Divine regeneration. Man cannot become 
 a child of God in right of human parentage: the new Creation is far 
 more excellent than the first Creation; its forces and products are 
 spiritual not physical. 
 
 αἱμάτων. The blood was regarded as the seat of physical life. Gen. 
 ix. 4; Lev. xvii. 11, 14. The plural is idiomatic (cf. τὰ ὕδατα, ‘the 
 waters,’ τὰ ydAaxra), and does not refer to the two sexes. In Eur. 
 Ion, 693 we have ἄλλων τραφεὶς ἀφ᾽ αἱμάτων. Winer, p. 220. 
 
 οὐδὲ ἐκ θ. σαρκός. Nor yet from will of flesh, i.e. from any fleshly 
 impulse. A second denial of any natural process. 
 
 οὐδὲ ἐκ θ. ἀνδρός. Nor yet from will of man, i.e. from the volition 
 of any human father. ’Avjp is not here put for ἄνθρωπος, the human 
 race generally ; it means the male sex, human fathers in contrast to 
 the Heavenly Father. A third denial of any natural process. 
 
 ἐγεννήθησαν. Were begotten. There is an interesting false read- 
 ing here. Tertullian (circ. a.p. 200) read the singular, ἐγεννήθη, which 
 he referred to Christ; and he accused the Valentinians of falsifying 
 the text in reading ἐγεννήθησαν, which is undoubtedly right. These 
 
I. 14} NOTES. 1 
 
 differences are most important: they shew that as early as a.p. 200 
 there were corruptions in the text, the origin of which had been lost. 
 Such corruptions take some time to grow: by comparing them and 
 tracing their ramifications we arrive with certainty at the conclusion 
 that this Gospel cannot have been written later than towards the end 
 of the first century, 4.p. 85—100. See on v, 18, 111. 6, 13, ix. 35. 
 
 14—18. THe INCARNATE WoRD’S REVELATION OF THE FATHER. 
 
 14. Kal ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο. This is the gulf which separates S. 
 John from Philo. Philo would have assented to what precedes; but 
 from this he would have shrunk. From v. 9 to 13 we have the sub- 
 jective side; the inward result of the Word’s coming to those who 
 receive Him. Here we have the objective; the coming of the Word 
 as a historical fact. The Logos, existing from all eternity with the 
 Father (vv. 1, 2), not only manifested His power in Creation (v. 3), 
 and in influence on the minds of men (vv. 9, 12, 13), but manifested 
 Himself in the form of a man of flesh.—The καί is resumptive, taking 
 us back to the opening verses. 
 
 σάρξ. Not σῶμα, nor ἄνθρωπος. There might have been a σῶμα 
 without σάρξ (1 Cor. xv. 40, 44), and there might have been the form 
 of a man, and yet no σάρξ (Matt. xiv. 26; Luke xxiv.37—39). Docetism 
 is by implication excluded: vi. 21, vii. 10, xix. 35. The important point 
 is that the Logos became terrestrial and material; the creative Word 
 Himself became a creature. The inferior part of man is mentioned, 
 to mark His humiliation: He took the whole nature of man, in- 
 cluding its frailty; all that nature in which He could grow, learn, 
 struggle, be tempted, suffer, and die. 
 
 ἐσκήνωσεν. Tabernacled among us. The σκηνή, or Tabernacle, 
 had been the seat of the Divine Presence in the wilderness. When 
 God became incarnate, to dwell among the Chosen People, σκηνοῦν 
 ‘to tabernacle’ was a natural word to use. We have here another 
 link (see above on ἀληθινός v. 9) between this Gospel and the Apoca- 
 lypse. Σκηνοῦν occurs here, four times in the Apocalypse, and no- 
 where else. Rev. vii. 15, xii. 12, xiii. 6, xxi. 3. There is perhaps 
 an association of ideas, suggested by similarity of sound, between 
 σκηνή and the Shechinah or δόξα mentioned in thenext clause. ‘The 
 idea that the Shechinah, the σκηνή, the glory which betokened the 
 Divine Presence in the Holy of Holies, and which was wanting in the 
 second temple, would be restored once more in Messiah’s days, was 
 a cherished hope of the Jewish doctors during and after the Apostolic 
 ages. ... 5. John more than once avails himself of imagery derived 
 from this expectation... The two writings (this Gospel and the 
 Apocalypse) which attribute the name of the Word of God to the, 
 Incarnate Son, are the same also which especially connect Messiah’s 
 Advent with the restitution of the Shechinah, the light or glory which 
 is the visible token of God’s presence among men.” Lightfoot, On 
 Revision, pp. ὅθ, 57. See on xi. 44, xv. 20, xix. 37, xx. 10. 
 
72 S. JOHN. [I. 14— 
 
 ἐθεασάμεθα. Contemplated or beheld: cf. 1 Johni.1. It isa 
 stronger word than ὁρᾷν, implying enjoyment in beholding. 
 
 τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ. Cf. 11. 11; xi. 40; xii. 41; xvii. 5, 24; 2 Cor. 111. 
 7—18; Rey. xxi. 10, Although the Word in becoming incarnate had 
 divested Himself of His Divinity, and not merely assumed but ‘ be- 
 came flesh,’ yet the moral and spiritual grandeur of His unique rela- 
 tionship to the Father remained and was manifest to His disciples. 
 There is probably a special reference to the Transfiguration (Luke ix. 
 32; 2 Pet. i. 17); and possibly to the vision at the beginning of the 
 Apocalypse. 
 
 ὡς. This particle does not necessarily signify mere likeness. Here 
 and Matt. vii. 29 it indicates exact likeness: the glory is altogether 
 such as that of the only-begotten Son of God; He taught exactly as 
 one having full authority. 
 
 μονογενοῦς. Only-begotten, ‘unigenitus.’ The word is used of the 
 widow’s son (Luke vii. 12), Jairus’ daughter (viii. 42), the demoniac 
 boy (ix. 38), Isaac (Heb. xi. 17). As applied to our Lord it occurs 
 only in S. John’s writings; here, v. 18, iii. 16, 18; 1 John iv. 9. It 
 marks off His unique Sonship from that of the τέκνα θεοῦ (v. 12). 
 It refers to His eternal generation from the Father, whereas πρωτότο- 
 cos refers to His incarnation as the Messiah and His relation to crea- 
 tures. See Lightfoot on Col. i. 15. 
 
 mapa πατρός. (See on παρὰ θεοῦ, v. 6.) From a father: 5. John 
 never uses πατήρ for the Father without the article: see on iv. 21. 
 The meaning is, ‘as of an only son sent on a mission from a father.’ 
 
 πλήρης. There is no need to make the preceding clause a paren- 
 thesis : πλήρης, in spite of the case, may go with αὐτοῦ. In Luke xx. 
 27, xxiv. 47, we have equally irregular constructions.—II\jp7ys looks 
 forward to πλήρωμα in νυ. 16. Winer, p. 705. 
 
 χάριτος. Χάρις from χαίρω means originally ‘that which causes 
 pleasure.’ Hence (1) comeliness, winsomeness ; from Homer down- 
 wards. In Luke iv. 22 λόγοι τῆς x. are ‘winning words.’ (2) Kind- 
 liness, good will; both in classical Greek and N.T. Luke ii. 52; Acts 
 ii. 47. (3) The favour of God towards sinners. This distinctly 
 theological sense has for its central point the freeness of God’s gifts: 
 they are not earned, He gives them spontaneously through Christ. 
 This notion of spontaneousness is not prominent in classical Greek: 
 it is the main idea in N.T. Χάρις is neither earned by works nor 
 prevented by sin; it is thus opposed to ἔργα, νόμος, ὀφείλημα, ἁμαρτία, 
 and branches out into various meanings too wide for discussion here. 
 ‘Grace’ covers all meanings. The third meaning, at its deepest and 
 fullest, is the one in this verse. 
 
 ἀληθείας. It is as τὸ Φῶς that the Logos is ‘ full of truth,’ as ἡ Ζωή 
 that He is ‘full of grace,’ for it is ‘by grace’ that we come to eternal 
 life. Eph. ii. 5. Moreover the ἀληθεία assures us that the χάρις is 
 real and steadfast: comp. the combination of ἔλεος and ἀληθεία in 
 the LXX. of Ps, lxxxix. 1, 2. 
 
1. 16.] NOTES. 73 
 
 15. μαρτυρεῖ, Present tense; beareth witness. At the end of a 
 long life this testimony of the Baptist still abides fresh in the heart of 
 the aged Apostle. He records three times in twenty verses (15, 27, 
 30) the cry that was such an epoch in his own life. The testimony 
 abides as a memory for him, as a truth for all. 
 
 κέκραγεν. Perfect with present meaning; cries. See onv. 42. The 
 word indicates strong emotion, as of a prophet. Cf. vii. 28, 37, xii. 44; 
 ΤᾺ. Bh. 9. 
 
 ὃν εἶπον. As if his first utterance under the influence of the Spirit 
 had been hardly intelligible to himself. For ov=‘of whom’ cf. vi. 71, 
 Vili. 27. 
 
 ὃ ὀπίσω κιτλ. The first and last of these three clauses must . 
 refer to time; éricw=‘ later in time,’ rmpdros=‘ first in time.’ The 
 middle clause is ambiguous: ἔμπροσθεν -Ξ ‘before’ either (1) in time, 
 or (2) in dignity. Téyovey seems to be decisive against (1). Christ 
 as God was before John in time, as the third clause states; but 
 John could not say, ‘He has come to be before me,’ or ‘has become 
 before me,’ in time. Moreover, to make the second clause refer to 
 time involves tautology with the third. It is better to follow the 
 A. V. ‘is preferred before me,’ i.e. ‘has become before me’ in 
 dignity: and the meaning will be, ‘He who is coming after me (in 
 His ministry as in His birth) has become superior to me, for He was 
 in existence from all eternity before me.’ Christ’s pre-existence in 
 eternity a great deal more than cancelled John’s pre-existence in the 
 world: and as soon as He appeared as a teacher He at once eclipsed 
 His forerunner, 
 
 πρῶτός pov ἦν. Cf. υ. 30 and xv. 18, where we again have a geni- 
 tive after a superlative as if it were a comparative. It is not strange 
 that ‘first of two,’ or ‘former,’ should be sometimes confused with 
 ‘first of many,’ or ‘first,’ and the construction proper to the one be 
 given to the other. Explained thus the words would mean ‘first in 
 reference to me,’ or ‘my first.’ But perhaps there is more than this; 
 viz., ‘He was before me, as noother can be,’ i.e, ‘He was before me 
 and first of all,’ πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως. 
 
 16. The Baptist’s witness to the incarnate Logos confirmed by 
 the experience of all believers. The Evangelist is the speaker. 
 
 πληρώματος. ‘A recognised technical term in theology, denoting 
 the totality of the Divine powers and attributes.” See Lightfoot on 
 Colossians, i. 19 and ii. 9, where this meaning is very marked. This 
 fulness of the Divine attributes belonged to Christ (v. 14), and by 
 Him was imparted to the Church, which is His Body (Eph. i. 23); 
 and through the Church each individual believer in his degree re- 
 ceives ἃ portion. 
 
 ἡμεῖς πάντες. Shews that the Evangelist and not the Baptist is 
 speaking. This appeal to his own experience and that of his fellows 
 
74 5. JOHN. [I. 16— 
 
 is natural as coming from the Apostle; it would not be natural in a 
 writer of a later age. Another indication that 8. John is the writer. 
 
 καί. Epexegetic,=‘namely’ or ‘even,’ explaining what we all 
 received. Comp. 1 Cor. iii. 5, xv. 38; Eph. vi. 18. Winer, p. 548. 
 
 χάριν ἀντὶ χάριτος. Literally, Grace in the place of grace, one 
 grace succeeding another and as it were taking its place. (On χάρις 
 see v.14.) There is no reference to the New Testament displacing 
 the Old: that would have been χάριν ἀντὶ τοῦ νόμου; see next verse. 
 Possibly the ἀντί may imply that one grace leads on to another, so 
 that the second is, as it were, a reward for the first. Winer, p. 456. 
 
 11. The mention of χάρις reminds the Evangelist that this was 
 the characteristic of the new dispensation and marked its superiority 
 to the old: the Law condemned transgressors, χάρις forgives them. 
 
 Sia Μωυσέως. It is regrettable that the translation of διὰ in this 
 prologue is not uniform in the A.V. In verses 3, 10, 17 we have ‘by,’ 
 in v. 7 ‘through.’ ‘By means of’ is the meaning in all five cases. 
 Moses did not give the Law any more than he gave the manna (vi. 32); 
 he was only the mediate agent, the μεσίτης by whose hand it was 
 given (Gal. iii. 19). The form Μωυσέως is rightly given in the best 
 MSS. The derivation is said to be from two Egyptian words mo= 
 aqua, and ugai=servari. Hence the Septuagint, which was made in 
 Egypt, and the best MSS., which mainly represent the text current in 
 Egypt, keep nearest to the Egyptian form. 
 
 ἐδόθη. Not ἐγένετο. The Law given through Moses was not his 
 own; the grace and truth that came through Christ were His own. 
 
 ἡ χάρις. The asyndeton is remarkable: the Coptic and Peshito 
 supply an equivalent for δέ, but this is a common insertion in ver- 
 sions, and no proof that a δέ has dropped out of the Greek texts. 
 
 ἡ ἀλήθεια. Like χάρις, ἀλήθεια is opposed to νόμος, not as truth to 
 falsehood, but as a perfect to an imperfect revelation. 
 
 Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. ‘‘To us ‘Christ’ has become a proper name, 
 and as such rejects the definite article. But in the Gospel narratives, 
 if we except the headings, or prefaces, and the after comments of the 
 Evangelists themselves (e.g. Matt. i. 1; Mark i. 1; John i. 17) no 
 instance of this usage can be found. In the body of the narratives 
 we read only of ὁ Χριστός, the Christ, the Messiah, whom the Jews 
 had long expected...... The very exceptions (Mark ix. 41; Luke ii. 11; 
 John ix. 22, xvii. 3) strengthen the rule.” Lightfoot, On Revision, 
 p. 100. Note that 5. John no longer speaks of the Logos: the Logos 
 has become incarnate (v. 14) and is spoken of henceforth by the 
 names which He has borne in history. 
 
 18. The Evangelist solemnly sums up the purpose of the Incarna- 
 tion of the Logos,—to be a visible revelation of the invisible God. It 
 was in this way that ‘the truth came through Jesus Christ,’ for the 
 
I. 18.] NOTES. 75 
 
 truth cannot be fully known while God is not fully revealed. Πάσῃ 
 θνητῇ φύσει ἀθεώρητος, am’ αὐτῶν τῶν ἔργων θεωρεῖται ὁ Θεός (Aristotle), 
 
 οὐδείς. Not even Moses. Until we see πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον 
 (1 Cor, xiii. 12) our knowledge is only partial. Symbolical visions, 
 such as Ex. xxiv. 10, xxxiii. 23; 1 Kings xix. 13; Isa. vi. 1, do not 
 transcend the limits of partial knowledge. 
 
 ἑώρακεν. Of actual sight. §. John uses no tense of dpdw but the 
 perfect either in the Gospel or Epistle: in vi. 2 the true reading is 
 ἐθεώρουν. 
 
 μονογενὴς θεός. The question of reading here is of much inter- 
 est. Most MSS. and versions read ὁ μονογενὴς υἷος or μον. vids. But 
 the three oldest and best MSS. and two others of great value read 
 μονογενὴς θεός. The test of the value of a MS., or group of MSS., on 
 any disputed point, is the extent to which it admits false readings on 
 other points not disputed. Judged by this test, the group of MSS. 
 reading μονογενὴς θεός is very strong, while the far larger group of 
 MSS. reading υἱός for θεός is comparatively weak, for the same group 
 might be quoted in favour of a multitude of readings which no one 
 would think of defending. Again, the revised Syriac, which is among 
 the minority of versions supporting θεός, is here of special weight, 
 because it agrees with MSS. from which it usually differs. The 
 inference is that the very unusual expression μονογενὴς θεός is the 
 original one, which has been changed into the usual ὁ μονογενὴς vids 
 (iii. 16, 18; 1 John iv. 9); a change easily made, as ΘΟ (-- ΘΕΟΣ) 
 is very like TC (=TIOZ). Both readings can be traced back to the 
 second century, which again is evidence that the Gospel was written 
 in the first century. Such differences take time to spread themselves 
 so widely. See on v. 13, ili. 6, and ix. 38. 
 
 ὁ ὧν εἰς τὸν κόλπον. The preposition of motion (comp. vv. 32, 33, 
 52) may point to Christ’s return to glory, after the Ascension. Comp. 
 Mark ii. 1, xiii. 16; Luke ix.61. On the other hand ὧν seems to point 
 to a timeless state; ‘Whose relation to the Father is eternally that of 
 one admitted to the deepest intimacy and closest fellowship.’ But ὦν 
 may be imperf. (‘who was’ rather than ‘who is’), as in y. 13, xi. 31, 
 49, xxi. 11. Winer, pp. 429, 517. 
 
 ἐκεῖνος. §. John’s peculiar retrospective use, to recall and empha- 
 size the main subject: see on v. 8, and comp. v. 88, v. 11, 37, 39, 
 43, vi. 57, ix. 37, xii. 48, xiv. 12, 21, 26, xv. 26. 
 
 ἐξηγήσατο. Declared, not ‘hath declared.’ Only-begotten God as 
 He is, He that is in the bosom of the Father, He interpreted (God), 
 supplying an accusative from the beginning of the verse. ᾿Εξηγεῖσθαι 
 is used both in the LXX. and in classical writers for interpreting the 
 Divine Will. 
 
 In this Prologue we notice what maybe called a spiral movement. 
 An idea comes to the front, like the strand of a rope, retires again, 
 and then reappears later on for development and further definition. 
 
76 S. JOHN. (I. 18— 
 
 Meanwhile another idea, like another strand, comes before us and 
 retires to reappear in like manner. Thus the Logos is presented to 
 us in v. 1, is withdrawn, and again presented to us in v.14, The 
 Creation passes next before us in v. 3, to reappear inv. 10. Then 
 ‘the Light’ appears in v. 4, and withdraws, to return vv. 8,9. Next 
 the rejection of the Logos is introduced in v. 5, and reproduced in 
 in vv. 10,11. Lastly, the testimony of John is mentioned in vv. 6, 7, 
 repeated in v. 15, taken up again in v. 19 and developed through the 
 next two sections of the chapter. 
 
 We now enter upon the first main division of the Gospel, which 
 extends to the end of chap. xii., the subject being CuristT’s MINISTRY, 
 or, His ReveLaATIoN oF HimseLF ΤῸ THE Wor LD, and that in three 
 parts; THE Testimony (i. 19—ii. 11), roe Worx (ii. 13—xi. 57), and 
 THE JUDGMENT (Xii.). 
 
 19—37. The Testimony of the Baptist, (a) to the deputation from 
 Jerusalem, (8) to the people, (y) to Andrew and John: 31—51. The 
 Testimony of the Disciples: ii, 1—11 The Testimony of the First Sign. 
 
 19—37. Tue TrestTimony OF THE Baptist. 
 
 19—28. Tue Testimony TO THE DEPUTATION FROM JERUSALEM. 
 
 19—28. This section describes a crisis in the ministry of the Bap- 
 tist. He had already attracted the attention of the Sanhedrin. It 
 was a time of excitement and expectation respecting the Messiah. 
 John evidently spoke with an authority beyond that of other teachers, 
 and his success was greater than theirs. The miracle which had 
 attended his birth, connected as it was with the public ministry of 
 Zacharias in the Temple, was probably known. He had proclaimed 
 the approach of a new dispensation (Matt. 111. 2), and this was be- 
 lieved to be connected with the Messiah. But what was to be John’s 
 relation to the Messiah? or was he the Messiah himself? This un- 
 certainty determined the authorities at Jerusalem to send and ques- 
 tion John as to his mission. Apparently no formal deputation from 
 the Sanhedrin was sent. The Sadducee members would not feel so 
 keen an interest in the matter. Their party acquiesced in the Roman 
 dominion and scarcely shared the intense religious and national 
 hopes of their countrymen. But to the Pharisees, who represented 
 the patriotic party in the Sanhedrin, the question was vital; and 
 they seem to have acted for themselves in sending an informal though 
 influential deputation of ministers of religion (v. 19) from their own 
 party (v. 24). The Evangelist was probably at this time among the 
 Baptist’s disciples and heard his master proclaim himself not the 
 Messiah but His Herald. It was a crisis for him as well as for his 
 master, and he records it as such, 
 
 19. καί. The narrative is connected with the prologue through 
 the testimony of John common to both. Comp. 1 John i. 5. 
 
I. 20.] NOTES. 7 
 
 οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι. The history of this word is interesting. (1) Origin- 
 ally it meant members of the tribe of Judah. After the revolt of 
 the ten tribes, (2) members of the kingdom of Judah. After the 
 captivity, because only the kingdom of Judah was restored to national 
 existence, (3) members of the Jewish nation (ii. 6, 13, iii. 1, vi. 4, 
 vii. 2). After many Jews and Gentiles had become Christian, (4) 
 members of the Church who were of Jewish descent (Gal. ii. 13), 
 Lastly (5) members of the nation which had rejected Christ; the spe- 
 cial usage of 5. John. With him οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι commonly means the 
 opponents of Christ, a meaning not found in the Synoptists. With 
 them it is the sects and parties (Pharisees, Scribes, &c.) that are the 
 typical representatives of hostility to Christ. But John writing later, 
 with a fuller consciousness of the national apostasy, and a fuller 
 experience of Jewish malignity in opposing the Gospel, lets the 
 shadow of this knowledge fall back upon his narrative, and _‘the 
 Jews’ to him are not his fellow-countrymen, but the persecutors and 
 murderers of the Messiah. He uses the term about 70 times, almost 
 always with this shade of meaning. 
 
 ἐξ ‘Ieporodvpov. After ἀπέστειλαν. S. John never uses the form 
 Ἱερουσαλήμ excepting in the Apocalypse, where he never uses the form 
 Ἱεροσόλυμα. S. Matthew, with the single exception of xxiii. 27, and 
 S. Mark, with the possible exception of xi. 1, never use ἱἹΙερουσαλήμ. 
 Both forms are common in §. Luke and the Acts, Ἱερουσαλήμ being 
 predominant. As distinguished from Ἱεροσόλυμα it is used wherever 
 the name has a religious significance, e.g. ἡ ἄνω ἹΙερουσαλήμ (Gal. iv. 
 25), cf. Matt. xxiii. 27; Heb. xii. 22; Rev. iii. 12; xxi. 2,10. ‘Iepov- 
 σαλήμ is found throughout the LXX. It was natural that the sacred 
 name should be preserved in its Hebrew form; but equally natural 
 that the Greek form should be admitted when it was a mere geogra- 
 phical designation. 
 
 ᾿ ἱερεῖς. The Baptist himself was of priestly family (Luke i. δ). 
 
 Aevelras. The Levites were commissioned to teach (2 Chron. 
 xxxv. 3; Neh. viii. 7—9) as well as wait in the Temple; and it is as 
 teachers, similar to the Scribes, that they are sent to the Baptist. 
 Probably many of the Scribes were Levites. The mention of Levites 
 as part of this deputation is the mark of an eyewitness. Excepting 
 in the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke x. 32), Levites are not 
 mentioned by the Synoptists, nor elsewhere in N. T. excepting Acts 
 iv. 36. Had the Evangelist been constructing a story out of borrowed 
 materials, we should probably have had ‘ scribes’ or ‘ elders’ instead 
 of Levites. These indications of eyewitness are among the strong 
 proofs of the authenticity of this Gospel. 
 
 20. ὡμολόγησεν kal οὐκ ἠρνήσατο. Antithetic parallelism (v. 3). 
 
 ἐγὼ οὐκ εἰμί. So the best MSS., making ἐγώ emphatic; the 
 Received Text having οὐκ εἰμὶ ἐγώ. The Baptist hints that though he 
 is not the Messiah, the Messiah is near at hand. 
 
 ὁ Χριστός. The Evangelist has dropped the philosophic term 
 Aéyos and adopted the Jewish title of the Messiah. He was familiar 
 
78 , S. JOHN. [I. 20— 
 
 with both aspects of Jesus and makes the transition naturally and 
 easily. See above on v. 17. 
 
 21. τί οὖν; ‘What art thou then?’ or, ‘What then are we to 
 think ?? 
 
 Ἡλίας εἶ σύ; The Scribes taught that Elijah would return before 
 the coming of the Messiah (Matt. xvii. 10), and this belief is repeatedly 
 alluded to in the Talmud, Cf, Mal. iv. 5. 
 
 οὐκ εἰμί. A forger would scarcely have written this in the face of 
 Matt. xi. 14, where Christ says that John is Elijah (in a figurative 
 sense). John here denies that he is Elijah in a literal sense; he is 
 not Elijah returned to the earth. 
 
 ὁ προφήτης. ‘The (well-known) Prophet’ of Deut. xviii. 15, who 
 some thought would be a second Moses, others a second Elijah, others 
 the Messiah. We see from vii. 40, 41, that some distinguished ‘ the 
 Prophet’ from the Messiah; and from Matt. xvi. 14, it appears that 
 there was an impression that Jeremiah or other prophets might 
 return. Here as in vii. 40, the translation should be ‘the Prophet’ 
 not ‘that prophet.’ We have a similar error v. 45; vi. 14, 48, 69. 
 
 This verse alone is almost enough to shew that the writer is a Jew. 
 Who but a Jew would know of these expectations? If a Gentile knew 
 them, would he not explain them? 
 
 22, εἶπαν οὖν. See on iii, 25, Their manner has the peremptori- 
 ness of officials. 
 
 τίς et; They continue asking as to his person; he replies as to his 
 office,—that of Forerunner. In the presence of the Messiah his 
 personality is lost. 
 
 23. ἐγὼ φωνὴ κιτιλ. I am a voice, de. The Synoptists use 
 these words of John as fulfilling prophecy. From this it seems that 
 they were first so used by himself. The quotation is from the LXX. 
 with the change of ἐτοιμάσατε into εὐθύνατε. John was a Voice 
 making known the Word, meaningless without the Word. Thereisa 
 scarcely doubtful reference to this passage in Justin Martyr (c. a.p. 
 150); οὐκ εἰμὶ ὁ Χριστὸς, ἀλλὰ φωνὴ βοῶντος. Trypho, \xxxviii, Comp. 
 iil. ὃ, 
 
 24. ἀπεσταλμένοι ἦσαν. The οἱ before the participle is of doubtful 
 authority. Omitting it, we translate And they had been sent from the 
 Pharisees, or better (as we have ἐκ and not παρά), and there had been 
 sent (some) of the Pharisees. For this use of ἐκ τῶν comp. vii. 40, xvi, 
 17; 2 John 4; Rev. ii. 10. We are not to understand a fresh deputa- 
 tion, as the οὖν in the next verse shews. It was precisely the Phari- 
 sees who would be jealous about innovations in religious rites. 8. John 
 mentions neither Sadducees nor Herodians. Only the sect most 
 opposed to Christ is remembered by the Evangelist who had gone 
 furthest from Judaism. 
 
1. 29. NOTES. 79 
 
 25. τί οὖν βαπτίζεις. What right have you to treat Jews as if 
 they were proselytes and make them submit to a rite which implies 
 that they are impure? Comp. Zech. xiii, 1. Βαπτίζω is the in- 
 tensive form of βάπτω: βάπτω, ‘I dip,’ Bamrrifw, ‘I immerse:’ so 
 ὁφλήμασι βεβαπτισμένος, ‘over head and ears in debt,’ Plut. Galb. xxi. 
 
 οὐκ εἶ ὁ Χριστός. Art not the Christ, 
 οὐδὲ ᾿Ηλίας οὐδὲ ὁ mp. Nor yet Elijah, nor yet the Prophet. 
 
 26. The Baptist’s words seem scarcely a reply to the question. 
 Perhaps the connexion is—‘ You ask for my credentials; and all the 
 while He who is far more than credentials to me is among you.’ 
 
 ἐν ὕδατι. In water: note the preposition here and vv. 26, 33. 
 
 27. ὁ ὀπίσω pov ἐρχόμενος. This is the subject of the sentence; 
 He that cometh after me...is standing in the midst of you, and ye 
 know Him not. Ὑμεῖς is emphatic; ‘ Whom ye who question me know 
 not, but whom I the questioned know.’ 
 
 ἄξιος ἵνα. Literally, worthy in order that I may unloose. An 
 instance of 8. John’s preferring iva where another construction would 
 have seemed more natural: see ΟΠ Ὁ. 8, and comp, ii. 25, v. 40, vi. 7, 
 xi. 50, xv. 8, &c. 
 
 αὐτοῦ. This is redundant after οὗ, perhaps in imitation of Hebrew 
 construction. 
 
 28., Βηθανίᾳφ. This, which is the true reading, was altered to 
 Βηθαβαρᾷ owing to the powerful influence of Origen, who could find 
 no Bethany beyond Jordan in his day. In 200 years the very name 
 of an obscure place might easily perish. Origen says that almost all 
 the old MSS. had Βηθανίᾳ. This Bethany or Bethabara must have 
 been near Galilee: comp. v, 29, with v. 43, and see on the ‘four 
 days,’ xi. 17. It is possible to reconcile the two readings. Betha- 
 bara has been identified with ’Abdrah, one of the main Jordan fords 
 about 14 miles 8. of the sea of Galilee: and ‘Bethania beyond 
 Jordan’ has been identified with Bashan; Bethania or Batanea being 
 the Aramaic form of the Hebrew Bashan, meaning ‘ soft level ground.’ 
 Bethabara is the village or ford; Bethania the district E. of the ford. 
 Conder, Handbook of the Bible, pp. 315, 320. The Jordan had grand 
 historical associations: to make men pass through its waters might 
 seem to some a preparation for conquests like those of Joshua. 
 
 29—34,. Tue TEstTImMony OF THE BAPTIST TO THE PEOPLE. 
 
 29. τῇ ἐπαύριον. These words prevent us from inserting the 
 Temptation between vv. 28 and 29. The fact of the Baptist knowing 
 who Jesus is, shews that the Baptism, and therefore the Temptation, 
 must have preceded the deputation from Jerusalem. S8. John omits 
 both, as being events well known to his readers. The Baptist’s 
 announcements are not a continuous discourse. They come forth 
 like sudden intuitions, of which he did not himself know the full 
 meaning, 
 
80 S. JOHN. [I. 29— 
 
 ἴδε. 5. John uses this form about 20 times (vv. 36, 47, 48, iii. 26, 
 v. 14, &c.), and ἐδού only four times (iv. 35, [xii. 15,] xvi. 32, xix. 5). 
 The Synoptists use ἴδε about 10 times (not in Luke) and ἰδού more 
 than 120 times. Both words are interjections, ‘Lo! Behold!,’ not 
 imperatives, ‘See, Look αὐ. Hence the nominative case. Comp. 
 xix. 14. 
 
 ε 
 
 ὁ ἀμνὸς τοῦ θεοῦ. The article shews that some Lamb familiar to 
 the Baptist’s hearers must be meant, and probably the Lamb of Is. 
 1111. (comp. Acts viii. 32), with perhaps an indirect allusion to the 
 Paschal Lamb (xix. 86). The addition τοῦ Θεοῦ may remind us of 
 Gen. xxii. 8. The figure of the Lamb for Christ appears in N. T. 
 elsewhere only 1 Pet. i. 19, and throughout the Apocalypse; but in 
 the Apocalypse the word is always ἀρνίον, never ἀμνός (v. 6, 8, 12, &e.). 
 
 ὃ αἴρων. This seems to make the reference both to Is. liii. esp. vv. 
 4—8, 10, and also to the Paschal Lamb, more clear. The Paschal 
 Lamb was expiatory (Ex. xii. 13). Taketh away, rather than beareth 
 (margin), is right; comp. 1 John iii. 5. ‘Bear’ would rather be 
 φέρω, as in the LXX, in Is. liii. 4, Christ took away the burden of 
 sin by bearing it; but this is not expressed here, though it may be 
 implied. Trv ἁμαρτίαν. Regarded as one great burden or plague. 
 
 τοῦ κόσμου. Isaiah sees no further than the redemption of the 
 Jews: ‘for the transgression of my people—rov λαοῦ pov—was He 
 stricken’ (1111. 8). The Baptist knows that the Messiah comes to 
 make atonement for the whole human race, even His enemies. 
 
 31. καἀγὼ οὐκ ἤδειν αὐτόν. I also knew Him not; I, like you 
 (v. 26), did not at first know Him to be the Messiah. This does not 
 contradict Matt. iii. 14. (1) ‘I knew Him not’ need not mean ‘I had 
 no knowledge of Him whatever.’ (2) John’s declaration of his need 
 to be baptized by Jesus does not prove that he had already recognized 
 Jesus as the Messiah, but only as superior to himself. 
 
 ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα. See on v. 8. This is the second half of the Divine 
 purpose respecting the Baptist. He was (1) to prepare for the Messiah 
 by preaching repentance ; (2) to point out the Messiah. 
 
 φανερωθῇ. One οἵ. 5. John’s favourite words; ii. 11, iii. 21, vii. 4, 
 ix. 3, xvii. 6, xxi. 1,14; 1 Johni. 2, ii. 19, 28, ii. 2, 5, 8, 9; Rev. iii. 
 18, xv. 4. See on ii, 11. 
 
 διὰ τοῦτο. For this cause (xii. 18, 27) came I: comp. τυ. 16, 18, 
 vii. 22, viii. 47, xix. 11. In translation we must distinguish διὰ τοῦτο 
 from 8. John’s favourite particle ον. 
 
 ἐν [τῷ] ὕδατι. Placed before βαπτίζων for emphasis, because here 
 he contrasts himself as baptizing with water with Him who baptizes 
 with the Holy Spirit. 
 
 32. ésapr. The Evangelist insists again and again on this aspect 
 of the Baptist: he bears witness to the Messiah; 7, 8, 15, 19, 34. 
 
 τεθέαμαι. I have beheld (vv. 14, 38; 1 John iv. 12, 14), The 
 testimony of the vision still remains; hence the perfect. 
 
I. 33. NOTES. Sr 
 
 ὡς περιστερὰν. Perhaps visible only to Jesus and the Baptist. 
 A real appearance is the natural meaning here, and is insisted on by 
 8. Luke (iii. 22); just as a real voice is the natural meaning in xii. 29. 
 And if we admit the ‘bodily shape,’ there is no sound reason for 
 rejecting the dove. The marvel is that the Holy Spirit should be 
 visible in any way, not that He should assume the form of a dove or 
 of ‘tongues of fire’ (Acts ii. 3) in particular. This symbolical vision 
 of the Spirit seems to be analogous to the visions of Jehovah granted 
 to Moses and other Prophets. 
 
 The descent of the Spirit made no change in the nature of Christ: 
 but possibly it awoke a full consciousness of His relation to God and 
 to man: He had been increasing in favour with both (Luke ii. 52). 
 It served two purposes; (1) to make the Messiah known to the Baptist 
 and through him to the world; (2) to mark the official beginning of 
 His ministry, like the anointing of a king. - As at the Transfigura- 
 tion, Christ is miraculously glorified before setting out to suffer, a 
 voice from heaven bears witness to Him, and ‘the goodly fellowship 
 of the Prophets’ shares in the glory. For ἔμεινεν see next verse. 
 
 ér αὐτόν. Pregnant construction; a preposition of motion with a 
 verb of rest. Thus both the motion and the rest are indicated. 
 Comp. v. 18, iii. 36, xix. 13, xx. 19, xxi, 4; Gen. i. 2. 
 
 33. κἀγὼ οὐκ ἤ. av. I also knew Him not. The Baptist again 
 protests that but for a special revelation he was as ignorant as others 
 that Jesus was the Messiah. Therefore he is here giving not his own 
 opinion about Jesus, but the evidence of a sign from heaven. 
 
 ὁ πέμψας. Inv. 6 the verb used was ἀποστέλλω. Πέμπειν is the most 
 general word for ‘send,’ implying no special relation between sender 
 and sent: ἀποστέλλειν adds the notion of a delegated authority consti- 
 tuting the person sent the envoy or representative of the sender 
 (vv. 19, 24). Both verbs are used of the mission of Christ and of the 
 mission of the disciples, as well as that of John. ᾿Αποστέλλειν is used 
 of the mission of Christ, iii. 17, 34, v. 38, vi. 29, 57, vii. 29, viii. 42, 
 x. 36, xi. 42, xvii. 3, 8, 18, 21, 23, 25; of the mission of the dis- 
 ciples, iv. 38, xvii. 18. Πέμπειν is used of the mission of Christ 
 (always in the aorist participle) iv. 34, v. 23, 24, 30, 37, vi. 38, 39, 
 40, 44, vii. 16, 18, 28, 33, ἄο. &c.; of that of the disciples, xiii. 20, 
 xx. 21. Πέμπειν is also used of the mission of the Spirit, xiv. 26, 
 xvi. 7. 
 
 ἐκεῖνος. ‘That one Himself and no other;’ see on vv. 8,18. "Ed ὃν 
 ἄν. The widest possibility; ‘ whosoever he may be on whom.’ 
 
 μένον. Another of S. John’s favourite words, a fact which the A.V. 
 obscures by translating it in seven different ways. ‘Abide’ is the 
 most common and the best translation (v. 32, iii. 36, iv. 40): besides 
 this we have ‘remain’ (here, ix. 41, xv. 11, 16), ‘dwell’ (i. 39, vi. 56, 
 xiv. 10, 17) ‘continue’ (ii. 12, viii. 31), ‘tarry’ (iv. 40, xxi. 22, 23), 
 ‘endure’ (vi. 27), ‘be present’ (xiv. 25). In v. 39, iv. 40, 1 John iil. 
 24, it is translated in two different ways; in 1 John ii. 24 in three 
 
 ST JOHN F 
 
82 5. JOHN. ΓΕ BB+ 
 
 different ways.—The Baptist and the Prophets were moved by the 
 Spirit at times; ‘the Spirit of the Lord came upon’ them from time 
 to time. With Jesus he abode continually. 
 
 ὁ Barr. ἐν mv. ay. This phrase introduced without explanation 
 assumes that the readers are well aware of this office of the Messiah, 
 i.e. are well-instructed Christians. Βαπτίζων is appropriate, (1) 
 to mark the analogy and contrast between the office of the Baptist 
 and that of the Messiah; the one by baptism with water awakens 
 the longing for holiness; the other by baptism with the Spirit satisfies 
 this longing: (2) because the gift of the Spirit is an out-pouring. 
 
 ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ. The epithet ἅγιον is given to the Spirit thrice in 
 this Gospel; here, xiv. 26, and xx. 22 (in vii. 39 the ἅγιον is very 
 doubtful). It is not frequent in any Gospel but the third; 5 times 
 in 5. Matthew, 4 in S. Mark, 12 in 5. Luke. S. Luke rarely omits 
 the epithet, which he uses about 40 times in the Acts. Here and 
 xx. 22 neither substantive nor epithet has the article, in xiv. 26 
 both have it. 
 
 34. ἑώρακα. I have seen, in joyous contrast to ‘I knew Him not,’ 
 vv. 31,33. Seeonv. 18. The perfects indicate that the results of 
 the seeing and of the testimony remain: comp. v. 52, 111, 21, 26, 29. 
 
 μεμαρτύρηκα. have borne witness. Our translators have ob- 
 scured 5. John’s frequent use of μαρτυρεῖν, as of μένειν, by capriciously 
 varying the rendering. This is all the more regrettable, because these 
 words serve to connect together the Gospel, the First Epistle, and the 
 Apocalypse. Μαρτυρεῖν is translated ‘ bear witness,’ i. 7, 18, 15, iii. 26, 
 28, v. 31, 32, 33, 36, 37, vill. 18, x. 25, xv. 27, xviii. 23; 1 Jchn i. 2, 
 v. 6; ‘bear record,’ i. 32, 34, viii. 13, 14, xii. 17, xix. 35; 1 John v. 7; 
 Rev. i. 2; ‘give record,’ 1 John v. 10; ‘testify,’ ii. 25, iii. 11, 32, 
 iv. 39, 44, v. 39, vii. 7, ἘΠῚ, 21, xv. 26, xxi. 24; 1 John iv. 14, 
 v. 9; Rev. xxii. 16, 18, 20: in xv. 26, 27 the translation is changed in 
 the same sentence. Μαρτυρία is rendered ‘ witness,’ i. 7, iii. 11, v. 31, 
 32, 33, 36; 1 John v. 9,10; Rev. xx. 4; ‘record,’ i. 19, viii. 13, 14, 
 xix, 35, xxi. 24; 1 John v. 10, 11; ‘testimony,’ iii. 32, 33, v. 34, 
 vill. 17; Rev. i..2, 9, vi. 9, xi. 7, xii: 11, 17, xix: 10: Π Johny 
 we have two different renderings in the same verse. Neither μαρτύ- 
 βίον nor μάρτυς, found in all three Synoptists, occurs in this Gospel. 
 
 ὁ vids τοῦ θεοῦ. The incarnate Λόγος, the Messiah (v.18). These 
 words of the Baptist confirm the account of the voice from heaven 
 (Matt. iii. 17). The whole passage (vv. 32—34) shews that 8S. John 
 does not, as Philo does, identify the Logos with the Spirit. 
 
 35—37. Tue TESTIMONY OF THE Baptist TO ANDREW AND JOHN. 
 
 35. τῇ ἐπ. π. The next day again; referring to v. 29. Thus far 
 we have three days, full of moment to the Evangelist and the Church, 
 On the first the Messiah is proclaimed as already present; on the 
 second He is pointed out; on the third He is followed. In each case 
 the Baptist takes the lead; it is by his own act and will that he 
 decreases while Jesus increases. 
 
1. 39.] NOTES. 83 
 
 The difference between this narrative and that of the Synoptists 
 (Matt. iv. 18; Mark i. 16; Luke v. 2) is satisfactorily explained by 
 supposing this to refer to an earlier and less formal call of these first 
 four disciples, John and Andrew, Peter and James. Their call to be 
 Apostles was a very gradual one. Two of them, and perhaps all four, 
 began by being disciples of the Baptist, who directs them to the Lamb 
 of God (v. 36), Who invites them to His abode (v. 39): they then 
 witness His miracles (ii. 2, &c.); are next called to be ‘fishers of men’ 
 (Matt. iv. 19); and are finally enrolled with the rest of the Twelve as 
 Apostles (Mark iii. 13). Their readiness to follow Jesus, as recorded 
 by the Synoptists, implies previous acquaintance with Him, as re- 
 corded by S. John. See note on Mark i. 20. 
 
 ἐκ τῶν pad. αὐτοῦ δύο. One of these was Andrew (v. 40); the 
 other was no doubt 8. John. The account is that of an eyewitness ; 
 and his habitual reserve with regard to himself accounts for his 
 silence, if the other disciple was himself. If it was someone else, 
 it is difficult to see why S. John pointedly omits his name. 
 
 There was strong antecedent probability that the first followers of 
 Christ would be disciples of the Baptist. The fact of their being so 
 is one reason for the high honour in which the Baptist has been held 
 from the earliest times by the Church. 
 
 36. ἐμβλέψας. Indicates a fixed, penetrating gaze. Comp. v. 42; 
 Mark x. 21, 27; Luke xx. 17, xxii. 61. 
 
 ἴδε «.7r.A. See on v. 28. These disciples were probably present 
 
 the previous day. Hence there is no need to say more. This is the 
 last recorded meeting between the Baptist and the Christ. 
 
 37. ἤκουσαν. Although they had not been specially addressed. 
 
 ἠκολούθησαν. The first beginning of the Christian Church. But 
 we are not to understand that they had already determined to become 
 His disciples. 
 
 38—52. Tue Testimony oF DISCIPLES. 
 
 This section falls into two divisions, each occupying a day; (1) the 
 6811 of Andrew, John, Peter, and perhaps James; (2) that of Philip 
 and Nathanael. Of these Peter and James were probably disciples of 
 John, In this also he was the Elijah who was to come first. 
 
 38—42. ANDREW, JOHN AND PETER. 
 
 38. θεασάμενος. Comp. vv.14 and 32. The context shews that He 
 saw into their hearts as well. 
 
 39. Τί ζητεῖτε; 1.6. in Me. He does not ask ‘Whom seek ye?’ 
 It was evident that they sought Him. 
 
 ‘PaBBt. A comparatively modern word when 5. John wrote, and 
 therefore all the more requiring explanation to Gentile readers. The 
 ‘i’ termination in Rabbi and Rabboni (xx. 16) =‘ my,’ but had prob- 
 ably lost its special meaning; comp. ‘ Monsieur,’ §. John does not 
 
 F2 
 
84 S. JOHN. (I. 39— 
 
 translate ‘my Master.’ 8S. John often interprets between Hebrew and 
 Greek ; thrice in this section. (Comp. wv. 42, 43.) 
 
 ποῦ μένεις; Where abidest thow? (See on v. 33.) They have 
 more to ask than can be answered on the spot. Perhaps they think 
 Him a travelling Rabbi staying close by; and they intend to visit 
 Him at some future time. He bids them come at once: now is 
 the day of salvation, In the A.V. v. 38 contains vv. 38 and 39 of 
 the Greek. 
 
 40. ὄψεσθε. The reading ‘Sere perhaps comes from v, 47, 
 ἐκείνην. That memorable day. 
 
 dpa ἦν ὡς δεκάτη. S. John remembers the very hour of this crisis 
 in his life: all the details of the narrative are very lifelike. 
 
 It is sometimes contended that S. John reckons the hours of the 
 day according to the modern method, from midnight to midnight, 
 and not according to the Jewish method, from sunset to sunset, as 
 everywhere else in N.T. and in Josephus, It is antecedently improb- 
 able that S. John should in this point vary from the rest of N.T. 
 writers; and we ought to require strong evidence before accepting 
 this theory, which has been adopted by some in order to escape from 
 the difficulty of xix. 14, where see notes. Setting aside xix. 14 as the 
 cause of the question, we have four passages in which 8. John men- 
 tions the hour of the day, this, iv. 6,52 and xi. 9. None of them are 
 decisive: but in no single case is the balance of probability strongly 
 in favour of the modern method. See notes in each place. Here 
 either 10a.m. or 4P.m. would suit the context: and while the ante- 
 cedent probability that 5. John reckons time like the rest of the 
 Evangelists will incline us to 4P.m., the fact that a good deal still 
 remains to be done on this day makes 10 4.m. rather more suitable; 
 and in that case ‘ abode with him that day’ is more natural. Origen 
 knows nothing of S. John’s using the modern method of reckoning. 
 
 41, ὁ ἀδελφὸς Σ. Π. Before the end of the first century, there- 
 fore, it was natural to describe Andrew by his relationship to his far 
 better known brother. In Church History Peter is everything and 
 Andrew nothing: but would there have been an Apostle Peter but for 
 Andrew? In the lists of the Apostles Andrew is always in the first 
 group of four, but outside the chosen three, in spite of this early call, 
 
 42. οὗτος. Comp. vv. 2, 7, ili. 2, 26. 
 
 πρῶτον. The meaning of ‘first’ becomes almost certain when we 
 remember 8. John’s characteristic reserve about himself. Both dis- 
 ciples hurry to tell their own brothers the good tidings, that the 
 Messiah has been found: Andrew finds his own brother first, and 
 afterwards John finds his: but we are left to infer the latter point. 
 
 Andrew thrice brings others to Christ; Peter, the lad with the loaves 
 (vi. 8), and certain Greeks (xii. 22); and, excepting Mark xiii. 3, we 
 know scareely anything else about him. Thus it would seem as if in 
 these three incidents S. John had given us the key to his character, 
 And here we have another characteristic of this Gospel—the lifelike 
 
1.481 NOTES. 8s 
 
 way in which the less prominent figures are sketched. Besides 
 Andrew we have Philip, i. 44, vi. 5, xii. 21, xiv. 8; Thomas, xi. 16, 
 xiv. 5; xx. 2429; Nathanael, i. aaa: Nicodemus, lil, £35) Vii. 
 50. 52, xix, 39; Martha and Mary, xi., xii. 1—3. 
 
 Eipykapev. Does not prove that S. John is still with him, only 
 that they were together when their common desire was fulfilled. 
 
 τὸν Μεσσίαν. The Hebrew form of this name is used by 5. John 
 only, here and iy. 25. Elsewhere the LXX. translation, ὁ χριστός, is 
 used; but here χριστός has no article, because 5. John is merely inter- 
 preting the word, not the title. Comp. iii. 28, iv. 25, 29, vii. 26, 31, 
 41, x. 24, xi. 27, xii. 34, xx. 31. 
 
 43. ἐμβλέψας. Comp. v. 36 and Luke xxii. 61: what follows shews 
 that Christ’ s look penetrated to his heart and read his character. 
 
 *Iwavvov. This, and not Ἰωνᾶ, seems to be the true reading here 
 and xxi. 15, 16, 17: but Ἰωνᾷ might represent two Hebrew names, 
 Jonah and Johanan=John. Tradition gives his mother’s name as 
 Johanna. Andrew probably had mentioned his name and parentage. 
 
 Κηφᾶς. This Aramaic form occurs elsewhere in N.T. only 1 Cor. i, 
 12, iii. 22, ix. 5, xv. 5; Gal.i. 18, 11. 9, 11, 14. The second Adam, 
 like (Gen. 11. 19) the ‘first, gives names to those brought to Him, 
 The new name, as in the case of Abraham, Sarah, and Israel, indi- 
 cates his new position rather than his character; for he was ‘ unstable 
 as water’ (xvill. 25; Gal. ii. 11, 12): Simon is designated for a new 
 office. Matt. xvi. 18 presupposes the incident recorded here: here 
 Simon shall be called, there he is, Peter. 
 
 Ilérpos. Translate, Peter, with ‘a stone,’ or ‘a mass of rock,’ in 
 the margin.—It is quite clear from this narrative that S. Peter was 
 not called first among the Apostles, 
 
 4452. Puinip AND NATHANAEL. 
 
 44. τῇ ἐπαύριον. We thus far have four days accurately marked; 
 (1) v. 19; (2) v. 29; (3) v. 35; (4) v. 44. A writer of fiction would 
 not have cared for minute details which might entangle him in dis- 
 crepancies: they are thoroughly natural in an eyewitness profoundly 
 interested in the events, and therefore remembering them distinctly. 
 
 ἠθέλησεν. Willed or was minded to go forth: the ‘would’ of A.V. 
 is too weak (comp. vi. 67, viii. 44). Jesus determined to go from 
 Judaea to Galilee: on His way He finds Philip (see on ix. 35). 
 
 ἀκολούθει por. In the Gospels these words seem always to be the 
 call to become a disciple: Matt. viii. 22, ix. 9, xix. 21; Mark ii. 14, 
 x. 21; Luke v. 27, ix. ὅθ; John xxi.19. With two exceptions they 
 are always addressed to those who afterwards became Apostles. 
 
 45. ἀπὸ Bnd. For the change of preposition see on xi.1. The 
 local knowledge displayed in this verse is very real. §. John would 
 possess it; a writer in the second century would not, and would not 
 
86 S. JOHN. ΠῚ 45— 
 
 care to invent. This is ‘Bethsaida of Galilee’ (xii. 21) on the 
 western shore, not Bethsaida Julias (see on Matt. iv. 13). In the 
 Synoptists Philip is a mere name: our knowledge of him comes— 
 from 5. John (see on v. 42, vi. 7, xii. 21, xiv. 8). 
 
 46. εὑρίσκει &. Thus the spiritual λαμπαδηφορία proceeds: the 
 receivers of the sacred light hand it on to others, Et quasi cursores 
 vitai lampada tradunt (Luer. ii. 77). 
 
 Ναθαναήλ -- ‘Gift of God.’ The name occurs Num. i. 8; 1 Chron. 
 ii. 14; 1 Esdrasi. 9, ix. 22. Nathanael is commonly identified with 
 Bartholomew; (1) Bartholomew is only a patronymic and the bearer 
 would be likely to have another name (comp. Barjona of Simon, 
 Barnabas of Joses); (2) S. John never mentions Bartholomew, the 
 Synoptists never mention Nathanael; (3) the Synoptists in their 
 lists place Bartholomew next to Philip, as James next his probable 
 caller John, and Peter (in Matt. and Luke) next his caller Andrew; 
 (4) all the other disciples mentioned in this chapter become Apostles, 
 and none are so highly commended as Nathanael; (5) all Nathanael’s 
 companions named in xxi. 2 were Apostles (see note there). But all 
 these reasons do not make the identification more than probable. The 
 framers of our Liturgy do not countenance the identification: this 
 passage appears neither as the Gospel nor as a Lesson for 8, Bar- 
 tholomew’s Day. 
 
 ὃν ἔγραψεν M. κιτλ. Luthardt contrasts this elaborate pro- 
 fession with the simple declaration of Andrew (v. 42). The divisions 
 of the O.T. here given are quite in harmony with Jewish phraseology. 
 Moses wrote of Him not merely in Deut. xviii. 15, but in all the 
 various Messianic types and promises. 
 
 τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ τ. ἀπὸ N. The words-are Philip’s, and express the 
 common contemporary belief about Jesus. As His home was there, 
 τὸν ἀπὸ Ναζαρέτ was both natural and true: and τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ was 
 natural enough, if untrue. That the Evangelist is ignorant of the 
 birth at Bethlehem, or of its miraculous character, in no way follows 
 from this passage. Rather he is an honest historian, who records 
 exactly what was said, without alterations or additions of his own. 
 ‘‘Here we observe for the first time a peculiarity in the narrative of 
 5. John. It seems that the author takes pleasure in recalling certain 
 objections to the Messianic dignity of Jesus, leaving them without 
 reply, because every one acquainted with the Gospel history made 
 short work of them at once; comp. vii. 27, 35, 42, &c.” (Godet.) 
 
 47. ἐκ Naf. «.r.A. All Galileans were despised for their want 
 of culture, their rude dialect, and contact with Gentiles. They were 
 to the Jews what Beotians were to the Athenians, But here it is a 
 Galilean who reproaches Nazareth in particular. Apart from the 
 Gospels we know nothing to the discredit of Nazareth; neither in O.T. 
 nor in Josephus is it mentioned; but what we are told of the people 
 by the Evangelists is mostly bad. Christ left them and preferred to 
 dwell at Capernaum (Matt. iv. 13); He could do very litile among 
 
I. 50.] NOTES. 87 
 
 them, ‘because of their unbelief’ (xiii. 58), which was such as to 
 make Him marvel (Mark vi. 6); and once they tried to kill Him 
 (Luke iv. 29). 5. Augustine would omit the question. Nathanael ‘* who 
 knew the Scriptures excellently well, when he heard the name Naza- 
 reth, was filled with hope, and said, From Nazareth something good 
 can come.” But this is not probable. Possibly he meant ‘Can any 
 good thing come out of despised Galilee?’ or, ‘Can anything so good 
 come out of so insignificant a village?’ 
 
 ἔρχου k. ἴδε. The best cure for ill-founded prejudice; at once the 
 simplest and the surest method. Philip shews the strength of his 
 own conviction by suggesting this test, which seems to be in har- 
 mony with the practical bent of his own mind. See on xii. 21 and 
 ᾿ xiv. 8. Here, of course, ide is the imperative; not an interjection, 
 as in vv, 29, 35, 48. 
 
 48. εἶδεν... ἐρχόμενον. This shews that Jesus did not overhear 
 Nathanael’s question. 83. John represents his knowledge of Nathanael 
 as wiraculous: as in v. 42 He appears as the searcher of hearts. 
 
 ἀληθῶς. In character as well as by birth. The guile may refer to 
 the ‘subtilty’ of Jacob (Gen. xxvii. 35) before he became Israel: ‘Lo 
 a son of Israel, who is in no way a son of Jacob.’ The ‘supplanter’ 
 is gone; the ‘prince’ remains. His guilelessness is shewn in his 
 making no mock repudiation of Christ’s praise: he is free from ‘the 
 pride that apes humility.’ It is shewn also in the manner of his con- 
 version. Like a true Israelite he longs for the coming of the Mes- 
 siah, but he will not too lightly believe in the joy that has come, nor 
 does he conceal his doubts. But as soon as he has‘ come and seen,’ he 
 knows, and knows that he is known: thus ‘I know Mine and Mine 
 know Me’ (x. 14) is fulfilled beforehand. 
 
 S. John uses ἀληθῶς about 8 times, and in the rest of N.T. it occurs 
 about 8 times (see on v. 8). 
 
 49. ὑπὸ τὴν συκῆν. Note the case, implying motion to under, 
 and comp. vv. 18, 32, 33. The phrase probably means ‘at home,’ in 
 the retirement of his own garden (1 Kings iv. 25; Mic. iv. 4; Zech. 
 iii. 10). He had perhaps been praying or meditating, and seems to 
 feel that Christ knew what his thoughts there had been. It was 
 under a fig tree that S. Augustine heard the famous ‘ tolle, lege.’ 
 
 50. ὁ vids τ. 8. Experience of His miraculous knowledge con- 
 vinces Nathanael, as it convinces the Samaritan woman (iv. 29) and 
 5. Thomas (xx. 28), that Jesus must stand in the closest relation to 
 God: hence he uses this title of the Messiah (xi. 27; Matt. xxvi. 63; 
 Mark iii. 11, v. 7; Luke iv. 41) rather than the more common ‘Son 
 of David.’ 
 
 Bac. εἶ τ. Ἴσρ. Noarticle. The title isnot synonymous with ‘the 
 Son of God,’ though both apply to the same person, and it points to 
 hopes of an earthly king, which since the destruction of Jerusalem 
 even Jews must have ceased to cherish. How could a Christian of 
 the second century have thrown himself back to this? 
 
88 S. JOHN. (I. 51— 
 
 51. πιστεύεις. As in xvi. 31, xx. 29, the sentence is half a question, 
 half an exclamation. He, who marvelled at the unbelief of the people 
 of Nazareth, expresses joyous surprise at the ready belief of the guile- 
 less Israelite of Cana. 
 
 52. ᾿Αμὴν, ἀμὴν. The double ἀμήν occurs 25 times in this 
 Gospel, and nowhere else, always in the mouth of Christ. It intro- 
 duces a truth of special solemnity and importance. The single ἀμήν 
 occurs about 30 times in Matt., 14 in Mark, and 7 in Luke. Hence 
 the title of Jesus, ‘the Amen’ (Rev. iii. 14. The word is originally a 
 verbal adjective, ‘firm, worthy of credit,’ sometimes used as a sub- 
 stantive; e.g. ‘God of truth’ (Is. lxv. 16) is literally ‘God of (the) 
 Amen.’ In the LXX. ἀμήν never means ‘verily;’ in the Gospels it 
 always does. The ἀμήν at the end of sentences (xxi. 25; Matt. vi. 13, 
 xxviii. 20; Mark xvi. 20; Luke xxiv. 53) is in every case of doubtful 
 authority. 
 
 ὑμῖν. Nathanael alone had been first addressed; now all present. 
 
 τ. οὐρ. avewyota. The heaven opened; made open and remaining 
 so. What Jacob saw in a vision they shall see realised. The In- 
 carnation brings heaven down to earth; the Ascension takes earth 
 up to heaven. These references to Jacob (v. 48) were possibly sug- 
 gested by the locality: Bethel, Mahanaim, and the ford Jabbok, all 
 lay near the road that Jesus would traverse between Judaea and 
 Galilee. 
 
 τ. ἀγγέλους τ. 8. The reference is not to the angels which ap- 
 peared after the Temptation, at the Agony, and at the Ascension; 
 rather to the perpetual intercourse between God and the Messiah 
 during His ministry, and afterwards between God and Christ’s Body, 
 the Church; those ‘ ministering spirits’ who link earth to heaven. 
 
 ἀναβαίνοντας. Placed first: prayers and needs ascend; then 
 graces and blessings descend. But see Winer, p. 692. 
 
 τ. υἱὸν τ. ἀνθρώπου. This phrase in all four Gospels is invariably 
 used by Christ Himself of Himself as the Messiah; upwards of 80 
 times in all. None of the Evangelists direct our attention to this 
 strict limitation in the use of the expression: their agreement on this 
 striking point is evidently undesigned, and therefore a strong mark of 
 their veracity. See notes on Matt. viii. 20; Mark ii. 10. In O.T. 
 the phrase ‘ Son of Man’ has three distinct uses; (1) in the Psalms, 
 for the ideal man; viii. 4—8, Ixxx. 17, exliv. 3, exlvi. 3: (2) in Eze- 
 kiel, as the name by which the Prophet is addressed by God; ii. 1, 3, 
 6, 8, iii. 1, 3, 4, &c., &c., more than 80 times in all; probably to 
 remind Ezekiel that in spite of the favour shewn to him, and the 
 wrath denounced against the children of Israel, he, no less than they, 
 had a mortal frailty: (3) in the ‘night visions’ of Dan. vii. 13, 14, 
 where ‘One like a son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and 
 came to the Ancient of Days...and there was given Him dominion, 
 and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages 
 should serve Him, &c.’ That ‘Son of man henceforth became one of 
 the titles of the looked-for Messiah’ may be doubted. Rather, the 
 
II. 1.] NOTES. 89 
 
 title was a new one assumed by Christ, and as yet only dimly under- 
 stood (comp. Matt. xvi. 13). Just as ‘the Son of David’ marked 
 Him as the one in whom the family of David culminated, so ‘the 
 Son of Man’ as the one in whom the whole human race culminates. 
 
 This first chapter alone is enough to shew that the Gospel is the 
 work of a Jew of Palestine, well acquainted with the Messianic hopes, 
 and traditions, and with the phraseology current in Palestine at the 
 time of Christ’s ministry ; able also to give a lifelike picture of the 
 Baptist and of Christ’s first disciples, 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 12. Kadapvaovp (preferred by the best editors to Καπερναούμ). 
 
 17. καταφαγεταί (SABP) has been altered to κατέφαγε in order to 
 bring the quotation into harmony with the LXX. 
 
 20. τεσσεράκοντα. This Ionic form of τεσσαράκοντα has good MS. 
 authority here, Rev. xi. 2, xiii. 5, xiv. 1, xxi. 17. Winer, p. 46. 
 
 23. ἐν τοῖς ᾿Τεροσολύμοις for ἐν ‘Iep. S. John alone gives Ἱεροσόλυμα 
 the article, here, v, 2, x. 22, xi, 18; contrast i. 19, iv. 20, 21, ii, 13, v. 
 1, xi, 55, xii. 12. 
 
 CuHap, Il, 1—11, Tue Testimony or THE Frest Siren. 
 
 Jesus is passing from the retirement in which He has lived so long 
 imrrto the publicity of His ministry. The scene which follows lies half- 
 way between—in the family circle, where privacy and publicity meet. 
 Τὸ is the same when He returns from temporary retirement in Peraea 
 to the completion of His ministry before His Passion. The last 
 miracle, like the first, is wrought in the circle of family life (xi. 8). 
 
 1. τῇ τρίτῃ. From the calling of Philip (i. 43), the last date 
 mentioned, making a week in all; the first week, possibly in contrast 
 to the last (xii. 1). 
 
 Kava τ. Tad. To distinguish it from Cana of Asher (Josh, xix, 
 28); an instance of the Evangelist’s knowledge of Palestine. This 
 Cana is not mentioned in O. T. It was the home of Nathanael (xxi. 
 2), which disproves the theory that Jesus and His mother had at one 
 time lived at Cana, for in so small a place Jesus and Nathanael could 
 not have been unknown to one another. Cana is now generally 
 identified with Kanet el-Jelil, about six miles N. of Nazareth, rather 
 than with Kefr-Kenna. 
 
 > 
 
 ἦν. Imperf. in contrast to the aorist in v. 2. She was staying 
 there ; her Son was invited for the feast: she speaks to the servants 
 as if she were quite at home in the house (v. 5). Joseph has dis. 
 appeared: the inference (not quite certain) is that in the interval 
 between Luke ii. 51 and this marriage—about 17 years—he had died. 
 Mary does not appear again in this Gospel till the Crucifixion. 
 
90 : S. JOHN. (IL. 2— 
 
 2. ἐκλήθη. Singular, as if the including of the disciples were an 
 afterthought. There were now five or six; Andrew, John, Peter, 
 Philip, Nathanael, and probably James. 
 
 Stxal6°I. And Jesus also (iii. 23, xviii. 2, 5, xix. 39). 
 
 3. tor. olv. When wine failed. The arrival of these six or seven 
 guests might cause the want, and certainly would make it more 
 apparent. To Eastern hospitality such a failure on such an occasion 
 would seem a disgraceful calamity. Whether the feast had already 
 lasted several days (Gen. xxix. 27; Judg. xiv. 17; Tob. ix. 12, x. 1), 
 we do not know. 
 
 oly. οὐκ ἔχ. Much comment has obscured a simple text. The 
 family in which she was a guest were in a serious difficulty. Perhaps 
 she felt partly responsible for the arrangements; certainly she would 
 wish to help. What more natural than that she should turn to her 
 Son, like the sisters at Bethany afterwards (xi. 3), and tell Him of the 
 trouble? That she wished Him to break up the party, or begin a 
 discourse to distract attention, is quite alien from the context. 
 Whether she expected a miracle, is uncertain: but her appeal for help 
 may well have been accompanied by the thought, that here was an 
 opportunity for her mysterious Son, who had already been pro- 
 claimed by the Baptist, to manifest Himself as the Messiah. 
 ae had used his powers to relieve ordinary needs; why not her 
 
 on? 
 
 4. τί ἐμοὶ x. σοί, γύναι; 5. John alone of all the Evangelists 
 never gives the Virgin’s name, Here, as so often, he assumes that 
 his readers know the main points in the Gospel narrative: or it may 
 be part of the reserve which he exhibits with regard to all that nearly 
 concerns himself. Christ’s Mother had become his mother (xix. 26, 
 27). He nowhere mentions his brother James. 
 
 Treatises have been written to shew that these words do not 
 contain a rebuke; for if Christ here rebukes His Mother, it cannot be 
 maintained that she is immaculate. ‘Woman’ of course implies no 
 rebuke; the Greek might more fairly be rendered ‘ Lady’ (comp. xix. 26). 
 At the same time it marks a difference between the Divine Son and 
 the earthly parent: He does not say, ‘Mother.’ The sword is be- 
 ginning to pierce her heart, as the earthly ties between parent and 
 child begin to be severed. The severance is taken a stage further, 
 Matt. xii. 46—50, and completed on the Cross (xix. 26). But ‘what 
 have I to do with thee?’ does imply rebuke, as is evident from the 
 other passages where the phrase occurs, Judg. xi. 12; 1 Kings xvii, 
 18; 2 Kings iii. 13; Matt. vili. 29; Mark 1. 24; Luke viii. 28. Only 
 in one passage does the meaning seem to vary: in 2 Chron. xxxv, 21 
 the question seems to mean ‘why need we quarrel?’ rather than 
 ‘what have we in common?’ But such a meaning, if possible there, 
 would be quite inappropriate here. The further question has been 
 asked, —what was she rebuked for? 83. Chrysostom thinks for vanity; 
 she wished to glorify herself through her Son. More probably for 
 interference: He will help, and He will manifest Himself, but in His 
 own way, and in His own time. Comp. Luke ii. 51. 
 
IL. 9.] NOTES. gr 
 
 ἡ ὥρα μου. The meaning of ‘My hour’ and ‘His hour’ in this 
 Gospel depends in each case on the context. There cannot here be 
 any reference to His death; rather it means His hour for ‘ manifest- 
 ing forth His glory’ (v. 11) as the Messiah by working miracles. The 
 exact moment was still in the future. Comp. vii. 8, where He for the 
 moment refuses what He soon after does; and xii. 23, xvii. 1, which 
 confirm the meaning here given to ‘ hour,’ 
 
 5. Between the lines of His refusal her faith reads a better answer 
 to her appeal, and she is content to leave all to Him. 
 
 6. AO. ὑδρ. ἕξι As an eyewitness 5. John remembers their 
 material, number, and size, The surroundings of the first miracle 
 would not easily be forgotten. Vessels of stone were less liable to 
 impurity: it is idle to seek for special meaning in the number six. 
 
 καθαρισμόν. Matt. xv. 2; Mark vii. 3 (see note); Luke xi. 39. 
 
 petpyntas. A werpyrjs=about nine gallons, so that ‘firkin’ is an 
 almost exact equivalent. The six, holding from 18 to 27 gallons 
 each, would together hold 106 to 162 gallons. ᾿Ανά is distributive ; it 
 cannot mean ‘towards’, ‘about’: Rey. iv. 8. Winer, p. 497. 
 
 7. γεμίσατε. What is the meaning of this command, if (as some 
 contend) only the water drawn out was turned into wine? And why 
 such care to state the large size of the vessels? These had been 
 partly emptied by the ceremonial ablutions of the company. Note 
 that in His miracles Christ never creates; He increases the quantity, 
 or changes the quality of what already exists. 
 
 ἕως ἄνω. His Mother’s words (v. 5) have done their work. Our 
 attention seems again to be called to the great quantity of water 
 changed into wine. ‘‘It is His first miraculous sign; and it must 
 bear strong testimony to His riches, His munificence, and the joy 
 which it gives Him to bestow relief or even gladness : it must become 
 the type of the fulness of grace and joy which the only-begotten Son 
 brings to the earth” (Godet). 
 
 8. dpxitp. Manager of the feast (triclinium) rather than ruler: 
 but it is doubtful whether the head-waiter, who managed the feast 
 and tasted the meat and drink, is meant, or the rex convivii, arbiter 
 bibendi, the guest elected by the other guests to preside. The bad 
 taste of his remark inclines one to the former alternative: Ecclus. 
 xxxii. 1, 215 in favour of the second. In any case the translation 
 should be uniform in these two verses, not sometimes ‘governor,’ 
 sometimes ‘ruler.’ The word occurs nowhere else inN.T. ‘Ydpia and 
 ἀντλάω are also peculiar to this Gospel, and occur again iv. 7, 15, 28. 
 
 9. τὸ 08. οἷν. yey. The water now become wine. This seems to imply 
 that all had become wine: there is nothing to distinguish what was 
 now wine from what still remained water. It is idle to ask at what 
 precise moment or in what precise way the water became wine: an 
 instantaneous change seems to be implied. Τεύεσθαι 6, acc. occurs 
 Heb. vi. 5 and in LXX.: very rare in classical Greek. 
 
92 S. JOHN. (II. 10— 
 
 10. μεθυσθῶσιν. Have become drunk, are drunk. The A. V. does 
 not give the full coarseness of the man’s joke, although in Matt. xxiv. 
 49; Acts ii. 15; 1 Cor. xi. 21; 1 Thess. v. 7; Rev. xvii. 2, 6, the same 
 word is rightly translated. The Vulgate has inebriati fuerint ; Tyndall 
 and Cranmer have ‘be dronke’; the error comes from the Geneva 
 Bible. Of course the man does not mean that the guests are in- 
 toxicated ; it is a jocular statement of his own experience at feasts. 
 
 ἕως ἄρτι. This was true in a sense of which he never dreamed. 
 The True Bridegroom was there, and had indeed kept the best dis- 
 pensation until the last. Ἄρτι occurs about 12 times in this Gospel, 
 7 in Matt., not at all in Mark or Luke. It expresses the present 
 in relation to the past and the future, ‘at this stage,’ ‘at this crisis,’ 
 whereas νῦν regards the present moment only, ‘now’ absolutely, 
 Comp. v. 17, ix. 19, 25, xiii. 7, 19, 33, 37; xvi. 12, 31, ὅτ: 
 
 11. ταύτην ἐπ. ἀρχ. τ. σ. This as a beginning of His signs did 
 Jesus: it is the first miracle of all, not merely the first in Cana. This 
 is quite conclusive against the miracles of Christ’s childhood recorded 
 in the Apocryphal Gospels and is evidence of the truthfulness of the 
 writer. If he were inventing, would he not also place miracles 
 throughout the whole of Christ’s life? See on v. 23, iv. 48; σημεῖον 
 should throughout the Gospel be rendered ‘sign’ not ‘ miracle.’ Δυνά- 
 pecs, So frequent in the Synoptists for ‘miracles,’ is never used by 
 S. John; τέρατα only once (iv. 48), and then in conjunction with 
 σημεῖα, a word which he uses 17 times. Christ’s miracles were ‘signs’ 
 of His Divine mission: comp. Ex. iv. 8. They were evidence of a 
 perfect humanity working in unison with a perfect Divinity. They 
 were also symbolical of spiritual truths: see on ix. 39. 
 
 ἐν Kava τ. Tad. Thus 8. John agrees with the Synoptists in 
 representing the Messianic career as beginning in Galilee. 
 
 ἐφανέρωσεν. Another of 5. John’s favourite words (see on i, 31): 
 the rendering should be kept uniform, especially here, vii. 4, xvii. 6, 
 xxi. 1, where the active is used. In the other Gospels the word occurs 
 only Mark iv. 22 [xvi. 12, 14], always in the passive. 
 
 τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ. This is the final cause of Christ’s ‘signs,’ His 
 own and His Father’s glory (xi. 4), and these two are one. Herein 
 lies the difference between His miracles and those wrought by Pro- 
 phets and others: they never manifested their own glory, but that of 
 Jehovah (Ex. xvi. 7). 
 
 ἔπιστ. εἰς αὐ. of pal. av. What a strange remark for a writer in 
 the second century to make! His disciples believed on Him? Of course 
 they did. Assume that a disciple himself is the writer, and all is 
 explained: he well remembers how his own imperfect faith was con- 
 firmed by the miracle. A forger would rather have given us the effect 
 on the guests. Three times in this chapter does 8. John give us the 
 disciples’ point of view, here, v. 17 and v. 22; very natural in a 
 disciple, not natural in a later writer. See on xi. 15, xxi. 12. 
 
 This verse gives us four facts respecting the sign; 1. it was the 
 
ΤΙ, 12.] NOTES, 93 
 
 first; 2. it took place in Galilee; 3. its end was Christ’s glory; 4. its 
 immediate result was the confirmation of the disciples’ faith. 
 
 Two objections have been made to this miracle (1) on rationalistic, 
 (2) on ‘Temperance’ grounds. (1) It is said that it is a wasteful 
 miracle, a parade of power, unworthy of a Divine Agent: a tenth of 
 the quantity of wine would have been ample. But the surplus was 
 not wasted any more than the twelve baskets of fragments (vi. 13); it 
 would be a royal present to the bridal pair. (2) It is urged that 
 Christ would not have supplied the means for gross excess; and to 
 avoid this supposed difficulty it is suggested that the wine made was 
 not intoxicating, i.e. was not wine at all. But in all His dealings 
 with men God allows the possibility of a temptation to excess. All 
 His gifts may be thus abused. The 5000 might have been gluttonous 
 over the loaves and fishes. 
 
 Christ’s honouring a marriage-feast with His first miracle gives His 
 sanction (1) to marriage, (2) to times of festivity. And here we see 
 the contrast between O. and N. T. The miracles of O. T. are 
 mostly miracles of judgment. Those of N. T. are nearly all miracles 
 of blessing. Moses turns water into blood: Jesus turns water into 
 wine. 
 
 Four hundred years had elapsed since the Jews had seen a miracle. 
 The era of Daniel was the last age of Jewish miracles. Since the 
 three children walked in the burning fiery furnace, and Daniel had 
 remained unhurt in the lions’ den, and had read the handwriting on 
 the wall, no miracle is recorded in the history of the Jews until Jesus 
 made this beginning of His ‘signs’ at Cana of Galilee. No wonder 
 that the almost simultaneous appearance of a Prophet like John and 
 a Worker of miracles like Jesus attracted the attention of all classes. 
 
 On the symbolical meaning of this first sign see Introduction, 
 chap. v. § 3. 
 
 12. This verse alone is almost enough to disprove the theory that 
 the Gospel is a fiction written with a dogmatic object: ‘* why should 
 the author carry his readers thus to Capernaum—for nothing?” If 
 5. John wrote it, all is natural. He records this visit because it took 
 place, and because he well remembers those ‘ not many days.’ 
 
 κατέβη. Down from the plateau on which Cana and Nazareth 
 stand to the shore of the lake, Capernaum, or Caphar-nahum, the 
 modern Tell-Hfim, was the chief Jewish town, as Tiberias was the 
 chief Roman town, of one of the most busy and populous districts of 
 Palestine: it was therefore a good centre, For μ. τοῦτο see on iii, 22. 
 
 ἡ μήτ. av. x. ot 68. av.] Natural ties still hold Him; in the next 
 verse they disappear. On the vexed question of the ‘brethren of the 
 Lord’ see the Introduction to the Epistle of S. James. It is impossible 
 to determine with certainty whether they are (1) the children of 
 Joseph and Mary, born after the birth of Jesus; (2) the children of 
 Joseph by a former marriage, whether levirate or not; or (3) adopted 
 children. There is nothing in Scripture to warn us against (1), the 
 most natural view antecedently ; but it has against it the general con- 
 sensus of the Fathers, and the prevailing tradition of the perpetual 
 
94 S. JOHN. ΠῚ. 12— 
 
 virginity of S. Mary. Jerome’s theory, that they were our Lord’s 
 cousins, sons of Alphaeus, is the one commonly adopted, but vii. 5 
 (see note) is fatal to it, and it labours under other difficulties as well. 
 The fact of His brethren being with Him makes it probable that He 
 returned to Nazareth from Cana before coming down to Capernaum. 
 
 ov πολλὰς np. Because the Passover was at hand, and He must 
 be about His Father’s business. §S. John here corrects the impres- 
 sion, easily derived from §S. Matt. (iv. 13, ix. 1), that when Christ 
 moved from Nazareth to Capernaum, the latter at once became His 
 usual abode, ‘ His own city.’ 
 
 1, 183—XL 657. Tne Work. 
 
 We enter now on the second and principal portion of the first 
 main division of the Gospel, thus subdivided:—Tur Worx 1. among 
 Jews (ii. 13—iii. 36); 2. among Samaritans (iv. 1—42); 3. among 
 Galileans (iv. 42—54); 4. among mixed multitudes, chiefly Jews 
 (v.—ix.). In this last subdivision the Work becomes a CONFLICT 
 between Jesus and ‘ the Jews,’ 
 
 TI. 13--ΤΠ. 36. THe Work amone Jews. 
 
 13. τὸ πάσχα τ. “I. The passover of the Jews. Perhaps 
 an indication that this Gospel was written after a Passover of the 
 Christians had come into recognition. Passovers were active times 
 in Christ’s ministry; and this is the first of them. It was possibly 
 the nearness of the Passover which caused this traffic in the Temple 
 Court. It existed for the convenience of strangers. Certainly the 
 nearness of the Feast would add significance to Christ’s action. 
 While the Jews were purifying themselves for the Passover He puri- 
 fied the Temple. S. John groups his narrative round the Jewish 
 festivals: we have (1) Passover; (2) Purim (?), v. 1; (3) Passover, 
 vi. 4; (4) Tabernacles, vii. 2; (5) Dedication, x. 22; (6) Passover, 
 xi. 55. 
 
 ἀνέβη. Up to the capital. The public ministry of the Messiah 
 opens, as we should expect, in Jerusalem and in the Temple. The 
 place is as appropriate as the time. 
 
 14—22. Tue First CLEANSING OF THE TEMPLE, 
 
 14. ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ. In the sacred enclosure, viz. the Court of the 
 Gentiles, sometimes called ‘the mountain of the house;’ whereas ἐν 
 τῷ vag (see on v. 19) would mean in the sanctuary, in the Temple 
 proper: the traffic would be great on the eve of the Passover. The 
 account is very graphic, as of an eyewitness; note especially καθημέ- 
 vous; the money-changers would sit, the others would stand. The 
 animals mentioned are those most often wanted for sacrifice. 
 
 τ. κερματιστὰς. From κέρμα (xelpw)=‘anything cut up, small 
 change :’ the dealers in small change. The article implies that they 
 were habitually there. Comp. Zech. xiv, 21, where for ‘Canaanite’ 
 we should perhaps read ‘ traflicker’ or ‘ nerchant.’ 
 
IL. 17.] NOTES. Os 
 
 15. ποιήσας dp. Peculiar to this account: there is no such inci- 
 dent in the cleansing recorded by the Synoptists. The scourge was 
 probably not used; to raise it would be enough. Zyxowvlwy are literally 
 twisted rushes. 
 
 τά τε πρόβ. «.7.B. Both the sheep and the oxen, explanatory of 
 πάντας, which does not refer to the sellers and exchangers, who pro- 
 bably fled at once: comp. Matt. xxii. 10. The order is natural; first 
 the driving out the cattle, then the pouring out the money and over- 
 turning the tables. 
 
 κολλυβιστῶν. From κόλλυβος- " rate of exchange’ (Cic. Verr. 
 11. iii, 78; Att. xu. vi. I); this was very high, 10 or 12 per cent. 
 Payments to the Temple were always made in Jewish coin, to 
 avoid profanation by money stamped with idolatrous symbols. 
 
 16. εἶπεν. The doves could not be driven out, and to let them 
 fly might have caused unseemly and prolonged commotion: He calls 
 to the owners to take the cages away. Throughout He guides His 
 indignation, not it Him. ‘The wrath of the Lamb’ is mercy here 
 and justice hereafter, never indiscriminating passion. 
 
 μὴ ποιεῖτε. Addressed to all, not merely to the dove-sellers. 
 
 τ. οἷκ. τοῦ πατρός pov. ‘Admiranda auctoritas’ (Bengel). A dis- 
 tinct claim to Messiahship: it reminds us of ἐν τοῖς τοῦ πατρός μου 
 (Luke ii. 49) spoken in the same place some 17 years before. Pos- 
 sibly some who heard the Child’s claim heard the Man’s claim also. 
 
 οἶκον ἐμπορίου. A house of traffic. Two years later things seem 
 to have become worse instead of better; the Temple has then become 
 ‘a den of robbers, a bandits’ cave.’ See on Matt. xxi, 13 and Mark 
 xi. 17. He meets with no resistance. As in Gethsemane (xviii. 6) 
 the majesty of His appearance prevails. But His success produces 
 opposite results: those who sympathize are confirmed in faith, 
 those who do not take offence. Later on the Evangelist almost 
 invariably points out this double effect of Christ’s teaching. 
 
 17. ἐμνήσθ. Then and there; contrast v. 22. Who could know 
 this but a disciple who was present? Who would think of inventing 
 it? See on v. 11. 
 
 γεγραμμ. ἐστίν. In quotations S. John almost always uses the 
 perf. part. with the auxiliary (vi. 31, 45, x. 34, xii, 14, [xix. 19]), 
 whereas the Synoptists commonly use the perf. pass. 
 
 καταφάγεται. Will devour, or consume me, i.e. wear me out (Ps. 
 lxix. 9). Excepting the 22nd, no psalm is so often alluded to in 
 N.T. as the 69th; comp. xv. 25, xix. 28; Acts i. 20; Rom. xv. 3, xi. 
 9, 10. There is no thought of Christ’s zeal proving fatal to Him; of 
 that the disciples as yet knew nothing. Nor are we to understand 
 that it was as a ‘Zealot,’ one who like Phinehas (Num. xxv.) took the 
 execution of God’s law-into his own hands, that Christ acted on 
 this occasion. If this were so, why did He not do this long before? 
 Rather, He acts as the Messiah, as the Son in His Father’s house: 
 
96 5. JOHN. ΠῚ a 
 
 therefore He waits till His hour has come, till His Messianic career 
 has commenced. Just at the time when every Jew was purifying 
 himself for the Feast, the Lord has suddenly come to His Temple to 
 purify the sons of Levi (Mal. iii. 1—3). 
 
 It is difficalt to believe that this cleansing of the Temple is iden- 
 tical with the one placed by the Synoptists at the last Passover in 
 Christ’s ministry; difficult also to see what is gained by the identifi- 
 cation. If they are the same event, either 8. John or the Synoptists 
 have made a gross blunder in chronology. Could 5. John, who was 
 with our Lord at both Passovers, make such a mistake? Could 
 S. Matthew, who was with Him at the last Passover, transfer to it an 
 event which took place at the first Passover, a year before his con- 
 version? When we consider the immense differences which distin- 
 guish the last Passover from the first in Christ’s ministry, it seems 
 incredible that anyone who had contemporary evidence could through 
 any lapse of memory transfer a very remarkable incident indeed from 
 one to the other. On the other hand the difficulty of believing 
 that the Temple was twice cleansed is very slight. Was Christ’s 
 preaching so universally successful that one cleansing would be cer- 
 tain to suffice? He was not present at the next Passover (vi. 4), and 
 the evil would have a chance of returning. And if two years later 
 He found that the evil had returned, would He not be certain to drive 
 it out once more? Differences in the details of the narratives cor- 
 roborate this view. 
 
 18. ot ᾿Ιουδαῖοι. See oni.19. On ἀπεκρίθησαν see on x. 32. 
 
 Τί σημεῖον. We have a similar question Matt. xxi. 23, but the 
 widely different answer shews that the occasion is different. Such 
 demands, thoroughly characteristic of the Pharisaic spirit (1 Cor. 
 i. 22), would be often made. The Jews failed to see that Christ’s 
 words and works were their own credentials. For ὅτι see Winer, p. 557. 
 
 19. λύσατε τ. ναὸν tr. The reply is “sudden as a flash of light- 
 ning;” (comp. [viii. 7]) and it leaves a lasting impression on all 
 (Matt. xxvi. 61, xxvii. 40): but what it revealed was not comprehended 
 until a fuller and more lasting light revealed it again. Itis S. Mat- 
 thew (xxvi. 61) and 5. Mark (xiv. 58) who tell us that this saying was 
 twisted into a charge against Christ, but they do not record the 
 saying. §S. John, who records the saying, does not mention the 
 charge. Such coincidence can scarcely be designed, and therefore is 
 evidence of the truth of both statements. See on xviii. 11, xii. 8. 
 Note that in these three verses ναός is used, not lepdv; the latter 
 is never used figuratively: Destroy this sanctuary (see on v. 14), 
 
 éyep@. His accusers turn this into ‘ build’ (οἰκοδομῆσαι), which is 
 not appropriate to raising a dead body. There is no contradiction 
 between Christ’s declaration and the ordinary N.T. theology, that the 
 Son was raised by the Father. The expression is figurative through- 
 out; and ‘I and My Father are one.’ Comp. x.18. This throwing 
 out seeds of thought for the future, which could not bear fruit at the 
 time, is one of the characteristics of Christ’s teaching. 
 
IT. 23.] NOTES. 97 
 
 20. τεσσ. κ. ἕξ ἕτεσιν. For the dative comp. xiv. 9. This was the third 
 Temple. Solomon’s Temple was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar. Zerub- 
 babel’s was rebuilt by Herod the Great. ‘‘The building of the Temple, we 
 are told by Josephus (Ant. xv. xi. 1), was begun in the 18th year of Herod 
 the Great, 734—735 a.u.c. Reckoning 46 years from this point, we 
 are brought to 781 or 782 a.U.c.=28 or 29 a.p. Comparing this with 
 the data given in Luke iii. 1, the question arises, whether we are to 
 reckon the 15th year of Tiberius from his joint reign with Augustus, 
 which began Α.Ὁ. 12; or from his sole reign after the death of 
 Augustus, A.D. 14. This would give us a.p. 27 or 29 for the first 
 public appearance of the Baptist, and at the earliest a.p. 28 or 30 
 for the Passover mentioned in this chapter.” So that there seems 
 to be exact agreement between this date and that of S. Luke, if we 
 count S. Luke’s 15 years from the joint reign of Tiberius. It is 
 incredible that this can have been planned; it involves intricate 
 calculation, and even with the aid of Josephus absolute certainty 
 cannot be obtained. “ΒΥ what conceivable process could a Greek in 
 the second century have come to hit upon this roundabout expe- 
 dient for giving a fictitious date to his invention?” (Sanday). 
 
 For other instances of misunderstanding of Christ’s words comp. 
 111. 4, 9, iv. 11, 15, 33, vi. 34, 52, vii. 35, viii, 22, 33, 52, xi. 12, xiv. 5. 
 
 21. ἔλεγεν. Was speaking. Even if inspiration be set aside, 
 8. John’s explanation must be admitted as the true one. What better 
 interpreter of the mind of Jesus can be found than ‘the disciple whom 
 Jesus loved’? And he gives the interpretation not as his only, but as 
 that of the disciples generally. Moreover, it explains the ‘three days,’ 
 which interpretations about destroying the old Temple-religion and 
 raising up a new spiritual theocracy do not. Nadés is also used of 
 Christians, the spiritual Body of Christ, 1 Cor. iii. 16, 17, vi. 19; 
 2 Cor. vi. 16. For the genitive of apposition see Winer, p. 666. 
 
 22. Trustine BELIEF, 
 
 ἠγέρθη. Was raised. Comp. xxi. 14; Acts iii. 15, iv. 10, v. 30. 
 They recollected it when the event which explained it took place; 
 meanwhile what had not been understood had been forgotten. Would 
 a but ΟΝ give these details about the disciples’ thoughts? 
 
 ee on v. 11. 
 
 τῇ γραφῇ. Not els τὴν γραφήν: they believed what the Scripture 
 (Ps. xvi. 10) said. See oni. 12. ‘H γραφή commonly means a parti- 
 cular passage (vii. 88, 42, x. 35, xiii. 18, xix. 24, 28, 36, 37; Mark xii. 
 10; Luke iv. 21; Acts viii. 32, 35), whereas ai γραφαί means Scrip- 
 ture generally (v. 39; Matt. xxi. 42, xxii. 29, xxvi. 54, 56; Mark xii. 
 24, &c.) Ofcourse only the O.T. can be meant. 
 
 εἶπεν. Spake, on this occasion. 
 
 23—25. BELIEF witHout Trust. 
 
 23. Note the different force of ἐν and the exactness of detail: in 
 Jerusalem, at the Passover, during the Feast. 
 
 ST JOHN G 
 
98 S. JOHN. (1123s 
 
 εἰς τὸ ὄνομα. See oni. 12, θεωροῦντες. See on vi. 2. : 
 
 τὰ σημεῖα. None of these ‘signs’ are recorded; comp. iv. 45, vii. 
 31, xi. 47, xii. 35, xx. 30, xxi. 25; Marki. 34, vi. 55,56. The number 
 of miracles wrought by Jesus during His public life was so great 
 (ἐποίει was habitually doing), that a writer inventing a Gospel would 
 almost inevitably place them throughout His whole life. That the 
 Evangelists rigidly confine them to the last few years, greatly adds 
 to our confidence in their accuracy. But the faith which was born of 
 wonder would be likely to cease when the wonder ceased, as here: 
 comp. Simon Magus (Acts viii. 13). 
 
 24. ἐπίστευεν. Antithesis to ἐπιστ. els τ. ὄν αὖτ. --- Many trusted 
 in His name, but Jesus did not trust Himself to them.’ 
 
 διὰ τὸ att. yw. For that He of Himself knew. Observe the 
 difference between διὰ τὸ (for that), ὅτι (because), and γάρ (for). 
 
 25. ἵνα tis papt. See on i. 7, 8: that any should bear witness 
 concerning man ; comp. xvi. 30. The article with dv@pwrov is generic. 
 
 αὐτὸς yap ἐγ. For He of Himself knew: note the repetition of 
 αὐτός in vv. 23, 24. We have instances of this supernatural know- 
 ledge in the cases of Peter (i. 42), Nathanael (i. 47, 48), Nicodemus 
 (iii. 3), the Samaritan woman (iv. 29), the disciples (vi. 61, 64), Judas 
 (vi. 70, xiii. 11), Peter (xiii. 38, xxi. 17), Thomas (xx. 27). It is 
 remarkable that the word here used for this supernatural knowledge 
 is γινώσκειν, ‘to come to know, perceive,’ rather than εἰδέναι, ‘to 
 know’ absolutely (comp. v. 42, x. 14, 15, 27, xvii. 25). This tends to 
 shew that Christ’s supernatural knowledge was in some degree ana- 
 logous to ours. Both verbs are used, 1. in reference to facts, know- 
 ledge of which Christ might have obtained in the ordinary manner 
 (γινώσκειν, iv. 1, v. 6, vi. 15; εἰδέναι, vi. 61); 2. in reference to facts, 
 knowledge of which must have been supernatural (γινώσκειν ii. 24, 25, 
 x. 14, 27; εἰδέναι, vi. 64, xiii. 1, 11, xviii. 4); 3. in reference to divine 
 things transcending human experience (γινώσκειν, xvii. 25; εἰδέναι, 
 i. 11, v.. 32, vil. 29, vill. 14, 55, xi. 42, xt. :50,-xui 3, sae 
 These references shew that the distinction, though not quite absolute, 
 is very marked between knowledge which in some sense can be 
 regarded as acquired (γινώσκειν) and that which is simply regarded 
 as possessed. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 2. πρὸς αὐτόν for mp. τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν (a correction for clearness at the 
 beginning of a lection: comp, iv. 16, 46, vi. 14, viii, 21, xi. 45). 
 
 15. ἐν αὐτῷ for els αὐτόν (a correction to 8. John’s usual construc- 
 tion): μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλ᾽ before ἔχῃ is an insertion (A) from v.16; NBL 
 omit. 
 
 25. μετὰ ᾿Ιουδαίου for μ. ᾿Ιουδαίων. 
 
 34. Omit ὁ θεός (gloss) after δίδωσιν, with NBC'L against AC?D. 
 
IIT. 1.] NOTES. 99 
 
 παρ. III, 1—21. Tue Discourse witn NicopEemvus. 
 
 This is the first of the discourses of our Lord which form the main 
 portion, and are among the great characteristics, of this Gospel. 
 They have been used as a powerful argument against its authen- 
 ticity; (1) because they are unlike the discourses in the Synoptic 
 Gospels, (2) because they are suspiciously like the First Epistle of S. 
 John, which all admit was written by the author of the Fourth 
 Gospel, (3) because this likeness to the First Epistle pervades not 
 only the discourses of our Lord, but those of the Baptist also, as well 
 as the writer’s own reflections throughout the Gospel. The inference 
 is that they are, as much as the speeches in Thucydides, if not as 
 much as those in Livy, the ideal compositions of the writer himself. 
 
 On the question as a whole we may say at once with Matthew 
 Arnold (Literature and Dogma, p. 170), ‘‘ the doctrine and discourses 
 of Jesus cannot in the main be the writer’s, because in the main they 
 are clearly out of his reach.” ‘Never man so spake’ (vii. 46). Not 
 even S. John could invent such words. 
 
 But the objections urged above are serious and ought to be answered. 
 (1) The discourses in 5. John are unlike those in the Synoptists, but 
 we must beware of exaggerating the unlikeness. They are longer, 
 more reflective, less popular. But they are for the most part addressed 
 to the educated and learned, to Elders, Pharisees, and Rabbis: even 
 the discourse on the Bread of Life, which is spoken before a mixed 
 multitude at Capernaum, is largely addressed to the educated portion 
 of it (vi. 41, 52), the hierarchical party opposed to Him, The dis- 
 courses in the first three Gospels are mostly spoken among the rude 
 and simple-minded peasants of Galilee. Contrast the University 
 Sermons with the Parish Sermons of an eminent modern preacher, 
 and we should notice similar differences. This fact will account for 
 a good deal. But (2) the discourses both in §. John and in the 
 Synoptists are translations from an Aramaic dialect. Two transla- 
 tions may differ very widely, and yet both be faithful; they may each. 
 bear the impress of the translator’s own style, and yet accurately 
 represent the original. This will to a large extent answer objections 
 (2) and (3). And we must remember that it is possible, and perhaps 
 probable, that the peculiar tone of 5. John, so unmistakeable, yet so 
 difficult to analyse satisfactorily, may be a reproduction, more or less 
 conscious, of that of his Divine Master. 
 
 But on the other hand we must remember that an eventful life 
 of half a century separates the time when 5. John heard these dis- 
 courses from the time when he committed them to writing. Christ 
 had promised (xiv. 26) that the Holy Spirit should ‘bring all things 
 to the remembrance’ of the Apostles; but we have no right to assume 
 that in so doing He would override the ordinary laws of psychology. 
 Material stored up so long in the breast of the Apostle could not 
 fail to be moulded by the working of his own mind. And therefore 
 we may admit that in his report of the sayings of Christ and of the 
 Baptist there is an element, impossible to separate now, which comes 
 from himself. His report is sometimes a literal translation of the 
 
 G2 
 
100 S. JOHN. [ΠΠ|. 1— 
 
 very words used, sometimes the substance of what was said put into 
 his own words: but he gives us no means of distinguishing where the 
 one shades off into the other. 
 
 Cardinal Newman has kindly allowed the following to be quoted 
 from a private letter written by him, July 15th, 1878. ‘‘ Every one 
 writes in his own style. §.John gives our Lord’s meaning in his 
 own way. At that time the third person was not so commonly used 
 in history as now. When a reporter gives one of Gladstone’s speeches 
 in the newspaper, if he uses the first person, I understand not only 
 the matter, but the style, the words, to be Gladstone’s: when the 
 third, I consider the style, ἄρ. to be the reporter’s own. But in 
 ancient times this distinction was not made. Thucydides uses the 
 dramatic method, yet Spartan and Athenian speak in Thucydidean 
 Greek. And so every clause of our Lord’s speeches in 8, John may 
 be in S. John’s Greek, yet every clause may contain the matter which 
 our Lord spoke in Aramaic. Again, 5. John might and did select or 
 condense (as being inspired for that purpose) the matter of our Lord’s 
 discourses, as that with Nicodemus, and thereby the wording might 
 be S. John’s, though the matter might still be our Lord’s.”’ 
 
 1, ἦν δὲ ἄνθ. Now there was a man. The δέ marks the con- 
 nexion with what precedes: Nicodemus was one of the ‘many’ who 
 believed on beholding His signs (ii. 23). “Av@pwzos probably refers to 
 ii. 25, as in i. 6 toi. 4; Nicodemus was a sample of that humanity 
 whose inmost being Jesus could read. Else we should expect rus. 
 
 Νικόδημος. He is mentioned only by 8. John. It is impossible 
 to say whether he is the Nicodemus (Nakedimon), or Bunai, of 
 the Talmud, who survived the destruction of Jerusalem, Love of 
 truth and fear of man, candour and hesitation, seem to be combined 
 in him, Comp. vii. 50. In xix. 39 his timidity is again noted and 
 illustrated, 
 
 ἄρχων. A member of the Sanhedrin (vii. 50: comp. xii. 42; Luke 
 xxill. 13, xxiv. 20), which was opposed to Jesus; hence, to avoid com- 
 promising himself (xii. 42), he comes by night. We do not know 
 whether 8. John was present; probably he was. Nicodemus would 
 not be afraid of disciples. 
 
 2. οὗτος. S. John’s use, to recall a previous subject; comp. i. 2, 
 7, 42, iv. 47, vi. 71, xxi. 24. 
 
 γυκτός. This proved his timidity and illustrated his spiritual con- 
 dition ; he was coming out of the night to the Light of men, as Judas 
 went out from Him into the night (see on xiii. 30, x. 22, xviii. 1, xxi. 19 
 and Introduction, chap. v. § 3). Jesus welcomes him; He does not 
 quench the smoking flax. 
 
 οἴδαμεν. Others also are inclined to believe, and he claims a share 
 in their enlightenment; but there is a touch of Pharisaic compla- 
 cency in the word: ‘some of us are quite disposed to think well of 
 you.’ The report of the deputation sent to the Baptist (i. 19—28) 
 and Christ’s signs have to this extent influenced even members of the 
 Sanhedrin. On Ῥαββί see i, 39, iv. 31, 
 
 — ὌὉμΩ 
 
IIL. 4.] ᾿ NOTES. ror 
 
 ἀπὸ θεοῦ. First for emphasis; it was from God that His commis- 
 sion to be a Rabbi came, not from having gone through the ordinary 
 training (vii. 15, 16). Does ‘art come from God’ indicate the Mes- 
 siah, ὁ épyduevos? If so, Nicodemus again shews his weakness; he 
 begins with admitting Messiahship and ends with the vague word &- 
 δάσκαλος : the Messiah was never thought of as a mere teacher. But 
 ἀπὸ θεοῦ may indicate only a Prophet (i. 6), or even less, 
 
 ἐὰν μὴ x.t.A. Again a weak conclusion ; one expects ‘unless he be 
 a Prophet,’ or, ‘the Messiah.’ 
 
 3. ἀπεκρίθη. He answers his thoughts (vy. 17; Luke vii. 40). 
 Nicodemus wonders whether Jesus is about to set up a kingdom. 
 See on ii. 25 andi. 52. 
 
 ἐὰν μή tis. Except one be born: quite indefinite, Nicodemus 
 changes τις tu ἀνθρωπος. 
 
 ἄνωθεν. The strict meaning is either 1. ‘from above’ literally 
 (Matt. xxvii. 51; Mark xv. 38), or 2. ‘from above’ figuratively (James 
 i. 17, iii. 15, 17), or 3. ‘from the beginning’ (Luke i, 3; Acts xxvi. 5). 
 S. John uses ἄνωθεν thrice elsewhere; xix. 23, ‘from above’ literally ; 
 iii, 23 and xix. 11, ‘from above’ figuratively. This favours the 
 rendering ‘from above’ here, which is generally adopted by the 
 Greek Fathers from Origen onwards. Moreover ‘to be born from 
 above’ recalls being ‘ born of God’ in i. 13 (comp. 1 John iii. 9, iv. 7, 
 v. 1, 4,18). But ‘from the beginning’ easily shades off into ‘afresh’ 
 or ‘over again’ (Gal. iv. 9 we have πάλιν ἄνωθεν combined). Hence 
 from very early times this has been one of the interpretations of 
 ἄνωθεν here, preserved in the Peschito, Ethiopic, and Latin Versions. 
 It confirms the rendering ‘over again’ or ‘anew’ to find Justin 
 Martyr (Apol. τ. lxi) quoting ἂν μὴ ἀναγεννηθῆτε, οὐ μὴ εἰσέλθητε els 
 τ. Bac. τ. οὐρανῶν as words of Christ (see on i. 23 and ix. 1) : ἀναγεν- 
 νᾶσθαι must mean ‘to be reborn.’ Comp. Christ’s reply to S. Peter in 
 the beautiful legend of the ‘Domine, quo vadis?’, ἄνωθεν μέλλω σταυρω- 
 θῆναι: where ἄνωθεν σταυροῦν doubtless represents the ἀνασταυροῦν 
 (crucify afresh) of Heb. vi. 6. 
 
 ov δύναται. It is a moral impossibility; not ‘shall not’ but 
 ‘cannot.’ See on vil. 7. 
 
 ἰδεῖν. i.e. so as to partake of it: so ἐδεῖν θάνατον, Luke ii. 26; 
 θάνατον θεωρεῖν John viil. 51; comp. Ps. xvi. 10, xe. 15. 
 
 τ. Bac. τ. θεοῦ. This phrase, so common in the Synoptists, occurs 
 only here and v. 5 in 5. John. We may conclude that it was the very 
 phrase used. It looks back to the theocracy, and indicates the 
 Messianic kingdom on earth, the new state of salvation. 
 
 Had Jesus been a mere enthusiast, would He have given so chilling 
 a reply (comp. v. 10) to a member of the Sanhedrin? Would He not 
 have been eager to make the most of such an opening? 
 
 4. yépwv dv. He puts the most impossible case, possibly with 
 reference to himself, ‘ when he is an old man, like myself.’ New birth 
 as a metaphor for spiritual regeneration cannot have been unknown 
 
102 S. JOHN. [Π|. 4— 
 
 to Nicodemus. He purposely misinterprets, in order to force a 
 reductio ad absurdum: or, more probably, not knowing what to say, 
 he asks what he knows to be a foolish question. 
 
 δ. ἐξ ὕδατος k. πνεύματος. The ἐξ answers to the εἰς which follows 
 and reminds us of the ἐν ini. 33. The convert is immersed in the 
 material and spiritual elements, rises new-born out of them, and 
 enters into the kingdom. Christ leaves the foolish question of Nico- 
 demus to auswer itself: He goes on to explain what is the real point, 
 and what Nicodemus has not asked, the meaning of ἄνωθεν: ‘of water 
 and (the) Spirit.” The outward s'gn and inward grace of Christian 
 baptism are here clearly given, and an unbiassed mind can scarcely 
 avoid seeing this plain fact. This becomes still more clear when 
 we compare i. 26 and 33, where the Baptist declares ‘I baptize 
 with water;’ the Messiah ‘baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.’ The 
 Fathers, both Greek and Latin, thus interpret the passage with 
 singular unanimity. Thus once more §. John assumes without 
 stating the primary elements of Christianity. Baptism is assumed 
 here as well known to his readers, as the Eucharist is assumed in 
 chap. vi. To ἃ well-instructed Christian there was no need to explain 
 what was meant by being born of water and the Spirit. The words 
 therefore had a threefold meaning, past, present, and future. In the 
 past they looked back to the time when the Spirit moved upon the 
 water, causing the new birth from above of Order and Beauty out of 
 Chaos. In the present they pointed to the divinely ordained (i. 33) 
 baptism of John: and through it in the future to that higher rite, to 
 which John himself bore testimony. Thus Nicodemus would see that 
 he and the Pharisees were wrong in rejecting John’s baptism (Luke 
 vii. 30). Of the two elements, water signifies the purifying power, 
 spirit the life-giving power: the one removes hindrances, making the 
 baptized ready to receive the other (Acts ii. 38; Tit. 111. 5). Note 
 that ἐκ is not repeated before πνεύματος, so that the two factors are 
 treated as inseparable: moreover, neither has the article; it is the 
 kind of factors rather than a definite instance that is indicated. 
 
 The Sinaiticus and some other authorities here read τῶν οὐρανῶν 
 for rod Θεοῦ. This reading renders Justin’s reference to the passage 
 still more certain (see on v. 3). 
 
 6. The meaning of γεννηθῆναι ἄνωθεν is still further explained by 
 an analogy. What man inherits from his parents is a body with 
 animal life and passions; what he receives from above is a spiritual 
 nature with heavenly capabilities and aspirations: what is born of 
 sinful human nature is human and sinful; what is born of the Holy 
 Spirit is spiritual and divine. 
 
 There is an interesting interpolation here. The old Latin and old 
 Syriac Versions insert quia Deus spiritus est et de Deo natus est. No 
 Greek MS. contains the words, which are obviously a gloss, But 5. 
 Ambrose (De Spir. 111. 59) charges the Arians with effacing guia Deus 
 spiritus est from their MSS. See oni, 13. 
 
 7. εἶπ. σοι, Δεῖ ὑμᾶς. Note the change of number and comp. i. 52. 
 The declaration is pressed home: τις in vv. 3 and d is no vague gene- 
 
III. 10.] NOTES. . 103 
 
 rality; excepting Him who says ‘ye,’ it is of universal application. 
 ‘Ye, the chosen people, ye, the Pharisees, ye, the rulers, who know 
 so much (v. 2), must all be born of water and spirit.’ 
 
 8. τὸ πνεῦμα κιτιλ. This verse is sometimes rendered thus: the 
 Spirit breatheth where He willeth, and thou hearest His voice, but 
 canst not tell whence He cometh and whither He goeth: so is every one 
 (born) who is born of the Spirit. Itis urged in favour of this render- 
 ing (1) that it gives to πνεῦμα the meaning which it almost invariably 
 has in more than 350 places in N.T., of which more than 20 are 
 in this Gospel: πνεῦμα may mean ‘ breath of the wind,’ yet its almost 
 invariable use in N.T. is ‘spirit’ or ‘the spirit,’ ἄνεμος being used 
 (e.g. vi. 18) for ‘wind’: (2) that it gives a better meaning to θέλει, a 
 word more appropriate 'to a person than to anything inanimate: that 
 it gives to φωνή the meaning which it has in 14 other passages in this 
 Gospel, viz. ‘articulate voice,’ and not ‘inarticulate sound.’ But on 
 the other hand (1) it gives to πνεῖ the meaning ‘breathes,’ which it 
 nowhere has in Scripture: in vi. 18 and elsewhere it is invariably 
 used of the blowing of the wind: (2) it involves the expression ‘ the 
 voice of the Spirit,’ also unknown to Scripture: (3) it requires the in- 
 sertion of ‘born’ in the last clause, in order to make sense. The 
 close of the verse, οὕτως ἐστὶ x.7.4., Shews that there is a comparison, 
 and this is almost conclusive for ‘wind’ as the meaning of πνεῦμα. 
 Comp. Eccles. xi. 5. The Aramaic word probably used by our Lord 
 has both meanings, ‘wind’ and ‘ spirit,’ to translate which S. John 
 could not use ἄνεμος, which has only the meaning of ‘ wind;’ so that 
 the first rather imposing argument for the rendering ‘spirit’ crumbles 
 away. ‘‘At the pauses in the conversation, we may conjecture, they 
 heard the wind without, as it moaned along the narrow streets of 
 Jerusalem; and our Lord, as was His wont, took His creature into 
 His service—the service of spiritual truth. The wind was a figure of 
 the Spirit. Our Lord would have used the same word for both” 
 (Liddon). Socrates uses the same simile; ἄνεμοι αὐτοὶ οὐχ ὁρῶνται, 
 ἃ δὲ ποιοῦσι φανερὰ ἡμῖν ἐστι, καὶ mporder cy αὐτῶν ἀϊσθανόμεθα (Xen. 
 Mem. tv. iii. 14). Τὴ the Ignatian Epistles (Philad. v1.) we read τὸ 
 πνεῦμα ov πλανᾶται, ἀπὸ Θεοῦ ὄν" οἷδεν γὰρ πόθεν ἔρχεται καὶ ποῦ ὑπάγει, 
 καὶ τὰ κρυπτὰ ἐλέγχει, Which is evidence of this Gospel being known 
 4.D, 150, and probably a.p. 115. See on iv. 10, vi. 33, x. 9. 
 
 ὁ γεγεννημένος. That hath been born; perf. pass. It is all over, 
 this spiritual birth, ‘he knoweth not how.’ He feels that the heavenly 
 influence has done its work; but he finds it incomprehensible in its 
 origin, which is divine, and in its end, which is eternal life. The 
 Sinaiticus, supported by the old Latin and old Syriac, inserts τοῦ 
 ὕδατος καὶ after ἐκ; another proof of the antiquity of corruptions. 
 See on i. 13, and comp. vv. 6, 13, 15. 
 
 9. γενέσθαι. Come to pass (see oni. 6). He is bewildered; but 
 there is no attempt at a rejoinder, asin v.4. Comp. Job xl. 4, 5. 
 
 10. σὺ εἶ ὁ διδάσκ. Art thou the teacher, a representative of the 
 highest knowledge and supreme authority in the Church? Jesus is 
 
104 S. JOHN. [Π1. 10— 
 
 astonished at the ignorance of Rabbis, just as He marvelled at the 
 unbelief of His countrymen (Mark vi. 6). ᾿Ισραήλ, frequent in Matt., 
 Luke, and Acts, occurs only 4 times in 5. John (i. 31, 50, xiii. 13, and 
 here): ‘the chosen people’ is the idea conveyed. Οὐ γινώσκεις. 
 Perceivest not: this was knowledge which he might have acquired, 
 had he made the effort. Winer, p, 143. 
 
 11. οἴδαμεν. The plurals between singulars are to be noted. They 
 may be rhetorical, giving the saying the tone of a proverb; but the 
 next verse seems to shew that they are literal. Jesus and His dis- 
 ciples tell of earthly things, Jesus alone of heavenly. Note the 
 order and the pairing of the verbs; That which we know, we speak ; 
 and of that which we have seen, we bear witness. See oni. 18, For 
 kal...ov λαμβ. The tragic tone once more; see oni. 5. 
 
 12. τὰ ἐπίγεια. Terrena, things which take place on earth, even 
 though originating in heaven, e.g. the ‘new birth,’ which though ‘of 
 God,’ must take place in this world. See on 1 Cor. xy. 40, and 
 James 111], 15. Prophets and other teachers can make known ἐπίγεια. 
 τὰ ἐπουράνια. The mysteries which are not of this world, the 
 nature of the Son, God’s counsels respecting man’s salvation. 
 
 13. οὐδεὲς dvaB. No one has been in heayen, so as to see and 
 know these ἐπουράνια, excepting the Son of Man (see on i. 52). There 
 is probably no direct reference to the Ascension. “Ex τ. odp. Out of 
 heaven, at the Incarnation, when from being ἐπουράνιος He became 
 the Son of Man. 
 
 ὁ ὧν ἐν τ. ovp. These words are wanting in the best MSS. 
 and other authorities. It is much easier to account for their in- 
 sertion than for their omission. It is, therefore, safest to regard 
 them as a very early expansion of the Greek in ancient Versions. 
 See on i. 13. They mean, ‘ Whose proper home is heaven,’ or, taking 
 ὧν as imperf. (vi. 62, ix. 25, xvii. 5), ‘Which was in heaven’ before 
 the Incarnation. Winer, p. 429. 
 
 14. τὸν ὄφιν. We here have some evidence of the date of the 
 Gospel. The Ophitic is the earliest Gnostic system of which we have 
 full information. The serpent is the centre of the system, at once its 
 good and evil principle. Had this form of Gnosticism been prevalent 
 before this Gospel was written, this verse would scarcely have stood 
 thus. An orthodox writer would have guarded his readers from 
 error: an Ophitic writer would have made more of the serpent. 
 
 οὕτως. Christ here testifies to the prophetic and typical character 
 of the O. T. Both Jewish and Christian writers vary much in their 
 explanations of the Brazen Serpent. It is safest in interpreting types 
 and parables to hold fast to the main features and not insist on the 
 details. Here the main points are the lifting up of a source of life to 
 become effectual through the faith of the sufferer. All these points 
 are expressed in vv. 14, 15. Nicodemus lived to see the fulfilment 
 of the prophecy (xix. 39). 
 
 tt i A) 
 
ITI. 16.] NOTES. 105 
 
 ὑψωθῆναι, On the Cross, as in viii. 28. The exaltation of Christ 
 to glory by means of the Cross (crux scala coeli) is probably not 
 included: for this δοξασθῆναι would be the more naturai term. In 
 ΧΙ]. 32 the Ascension is possibly included by ἐκ τῆς γῆς and in Acts 
 li. 33, v. 31 by τῇ δεξιᾷ τ. Θεοῦ: here and in viii. 28 there is no 
 such addition. Moreover, to include the Ascension spoils the com- 
 parison with the Brazen Serpent, 
 
 Set. It is so ordered in the counsels of God (Heb. ii. 9, 10). Comp. 
 v. 30, ix. 4, x. 16, xii. 34, xx. 9; Matt. xvi. 21, xxvi. 54; Mark viii. 
 31; Luke ix. 22, xvii. 25, xxii, 37, xxiv. 7, 26, 44. 
 
 15. ἵνα. See on i. 8. The eternal life of all believers, whether 
 Jew or Gentile, is the purpose of the Divine δεῖ. The lifting up on 
 the Cross was the turning-point in the faith of Nicodemus (xix. 39). 
 
 ἐν αὐτῷ. This goes with ἔχῃ rather than πιστεύων ; that every one 
 (xi. 25, xii. 46) that believeth may in Him have eternal life. Authori- 
 ties are much divided between ἐν and ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ, els and ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν. 
 The corfusion partly arose from the insertion of μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλ᾽ 
 from v. 16 before ἔχῃ, causing the preposition and pronoun to be taken 
 with πιστεύων. 
 
 ἱωὴν αἰώνιον. This is one of 8. John’s favourite phrases. It 
 occurs 17 times in the Guspel (8 in the Synoptics) and 6 in the 
 First Epistle. In neither Gospel nor Epistle does he apply αἰώνιος to 
 anything but (w7. The phrase ἔχειν ἑωὴν αἰώνιον is also one of 
 S. John’s phrases, v. 36, v. 24, vi. 40, 47, 54; 1 John iii. 15, v. 12. 
 
 16—21. It is much disputed whether what follows is a continua- 
 tion of Christ’s discourse, or 8. John’s comment upon it. That 
 expressions characteristic of S. John’s diction appear (μονογενής, πισ- 
 τεύειν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα, ποιεῖν τὴν ἀλήθειαν, τὸ φῶς), cannot settle the 
 question ; the substance may still be Christ’s though the wording is 
 S. John’s. And have we sufficient knowledge of our Lord’s phrase- 
 ology to distinguish 8. John’s wording from His? In any case we 
 have what was probably a conversation of long duration condensed 
 into one of five minutes. Nor does the cessation oi the conversational 
 form prove anything. The more Nicodemus became impressed the 
 less he would be likely to interrupt, like the disciples in the last 
 discourses. It seems unlikely that S. John would give us no indica- 
 tion of the change from the Lord’s words to his own, if the discourse 
 with Nicodemus really ended at v.15. See on vv. 31—36. 
 
 The subject of these six verses is as follows; God’s purpose in 
 sending His Son (16, 17); the opposite results (18, 19); the moral 
 
 | cause of these opposite results (20, 21). 
 
 16. γάρ. Explaining how God wills life to every believer. Τὸν 
 koopov=the whole human race (see on i. 10). This would be 
 a revelation to the exclusive Pharisee, brought up to believe that God 
 loved only the Chosen People. “A-yamdvis very frequent in the Gospel 
 and First Epistle, and may be considered characteristic of 5. John: 
 see on v. 20. Μονογενῆ ; see on i. 14. This shews the greatness of 
 
106 S. JOHN. ΠΗ 1624 
 
 God’s love: it would remind Nicodemus of the offering of Isaac. 
 Comp. 1 John iv. 9; Heb. xi. 17; Rom. viii. 82. "ESaxev is stronger 
 than ‘sent:’ it was a free gift to the world. Winer, p. 377. 
 
 πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων. The only limitation: eternal life is open to all. 
 ᾿Απόληται. Subj. after a past tense; see on i. 7. The translation 
 of (w7 αἰώνιος should be uniform; A.V. wavers between ‘eternal life’ 
 (v. 15, v. 39, vi. 54, 68, &c.), ‘life eternal’ (iv. 36, xii. 25), ‘ everlast- 
 ing life’ (here, υ. 36, iv. 14, v. 24, &c.), and ‘life everlasting’ (xii. 50): 
 ‘eternal life’ is best. 
 
 17. τὸν κόσμον. Thrice for emphasis; characteristic of 5. John’s 
 style (comp. v. 31, 1. 10, xii. 36, xv. 19, xvii. 14). 
 
 οὐ.. ἵνα κρίνῃ. Not in order to judge (comp. Luke ix. 56). This 
 does not contradict ix. 39. Since there are sinners in the world, 
 Christ’s coming involves a separation (κρίσις) of them from the good, 
 a judgment, a sentence: but this is not the purpose of His coming; 
 the purpose is salvation (xii. 47). The Jews expected both judgment 
 and salvation from the Messiah, judgment for the Gentiles, salvation 
 for themselves. Jesus affirms that the result of the κρίσις depends on 
 the faith, not on the race of each, Kpiveww and κρίσις are among 
 5. John’s characteristic words. 
 
 18. ov κρίνεται... κέκριται. Change of tense: is not judged...hath 
 been judged. The Messiah has no need to sentence unbelievers; 
 their unbelief in the self-revelation (ὄνομα) of the Messiah is of itself 
 a sentence. They are self-condemned; comp. v.36. Note the change 
 from fact to supposition marked by ov followed by uy: Winer, pp. 594, 
 602. 
 
 19. αὕτη δέ ἐσ. ἡ kp. But the judgment is this; this is what it 
 consists in. We have precisely the same construction 1 John i. 5, 
 v. 11, 14; and almost the same (iva for ὅτι) xv. 12, xvii. 3. 
 
 τὸ φῶς. This is not only §. John’s term (i. 4—9) but Christ’s 
 (viii, 12, ix. 5, xii. 46). On ἐλήλ. εἰς τ. k. see on xi. 27. 
 
 kal ἡγαπ. The tragic tone again (see on i. 5). Men loved the 
 darkness rather than the Light. Litotes or meiosis (vi. 37, vili. 40); 
 they hated the Light. Gravis malae conscientiae lux, Seneca, Ep. 122. 
 No allusion to Nicodemus coming by night: he chose darkness to con- 
 ceal not an evil work but a good one, 
 
 20. φαῦλα. Whereas πονηρός (v. 19) expresses the malignity of 
 evil, its power to cause suffering (πόνος), φαῦλος (perhaps akin to 
 paulus) expresses the worthlessness of it. The one is positive, the 
 other negative. Satan is ὁ πονηρός, the great author of mischief 
 (xvii. 15; 1 John ii. 13, 14, iii, 12, ν. 18, 19): πνεύματα πονηρά (Luke 
 Vii. 21), ὀφθαλμὸς πον. (Mark vii. 22), γενεὰ πον. (Matt. xii. 39), are 
 mischief-working spirits, eye and generation. Φαῦλος is the exact 
 opposite of σπουδαῖος: the one is ‘frivolous, good-for-nothing, 
 naughty ;’ the other is ‘ serious, earnest, good.’ 
 
 πράσσων. Is there any difference between πράσσειν and ποῖειν in 
 these two verses? V. 29 inclines one to think so, and the distinction 
 
III. 21.] NOTES. 107 
 
 drawn is that πράσσειν (agere) expresses mere activity, while ποιεῖν 
 ( facere) implies a permanent result. But in Rom. vii. 15—20, xiii. 4 
 the two words are interchanged indifferently, each being used both of 
 doing good and of doing evil. He that practiseth worthless things 
 (the aimless trifler) hateth the light, which would shew the true 
 value of the inanities which fill his existence. 1 Kings xxii, 8. 
 
 οὐκ. tox. The hatred is instinctive, the not coming is deliberate. 
 
 ἵνα μὴ ἐλεγχθῇ. In order that his works may not be convicted 
 of worthlessness, proved to be what they really are. The A.V. 
 translates ἐλέγχειν here and xvi. 8 ‘reprove,’ viii. 9 ‘ convict,’ viii. 46, 
 ‘convince ;’ and here the margin has ‘discovered.’ See on xvi. 8; 
 Matt. xviii. 15. 
 
 21. ποιῶν τ. ἀλήθ. To do the truth (1 John i. 6) is the opposite of 
 ‘doing’ or ‘making a lie,’ ποιεῖν ψεῦδος (Rev. xxi. 27, xxii. 15). It is 
 moral rather than intellectual truth that is meant, moral good recog- 
 nised by the conscience (xvili. 37). To ‘do the truth’ is to do that 
 which has true moral worth, the opposite of ‘practising worthless 
 things.’ In 1 Cor. xiii. 6 we have a similar antithesis: ‘rejoicing 
 with the truth’ is opposed to ‘rejoicing in iniquity.’ See oni. 9. 
 
 αὐτοῦ τὰ ἔργα. Αὐτοῦ is emphatic; ‘ his works’ as opposed to those 
 of ὁ φαῦλα πράσσων. Φανερωθῇ (see on i. 31) balances ἐλεγχθῇ : the 
 one fears to be convicted; the other seeks the light, not for self- 
 glorification, but as being drawn to that to which he feels that his 
 works are akin. Ὅτι is better rendered ‘that’ than ‘ because.’ 
 
 ἐν θεῷ. Note the order and the tense; that it is in God that they 
 have been wrought and still abide: the permanent result of a past 
 act. ‘In God’ means in the presence and’in the power of God. 
 
 These three verses (19—-21) shew that before the Incarnation there 
 were two classes of men in the world; a majority of evil-doers, whose 
 antecedents led them to shun the Messiah; and a small minority of 
 righteous, whose antecedents led them to welcome the Messiah. 
 They had been given to Him by the Father (vi. 37, xvii. 6); they 
 recognised His teaching as of God, because they desired to do God’s 
 will (vii. 17). Such would be Simeon, Anna (Ike ii. 25, 36), 
 Nathanael, the disciples, &c. 
 
 We have no means of knowing how Nicodemus was affected by this 
 interview, beyond the incidental notices of him vii. 50, 51, xix. 39, 
 which being so incidental shew that he is no fiction. The discourse 
 exactly harmonizes with his case, teaching that the righteousness of 
 the scribes and Pharisees is powerless to gain admission into the 
 kingdom of heaven. One by one his Pharisaic ideas of the kingdom, 
 the Messiah, salvation and judgment, are challenged: from mere 
 wonder at miracles and interest in the Worker of them he is made to 
 look within and consider his own moral sympathies and spiritual 
 convictions. Again we ask could a writer of the second century 
 throw himself back to this? 
 
108 S. JOHN. ΠῚ 2a= 
 
 22—36. Tue Baptism AND ΕἾΝΑΙ, ΤΕΒΤΙΜΟΝῪ or Joan. 
 
 22, 23. A mark of authenticity similar to ii. 12. It is impossible 
 to suppose that these verses were written in the interests of dogma. 
 S. John records these events, not for any theological purpose, but 
 because he was present, and remembers them. 
 
 22. μετὰ ταῦτα. Quite vague; a less close connexion than is 
 indicated by μετὰ τοῦτο. Contrast v. 1, 14, vi. 1, xix. 38, xxi. 1 with ii. 
 12, xi. 7,11, xix. 28. His τ. ᾿Ιουδαίαν γῆν. Occurs here only ; comp. 
 ἡ Ἶ. χώρα Mark i. 5; Acts xxvi. 20. Both phrases indicate the country 
 as distinct from the capital. The sphere of Christ’s ministry widens; 
 first the Temple (ii. 14), then Jerusalem (ii. 23), now Judaea, finally 
 Galilee (iv. 45, vi. 1). 
 
 διέτριβεν... ἐβάπτιζεν. Imperfects, implying that this went on for 
 some time. He was baptizing through His disciples (iv. 2): not yet 
 in the Name of the Trinity (vii. 39), as ordered to the Apostles (Matt. 
 Xxvili. 19), but as a continuation of John’s Baptism, accompanied by 
 the operation of the Spirit (v. 5). We have abundant evidence that 
 John baptized berore Christ’s ministry began, and that the Apostles 
 baptized after His ministry closed; yet ‘‘this is the one passage in 
 which it is positively stated that our Lord authorised baptism during 
 His lifetime’’ (Sanday). But how probable that the one baptism 
 should be the offspring of the other! 
 
 23. ἦν.. βαπτίζων. Not as rival to the Messiah but still in pre- 
 paration for Him, as Samuel continued to be Judge after the King 
 was appointed. John knew that the Messiah had come; but He had 
 not taken the public position which John expected Him to take, 
 and hence John was not led to suppose that his own office in preach- 
 ing repentance was atan end, John still went on; Jesus, owing to 
 His rejection in Jerusalem, seems to go back, ‘‘ becoming in a way 
 His own fore-runner” (Godet). Thus they appear for a moment 
 baptizing side by side. But the Baptist has reached his zenith; 
 whereas the Messiah’s career has scarcely begun. 
 
 Αἰνών. ‘Springs.’ The identifications of Aenon and Salim 
 remain uncertain, The Wady Fac’ah, an open vale full of springs, 
 running from Ebal to Jordan, is a tempting conjecture. There is a 
 Salim three miles south, and the name Aenon survives in ’Ainfin, 
 four miles north of the waters. 
 
 ὕδατα πολλά. For immersion: the expression points to springs or 
 streams rather than a single river like the Jordan. 
 
 24. The Evangelist has not said a word that could imply that the 
 Baptist was in prison. This remark refers to the Synoptists, and 
 guards us against the inference easily drawn from them (Matt. iv. 12; 
 Mark i. 14) that John’s imprisonment followed close on the Tempta- 
 tion and preceded the beginning of Christ’s ministry. The whole of 
 John i—iii. precedes Matt. iv. 12. In this magisterial interpretation 
 of earlier Gospels we trace the hand of an Apostle writing with sure 
 knowledge and conscious authority. 
 
ΠῚ. 29.] NOTES. E09 
 
 25. éyévero otv. There arose therefore; in consequence of Jesus 
 and John baptizing so near together. The Evangelist’s favourite 
 particle to mark a sequence in fact: see Introduction, Chap. v. 6 (c). 
 
 ζήτησις ἐκ κιτιλ. Questioning on the part of the disciples of 
 John with a Jew. The common reading ᾿Ιουδαίων is respectably sup- 
 ported, but seems quite out of place; with “Iovéalov, which has far 
 the strongest support, one expects τινος. The questioning may have 
 been as to the efficacy of John’s baptism compared with Christ’s, 
 or with the ordinary ceremonial purifications, ᾿Εκ implies that 
 John’s disciples started the discussion, and it ends in their going 
 at once to their master for his opinion about Jesus and His success. 
 
 26. ᾧ σὺ pep. To whom thou hast borne witness. This was 
 what seemed so monstrous; that One who appeared to owe His posi- 
 tion to John’s testimony should be competing with him and sur- 
 passing him: σύ and οὗτος are in emphatic opposition. 
 
 ἴδε οὗτος. Lo (see on i, 29) this fellow, expressing astonishment 
 and chagrin, and perhaps contempt: they regard baptizing as John’s 
 prerogative. In Matt. ix. 14 we find them cavilling again. 
 
 πάντες. An exaggeration very natural in their excitement: the 
 picture is thoroughly true to life. Comp. the excited statement of the 
 Samaritan woman, iv. 29; of the Pharisees, xii. 19; contrast v. 32, 
 and see on vi. 15. 
 
 27. οὐ δύναται. Comp. xix. 11. The meaning is disputed; either 
 (1) ‘Jesus could not succeed thus without help from Heaven, and 
 this should satisfy you that He is sent by God;’ or (2) “1 cannot 
 accept the supremacy which you would thrust on me, because I have 
 not received it from Heaven.’ The former is better, as being a more 
 direct answer to ‘all men come to Him.’ Possibly both meanings 
 are intended. 
 
 28. αὐτοὶ ὑμεῖς. ‘Ye yourselves, though you are so indignant on 
 my behalf.’ They had appealed to his testimony (v. 26); he turns it 
 against them. He is not responsible for their error. 
 
 tum. ἐκ. John speaks nmiore plainly in i. 26, 30: now that Jesus 
 has manifested Himself he feels free to declare Him to be the Christ. 
 
 29. John explains by a figure his subordination to the Messiah. 
 
 τὴν νύμφην. Here only in this Gospel does this well-known symbol 
 occur. Itis frequent both in O.T. and N.T. Is. liv. 5; Hos. ii. 19, 
 20;-Eph. y. 32; Rev. xix. 7, xxi. 2, 9. Comp. Matt. ix. 15, xxv. 
 1, In O.T. it symbolizes the relationship between Jehovah and His 
 chosen people, in N.T. that between Christ and His Church. By ‘the 
 friend of the bridegroom’ is meant the special friend, appointed to 
 arrange the preliminaries of the wedding, to manage and preside at 
 the marriage-feast. Somewhat analogous to our ‘ best man,’ but his 
 duties were very much more considerable. A much closer analogy 
 may be found among the lower orders in the Tyrol at the present 
 day. Here the Messiah is the Bridegroom and the Church His Bride; 
 
ITO S. JOHN. [III. 29— 
 
 John is His friend who has prepared the heart of the Bride and 
 arranged the espousal. He rejoices to see the consummation of his 
 labours, 
 
 ἑστηκὼς καὶ ἀκούων. In the attitude of a devoted attendant. 
 
 χαρᾷ χαίρει. A Hebraism: comp. Luke xxii. 15; Acts iv. 17, 
 v. 28, xxiil. 14; James v. 17; Matt. xiii. 14, xv. 4 (from LXX., where 
 the idiom is common). Winer, p. 584. It is in the marriage festivi- 
 ties that the Bridegroom’s voice is heard. 
 
 πεπλήρωται. Has been fulfilled and still remains complete: comp. 
 vv. 18, 21, 26, i. 34, 52, &c. To speak of joy being fulfilled is an 
 expression peculiar to S. John (xv. 11, xvi. 24, xvii. 13; 1 Johni, 4; 
 2 John 12): the active occurs Phil. ii. 2. 
 
 30. Se. See on v. 14. This joy of the Bridegroom’s friend, 
 in full view of the certain wane of his own influence and dignity, is in 
 marked contrast to the jealousy of his disciples. With this trium- 
 phant self-effacement he ceases to speak of himself, and the second 
 half of his discourse begins: 1. the Christ and the Baptist (27—-30) ; 
 2. the Christ and the world (31—36). 
 
 31—36. A question is raised with regard to this section similar 
 to that raised about vv. 16—21. Some regard what follows not as 
 a continuation of the Baptist’s speech, but as the Evangelist’s comment 
 upon it. But, as in the former case, seeing that the Evangelist gives 
 us no intimation that he is taking the place of the speaker, and that 
 there is nothing in what follows to compel us to suppose that there 
 is such a transition, it is best to regard the Baptist as still speaking. 
 It is, however, quite possible that this latter part of the discourse is 
 more strongly coloured with the Evangelist’s own style and phrase- 
 ology, while the substance still remains the Baptist’s. Indeed a change 
 of style may be noticed. The sentences becomes less abrupt and more 
 connected ; the stream of thought is continuous. 
 
 ‘‘The Baptist, with the growing inspiration of the prophet, unveils 
 before his narrowing circle of disciples the full majesty of Jesus; 
 and then, as with a swan-like song, completes his testimony before 
 vanishing from history” (Meyer). 
 
 There is no contradiction between this passage and Matt. xi. 2—6, 
 whatever construction we put on the latter (see notes there), John 
 was ‘of the earth,’ and therefore there is nothing improbable in his 
 here impressing on his disciples the peril of not believing on the 
 Messiah, and yet in prison feeling impatience, or despondency, or even 
 doubt about the position and career of Jesus. 
 
 31. ὁ ἄνωθεν épx. Christ: v. 13, viii. 23: ἄνωθεν here must mean 
 ‘from above’; see on v. 3. He is above all, John included, little as 
 John’s disciples may like the fact. Comp. Matt. xi. 11. 
 
 ὁ ὦν ἐκ τ. εἰ Ἀ Εἶναι ἐκ, expressing a moral relation, is charac- 
 teristic of S. John, vii. 17, viii. 23, 44, 47, xv. 19, xvii. 14, 16, xviii. 
 36, 37; 1 John ii. 16, 19, 21, iii. 8, ‘10, 12, ‘19, iv. 1—7, v. 16, 3 John 
 11; elsewhere in N.T. not common. Comp. γεγενῆσθαι ἐκ, vv. 5, 6, 8, 
 
ITT. 34.] NOTES. III 
 
 i. 13, viii. 41; 1 John ii. 29, iii. 9, iv. 7, v. 1, 4, 18. Note the 
 emphatic repetition of ἐκ τ. γῆς, as of κόσμος in v.17. Comp. xii. 36, 
 xy. 19. He that is of the earth, of the earth he is, and of the earth he 
 speaketh. This was John’s case: he spoke of ‘earthly things’ (v. 12), 
 Divine Truth as manifested in the world, and as revealed to him. He 
 could not, like Christ, speak from immediate knowledge of ‘ heavenly 
 things.’ Ἔκ τ. γῆς λαλεῖν is very different from ἐκ τ. κόσμου λαλεῖν (1 John 
 iv. 5); the one is to speak of God’s work on earth; the other of what 
 is not God’s work but opposes it. 
 
 ὁ ἐκ τ. οὐρ. épx. Repeating and defining ὁ ἄνωθεν épy., thoroughly 
 in 5. John’s style. In what follows we have another (see vv. 13, 15) 
 interesting question of reading. T. R. has ἐπάνω πάντων ἐστί, καὶ. 
 The καί must be omitted on overwhelming evidence (NBDL against A): 
 asyndeton is the rule throughout this passage. The evidence as to 
 ἐπάνω π. ἐστί is very divided, the balance being against the words. 
 Omitting them, we translate: He that cometh from heaven beareth 
 witness to that which He hath seen and heard. 
 
 32. ὃ ἑώρακεν κι HK. In His pre-existence with God; v. 11, i, 18. 
 He has immediate knowledge of τὰ ἐπουράνια. Τοῦτο, precisely this 
 is the substance of His witness: comp. xiv. 13. This use of a retro- 
 spective pronoun for emphasis is frequent in 3. John; v. 88, vi. 46, 
 vii. 18, viii. 26, x. 25, xv. 5. 
 
 καὶ... οὐδεὶς λαμβ. The tragic tone again; see on i, 5, and comp. 
 v. 11. ‘No man’ is an exaggeration resulting from deep feeling: 
 comparatively speaking none, so few were those who accepted the 
 Messiah. Comp. the similar exaggeration on the other side, v. 26, 
 ‘all men come to Him.’ These extreme contradictory statements, 
 placed in such close proximity, confirm our trust in the Evangelist as 
 faithfully reporting what was actually said. He does not soften 
 it down to make it look plausible. 
 
 33. The Baptist at once shews that οὐδείς is hyperbolical: some 
 did receive the witness; ‘but what are they among so many?’ 
 
 ἐσφράγισεν. Of sealing a document to express one’s trust in it and 
 adherence to it (vi. 27; 1 Cor, ix. 2): but in this figurative sense the 
 middle is more usual (Rom. xv. 28; 2 Cor. i. 22; Eph. i. 13, iv. 30); 
 the active in the literal sense (Matt. xxvii. 66). Αὐτοῦ is emphatic, 
 balancing ὁ Θεός: ‘he that receiveth Christ’s witness, set his seal that 
 God is true.’ To believe the Messiah is to believe God, for the 
 Messiah is God’s ambassador and interpreter (i. 18). ᾿Αληθής not 
 ἀληθινός; see on i. 9. 
 
 34. τὰ ῥήματα. §. John uses this word only in the plural (v. 47, 
 vi. 63, 68, vill, 47, xii. 47, xv. 7); it means the separate utterances, 
 as distinct from ὁ λόγος (vi. 60, viii. 43, 51, xii. 48, xv. 3), which is the 
 communication as a whole, 
 
 ov γὰρ ἐκ p. Ὃ Θεός is a gloss of interpretation. Omitting it, we 
 translate, He giveth not the Spirit by measure ; or, the Spirit giveth 
 not by measure. The former is better, and ‘He’ is probably God. 
 
112 S. JOHN. [11. 34— 
 
 ‘Unto Him’ should not be supplied, though there is a direct 
 reference to Jesus, ‘Not by measure’ (first for emphasis) ‘ giveth 
 He the Spirit,’ least of all to Jesus, ‘for it pleased (the Father) that 
 in Him the whole plenitude (of Divinity) should have its permanent 
 abode’ (Col. i. 19). Some make Christ the nominative, as giving 
 the Spirit fully to His disciples; but this does not agree with v. 35. 
 
 35. ἀγαπᾷ. See on v.16 andcomp. v.10. The words seem to be an 
 echo of the voice from heaven which John had so lately heard; οὗτός 
 ἐστιν ὁ vids μου ὁ ἀγαπητός. The love explains the giving all into His 
 hand, so that He becomes πάντων κύριος (Acts x. 36), and κεφαλὴ ὑπὲρ 
 πάντα (Eph, i, 22). 
 
 δέδωκεν. In S. John statements respecting the Father’s gifts 
 to the Son are specially frequent. He has given Him all things 
 (xiii. 3); to have life in Himself (v. 26); all judgment (v. 22, 27); His 
 name and glory (xvii. 11, 24); authority over all flesh (xvii. 2); faith- 
 ful disciples (vi. 39); commandment what to say (xii. 49) and do (xiv. 
 31, xvii. 4). Here the hand signifies power to dispose of and control. 
 Note the pregnant construction ; ‘ has given into, so that they remain 
 in His hand;’ in i. 18, 32, 33, we have the converse, a verb of rest 
 with a preposition of motion. 
 
 36. ἔχει ἵ. αἰώνιον. See on v.16. Present; ‘ hath,’ not ‘shall have.’ 
 Believers already have eternal life. We often think of it as something 
 to be won; but it has already been given. The struggle is not to gain, 
 but to retain: v. 24, vi. 47, 54, xvii. 3. Winer, p. 332. 
 
 ὁ ἀπειϑῶν. He that disobeyeth, rather than ‘he that believeth not.’ 
 Unbelief may be the result of ignorance; disobedience must be volun- 
 tary. A similar correction of A.V. seems to be needed Acts xiv. 2, 
 xix. 9 ; Rom, xi. 30 (margin), Comp. Heb. iv. 6, 11; 1 Pet. iv. 1. 
 
 οὐκ ὄψεται. Has not seen and has no prospect of seeing. 
 
 ἧ ὀργὴ τ. θεοῦ. This phrase occurs nowhere else in the Gospels, 
 and its unique character is against this passage (31—36) being the 
 comment of the Evangelist and not the Baptist’s speech. The wrath 
 of God is the necessary complement of the love of God. If there is 
 love for those who believe, there must be wrath for those who 
 refuse. Comp. Matt. iii. 7; Luke iii. 7; Rom. i, 18, ix. 22, xii, 19; 
 1 John iii. 14. 
 
 μένει, not μενεῖ ; abideth, not ‘will abide.’ He is under a ban until 
 he believes, and he refuses; therefore his ban remains (comp. 1 John 
 νυ. 12). He, like the believer, not only will have, but has his portion. 
 It rests with him also, whether the portion continues his. He has to 
 struggle, not to avert a sentence, but to be freed from it. Thus the 
 last-spoken words of O. T. prophecy resemble its last-written words. 
 We have here the last utterance of the Baptist. Its sternness recalls 
 and enforces the last solemn warning of Malachi:—‘lest I come and 
 smite the earth with a curse,’ 
 
{V. 1.] NOTES. 113 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 14. διψήσει for διψήσῃ (correction to the usual construction: comp. 
 vi. 42, x. 5, Luke x. 19). 
 
 16. Omit ὁ Ἰησοῦς after αὐτῇ : comp. ili. 2, 
 21. πίστενέ por, γύναι (NBL) for γύναι, πίστευσόν μοι (A). 
 
 27. ἐθαύμαζον, with all the best MSS., for é@avuacav, which has 
 been substituted to harmonize with ἦλθαν. 
 
 42. Omit ὁ Χριστός after κόσμου, with NBC! and most versions and 
 Fathers against AC#D. 
 
 43. Omit καὶ ἀπῆλθεν after ἐκεῖθεν, with NBCD. 
 
 46. Omit ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς after otv: comp. iii. 2. Kadgapvaovp for Ka- 
 περναούμ: comp. 11. 12. 
 
 51. ὑπήντησαν (always used by 8S. John; xi. 20, 30, xii. 18) for 
 ἀπήντησαν (never used by him), with NBCDKL against A. 
 
 52. τὴν ὥραν παρ᾽ αὐτῶν for παρ᾽ αὐ. τ. wp., a correction to bring 
 παρ᾽ αὐτῶν nearer to ἐπύθετο. 
 
 1—42. Tue Work AMONG SAMARITANS, 
 
 The whole section is peculiar to 5. John, and is evidently the nar- 
 rative of an eyewitness: of the Synoptists 8. Luke alone, the writer of 
 ‘the Universal Gospel,’ mentions any intercourse of Christ with 
 Samaritans (ix. 52, xvii. 16; comp. x. 88). Vv. 1—4 are introduc- 
 tory, explaining the change of scene, like ii, 13 in the previous 
 section. 
 
 1. οὖν. This refers back to iii. 22—26. Of the many who came 
 to Jesus some told the Pharisees (see on i. 24) of His success, as 
 others told the Baptist, and this was reported to Him again: ὁ κύριος 
 here, which is rarely used except by S. Luke of Christ before the 
 Resurrection (vi. 23, xi. 2; Luke x. 1, xi. 39, xii. 42, xvii. 5, 6, &c.) is 
 no evidence that the knowledge was supernatural. See on 11. 20. 
 
 ποιεῖ K. Bart. Is making and baptizing; the very words of the 
 report. This is important for the meaning of v. 2, which is a correc- 
 tion not of 5. John’s statement, but of the report to the Pharisees: in 
 A.V. the Evangelist seems to be correcting himself. 
 
 ἢ Iwav. They had less objection to John’s success. He disclaimed 
 being the Messiah, he ‘did no miracle,’ and he took his stand 
 on the Law. They understood his position better than that of Jesus, 
 and feared it less. Jesus had been proclaimed as the Messiah, He 
 wrought miracles, and He shewed scant respect to traditions, 
 
 ST JOHN 15} 
 
114 3, JOHN. (IV. 2-- 
 
 2. αὐτὸς οὐκ. Because baptizing is the work of a minister, not 
 of the Lord: Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit (i. 33). 
 
 3. ἀφῆκεν. ‘He left it alone, let it go’ (v. 28) as something that 
 He would have retained, but now left to itself. First the Temple, 
 then Jerusalem, and now Judaea hays to be abandoned, because He 
 can win no welcome. On the contrary, the report of His very partial 
 success seems at once to have provoked opposition, which He avoids 
 by retiring. Perhaps also He wished to avoid the appearance of 
 being a rival of John. There is no trace of His continuing to baptize 
 in Galilee. 
 
 πάλιν. Omitted by some important witnesses. It points to i. 43— 
 ii, 12. He had come from Capernaum to Jerusalem for the Passover 
 (ii. 13); He now returns to Galilee, where His opponents would have 
 less influence. That this return is the beginning of the Galilean 
 ministry recorded by the Synoptists (Matt. iv. 12) is possibly but 
 by no means certainly correct. See on vi. 1 and Mark i. 14, 15. 
 
 4. ἔδει. There was no other way, unless He crossed the Jordan, 
 and went round by Perea, as Jews sometimes did to avoid annoyance 
 from the Samaritans (see on Matt. x. 5). As Jesus was on His way 
 from Jerusalem, He had less reason to fear molestation. Contrast 
 Luke ix. 53. 
 
 5—42. Doubt has been thrown on this narrative in four different 
 ways. (1) Ona priori grounds. How could the Samaritans, who re- 
 jected the prophetical books, and were such bitter enemies of the 
 Jews, be expecting a Messiah? The narrative is based on a funda- 
 mental mistake. But it is notorious that the Samaritans did look 
 for a Messiah, and are looking for one to the present day. Though 
 they rejected the Prophets, they accepted the Pentateuch, with all 
 its Messianic prophecies. (2) On account of Matt. x. 5. Would 
 Christ do what He forbad His disciples to do? But what He forbad 
 them was to undertake a mission to the Samaritans until the lost 
 sheep of Israel had been sought after; whereas, 1. He had already 
 been seeking after Israel; 2. this was no mission to the Samaritans. 
 He went thither, we are expressly told, because He could not help 
 going, ἔδει. Was it to be expected that being there He should abstain 
 from doing good? (3) On account of Acts viii. 5. How could Philip 
 go and convert the Samaritans, if Christ had already done so? But 
 is it to be supposed that in two days Christ perfected Christianity in 
 Samaria (even supposing, what is not certain, that Christ and Philip 
 went to the same town), so as to leave nothing for a preacher to do 
 afterwards? Many acknowledged Jesus as the Messiah who after- 
 wards, on finding Him to be very different from the Messiah they 
 expected, fell away. This would be likely enough at Samaria. The 
 seed had fallen on rocky ground. (4) On the supposition that the 
 narrative is an allegory, of which the whole point lies in the words 
 ‘thou hast had five husbands, and he whom thou now hast is not thy 
 husband.’ The five husbands are the five religions from Babylon, 
 Cuthah, Ava, Hamath, and Sepharvaim, brought to Samaria by the 
 
IV. 6.] |. worns. 115 
 
 colonists from Assyria (2 Kings xvii. 24); and the sixth is the 
 adulterated worship of Jehovah. If our interpreting Scripture depends 
 upon our guessing such riddles as this, we may well give up the task 
 in despair. But the allegory is a pure fiction. 1. When 8. John 
 gives us an allegory, he leaves no doubt that it is an allegory. There 
 is not the faintest hint here. 2. It would be extraordinary that in a 
 narrative of 38 verses the whole allegory should be contained in less 
 than one verse, the rest being mere setting. This is like a frame 
 a yard wide round a miniature. 8. Though there were five nations, 
 there were seven or eight worships (2 Kings xvii. 30, 31), and the 
 worships were simultaneous, not successive like the husbands. 4. There 
 is a singular impropriety in making the heathen religions ‘ husbands,’ 
 while the worship of Jehovah is represented by a paramour. 
 
 The narrative is true to what we know of Jews and Samaritans at 
 this time. The topographyis well preserved. ‘The gradual develop- 
 ment of the woman’s belief is psychologically true.’ These and other 
 points to be noticed as they occur may convince us that this narrative 
 cannot be a fiction. Far the easiest supposition is that it is a faithful 
 record of actual facts. 
 
 δ. ἔρχ. οὖν. He cometh therefore ; because that was the route. 
 
 πόλιν. Town; the word does not imply anything very large. 
 Capernaum, which Josephus calls a κώμη, the Evangelists call 8 
 πόλις. Samaria here is the insignificant province into which the 
 old kingdom of Jeroboam had dwindled. 
 
 λεγομένην Συχάρ. Aeyou. may be another indication that this 
 Gospel was written outside Palestine, or it may mean that Sychar 
 was a nickname (‘liar’ or ‘drunkard’). In the one case Sychar is 
 different from Sychem or Shechem, and is the mediaeval Ischar and 
 modern ’Askar; in the other it is another name for Sychem, the 
 Neapolis of 5. John’s day, a name which survives in Naplts, the 
 home of the Samaritans at the present day. The former is very 
 preferable. Would not S. John have written Νεαπόλις if he had 
 meant Sychem? He writes Tiberias (vi. 1, 23, xxi. 1): but Tiberias 
 was probably a new town with a new name, whereas Neapolis was 
 a new name for an old town; so the analogy is not perfect. Eusebius 
 and Jerome distinguish Sychar from Sychem : and Naplis has many 
 wells close at hand, 
 
 τ. χωρίου. The portion of ground; Shechem means ‘portion.’ 
 Abraham bought it, Jacob gave it to Joseph, and Joseph was buried 
 there (Gen. xxxiii. 19, xlviii. 22; Josh. xxiv. 32). 
 
 6. πηγή. Spring; v. 14; Rev. vii. 17, viii. 10, xiv. 7, xvi. 4, xxi. 
 6; elsewhere in N. T. rare. Similarly φρέαρ, well, occurs vv, 11, 12; 
 Rev. ix. 1,2; elsewhere only Luke xiv. 5. See on vii. 30. Ii still 
 exists, but without spring-water, in the entrance to the valley between 
 Ebal and Gerizim; one of the few undisputed sites. Samaria was 
 now to receive the fulfilment of the promises in Gen. xlix. 22; Deut. 
 XxXxili. 28, and become the heir of the patriarchs, Jacob’s well was a 
 pledge of this. 
 
 Η 3 
 
116 S. JOHN. [IV. 6— 
 
 ἐκαθ. οὕτως ἐπὶ τ. π. Was sitting thus (just as He was) by (vy. 2) 
 the spring. These details shew full information. He is willing at 
 once to surrender His rest by day to the Samaritan woman, as His 
 rest by night to Nicodemus (111. 2) and His retirement on the moun- 
 tain to the multitude (vi. 5). On ἐκ expressing result see Winer, pp. 
 459, 772. 
 
 ὡς ἕκτη. This case again is not decisive as to 8. John’s mode of 
 reckoning the hours. On the one hand, noon was an unusual hour 
 for travelling and for drawing water, while evening was the usual 
 time for the meal (vv. 8, 81). On the other, a woman whose life was 
 under a cloud (v. 18) might select an unusual hour; and at 6 P.M. 
 numbers would probably have been coming to draw, and the con- 
 versation would have been disturbed. Again, after 6 p.m. there would 
 be rather short time for all that follows. These two instances (i. 39 
 and this) lend no strong support to the antecedently improbable 
 theory that S. John’s method of counting the hours is different from 
 the Synoptists’, 
 
 7. ἐκ τ. Zap. Of the province, not of the city of Samaria. A 
 woman of the city would not have come all that distance for water. 
 The city was at that time called Sebaste, a name given to it by Herod 
 the Great in honour of Augustus (Σεβαστός), who had granted the 
 place to Herod on the death of Antony and Cleopatra (see on vi. 1). 
 Herod’s name Sebaste survives in the modern Sebustieh. In legends 
 this woman is called Photina. For ἀντλῆσαι, comp. ii. 8. 
 
 δός μοι πεῖν. Quite literal, as the next verse shews: He asked her 
 for refreshment because His disciples were not there to give it. ‘Give 
 Me the spiritual refreshment of thy conversion’ is a meaning read 
 into the words, not found in them. This request and κεκοπιακὼς ἐκ τ. 
 od. (v. 6) shew how untenable is the view that the Fourth Evangelist 
 held Docetic views: the reality of Christ’s human form is very plain 
 here (see on xix. 35). The reality of His human sympathy appears 
 also ; for often the best way to win a person is to ask a favour, 
 
 9. ἡ Σαμαρ. The adjective, as distinct from ἐκ τῆς Σ. in v. 7, 
 lays stress on the national and religious characteristics. The repeti- 
 tion of the article, ἡ γυνὴ ἡ Z., giving emphasis to the adjective, is 
 very frequent in 5. John; v. 30, vi. 38, 42, 44, 50, 51, 58, ἄο. &e. 
 
 πῶς σὺ-- παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ. The pronouns are in emphatic opposition: 
 she is half amused and half triumphant. She would know Him to be 
 a Jew by His dress and speech. In His request He would use the 
 testing letter (Judg. xii. 6), ‘Teni lischekoth,’ which a Samaritan 
 would pronounce ‘ lisekoth.’ 
 
 οὐ γὰρ ovyx. For Jews have no dealings with Samaritans; no 
 articles. The remark is not the woman’s, but 3. John’s, to explain 
 her question. Comp, Luke ix. 53. As He was on His way from 
 Judaea she would suppose Him to be a Judaean. Galileans seem to 
 have been less strict, and hence His disciples had gone to buy food of 
 Samaritans. But even Pharisees allowed Samaritan fruit, vegetables, 
 and eggs. Some important authorities omit the remark, 
 
IV. 12.] NOTES. 117 
 
 10. εἰ ἤδεις. If thow hadst known; on account of the aorists 
 which follow: ofja has no aorist ; comp. xi. 21, 32, xiv. 28, for the 
 same construction ; and contrast vy. 46 and viii. 19, where A.V. makes 
 the converse mistake of translating imperfects as aorists. 
 
 τ. δωρεὰν τ. θεοῦ, What He is ready to give to all, what is now 
 held out to thee, salvation, or the living water. Comp. Rom. y. 15; 
 2 Cor. ix. 15. 
 
 ov dv yr. Σύ is emphatic; ‘instead of His asking of thee.’ 
 ‘Spiritually our positions are reversed. It is thou who art weary, 
 and footsore, and parched, close to the well, yet unable to drink; 
 it is I who can give thee the water from the well, and quench thy 
 thirst for ever.’ There is a scarcely doubtful reference to this passage 
 in the Ignatian Epistles, Romans, vit. See p. xxi. and on vi, 33, to 
 which there is a clear reference in this same chapter, and on iii, 8. 
 The passage with these references to the Fourth Gospel is found in 
 the Syriac as well as in the shorter Greek versions of Ignatius; so that 
 we have almost certain evidence of this Gospel being known a.p. 115. 
 
 11. Κύριε. Sir, not ‘Lord.’ Having no neutral word in English, 
 we must, as A.V., translate Κύριε sometimes ‘ Sir,’ sometimes ‘ Lord.’ 
 But ‘Sir’ is a marked change from the feminine pertness of v. 9: His 
 words and manner already begin to impress her. 
 
 βαθύ. Earlier travellers say over 100 feet; now it is about 75 feet 
 deep. For φρέαρ see on v. 6: ἄντλημα here only in Ν, T. 
 
 τὸ U8. τὸ ζ. The water, the living water (see on v. 9), of which 
 Thou speakest. She thinks He means spring-water as distinct from 
 cistern-water. Comp. Jer. ii. 13, where the two are strongly contrasted. 
 In Gen. xxvi. 19, as the margin shews, ‘springing water’ is literally 
 ‘living water,’ viva aqua. What did Christ mean by the ‘living 
 water’? Christ here and vii. 38 uses the figure of water, as else- 
 where of bread (vi.) and light (viii. 12), the three most necessary 
 things for life. But he does not identify Himself with the living 
 water, as He does with the Bread, and the Light: therefore it seems 
 better to understand the living water as the ‘grace and truth’ of 
 which He is full (i. 14). Comp. Ecclus. xv. 3; Baruch iii. 12; Rey. 
 ὙΠ ΠΝ ΧΙ. ὃ ΧΙ]. 1. 
 
 12. μὴ σὺ μείζ. Σύ 15 very emphatic; Surely Thou art not greater: 
 comp. Viil. 53, xviii. 33. Her loquacity as contrasted with the senten- 
 tiousness of Nicodemus is véry natural, while she shews a similar 
 perverseness in misunderstanding spiritual metaphors, 
 
 Tov πατρὸς ἡμῶν. The Samaritans claimed to be descended from 
 Joseph; with how much justice is a question very much debated. 
 Some maintain that they were of purely heathen origin, although 
 they were driven by calamity to unite the worship of Jehovah with 
 their own idolatries: and this view seems to be in strict accordance 
 with 2 Kings xvii. 23—41. Renegade Jews took refuge among them 
 from time to time; but such immigrants wouid not affect the texture 
 of the nation more than French refugees among ourselves, Others 
 
118 S. JOHN. (Iv. 12— 
 
 hold that the Samaritans were from the first a mongrel nation, a 
 mixture of heathen colonists with Jewish inhabitants, left behind 
 by Shalmaneser. There is nothing to shew that he did leave any 
 (2 Kings xviii. 11); Josephus says (Ant. rx. xiv. 1) that ‘he trans- 
 planted all the people.’ When the Samaritans asked Alexander 
 the Great to excuse them from tribute in the Sabbatical year, because 
 as true sons of Joseph they did not till their land in the seventh year, 
 he pronounced their claim an imposture, and destroyed Samaria. 
 Our Lord calls a Samaritan ‘ one of a different race,’ ἀλλογενής (Luke 
 xvii. 18). 
 
 ἔδωκεν ἡμῖν. This has no foundation in Scripture, but no doubt 
 was a Samaritan tradition. She means, ‘the well was good enough 
 for him, his sons, and his cattle, and is good enough for us; hast 
 Thou a better?’ The energetic diffuseness of her statement is very 
 natural, Opéppara might mean ‘slaves.’ 
 
 13, 14. He leaves her question unanswered, like that of Nicodemus, 
 and passes on to develope the metaphor rather than explain it, con- 
 trasting the literal with the figurative sense. Comp. iii. 6, vi. 35, 
 48—58, x. 7—9. Note the change from πᾶς ὁ πίνων, every one that 
 drinketh (habitually) to és ἂν πίῃ, whosoever hath drunk (once for all). 
 
 14. οὐ μὴ Sup. εἰς τ. αἰ. Strongest negation (v. 48), will certainly 
 not thirst for ever (see on vili. 51), for it is the nature of the living 
 water to reproduce itself perpetually, so that the thirst is quenched as 
 soon as it recurs. And this inexhaustible fount not only satisfies the 
 possessor but refreshes others also (vii. 38). 
 
 εἰς ζωὴν αἰών. This is the immediate result; the soul in which the 
 living water flows has eternal life: see on v. 36 and 11], 16, 84. Comp. 
 vi. 27, where the living bread is said to abide eis ζωὴν αἰώνιον. 
 
 15. She still does not understand, but does not wilfully misunder- 
 stand. This wonderful water will at any rate be worth having, and 
 she asks quite sincerely (not ironically) for it. Had she been a Jew, 
 she could scarcely have thus misunderstood ; this metaphor of ‘ water’ 
 and ‘living water’ is so frequent in the Prophets. Comp. Isa. xii. 3, 
 xliv. 3; Jer. ii. 18; Zech. xiii. 1, xiv. 8. But the Samaritans rejected 
 all but the Pentateuch. With διέρχωμαι comp. Luke ii. 15; Acts ix. 38. 
 
 16. φών. τ. ἄνδρα σοῦ. Not that the man was wanted, either as 
 a concession to Jewish propriety, which forbad a Rabbi to talk with a 
 woman alone, or for any other reason. By a seemingly casual request 
 Christ lays hold of her inner life, convinces her of sin, and leads her 
 to repentance, without which her request, ‘Give me this water,’ could 
 not be granted. The husband who was no husband was the plague- 
 spot where her healing must begin. 
 
 17. οὐκ ἔχω avd. Her volubility is checked: in the fewest possible 
 words she tries to stop a dangerous subject at once. 
 
 καλῶς. There is perhaps a touch of irony, as in Matt. xv. 7; 2 
 Cor. xi. 4. Comp. viii. 48; Luke xx. 3). 
 
IV. 21.] NOTES. 11g 
 
 18. πέντε dvd. Quite literally; they were either dead or divorced, 
 and she was now living with a man without being married to him. 
 The emphatic position of cov may possibly mean that he is the 
 husband of some one else. 
 
 τοῦτο ἀλ. εἴρ. This thou hast said truly, literally ‘a true thing.’ 
 Christ exposes the falsehood lurking under the literal truth. 
 
 19. προφήτης. One divinely inspired with supernatural know- 
 ledge, 1 Sam. ix. 9. The declaration contains an undoubted, though 
 indirect, confession of sin. Note the gradual change in her attitude 
 of mind towards Him. First, off-hand pertness (v. 9); then, respect 
 to His gravity of manner and serious words (v.11); next, a misun- 
 derstanding belief in what He says (v. 15); and now, reverence for 
 Him as a ‘man of God.’ Comp. the parallel development of faith in 
 the man born blind (see on ix. 11) and in Martha (see on xi. 21). 
 
 20. Convinced that He can read her life she shrinks from inspec- 
 tion and hastily turns the conversation from herself. In seeking a 
 new subject she naturally catches at one of absorbing interest to every 
 Samaritan. Or possibly she has had her religious yearnings before 
 this, and eagerly grasps a chance of satisfying them. Mount Gerizim 
 shorn of its temple recalls the great national religious question ever 
 in dispute between them and the Jews. Here was One who could 
 give an authoritative answer about it; she will ask Him. To urge 
 that such a woman would care nothing about the matter is unsound 
 reasoning. Are irreligious people never keen about religious questions 
 now-a-days ? 
 
 ἐν τ. ὄρει τ. Gerizim; her not naming it is very lifelike. The 
 Samaritans contended that here Abraham offered up Isaac, and after- 
 wards met Melchisedek. The former is more credible than the latter. 
 A certain Manasseh, a man of priestly family, married the daughter 
 of Sanballat the Horonite (Neh. xiii. 28), and was thereupon expelled 
 from Jerusalem. He fled to Samaria and helped Sanballat to set up 
 a rival worship on Gerizim. It is uncertain whether the temple on 
 Gerizim was built then (about B.c. 410) or a century later; but it was 
 destroyed by John Hyrcanus 8.6. 130, after it had stood 200 years or 
 more. Yet the Samaritans in no way receded from their claims, but 
 continue their worship on Gerizim to the present day. 
 
 ὑμεῖς λέγ. Unconsciously she admits that One, whom she has 
 confessed to be a Prophet, is against her in the controversy. Comp. 
 Deut. xii. 13. Δεῖ, must worship (v. 24) according to God’s will. 
 
 21—24. ‘‘We shall surely be justified in attributing the wonderful 
 words of verses 21, 23, 24, to One greater even than S. John. They 
 seem to breathe the spirit of other worlds than ours—‘ of worlds whose 
 course is equable and pure ;’ where media and vehicles of grace are 
 unneeded, and the soul knows even asit is known. There is nothing 
 so like them in their sublime infinitude of comprehension, and in- 
 tense penetration to the deepest roots of things, as some of the 
 sayings in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. v. 45, vi. 6). It is words 
 
129 S. JOHN. [IV. 21— 
 
 like these that strike home to the hearts of men, as in the most 
 literal sense Divine’”—(Sanday). 
 
 21. πίστενέ pot. See on i. 12, vi. 30. This formula occurs here 
 only; the usual one is ἀμὴν, ἀμὴν, λέγω σοι (iil. 8, 5, 11, xiii. 38, xxi. 
 18; comp. i. 52, iv. 35, v. 24, 25, &c.). The present, as distinct from 
 the aorist, means ‘believe, and continue to believe’ (x. 38, xii, 36, 
 xiv. 1,11). T.R. here reads πίστευσον. 
 
 ἔρχεται ὥρα. There cometh an hour (v. 25, 28, xvi. 2, 4, 25, 32). 
 He decides neither for nor against either place. The claims of both 
 will ere long be lost in something higher. The ruin on Gerizim and 
 the Temple at Jerusalem will soon be on an equality, but without any 
 privileges being transferred from the one to the other. Those who 
 worship ‘ the Father’ must rise above distinctions of place; for a time 
 is coming when limitations of worship will disappear. ‘ The Father’ 
 (ὁ πατήρ, never πατήρ) used absolutely of God is very common in 
 S. John, very rare elsewhere in N. T. (Matt. xi. 27; Acts i. 4, 7; 
 Rom. vi. 4; Eph. ii. 18). 
 
 22. ὃ οὐκ οἵδ. That which ye know not. The higher truth 
 having been planted for the future, Christ proceeds to answer her 
 question as to the present controversy. The Samaritan religion, even 
 after being purified from the original mixture with idolatry (2 Kings 
 xvii. 33, 41), remained a mutilated religion; the obscurity of the 
 Pentateuch (and of that a garbled text) unenlightened by the clearer 
 revelations in the Prophets and other books of O. T. Such a religion 
 when contrasted with the Jewish, which had developed in constant 
 contact with Divine revelation, might well be called ignorance. 
 
 ἡμεῖς K.7.A. We worship that which we know. The abstract 
 form conveyed by the neuter should be preserved in both clauses 
 (Acts xvii. 23). The first person plural here is not similar to that in 
 iii. 11 (see note there), though some would take it so. Christ here 
 speaks as a Jew, and in such a passage there is nothing surprising in 
 His so doing. As a rule Christ gives no countenance to the view 
 that He belongs to the Jewish nation in any special way, though the 
 Jewish nation specially belongs to Him (i. 11): He is the Saviour of 
 the world, not of the Jews only. But here, where it is a question 
 whether Jew or Samaritan has the larger share of religious truth, He 
 ranks Himself both by birth and by religion among the Jews. ‘We,’ 
 therefore, means ‘ we Jews.’ 
 
 ὅτι. The importance of the conjunction must not be missed: the 
 Jews know their God because the salvation of the world issues from 
 them. Their religion was not, like the Samaritan, mere deism, but a 
 παιδαγωγός leading on to the Messiah (Gal. 111, 24). 
 
 ἡ σωτηρία ἐκ r.’I.é. The salvation, the expected salvation, is of 
 the Jews; i.e. proceeds from them (not belongs to them), in virtue of 
 the promises to Abraham (Gen. xii. 3, xviii. 18, xxii. 18) and Isaac 
 (xxvi. 4): comp. Is. ii. 3; Obad. 17. This verse is absolutely fatal to 
 the theory that this Gospel is the work of a Gnostic Greek in the 
 
IV. 24.] NOTES. 121 
 
 second century (see on xix. 35). That salvation proceeded from the 
 Jews contradicts the fundamental principle of Gnosticism, that salva- 
 tion was to be sought in the higher knowledge of which Gnostics had 
 the key. Hence those who uphold such a theory of authorship as- 
 sume, in defiance of all evidence, that this verse is a later interpola- 
 tion. The verse is found in all MSS. and versions. See Introduc- 
 tion, Chap. τι. ii. For τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων see on xiii. 33. 
 
 23. καὶ νῦν ἐστίν. These words could not be added in v.21. The 
 local worship on Zion and Gerizim must continue for a while. But 
 already a few are rising above these externals to the spirit of true 
 worship, in which the differences between Jew and Samaritan dis- 
 appear. In the heavenly Jerusalem there is ‘no temple therein; for 
 the Lord God Almighty is the temple of it, and the Lamb’ (Rev. xxi. 
 22). Perhaps Jesus sees His disciples returning, and the sight of 
 them prompts the joyous καὶ viv ἐστι. 
 
 οἱ ἀληθινοὶ wp. True as opposed to unreal and spurious (see on 
 i. 9), not to insincere and lying worshippers. Jewish types and 
 shadows no less than Samaritan and Gentile imitations and delusions 
 must pass away. Worship to be perfect and real must be offered in 
 spirit and truth. 
 
 ἐν πνεύματι. This is opposed to what is material, carnal, and of 
 the earth, earthy; ‘this mountain,’ the Temple, limitations of time, 
 and space and nation. Not that such limitations are wrong; but they 
 are not of the essence of religion and become wrong when they are 
 mistaken for it. In the ‘holy ground’ of his own heart every one, 
 whatever his race, may at all times worship the Father. 
 
 καὶ ἀληθείᾳ. Just as ἐν πνεύματι confirms the declaration against 
 local claims in v. 21, so ἐν ἀληθείᾳ confirms the condemnation of an 
 ignorant worship, that sins against light, in v. 22. True worship 
 must be in harmony with the Nature and Will of God. In the sphere 
 of intellect, this means recognition of His Presence and Omniscience; 
 in the sphere of action, conformity with His absolute Holiness. 
 ‘Worship in spirit and truth,’ therefore, implies prostration of the 
 inmost soul before the Divine Perfection, submission of every thought 
 and feeling to the Divine Will. The two words express two aspects of 
 one truth; hence ἐν is not repeated : Winer, p. 522. 
 
 kal γὰρ 6 πατὴρ τ. For such the Father also seeketh for His wor- 
 shippers. ‘Such’ is emphatic; ‘this is the character which He also 
 desires in His worshippers.’ The ‘also’ must not be lost. That 
 worship should be ‘in spirit and truth’ is required by the fitness of 
 things: moreover God Himself desires to have it so, and works for 
 this end. Intus exhibe te templum Deo. In templo vis orare, in te 
 ora (S. Augustine). Note how three times in succession Christ speaks 
 of God as the Faiher (vv. 21, 23): perhaps it was a new aspect of Him 
 to the woman. 
 
 24. God is spirit (not ‘a spirit’), and must be approached in that 
 part of us which is spirit, in the true temple of God, ‘which temple 
 ye are. The premise was old (1 Kings viii. 27); it is the deduction 
 
122 S. JOHN. [IV. 24— 
 
 from it which though necessary (δεῖ) is new. Even to the chosen three 
 Christ imparts no truths more profound than these. He admits. this 
 poor schismatic to the very fountain-head of religion. 
 
 25. Μεσσίας. See oni. 41. There is nothing improbable in her 
 knowing the Jewish name and using it to a Jew. The word being 
 rare in N. T. we are perhaps to understand that it was the very word 
 used; but it may be S. John’s equivalent for what she said. Comp. 
 v.29. Throughout this discourse it is impossible to say how much of 
 it is a translation of the very words used, how much merely the sub- 
 stance of what was said. S. John would obtain his information from 
 Christ, and possibly from the woman also during their two days’ stay. 
 The idea that S. John was left behind by the disciples, and heard the 
 conversation, is against the tenour of the narrative and is contra- 
 dicted by vv. 8 and 27. 
 
 6X. Χριστός. Probably the Evangelist’s parenthetic explanation 
 (but contrast i. 42), not the woman’s. The Samaritan name for the 
 expected Saviour was ‘the Returning One,’ or (according to a, less 
 probable derivation) ‘the Converter.’ ‘The Returner’ points to. the 
 belief that Moses was to appear again. Comp. xi. 16, xx. 24. 
 
 ἐκεῖνος. Emphatic; in contrast with other Prophets and teachers; 
 the pronoun implies the exclusion of her present Teacher also. 
 
 ἀναγγελεῖ. He will announce to us all things: the revelation will be 
 complete. 
 
 26. ᾿Εγώ εἰμι. It is the ordinary Greek affirmative (Luke xxii. 70). 
 There is no reference to the Divine name ‘I AM,’ Ex. iii. 14; Deut. 
 xxxii. 39. This open declaration of His Messiahship is startling 
 when we remember Matt. xvi. 20, xvii. 9; Mark viii. 30. But one 
 reason for reserve on this subject, lest the people should ‘ take Him by 
 force to make Him a king’ (vi. 15), is entirely wanting here. There 
 was no fear of the Samaritans making political capital out of Him. 
 Moreover it was one thing for Christ to avow Himself when He saw 
 that hearts were ready for it; quite another for disciples to make 
 Him known promiscuously. Contrast Matt. xxvi. 63. 
 
 27. ἐθαύμαζον. Change of tense; their coming was a single act, 
 they continued wondering (vv. 30, 40) that He was talking with a 
 woman, contrary to the precepts of the Rabbis. ‘Let no man talk 
 with a woman in the street, no not with his own wife. Rather burn 
 the words of the Law than teach them to women.’ This was proba- 
 bly the first time that they had seen Him ignore this prejudice, and 
 the woman’s being a Samaritan would increase their astonishment. 
 
 οὐδείς. Out of reverence: comp. xxi. 12. 
 
 μέντοι. Only thrice (2 Tim. ii. 19; James ii, 8; Jude 8) outside 
 this Gospel (vii. 13, xii. 42, xx. 5, xxi. 4). The two questions are 
 probably both addressed (hypothetically) to Christ. The word λαλεῖν, 
 thrice in two verses, seems to point to the freedom with which He had 
 conversed with her, 
 
LV. 32.] NOTES. 123 
 
 28. οὖν. Therefore, because of the interruption: see on iii, 25. 
 “Ydpla occurs 11. 6, 7 and nowhere else. Her leaving it to take care of 
 itself (v. 3) shews that her original errand is of no moment compared 
 with what now lies before her; it is also a pledge for her speedy 
 return. This graphic touch is from one who was there, and saw, and 
 remembered. 
 
 ᾿ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις. The people, those whom she met anywhere. She 
 feels that the wonderful news is for all, not for her ‘ husband’ only 
 (v. 16). Like Andrew, John, and Philip, her first impulse is to tell 
 others of what she has found, and in almost the same words; ‘ Come, 
 see’ (i. 41—46). The learned Nicodemus had given no sign of being 
 convinced. This ignorant schismatic goes forth in the enthusiasm of 
 conviction to proclaim her belief. 
 
 29. πάντα ἃ. ἐπ. How natural is this exaggeration! In her excite- 
 ment she states not what He had really told her, but what she is con- 
 vinced He could have told her. Comp. πάντες in iii. 26, and οὐδείς in 
 ii. 32. This strong language is in all three cases thoroughly in keeping 
 with the circumstances. See oni. 50, xx. 28. 
 
 μήτι οὗτος. Can this be the Christ? not ‘Is not this,’ as A.V., 
 which has a similar error xviii. 17, 25. Comp. v. 33, vii. 31, 48, viii. 
 22, xviil. 35, xxi. 5; where in all cases a negative answer is antici- 
 pated; num not nonne. Here, although she believes that He is the 
 Christ, she states it as almost too good to be true. Moreover she 
 does not wish to seem too positive and dogmatic to those who do not 
 yet know the evidence, 
 
 30. ἐξῆλθον... ἤρχοντο. Went out...were coming (comp. νυ. 27): 
 the single act (aorist) is contrasted with what took some time (imperf.). 
 See on xi. 29. Weare to see them coming across the fields as we 
 listen to the conversation that follows (31—38). 
 
 31. ἐν τῷ per. Between her departure and their arrival. 
 
 ἠρώτων. Were beseeching Him (vv. 40, 47): they had left him 
 exhausted with the journey (v. 6), and they urge, not their own wonder 
 (v. 27), but His needs. 
 
 “Ῥαββί. See oni. 39. Here and in ix. 2 and xi. 8 our translators 
 have rather regrettably turned ‘ Rabbi’ into ‘Master’ (comp. Matt. 
 xxvi, 25,49; Mark ix. 5, xi, 21, xiv. 45); while ‘Rabbi’ is retained 
 i. 38, 49, 11. 2, 26, vi. 25 (comp. Matt. xxiii. 7, 8). Apparently their 
 principle was that wherever a disciple addresses Christ, ‘ Rabbi’ is to 
 be translated ‘ Master;’ in other cases ‘ Rabbi’ is to be retained; thus 
 obscuring the view which the disciples took of their own relation to 
 Jesus. He was their Rabbi. 
 
 32. ἐγὼ... ὑμεῖς, In emphatic opposition: they have their food; 
 He has His. Joy at the fruit of His teaching prompts Him to refuse 
 food; not of course that His human frame could do without it, but 
 that in His delight He for the time feels no need of it. Βρῶσις is 
 rather ‘ eating’ than food, which is βρῶμα, as in v. 34; comp. vi. 27, 
 δῦ. 8. Paul accurately distinguishes the two; Col. ii. 16; Rom. xiv. 
 
124 S. JOHN. [IV. 32— 
 
 17; 1 Cor. viii. 4; 2 Cor. ix. 10; so also Heb, xii. 16: πόσις and 
 πόμα the same; Rom. xiv. 17; 1 Cor. x. 3; also Heb. ix. 10. 
 
 οὐκ οἴδατε. Know not; not (as A.V.) ‘know not of,’ which spoils 
 the sense. The point is, not that He has had food without their 
 knowledge, but a kind of food of which they have no conception. 
 
 33. πρὸς ἀλλ. Comp. v. 27, xvi. 17. They refrain from pressing 
 Him with their difficulty. 
 
 ἤνεγκεν. Emphatic: ‘Surely no one hath brought Him anything 
 to eat.’ This would be specially uniikely among Samaritans. Another 
 instance of dulness as to spiritual meaning. In ii. 20 it was the 
 Jews; in 11], 4 Nicodemus; in v, 11 the Samaritan woman; and now 
 the disciples. ‘ What wonder that the woman did not understand the 
 water? The disciples do not understand the food!’ (Augustine). 
 Comp. xi. 12, xiv. 5. These candid reports of what tells against the 
 disciples add to the trust which we place in the narratives of the 
 Evangelists. 
 
 34. ἐμὸν Bp. ἐστιν ἵνα. ᾿Εμόν is emphatic: My food is that I may do 
 the will of Him that sent Me and (thus) perfect His work. Christ’s aim 
 and purpose is His food. See oni. 8; iva is no mere periphrasis for 
 the infinitive (vi. 29, 40, xvii. 3; 1 John iii. 11, v. 3; comp. i. 27, ii. 
 25, v. 40). This verse recalls the reply to the tempter ‘man doth not 
 live by bread alone,’ and to His parents ‘ Wist ye not that I must be 
 about My Father’s business?’ Luke iy. 4, ii, 49. It is the first of 
 many such sayings in this Gospel, expressing Christ’s complete con- 
 formity to His Father’s will in doing His work (v. 30, vi. 38, xi. 4, 
 xii. 49, 50, xiv. 31, xv. 10, xvii. 4), TeAeotv (not merely τελεῖν) means 
 ‘to bring to a full end, make perfect;’ frequent in S. John (vy. 36, 
 xvii. 4, 23, xix, 28; 1 John ii. 5, iv. 12, 17) and in Hebrews. 
 
 35. ἔτι τετράμ. K.7.A. This cannot be a proverb, No such pro- 
 verb is known; and a proverb on the subject would have to be differ- 
 ently shaped; e.g. ‘From seedtime to harvest is four months;’ ἔτι 
 points to a single case. So that we may regard this saying as a mark 
 of time. Harvest began in the middle of Nisan or April. Four 
 months from that would place this event in the middle of December: 
 or, if (as some suppose) this was a year in which an extra month was 
 inserted, in the middle of January. The words form an iambic verse. 
 
 ὅτι Aevkal εἰσιν. In the green blades just shewing through the soil 
 the faith of the sower sees the white ears that will soon be there. So 
 also in the flocking of these ignorant Samaritans to Him for instruc- 
 tion Christ sees the abundant harvest of souls that is to follow. Ὅτι 
 should be taken after θεάσασθε, behold that, not as A.V. ‘for,’ or ‘ be- 
 cause.’ The punctuation is very uncertain, as to whether ἤδη belongs 
 to this verse or the next. The balance of authority gives ἤδη to v. 36; 
 but in punctuation MSS. are not of great authority, and ἤδη at the 
 end of v. 35 seems intended to balance ἔτι at the beginning of it. 
 Comp. 1 John iy. 3. 
 
 36. els ζωὴν αἰ. See on 11]. 15,16, Eternal life is regarded as the 
 
IV, 42.] NOTES. 125 
 
 granary into which the fruit is gathered; comp. v. 14, and for similar 
 imagery Matt. ix. 37, 38. 
 
 ἵνα. This is God’s purpose. Ps. cxxvi. 5, 6 promises that the toil 
 of sowing shall be rewarded with the joy of reaping; but in the Gos- 
 pel the gracious work is so rapid that the sower shares in the joys of 
 harvest. The contrast between His failure in Judaea and His success 
 in Samaria fills Jesus with joy. Christ, not the Prophets, is the 
 Sower. The Gospel is not the fruit of which the O.T. is the seed; 
 rather the Gospel is the seed for which the O.T. prepared the ground. 
 And His ministers are the reapers; in this case the Apostles. 
 
 37. ἐν γὰρ... ἀληθινός. For herein is the saying (proved) a true one, 
 shewn by fulfilment to be a genuine proverb and not an empty phrase. 
 See on v, 23, vii. 28, xix. 35. ’Ev τούτῳ refers to what precedes (comp. 
 xv. 8, xvi. 30), in your reaping what others sowed (vv. 35, 36). 
 
 38. κεκοπιάκατε. Ye have laboured. The pronouns, as in v. 32, 
 are emphatic and opposed. This will be the rule throughout; sic vos 
 non vobis. 
 
 ἄλλοι. Christ, the Sower; but put in the plural to balance ὑμεῖς. 
 In v. 37 both are in the singular for the sake of harmony; ὁ σπείρων, 
 Christ; ὁ θερίζων, His ministers, 
 
 39. πολλοὶ ἐπ. eis ad. Strong proof of the truth of v.35. These 
 Samaritans outstrip the Jews, and even the Apostles, in their readi- 
 ness to believe. The Jews rejected the testimony of their own Scrip- 
 tures, of the Baptist, of Christ’s miracles and teaching. The Sama- 
 ritans accept the testimony of the woman, who had suddenly become 
 an Apostle to her countrymen, The miraculous knowledge displayed 
 by Jesus for a second time (i. 49) produces immediate and complete 
 conviction, and in this case the conviction spreads to others. 
 
 40. ἠρώτων. Kept heseeching (vv. 30, 31, 47). How different 
 from His own people at Nazareth (Matt. xiii. 58; Luke iv. 29) and 
 from the Jews at Jerusalem after many miracles and much teaching 
 (v. 18, &c.). And yet he had uncompromisingly pronounced against 
 Samaritan claims (v. 22). Comp. the thankful Samaritan leper (Luke 
 xvii. 16, 17). 
 
 μεῖναι. See oni. 33. They wished him to take up his abode per- 
 manently with them, or at least for a time, 
 
 42. οὐκέτι x.t.A. Note the order: No longer is it because of thy 
 speech that we believe (see oni. 7). Λαλιά and λόγος should be dis- 
 tinguished in translation. In classical Greek λαλιά has a slightly 
 uncomplimentary turn, ‘gossip, chatter.’ But this shade of mean- 
 ing is lost in later Greek, though there is perhaps a tinge of it here, 
 ‘not because of thy talk;’ but this being doubtful, ‘speech’ will 
 be safer. §S. John uses λόγος both for her word (v. 39) and Chrisi’s 
 (v.41). See on viii. 43, where Christ uses λαλιά of His own teaching, 
 
 αὐτοὶ γ. ἀκ. For we have heard for ourselves. 
 
126 5. JOIN. ΠΥ͂. 49— 
 
 ἀληϑῶς ὁ σ. τ. κι See oni. 48 ἀπῇ 10. It is not improbable that 
 such ready hearers should arrive at this great truth so rapidly. They 
 had the Pentateuch (comp. Gen, xii. 3, xviii, 18, xxii. 18, xxvi. 4), and 
 not being in the trammels of Jewish exclusiveness would believe that 
 the Messiah was not for the Jew alone. The Samaritan gave up less 
 than the Jew when he accepted Christ. It is therefore unnecessary 
 to suppose that 8. John is unconsciously giving his own expression 
 (1 John iy. 14) for theirs. 
 
 43—54. Tare Work AmMonG GALILEANS. 
 
 43. τὰς δ. ip. The two days mentioned in v.40, These three 
 verses (43—45) form a sort of introduction to this section, as ii, 13 
 and iy. 1—4 to the two previous sections, 
 
 44. αὐτὸς γὰρ «.t.A. This is a well-known difficulty. As in 
 xx. 17, we have a reason assigned which seems to be the very oppo- 
 site of what we should expect. This witness of Jesus would account 
 for His not going into Galilee: how does it account for His going 
 thither? It seems best to fall back on the old explanation of Origen, 
 that by ‘His own country’ is meant Judaea, ‘the home of the Pro- 
 phets,’ and, we may add, the land of His birth, for centuries con- 
 nected with Him by prophecy. Moreover, Judaea fits in with the 
 circumstances. He had not only met with little honour in Judaea; 
 He had been forced to retreat from it. No Apostle had been fownd 
 there. The appeal to Judaea had in the main been a failure, True 
 that the Synoptists record a similar saying (Matt. xiii. 57; Mark 
 vi. 4; Luke iv. 24) not in relation to Judaea, but to Nazareth, ‘where 
 He had been brought up.’ But as they record the Galilaean, and 
 S. John the Judaean ministry, it is only natural that a saying capable 
 of various shades of meaning, and perhaps uttered on more than one 
 occasion, should be applied in different ways by them and by ὃ. John. 
 Origen’s explanation accounts quite satisfactorily not only for the 
 γάρ here, but also for the οὖν in v. 45, which means When therefore 
 He came into Galilee, the welcome which He received proved the 
 truth of the saying; ‘Galilee of the Gentiles’ received Him whom οἱ 
 ἴδιοι (i. 11), the Jews of Jerusalem and Judaea, had rejected. 
 
 45. ἐν τῇ ἑορτῇ. The Passover; but there is no need to name it, 
 because it has already been mentioned in connexion with these mira- 
 cles, ii. 23. Perhaps these Galilaeans who then witnessed the miracles 
 were the chief of the πολλοί who then believed. 
 
 46. ἦλθεν οὖν. He came therefore, because of the previous invita- 
 tion and welcome: see Introduction, chap. v. 6, ὁ. 
 
 βασιλικός. Royal official of Herod Antipas, who though only 
 tetrarch was given his father’s title of βασιλεύς. The word has no- 
 thing to do with birth (‘nobleman’ A.V.), nor can we tell whether a 
 civil or military officer is intended. That he was Chusa (Luke viii. 3) 
 or Manaen (Acts xiii. 1) is pure conjecture. Here and in v. 49 be form 
 βασιλίσκος is strongly supported. 
 
IV. 52.] NOTES. 12ἢ 
 
 41. ἀπῆλθεν... ἠρώτα. Comp. vv. 27, 30, 40,50, and see on xi. 29. 
 The leaving his son was a single act (aor.), the beseeching (vv. 31, 40) 
 was continuous (imp.). For wa see on i. 8. Some scholars think 
 that in constructions like this ἵνα does not mean ‘in order that,’ but 
 ‘that,’ and simply defines the scope of the request or command; comp. 
 Xi. 57, xvii. 15, 21, xix. 31, 38, xv. 17, 12, xi. 57. Winer, pp. 425, 
 573. 
 
 καταβῇ. Down to the lake (ii. 12); about 20 miles. See oni. 7. 
 
 ἤμελλε. Μέλλειν here simply means ‘to be likely’ without any fur- 
 ther notion either of intention (vi. 6, 15, vii. 35, xiv. 22), or of being 
 fore-ordained (xi. 51, xii. 33, xviii. 32). 
 
 48. σημεῖα x. τέρατα. Christ’s miracles are never mere τέρατα, 
 wonders to excite astonishment; they are ‘signs’ of heavenly truths 
 as well, and this is their primary characteristic. Where the two 
 words are combined σημεῖα always precedes, excepting Acts ii. 22, 43, 
 vi. 8, vii. 36. 5. John nowhere else uses τέρατα : his words for miracles 
 
 are σημεῖα and ἔργα. 
 
 οὐ μὴ πιστεύσητε. Strongest negation (v.14). Ye will in no wise 
 believe: or interrogatively; Will ye in no wise believe? Comp. ov μὴ 
 πίω; xviii. 11. The words are addressed to him (πρὸς αὐτόν), but as 
 the representative of the many who demanded a sign before believing 
 (see on 1 Cor, i. 22). Faith of this low type is not rejected (x. 38, 
 xiv. 11, xx. 29); it may grow into something better, as here, by being 
 tested and braced (v. 50). But it may also go back into sheer un- 
 belief, as with most of those who were won over by His miracles. 
 The verse tells of the depressing change which Christ experienced in 
 returning from Samaria to the land of Israel. 
 
 49. Κύριε. See on v. 11. His words shew both his faith and its 
 weakness. He believes that Christ’s presence can heal; he does not 
 believe that He can heal without being present. The words for the 
 child are characteristic: the father uses παιδίον, the term of endear- 
 ment; Jesus and the Evangelist use vids, the term of dignity; the 
 servants the more familiar παῖς. 
 
 50. ἐπίστ. τῷ λόγῳ. Not yet ἐπίστ. εἰς αὐτόν : but this is an ad- 
 vance on κατάβηθι πρὶν ἀποθανεῖν. 
 
 52. κομψότερον ἔσχεν. Literally, got somewhat better; a collo- 
 quial expression: κομψώς ἔχεις, ‘you are getting on nicely,’ occurs 
 as a doctor’s expression, Arrian, Diss. Hpict. 11. x. 13. The father 
 expects the cure to be gradual: the fever will depart at Christ’s 
 word, but in the ordinary way. He has not yet fully realised Christ’s 
 power. The servants’ reply shews that the cure was instantaneous, 
 
 ἐχθὲς ὥραν EBS. Accusative; during or in the seventh hour. Once 
 more we have to discuss 5. John’s method of counting the hours. (See 
 on i. 39, iv. 6.) Obviously the father set out as soon after Jesus said 
 ‘thy son liveth’ as possible; he had 20 or 25 miles to go to reach 
 home, and would not be likely to loiter. 7 a.m. is incredible; he 
 would have been home long before nightfall, and the servants met 
 
128 S. JOHN. [IV. 52— 
 
 him some distance from home. 7 P.M. is improbable; the servants 
 would meet him before midnight. Thus the modern method of reck- 
 oning from midnight to midnight does not suit. Adopting the 
 Jewish method from sunset to sunset, the seventh houris 1 p.m. He 
 would scarcely start at once in the mid-day heat; nor would the ser- 
 vants, Supposing they met him after sunset, they might speak of 
 lpm. as ‘yesterday.’ (But see on xx. 19, where S. John speaks of 
 the late hours of the evening as belonging to the day before sunset.) 
 Still, 7 p.m. is not impossible, and this third instance must be 
 regarded as not decisive. But the balance here seems to incline to 
 what is antecedently more probable, that 8. John reckons the hours, 
 like the rest of the Evangelists, according to the Jewish method, 
 
 53. ἔγνω. Recognised, perceived. 
 
 ἐπίστευσεν. Εἰς αὐτόν, i.e. as the Messiah: comp. υ. 42, i. 7, 51, vi. 
 36, xi. 15, where, as here, πιστεύω is used absolutely. The growth of 
 this official’s faith is sketched for us in the same natural and inci- 
 dental way as in the eases of the Samaritan woman (v. 19), the man 
 born blind (ix. 11), and Martha (xi. 21). 
 
 ἡ οἰκία av. ὅλη. The first converted family. Comp. Cornelius, 
 Lydia, and the Philippian gaoler (Acts x. 24, xvi. 15, 34). 
 
 δά. τοῦτο π. 8.0. This again as a second sign did Jesus, after He 
 had come out of Judaea into Galilee. Once more 8. John carefully 
 distinguishes two visits to Galilee, which any one with only the 
 Synoptic account might easily confuse. Both signs confirmed im- 
 perfect faith, the first that of the disciples, the second that of this 
 official and his household. 
 
 The question whether this foregoing narrative is a discordant 
 account of the healing of the centurion’s servant (Matt. viii. 5; Luke 
 vii. 2) has been discussed from very early times, for Origen and 
 Chrysostom contend against it. Irenaeus seems to be in favour of 
 the identification, but we cannot be sure that he is. He says, ‘He 
 healed the son of the centurion though absent with a word, saying, 
 Go, thy son liveth.’ Irenaeus may have supposed that this official 
 was a centurion, or ‘centurion’ may bea slip. Hight-very marked 
 points of difference between the two narratives have been noted. 
 Together they amount to something like proof that the two narratives 
 cannot refer to one and the same fact, unless we are to attribute an 
 astonishing amount of carelessness or misinformation either to the 
 Synoptists or to 5. John. 
 
 (1) Here a ‘king’s man’ pleads for his son; there a centurion for 
 his servant. 
 
 (2) Here he pleads in person; there the elders plead for him. 
 
 (3) The father is probably a Jew; the centurion is certainly a 
 Gentile. 
 
 (4) Here the healing words are spoken at Cana; there at Caper- 
 naum. 
 
 (5) Here the malady is fever; there paralysis. 
 
WI NOTES. 129 
 
 (6) The father wishes Jesus to come; the centurion begs Him not 
 to come. 
 
 (7) Here Christ does not go; there apparently He does. 
 
 (8) The father has weak faith and is blamed (v. 48); the centurion 
 has strong faith and is commended, 
 
 And what difficulty is there in supposing two somewhat similar 
 miracles? Christ’s miracles were ‘signs;’ they were vehicles for 
 conveying the spiritual truths which Christ came to teach. If, as is 
 almost certain, He often repeated the same instructive sayings, may 
 He not sometimes have repeated the same instructive acts? Here, 
 therefore, as in the case of the cleansing of the Temple (ii. 13—17), 
 it seems wisest to believe that S. John and the Synoptists record 
 different events. 
 
 Cuars. V. to XI. THE Work AamMone ΜΊΧΕΡ MULTITUDES, 
 CHIEFLY JEWS. 
 
 The Work now becomes a conFuict between Christ and ‘the Jews;’ 
 for as Christ reveals Himself more fully, the opposition between Him 
 and the ruling party becomes more intense; and the fuller revelation 
 which excites the hatred of His opponents serves also to sift the 
 disciples; some turn back, others are strengthened in their faith by 
 what they see and hear. The Evangelist from time to time points 
 out the opposite results of Christ’s work: vi. 60—71, vii. 40—52, ix. 
 13—41, x. 19, 21, 39—42, xi. 45—57. Three miracles form crises in 
 the conflict; the healing of the impotent man (v.), of the man born 
 blind (ix.), and the raising of Lazarus (xi). 
 
 Thus far we have had the announcement of the Gospel to the 
 world, and the reception it is destined to meet with, set forth in 
 four typical instances; Nathanael, the guileless Israelite, truly reli- 
 gious according to the light allowed him; Nicodemus, the learned 
 ecclesiastic, skilled in the Scriptures, but ignorant of the first ele- 
 ments of religion; the Samaritan woman, immoral in life and schis- 
 matical in religion, but simple in heart and readily convinced; and 
 the royal official, weak in faith, but progressing gradually to a full 
 conviction. But as yet there is little evidence of hostility to Christ, 
 although the Evangelist prepares us for it (i. 11, 11. 18—20, 111, 18,19, 
 26, iv. 44). Henceforth, however, hostility to Him is manifested in 
 every chapter of this division. Two elements are placed in the 
 sharpest contrast throughout; the Messiah’s clearer manifestation of 
 His Person and Work, and the growing animosity of ‘the Jews’ in 
 consequence of it. The opposition is stronger in Judaea than else- 
 where; strongest of all at Jerusalem. In Galilee they abandon Him, 
 in Jerusalem they compass His death. Two miracles form the intro- 
 duction to two great discourses: two miracles illustrate two dis- 
 courses. The healing at Bethesda and the feeding of the 5000 lead to 
 discourses in which Christ is set forth as the Source and the Support 
 of Life (v., vi.). Then He is set forth as the Source of Truth and 
 Light ; and this is illustrated by His giving physical and spiritual 
 sight to the blind (vii.—ix.). Finally He is set forth as Zove under 
 
 ST JOHN I 
 
130 S. JOHN. [Vv. 1— 
 
 the figure of the Good Shepherd giving His life for the sheep; and 
 this is illustrated by the raising of Lazarus, a work of love which 
 costs Him His life (x., xi.). Thus, of four typical miracles, two 
 form the introduction and two form the sequel to great discourses, 
 The prevailing idea throughout is truth and love provoking contra- 
 diction and enmity. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 3. Omit ἐκδεχομένων τὴν τοῦ ὕδατος κίνησιν after ξηρῶν, with 
 NA'BC'L against D and the great mass of later authorities; a gloss 
 suggested by v. 7, and added before v. 4. 
 
 4. Omit the whole verse, with NBC!D against AL and the majority 
 of later authorities; a gloss probably embodying an ancient tradition. 
 Insertion in this case is easily explained, omission not. 
 
 5. Insert αὐτοῦ (overlooked between -g and rov-) after ἀσθενείᾳ. 
 
 8—1l. κράβαττον is the form now generally received in Ν, T. for 
 κράββατον. 
 
 16. Omit καὶ ἐζήτουν αὐτὸν ἀποκτεῖναι (inserted from v. 18) with 
 NBCDL against A. 
 
 25, 28. ἀκούσουσιν. We cannot determine with certainty between 
 this form (xvi. 13?) and ἀκούσονται: ἀκούσομαι is the more common 
 future in N. T. On ζήσουσιν (v. 25) see on vi. 57. 
 
 36. μείζων (ABEGMA) is to be preferred to μείζω (δ), δέδωκεν (NBL) 
 to ἔδωκε (AD), which has been influenced by vv. 26, 27. 
 
 87. ἐκεῖνος (NBL) for αὐτός, which was first inserted along with 
 ἐκεῖνος (D), and then drove it out (A). 
 
 43. λήμψεσθε for λήψεσθε: xvi. 14,15, 24. Winer, p. 53. 
 
 (ἜΑΡ, VY. CuHrist THE Source oF LIFE. 
 
 In chaps. v. and vi. the word ‘life’ occurs 18 times; in the rest of 
 the Gospel 18 times. ‘Thy son liveth’ (iv. 51) leads up to this 
 subject. 
 
 This chapter falls into two main divisions; (1) The Sign at the 
 Pool of Bethesda and its Sequel (1—16); (2) The Discourse on the Son 
 as the Source of Life (17—47). 
 
 1—9. Tue Sicn at THE Poot or BETHESDA, 
 
 1, μετὰ ταῦτα. See on iii, 22. 
 
 ἑορτὴ τ I ABD, Origen, and many later authorities omit the 
 article, which though very ancient, was probably inserted owing to 
 a belief that Tabernacles or the Passover was the feast intended. 
 
V. 2). NOTES. 131 
 
 Insertion would be more likely than omission. If ἑορτή is the true 
 reading, this alone is almost conclusive against its being the Passover ; 
 S. John would not call the Passover ‘a feast of the Jews.’ Moreover 
 in all other cases where he mentions Passovers he lets us know that 
 they are Passovers and not simply feasts, ii. 13, vi. 4, xi. 55, ἄο. He 
 gives us three Passovers; to make this a fourth would be to put an 
 extra year into our Lord’s ministry for which scarcely any events can 
 be found, and of which there is no trace elsewhere. In vii. 19—24 
 Jesus justifies the healing at this feast. Would He go back to an 
 event like this after a year and a half? Almost every other feast, and 
 even the Day of Atonement, has been suggested; but the only 
 one which fits in satisfactorily is Purim. We saw from iv. 35 that 
 the two days in Samaria were either in December or January. The 
 ' next certain date is vi. 4, the eve of the Passover, i.e. April. Purim, 
 which was celebrated in March (14th and 15th Adar), falls just in the 
 right place in the interval. This feast commemorated the deliverance 
 cf the Jews from Haman, and took its name from the lots which he 
 caused to be cast (Esther 111. 7, ix. 24, 26, 28). It was a boisterous 
 feast, and some have thought it unlikely that Christ would have 
 anything to do with it. But we are not told that He went to Jeru- 
 salem in order to keep the feast; Purim might be kept anywhere. 
 More probably He went because the multitudes at the feast would 
 afford great opportunities for teaching. Moreover, it does not follow 
 that because some made this feast a scene of unseemly jollity, there- 
 fore Christ would discountenance the feast itself. Assuming Purim 
 to be right, why does 8. John not name it? Not because it was 
 without express Divine sanction; the Dedication (x. 22) was a feast 
 of man’s institution. More probably because Purim had no refer- 
 ence to either Christ or His work. ‘The promised salvation is of 
 the Jews,’ and §S. John is ever watchful to point out the connexion 
 between Jesus and the O. T. The Passover and Feast of Tabernacles 
 pointed clearly to Him; the Feast of Dedication pointed to His work, 
 the reconsecration of the Jewish people to Jehovah. To refer the 
 political festival of Purim to Him whose kingdom was not of this 
 world (xviii. 36), might cause the gravest misunderstanding. The 
 feast here has no symbolical meaning, but is a barren historical fact; 
 and the Evangelist leaves it in obscurity. 
 
 ἀνέβη. Went up, because to the capital. 
 
 2. ἔστιν. The present tense is no evidence that this Gospel was 
 written before the destruction of Jerusalem. 8. John might easily write 
 of the place as he remembered it. Even if the building were destroyed 
 the pool would remain; and such a building, being of the nature of a 
 hospital, would possibly be spared. See on xi. 18. 
 
 ἐπὶ τῇ προβατικῇ κιτιλ. Reading and interpretation are somewhat 
 uncertain: κολυμβήθρα is preferable to κολυμβήθρᾳ, ἡ ἐπιλεγομένη to 
 τὸ λεγόμενον, and Βηθζαθά to Βηθεσδά or Βηθσαϊδά. It is better to 
 supply πύλῃ rather than ἀγορᾷ with προβατικῇ, although the ellipse 
 of πύλῃ occurs nowhere else; for we know from Neh. iii. 1, 32, xii. 39, 
 that there was a sheep-gate, It was near the Temple, for by it sacri- 
 
 12 
 
132 5, JOHN. ΓΥ͂. 2— 
 
 fices probably entered the Temple. There is evidence, however, that 
 there were two pools at this place, and so we may translate, Now there 
 is at Jerusalem, by the sheep-pool, the pool (or, reading τὸ dey., the 
 place) called, &c. We cannot be sure from ἐπιλεγομένη (‘ surnamed’) 
 that the pool had some other name as well. ‘The pool’ might be 
 the name, Bethzatha the surname. Beth-esda=‘ House of Mercy,’ or 
 (-Aschada) ‘of outpouring,’ or (estéu) ‘of the Portico,’ Beth- 
 zatha may mean ‘ House of the Olive.’ The traditional identification 
 with Birket Israel is not commonly advocated now. The ‘Fountain 
 of the Virgin’ is an attractive identification, as the water is inter- 
 mittent to this day. This fountain is connected with the pool of 
 Siloam, and some think that Siloam is Bethesda. That 8. John 
 speaks of Bethesda here and Siloam in ix. 7, is not conclusive against 
 this: for Bethesda might be the name of the building and Siloam of 
 the pool, which would agree with ἐπιλεγομένη, as above, 
 
 Ἕβραϊστί. In Aramaic, the language spoken at the time, not the 
 old Hebrew of the Scriptures. See on xx. 16. The word occurs only 
 in this Gospel (xix. 13, 17, 20, xx. 16) and in Revelation (ix. 11, 
 xvi. 16), See oni. 14, iv. 6, vii. 30, xi. 44, xv. 20, xix. 37, xx. 16. 
 
 στοάς. Colonnades or cloisters. These would shelter the sick. 
 The place seems to have been a kind of charitable institution, 
 and Jesus, we may suppose, had come to heal this patient. 
 
 3. τυφλ., x., & The special kinds of ἀσθενοῦντες. The words 
 which follow in T.R., and the whole of v. 4 are an interpolation, 
 though a very ancient one, for it was known to Tertullian (De Bapt. v.). 
 “ The whole passage is omitted by the oldest representatives of each 
 great group of authorities’ (Westcott). The conclusion of v. 3 was 
 added first as a gloss on v. 7; and v. 4 may represent the popular 
 belief with regard to the intermittent bubbling of the healing water, 
 first added as a gloss, and then inserted into the text. The water was 
 probably mineral, and the people may have been right in supposing 
 that it was most efficacious when it was most violent. The MSS. 
 which contain the insertion vary very much. 
 
 δ. ἔτη. Accusative after ἔχων, like χρόνον in v. 6; having (passed) 
 thirty-eight years in his infirmity. Not that he was 38 years old, but 
 had had this malady 38 years. To suppose that S. John regards him 
 as typical of the nation, wandering 88 years in the wilderness and 
 found paralysed by the Messiah, is perhaps fanciful. 
 
 6. γνούς. Perhaps supernaturally, as He knew the past life of 
 the Samaritan woman (see on ii. 25): but He might learn it from 
 the bystanders; the fact would be well known. 
 
 θέλεις. Dost thou wish? Note that the man does not ask first. 
 Here and in the case of the man born blind (ix.), as also of Malchus’ 
 ear (Luke xxii. 51), Christ heals without being asked to do so. 
 Excepting the healing of the royal official’s son all Christ’s miracles 
 in the Fourth Gospel are spontaneous, On no other occasion does 
 Christ ask a question without being addressed first: why does He now 
 ask a question of which the answer was so obvious? Probably in 
 
107 NOTES. 133 
 
 order to rouse the sick man out of his lethargy and despondency. It 
 was the first step towards the man’s having sufficient faith: he must 
 be inspired with some expectation of being cured. Comp. 8S. Peter’s 
 Βλέψον eis ἡμᾶς (Acts 111. 4), The question has nothing to do with 
 religious scruples; ‘Art thou willing to be made whole, although it is 
 the Sabbath?’ 
 
 7. ἄνθρ. οὐκ ἔχω. Not only sick, but friendless. See on iv. 11. 
 
 ὅταν ταραχθῇ. Whenever &c. The disturbance took place at 
 irregular intervals: hence the need to wait and watch for it. 
 
 βάλῃ. Literally, throw me in; perhaps implying that the gush of 
 water did not last long, and there was no time to be lost in quiet 
 carrying. But in this late Greek βάλλειν has become weakened in 
 Meaning : xii, 6, xiii. 2, xviii. 11, xx. 25; Matt. ix. 2, 17, x. 34, 
 
 ἔρχομαι ἐγώ. Unaided and therefore slowly. 
 
 ἄλλος. Not ἄλλοι; one other is hindrance enough, so small is the 
 place in which the bubbling appeared. 
 
 8. ἔγειρε, ἄρον. As with the paralytic (Mark ii. 9), Christ does 
 not ask as to the man’s faith: He knew that he had it; and the man’s 
 attempting to rise and carry his bed after 38 years of impotence was 
 an open confession of faith. 
 
 κράβαττον. Grabatus (Cic. Div. II. uxi.); a pallet: probably 
 only a mat or rug, still common in the East. The word is said to be 
 Macedonian (Mark ii. 4, vi. 55; Acts v. 15, ix. 33). 
 
 9. ἦρεν... περιεπάτει. The taking up took place once for all (sor.), 
 the walking continued (imp.): comp. iv, 27, 30, 40, 47, 50, vi. 66, 
 xi. 27. It is scarcely necessary to discuss whether this miracle can 
 be identical with the healing of the paralytic let down through the 
 roof (Matt. ix.; Mark ii.; Luke v.). Time, place, details and context 
 are all different, especially the important point that this miracle 
 was wrought on the Sabbath, 
 
 9—16. Tue SEQUEL OF THE SIGN. 
 
 ἦν δὲ σάββατον. Now on that day was a Sabbath. This is the 
 text for what follows. Jesus had proclaimed Himself Lord of the 
 Temple (see on 11. 17); He now proclaims Himself Lord of the 
 Sabbath. This is a new departure: ritual must give way to love. 
 The fourth commandment was the favourite sphere of Jewish re- 
 ligiousness. By ostentatious rigour in enforcing it the Pharisees 
 exhibited their zeal for the Law. Here, therefore, Jesus confronted 
 them. He came to vindicate the Law and make it once more lovable. 
 So long as it remained an iron taskmaster it would keep men from 
 Christ, instead of being a παιδαγωγός to bring them to Him (Gal. 
 11, 24). 
 
 10. οἱ Ιουδαῖοι. The hostile party, as usual, and perhaps members 
 of the Sanhedrin (1. 19). They ignore the cure, and notice only what 
 can be attacked. They had the letter of the law strongly on their 
 side: comp, Exod. xxii. 12, xxxi. 14, xxxv. 2, 3; Num. xv. 32; 
 
134 S. JOHN. ΤΥ͂. 10— 
 
 Neh. xiii. 15; and especially Jer. xvii. 21. Acts of healing (except in 
 urgent cases) and carrying furniture were among the thirty kinds 
 of work forbidden by the fourth commandment, according to Rabbini- 
 cal interpretation. 
 
 τῷ τεθεραπευόμένῳ. To the man that had been cured. Contrast 
 6 ἰαθείς in v, 18. 
 
 11. ὁ ποιήσας. The man’s defiance of them in the first flush 
 of his recovered health is very natural. He means, ‘if He could cure 
 me of a sickness of 38 years, He had authority to tell me to take up 
 my bed.’ They will not mention the cure; he flings it in their face. 
 There is a higher law than that of the Sabbath, and higher authority 
 than theirs. Comp. the conduct of the blind man, chap. ix. The 
 attitude of both parties throughout is thoroughly natural. 
 
 ἐκεῖνος. Even He, with emphasis: 5. John’s characteristic use of 
 ἐκεῖνος ; see on i. 18, and comp, Mark vii. 15, 20; Rom. xiv. 14. 
 
 12. ὁ dv@p. Who is the man? ‘man,’ implying a contemptuous 
 contrast with the law of God. Again they ignore the miracle and 
 attack the command. They do not ask, ‘Who cured thee, and there- 
 fore must have Divine authority?’ but, ‘Who told thee to break the 
 Sabbath, and therefore could not have it?’ Christ’s command was 
 perhaps aimed at erroneous views about the Sabbath. 
 
 13. ἐξένευσεν. Withdrew or turned aside: literally (vetw) ‘stooped 
 out of the way of,’ ‘bent aside to avoid.’ Here only in N.T. It 
 might mean (véw) ‘swam out of,’ which would be a graphic expression 
 for making one’s way through a surging crowd and natural in a fisher- 
 man of the sea of Galilee: but LXX. in Judg. iv. 18 is certainly νεύω 
 not véw (comp. 2 K. ii. 24, xxiii. 16). 
 
 ὄχλου ὄντος. This is ambiguous: it may mean why He withdrew, 
 viz. to avoid the crowd, or how He withdrew, viz. by disappearing in 
 the crowd. Both make good sense. 
 
 14. μετὰ ταῦτα. See on iii. 22, ix. 35. Probably the same day; we 
 may suppose that one of his first acts after his cure would be to offer 
 his thanks in the Temple. On vv. 13 and 14 5. Augustine writes, ‘‘It 
 is difficult in a crowd to see Christ; a certain solitude is necessary for 
 our mind; it is by a certain solitude of contemplation that God is 
 seen...... He did not see Jesus in the crowd, he saw Him in the 
 Temple. The Lord Jesus indeed saw him both in the crowd and 
 in the Temple. The impotent man, however, does not know Jesus in 
 the crowd; but he knows Him in the Temple.” For ἴδε see on i, 29. 
 
 μηκέτι ἁμάρτανε. Present imperative; continue no longer in sin. 
 Comp. [viii. 11,] xx. 17; 1 John iii. 6 The man’s conscience would 
 tell him what sin. Comp. [viil. 7]. What follows shews plainly not 
 merely that physical suffering in the aggregate is the result of sin in 
 the aggregate, but that this man’s 38 years of sickness were the result 
 of his own sin. This was known to Christ’s heart-searching eye (ii 
 24, 25), but it is a conclusion which we may not draw without the 
 
V. 11. NOTES. 135 
 
 clearest evidence in any given case. Suffering serves other ends than 
 punishment: ‘whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth;’ and comp. ix. 3. 
 
 χεῖρον. Not necessarily hell: even in this life there might be a 
 worse thing than the sickness which had consumed more than half 
 man’s threescore and ten. So terrible are God’s judgments; so awful 
 is our responsibility. Comp. Matt. xii. 45; 2 Pet. 11. 20. 
 
 15. τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις. See oni. 19. Authorities differ as to whether 
 εἶπεν or ἀνήγγειλεν is the verb. If the latter is correct, S. John 
 perhaps intimates that the man’s announcement was virtually a pro- 
 phetic declaration (comp. iv. 25, xvi. 13, 14, 15, 25; 1 John i. 5; 
 the only places where he uses the word). But in no case need we 
 suppose that the man purposes to convert ‘the Jews.’ On the other 
 hand he does not act in malice against Jesus; in that case he would 
 have said ‘He that bade me carry my bed.’ But he retains his old 
 defiance (v.11). He had good authority for breaking the Sabbath— 
 One who could work miracles; and this was the famous Teacher from 
 Galilee. 
 
 16. Sia τοῦτος For this cause. We should mark the difference 
 between διὰ τοῦτο (v. 18, vi. 65, vii. 21, 22, viii. 47, ix. 23, x. 17, xii. 
 39, xiii, 11, xv. 19, xvi. 15) and οὖν, therefore. 
 
 ἐδίωκον. Once more we have contrasted effects of Christ’s work 
 (see on ii. 16). The man healed returns thanks in the Temple, and 
 maintains the authority of Jesus over the Sabbath: ‘the Jews’ 
 persecute Him. This is the first declaration of hostility, and it comes 
 very early in the ministry. Note the imperfects ἐδίωκον, ‘ continued to 
 persecute’; the hostility is permanent: ἐποίει, ‘was wont to do’; He 
 went counter to the Law on principle. Ὅτι ἐποίει may be either the 
 Jews’ or 8S. John’s statement. Perhaps some of the unrecorded 
 miracles (ii. 23, iv. 45) were wrought on the Sabbath. His having 
 convicted them of publicly profaning the Temple (ii. 14) would make 
 them the more eager to retaliate for a public profanation of the 
 Sabbath. Comp. a similar result in Galilee (Luke vi. 1—11). 
 
 17—47. Tux DiscouRsE ON THE Son AS THE SouRCE oF LIFE, 
 
 17. ἀπεκρίνατο. The middle occurs in S. John only here, v. 19, 
 and xii. 23 (?). This was how He met their constant persecution. 
 The discourse which follows (see introductory note to chap. iii.) may 
 be thus analysed. (Sanday, p.106.) It has two main divisions—I. 
 The prerogatives of the Son of God (17—30). Il. The unbeliey of the 
 Jews (31—47). These two are subdivided as follows: I. 1. Defence 
 of healing on the Sabbath based on the relation of the Son to the 
 Father (17, 18). 2. Intimacy of the Son with the Father further 
 enforced (19, 20). 8, This intimacy proved by the twofold power 
 committed to the Son (a) of communicating spiritual life (21—27), 
 (Ὁ) of raising the dead (28, 29). 4. The Son’s qualification for these 
 high powers is the perfect harmony of His Will with that of the 
 Father (30). Il. 1. The Son’s claims rest not on His testimony 
 alone, nor on that of John, but on that of the Father (31—35), 2, 
 
136 S. JOHN. [V. 17— 
 
 The Father’s testimony is evident (a) in the works assigned to the 
 Son (36), (b) in the revelation which the Jews reject (3740). 3. Not 
 that the Son needs honour from men, who are too worldly to receive 
 Him (41—44). 4, Their appeal to Moses is vain; his writings con- 
 demn them, 
 
 17—30. THE PREROGATIVES AND PowERs OF THE Son oF Gop. 
 
 17,18. Defence of healing on the Sabbath based on the relation of 
 the Son to the Father. 
 
 17. ἕως ἄρτι. See on ii. 10. My Father is working even until 
 now; I am working also. From the Creation up to this moment 
 God has been ceaselessly working for man’s salvation. From such 
 activity there is no rest, no Sabbath: for mere cessation from ac- 
 tivity is not of the essence of the Sabbath; and to cease to do good 
 is not to keep the Sabbath but to sin. Sabbaths have never hindered 
 the Father’s work; they must not hinder the Son’s. Elsewhere 
 (Mark ii. 27) Christ says that the Sabbath is a blessing not a burden ; 
 it was made for man, not man for it. Here He takes far higher 
 ground for Himself. He is equal to the Father, and does what the 
 Father does. Mark ii. 28 helps to connect the two positions, If the 
 Sabbath is subject to man, much more to the Son of Man, who is 
 equal to the Father. Is not the Law-Giver greater than His laws? 
 Note the co-ordination of the Son’s work with the Father’s. 
 
 18. διὰ τοῦτο. See on v. 16. Μάλλον shews that ἐδίωκον in v. 16 
 includes attempts to compass His death. Comp. Mark iii. 6. This 
 is the blood-red thread which runs through the whole of this section 
 of the Gospel; vii. 1, 19, 25, viii. 37, 40, 59, x. 31, xi. 53, xii. 10. 
 
 ἔλυεν. Was loosing or relaxing, making less binding; solvebat. Not 
 a single occasion, but a general principle, was in question, Comp. 
 vii. 23, and see on x. 35: Matt. v. 19, xviii. 18, 
 
 ἴσον €. π. τ. 8. They fully understand the force of the parallel 
 statements, ‘My Father is working; I am working also,’ and the 
 exclusive expression ‘My Father,’ not ‘our Father’ (viii. 41). ‘ Be- 
 hold,’ says 8. Augustine, ‘the Jews understand what the Arians fail to 
 understand.’ If Arian or Unitarian views were right, would not 
 Christ at once have explained that what they imputed to Him as 
 blasphemy was not in His mind at all? But instead of explaining 
 that He by no means claims equality with the Father, He goes on to 
 reaffirm this equality from other points of view: see especially v. 23. 
 
 19, 20. Intimacy of the Son with the Father further enforced. 
 
 19. οὐ ὃ. ὁ vids π. ἀφ᾽ ἑ. οὐδέν. It is morally impossible for Him to 
 act with individual self-assertion independent of God, because He is the 
 Son: Their Will and working are one. It was to this independent 
 action that Satan had tempted Him (comp. ‘ Better to reign in hell 
 than serve in heaven’), The Jews accuse Him of blasphemy; and 
 blasphemy implies opposition to God: but He and the Father are 
 most intimately united. See oni, δῶ, 
 
V. 21.] NOTES. 137 
 
 ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ. The expression is peculiar to 8. John: comp. v. 80, vii. 
 ΤΊ, 28, viii. 28, 42, xi. 51, xiv. 10, xv. 4, xvi. 138. There is only one 
 πηγὴ τῆς ἜΞΞΈΣΣ the Son must in some sense be dependent; the 
 very idea implies it. Comp. ‘I have not done them of mine own 
 mind’ (ἀπ᾽ ἐμαυτοῦ), Numb, xvi. 28. 
 
 ἐὰν μή τι BA. Unless He seeth the Father doing it. 
 
 ἃ γὰρ ἄν. The negative statement is explained by a positive one. 
 The Son cannot act of Himself, for He is ever engaged in doing the 
 Father’s work, whatsoever it may be. 
 
 20. ὁ γὰρ mw. Moral necessity for the Son’s doing what the 
 Father does. The Father’s love for the Son compels Him to make 
 known all His works to Him; the Son’s relation to the Father 
 compels Him to do what the Father does. The Son continues on 
 earth what He had seen in heaven before the Incarnation. 
 
 φιλεῖ, Some good authorities read ἀγαπᾷ (perhaps from 11], 35), 
 but φιλεῖ is right. Φιλεῖν (amare) denotes affection resulting from 
 personal relationship; ἀγαπᾷν (diligere) denotes affection resulting 
 from deliberate choice: see on xi, 5, xxi. 15. 
 
 μείζονα τ. Greater works than these will He shew Him. ‘The 
 Father will give the Son an example of greater works than these 
 healings, the Son will do the like, and ye unbelievers will be shamed 
 into admiration.’ He does not say that they will believe. ‘ Works’ 
 is a favourite term with S. John to express the details of Christ’s 
 work of redemption, much as ῥήματα in relation to λόγος (see on 111. 
 84). Comp. v. 36, ix. 4, x. 25, 82, 37, xiv. 11, 12, xv. 24. Of these 
 passages, xiv, 12 is analogous ‘to this, shewing that what the Father 
 does for the Son, the Son does for those who believe on Him. 
 
 21—29. The intimacy of the Son with the Father proved by the 
 twofold power committed to the Son (a) of communicating spiritual life, 
 (b) of causing the bodily resurrection of the dead. 
 
 21—27. The Father imparts to the Son the power of raising the 
 Spiritually dead. It is very important to notice that ‘raising the 
 dead’ in this section is figurative; raising from moral and spiritual 
 death: whereas the resurrection (vv. 28, 29) is literal; the rising of 
 dead bodies from the graves. It is impossible to take both sections in 
 one and the same sense, either figurative or literal. The wording of 
 υ. 28 and still more of v. 29 is quite conclusive against spiritual 
 resurrection being meant there: what in that case could ‘the resur- 
 rection of damnation’ mean? Verses 24 and 25 are equally con- 
 clusive against a bodily resurrection being meant here: what in that 
 case can ‘an hour is coming, and now is’ mean ὃ 
 
 21. ἐγείρει τιν. This is one of the ‘greater works’ which the 
 Father sheweth the Son, and which the Son imitates, the raising up 
 those who are spiritually dead. Not all of them: the Son imparts 
 life only to ‘whom He will:’ and He wills not to impart it to those 
 
138 3. JOHN. [V.' 21— 
 
 who will not believe. The ‘whom He will’ would be almost unin- 
 telligible if actual resurrection from the grave were intended. 
 
 22. οὐδὲ γὰρ ὁ π. For not even doth the Father (to Whom judg- 
 ment belongs) judge any man. The Son therefore has both powers, 
 to make alive whom He will, and to judge: but the second is only the 
 corollary of the first. Those whom He does not will to make alive are 
 by that very fact judged, separated off from the living, and left in the 
 death which they have chosen. He does not make them dead, does 
 not slay them. They are spiritually dead already, and will not be 
 made alive. As in iii. 17, 18, the context shews that the judgment is 
 one of condemnation. Note the emphatic position of πᾶσαν. 
 
 23. ov tuna. By not knowing the Father’s representative, 
 
 24. ὁ T. A. μ. ἀκούων. This shews that οὖς θέλει (v. 21) implies 
 no arbitrary selection. Each decides for himself whether he will hear 
 and believe and thus have life. 
 
 πιστ. τῷ πέμψαντι, Believeth Him that sent (see oni. 33). Here 
 and viii. 31; Acts xvi, 34, xviii. 8; Tit. ii. 8, the A. V. renders mor. 
 τινί, ‘to believe a man’s word,’ as if it were πιστ. els τινα, ‘to believe 
 on a man.’ Here the meaning is, ‘believeth God’s word respecting 
 His Son :’ see on i. 12, vi. 20. 
 
 ἔχει {. αἰών. Hath it already: see on iii. 36 and 16, 
 eis Kp. οὐκ px. Cometh not into judgment. 
 
 peraB. x... Is passed over out of death into life: comp, xiii. 1; 
 1 John iii. 14. This cannot refer to the resurrection of the body: it 
 is equivalent to escaping judgment and obtaining eternal life; shew- 
 ing that the death is spiritual and the resurrection spiritual also. 
 
 25. Repetition of v. 24 in a more definite form, with a cheering 
 addition: v. 24 says that whoever hears and believes God has eternal 
 life; v. 25 states that already some are in this happy case. 
 
 ἔρχ. ὥρα. There cometh an hour: comp. iv. 21, 23. 
 
 καὶ viv ἐστιν. These words also exclude the meaning of a bodily 
 resurrection ; the hour for which had not yet arrived. The few cases 
 in which Christ raised the dead cannot be meant; (1) the statement 
 evidently has a much wider range; (2) the widow’s son, Jairus’ 
 daughter, and Lazarus were not yet dead, so that even of them ‘and 
 nou is’ would not be true; (3) they died again after their return from 
 death, and ‘they that hear shall live’ clearly refers to eternal life, as 
 a comparison with v. 24 shews. If a spiritual resurrection be under- 
 stood, ‘and now is’ is perfectly intelligible: Christ’s ministry was 
 already winning souls from spiritual death. 
 
 26. So gave He also to the Son. Comp. ‘the living Father sent 
 Me, and I live by the Father’ (vi. 57). The Father is the absolutely 
 living One, the Fount of all Life. The Messiah, however, imparts 
 life to all who believe; which He could not do unless He had in 
 Himself a fountain of life; and this the Father gave Him when He 
 
V. 29.] NOTES. . 139 
 
 sent Him into the world. The Eternal Generation of the Son from 
 the Father is not here in question; it is the Father’s communication 
 of Divine attributes to the Incarnate Word that is meant. 
 
 27. ἐξουσίαν ἔδωκεν. Gave Him authority (i. 12, x. 18), when He 
 sent Him into the world. Aorists mark what was done once for all. 
 
 ὅτι vids ἄνθρ. ἐστίν. Because He is a son of man, i.e. not because 
 He is the Messiah, but because He is a human being. Neither ‘son’ 
 nor ‘man’ has the article. Where ‘the Son of Man,’ i.e. the Messiah, 
 is meant, both words have the article: comp. i. 52, ili. 13, 14, vi. 27, 
 53, 62, viii. 28, &c. Because the Son emptied Himself of His glory 
 and became a man, therefore the Father endowed Him with these 
 two powers; to have life in Himself, and to execute judgment. 
 
 Before passing on to the last section of this half of the discourse we 
 may remark that “the relation of the Son to the Father is seldom 
 alluded to in the Synoptic Gospels. But a single verse in which it is, 
 seems to contain the essence of the Johannean theology, Matt. xi. 27: 
 ‘ All things are delivered unto Me of My Father; and no man knoweth 
 the Son but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save 
 the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him.’ This 
 passage is one of the best authenticated in the Synoptic Gospels. It 
 is found in exact parallelism both in 5. Matthew and 8S. Luke...... 
 And yet once grant the authenticity of this passage, and there is 
 nothing in the Johannean Christology that it does not cover.” Sanday. 
 The theory, therefore, that this discourse is the composition of the 
 Evangelist, who puts forward his own theology as the teaching of 
 Christ, has no basis. If the passage in 5. Matthew and 8S. Luke 
 represents the teaching of Christ, what reason have we for doubting 
 that this discourse does so? To invent the substance of it was 
 beyond the reach even of 5. John; how far the precise wording is his 
 me pannot tell, This section (21—27) bears strong impress of his 
 style. 
 
 28, 29. The intimacy between the Father and the Son further 
 proved by the power committed to the Son of causing the bodily 
 resurrection of the dead. 
 
 28. μὴ Savp. Comp. iii. 7. Marvel not that the Son can grant 
 spiritual life to them that believe, and separate from them those who 
 will not believe. There cometh an hour when He shall cause a 
 general resurrection of men’s bodies, and a final separation of good 
 from bad, a final judgment. He does not add ‘and now is,’ which is 
 in favour of the resurrection being literal. 
 
 πάντ. οἱ ἐν τ. pv. Not ‘whom He will;’ there are none whom He 
 does not will to come forth from their sepulchres (see on xi. 7). All, 
 whether believers or not, must rise. This shews that spiritual resur- 
 rection cannot be meant. 
 
 29. τὰ φ. moat. Practised worthless things. See on iii. 20. 
 
 εἰς ἀνάστ. kp. Unto the resurrection of judgment. These words 
 are the strongest proof that spiritual resurrection cannot be meant, 
 
140 S. JOHN, [V. 29— 
 
 Spiritual resurrection must always be a resurrection of life, a passing’ 
 from spiritual death to spiritual life. A passing from spiritual death 
 to judgment is not spiritual resurrection. This passage, and Acts 
 xxiv. 15, are the only direct assertions in N. T. of a bodily resur- 
 rection of the wicked. It is implied, Matt. x. 28; Rev. xx. 12, 13. 
 Comp. Dan. xii. 2. A satisfactory translation for κρίνειν and κρίσις 
 is not easy to find: they combine the notions of ‘separating’ and 
 ‘judging,’ and from the context often acquire the further notion of 
 ‘condemning.’ See on iii. 17, 18, and for the genitive Winer, p. 235, 
 
 30. The Son’s qualification for these high powers is the perfect 
 harmony between His Will and that of the Father. 
 
 ov Suv. ἐγώ. Change to the first person, as in vi. 35. He identifies 
 Himself with the Son. It is because He is the Son that He cannot 
 act independently: it is impossible for Him to will to do anything 
 but what the Father wills. See on v. 19. 
 
 καθὼς ἀκούω. From the Father: Christ’s judgment is the declara- 
 tion of that which the Father communicates to Him. Hence Christ’s 
 judgment must be just, for it is in accordance with the Divine Will; 
 and this is the strongest possible guarantee of its justice. Matt. xxvi. 
 39. The Jews were seeking to do their own will, and their judgment 
 was not just. 
 
 31—47. Tur UNBELIEF OF THE JEWS, 
 
 31—35. These claims rest not on My testimony alone, nor on that of 
 John, but on that of the Father. 
 
 31. οὐκ ἔστιν ἀληθής. Nothing is to be understood ; the words are 
 to be taken literally: ‘If I bear any witness other than that which 
 My Father bears, that witness of Mine is not true.’ In viii. 14, we 
 have an apparent contradiction to this, but it is only the other side of 
 the same truth: ‘ My witness is true because it is really My Father’s.’ 
 
 32. ἄλλος ἐστίν, Not the Baptist (v. 34), but the Father (vii. 28, 
 viii. 26). On μαρτυρῶ see on i. 7. 
 
 33. ἀπεστάλκ....μεμαρτ. Ye have sent unto J., and he hath borne 
 witness. The perfects express the abiding results of past actions. 
 ‘What ye have heard from him is true; but I do not accept it; the 
 testimony which I accept comes not from man, I mention it for your 
 sakes, not My own. If ye believe John ye will believe Me and be 
 saved.’ ‘Ye’ and ‘I’ in these two verses (33, 34) are in emphatic 
 opposition. Note the article before μαρτυρίαν. 
 
 35. ἐκεῖνος κιτλ, The A. V. is here grievously wrong, ignoring 
 the Greek article twice over, and also the meaning of the words; and 
 thus obscuring the marked difference between the Baptist and the 
 Messiah: better, he was the lamp which is kindled and (so) shineth. 
 Christ is the Light; John is only the lamp kindled at the Light, and 
 shining only after being so kindled, having no light but what is 
 derived. Λύχνος is again rendered ‘light’ Matt. vi, 22, but ‘candle’ 
 
Υ. 8517.] NOTES. 141 
 
 Matt. v. 15; Mark iv. 21; Luke viii. 16, xi. 33, 36, xv. 8: Rev. xviii. 
 23, xxii. 5. ‘Lamp’ would be best in all places. No O.T. prophecy 
 speaks of the Baptist under this figure. David is so called 2 Sam. 
 xxi. 17 (see margin), and Elijah (Ecclus, xlviii. 1); and 5. Augustine 
 applies ἡτοίμασα τῷ Χριστῷ μου λύχνον, paravi lucernam Christo Meo 
 (Ps. cxxxii. 18), to the Baptist. The imperfects in this verse seem to 
 imply that John’s career is closed; he is in prison, if not dead. 
 
 ἠθελ. dyad. Like children, they were glad to disport themselves 
 in the blaze, instead of seriously considering its meaning. And even 
 that only for a season: their pilgrimages to the banks of the Jordan 
 had soon ended; when John began to preach repentance they left 
 him, sated with the novelty and offended at his doctrine.—For an- 
 other charge of frivolity and fickleness against them in reference to 
 John comp. Matt. xi. 16—19. 
 
 36—40. The Father’s testimony is evident, (a) in the works as- 
 signed to Me, (b) in the revelation which ye do not receive. 
 
 36. ἐγὼ δὲ ἔχω. JI have the witness which is greater than John ; 
 or, the witness which I have is greater than John, viz. the woiks 
 (see on v. 20) which as the Messiah I have been commissioned to do. 
 Among these works would be raising the spiritually dead to life, 
 judging unbelievers, as well as miracles: certainly not miracles only ; 
 vii. 3, x. 38. See on iii. 35. 
 
 ἵνα teX. Literally, in order that I may accomplish; comp. xvii. 4. 
 This was God’s purpose. See on iv. 34, 47, ix. 3. 8. John is very 
 fond of constructions with iva, especially of the Divine purpose. 
 
 37—40. The connexion of thought in the next few verses is very 
 difficult to catch, and cannot be affirmed with certainty. This is 
 often the case in 8. John’s writings. A number of simple sentences 
 follow one another with an even flow; but it is by no means easy to 
 see how each leads on to the next. Here there is a transition from 
 the indirect testimony to the Messiahship of Jesus given by the works 
 which He is commissioned to do (v. 36) to the direct testimony to the 
 same given by the words of Scripture (37—40). The Jews were 
 rejecting both. 
 
 37. ὁ πέμψας. See oni. 33: ἐκεῖνος, see on i. 18, 11. 82, Note the 
 change from aorist to perfect; The Father which sent Me (once for all 
 at the Incarnation) He hath borne witness (for a long time past, and 
 is still doing so) of Me. For the conjunctions see Winer, p. 613. 
 
 οὔτε φωνὴν «.r.A. These words are a reproach; therefore there 
 can be no allusion (as suggested in the margin) to the Baptism or the 
 Transfiguration. The Transfiguration had not yet taken place, and 
 very few if any of Christ’s hearers could have heard the voice from 
 heaven at the Baptism. Moreover, if that particular utterance were 
 meant, φωνήν would have had the article. Nor can there be any 
 reference to the theophanies, or symbolical visions of God, in O.T. 
 It could be no matter of reproach to these Jews that they had never 
 beheld a theophany. A paraphrase will shew the meaning; ‘neither 
 
142 S. JOHN. [V. 37— 
 
 with the ear of the heart have ye ever heard Him, nor with the eye 
 of the heart have ye ever seen Him, in the revelation of Himself given 
 in the Scriptures; and so ye have not the testimony of His word 
 present as an abiding power within you.’ There should be no full 
 stop at ‘shape,’ only a comma or semi-colon. Had they studied 
 Scripture rightly they would have had a less narrow view of the 
 Sabbath (v. 16), and would have recognised the Messiah. 
 
 38. ‘And hence it is that ye have no inner appropriation of the 
 word’—seeing that ye have never received it eitner by hearing or 
 vision. Ὧν λόγος is not a fresh testimony different from φωνή and 
 εἶδος : all refer to the same—the witness of Scripture to the Messiah. 
 
 ὅτι ὃν ἀπ. Because whom He sent: see on i. 33. Proof of the 
 previous negation. One who had the word abiding in his heart could 
 not reject Him to whom thet word bears witness. 1 John ii. 14, 24. 
 
 τούτῳ ὑμεῖς. In emphatic opposition. See on i. 12, vi. 30, 111. 32. 
 
 39. épavvare τ. yp. It will never be settled beyond dispute 
 whether the verb here is imperative or indicative. As far as the 
 Greek shews, it may be either, ‘search,’ or ‘ye search,’ and both make 
 sense. Comp. xii. 19, xvi. 31. The question is, which makes the 
 best sense, and this the context must decide. The context seems 
 to be strongly in favour of the indicative, ye search the Scriptures. 
 All the verbs on either side are in the indicative; and more especially 
 the one with which it is so closely connected, οὐ θέλετε. Ye search the 
 Scriptures, and (instead of their leading you to Me) ye are not willing 
 to come to Me. The tragic tone once more: see oni, 5. The re- 
 proach lies not in their searching, but in their searching to so little 
 purpose. Jewish study of the Scriptures was too often learned trifling 
 and worse; obscuring the text by frivolous interpretations, ‘making 
 it of none effect’ by unholy traditions. “Ypets is emphatic: because ye 
 are the people who think. Not that they were wrong in thinking that 
 eternal life was contained in the Scriptures: their error was in think- 
 ing that by their dissection of them, letter by letter, they had found it. 
 They had scrutinised with the utmost minuteness the written word 
 (γραφαί), and missed the living word (λόγος) which spoke of the 
 Messiah ; ἐκεῖναι (i. 8, 18), precisely they, the very books ye study so 
 diligently. 
 
 40. οὐ θέλετε. Ye are not willing to come to Me. This is at the 
 root of their failure to read Scripture aright; their hearts are es- 
 tranged. They have no will to find the truth, and without that no 
 intellectual searching will avail. Here again man’s will is shewn to 
 be free; the truth is not forced upon him; he can reject if he likes: 
 iii. 19, vii. 17, vili. 44. 
 
 41—44. Not that I seek glory from men; had I done so, you would 
 have received Me. Your worldliness prevents you from receiving One 
 whose motives are not worldly. 
 
 41. οὐ AapB. It is nothing to Me; I have no need of it, and 
 refuse it (v. 84). Glory would perhaps be better than ‘honour’ both 
 
Υ. 45.] NOTES. 143 
 
 here and in v. 44, and than ‘praise’ in ix. 24 and xii. 43; see 
 notes there. Christ is anticipating an objection, and at the same 
 time shewing what is the real cause of their unbelief. ‘Glory from 
 men is not what I seek; think not the want of that is the cause of 
 My complaint. The desire of glory from men is what blinds your 
 eyes to the truth.’ 
 
 42. ἔγνωκα. I have come to know and therefore I know: comp. 
 κέκραγα (i. 15), ἤλπικα (v. 45), olda (v. 32). Once more Christ appears 
 as the searcher of hearts; comp. i. 47, 50, ii. 24, 25 (see note), iv. 17, 
 18, 48, v. 14. 
 
 ἐν ἑαυτοῖς. Jn yourselves, in your hearts. ‘ Thou shalt love the 
 Lord thy God with all thy heart’ (Deut. vii. 5) was written on their 
 broad phylacteries (see note on Matt. xxiii. 5), but it had no place in 
 their hearts and no influence on their lives. It is the want of love, 
 the want of will (v. 40), that makes them reject and persecute the 
 Messiah. The phrase ἡ ἀγάπη τ. θεοῦ occurs 1 John ii, 5, 111, 17, 
 iv. 9, v. 3; elsewhere in the Gospels only Luke xi. 42. 
 
 43. καὶ οὐ λαμβ. The καί of tragic contrast, asin v. 40. ‘I come 
 with the highest credentials (x. 25), as My Father’s representative 
 (viii. 42), and ye reject Me (see on i. δ). 
 
 ἐν τ. dv τ. ἰδίῳ. Double article; in the name that is his own, asa 
 false Messiah (Matt. xxiv. 5, 24). Both the verb, ἔλθῃ, and ἄλλος (not 
 érepos), which implies some kind of likeness, point to a pretended 
 Messiah. Sixty-four such have been counted. On ἐκεῖνον see on i. 18, 
 
 44. ὑμεῖς, Emphatic; ‘such men as you.’ It is morally impos- 
 sible for you, who care only for the glory that man bestows, to believe 
 on One who rejects such glory. This is the climax of Christ’s accu- 
 sation, They have reduced themselves to such a condition that they 
 cannot believe. They must change their whole view and manner of 
 life before they can do so: comp. v. 47. On πιστεῦσαι see on 1. 7. 
 
 π. τ᾿ povov 8. From the only God, from Him who alone is God: 
 whereas by receiving glory they were making gods of themselves. So 
 that it is they who really make themselves equal with God (v. 18). 
 ‘The only God,’ as in xvii. 3; 1 Tim. vi. 16: ‘God only’ would be τοῦ 
 6. μόνου (Matt. xii. 4, xvii. 8) or μόνου τ. 6. (Luke v. 21, vi. 4). The 
 second δόξαν has the article, the first has not: they receive glory, 
 such as it is, from one another, and are indifferent to the glory, which 
 alone deserves the name. They pride themselves on the external 
 glory of Israel and reject the true glory which God would give them 
 in the Messiah. The whole should run thus, How can ye believe, 
 seeing that ye receive glory one of another: and the glory which 
 cometh from the only God ye seek not. Winer, p. 723. 
 
 45—47. Do not appeal to Moses: his writings condemn you. 
 
 Thus the whole basis of their confidence is cut away. Moses on 
 whom they trust as a defender is their accuser. 
 
 45. μὴ δοκεῖτε. ‘Think not, because I reproach you now, that it 
 is I who will accuse you.’ If this refers to the day of judgment (and 
 
144 S. JOHN. [V. 45— 
 
 the future tense seems to point to that), there are two reasons why 
 Christ will not act as accuser (1) because it would be needless; there 
 is another accuser ready; (2) because He will be acting as Judge. 
 
 ἔστιν ὁ κατ. Your accuser exists already; he is there with his 
 charge. Note the change from future to present: Christ will not be, 
 because Moses 7s, their accuser. 
 
 Μωυσῆς. See oni. 17. Moses represents the Law. It was zeal 
 for the Mosaic Law which stirred the Jews on this occasion. 
 
 ἠλπίκατε. On whom ye have set your hope; present result of 
 past action. Ἤλπικα is spero not speravi: see on Ὁ. 42 and comp. 
 1 Tim. vy. 5. The Jews eagerly claimed him as their own (ix. 28, 29). 
 
 46. εἰ.. ἐπιστεύετε. If ye believed (as in v. 47) M., ye would 
 believe Me : not ‘had ye believed,’ ‘would have believed,’ which would 
 have required aorists. Comp, viii. 19 (where A.V. has a similar 
 error), 42, ix. 41, xv. 19, xviii. 36; and contrast iv. 10, xi. 21, 32, 
 xiv. 28, where we have the aorist. The γάρ introduces the proof that 
 Moses is their accuser; his statements and Christ’s agree: see on 
 vi. 30, 
 
 περὶ y. ἐμοῦ. Emphatic: For it was of Me he wrote. Christ here 
 stamps the Pentateuch with His authority; accepting, as referring to 
 Himself, its Messianic types and prophecies. Luke xxiv. 27, 44. 
 
 47, ἐκείνου... ἐμοῖς. These are the emphatic words, not γράμμασιν and 
 ῥήμασιν. The comparison is between Moses and Christ; the contrast 
 between writings and words is no part of the argument. It was a 
 mere matter of fact that Moses had written and Christ had not. 
 Comp. ‘If they hear not Moses and the prophets, &c.’ (Luke xvi. 31). 
 For εἰ οὐ see on x. 87. On ῥήμασιν see on 11]. 84. 
 
 We pass now from a crisis in the work at Jerusalem to a crisis in 
 the work in Galilee, each typical of the section to which it belongs 
 and exhibiting the development of national unbelief. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 2. ἐθεώρουν for ἑώρων, a tense of dpdw never used by S. John, 
 
 9. Omit ἕν after παιδάριον, with NBDL, Lat. vet., Syr. vet., and 
 Origen, i.e. the oldest MSS., oldest versions, and oldest Father who 
 quotes the passage. 
 
 11. ἔλαβεν οὖν (S. John’s favourite particle) for ἔλαβε δέ. Omit 
 (NJABL) τοῖς μαθηταῖς, οἱ δὲ μαθηταί after διέδωκεν. The insertion (D) 
 comes from the Synoptic narrative. 
 
 14. Omit ὁ Ἰησοῦς after σημεῖον with NBD against A: comp. iii, 
 2, iv. 46, viii. 21. k 
 
 22. εἶδον for ἰδών (misconception of the construction). After 
 εἰ μὴ ἕν omit ἐκεῖνο els ὃ ἐνέβησαν οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ (explanatory gloss). 
 
VIL] NOTES. 145 
 
 35. διψήσει for διψήσῃ (correction to usual construction: comp. iv. 
 14, x. 5). 
 
 38. ἀπό for ἐκ (from vv. 33, 41, 51), 
 
 40. γάρ for dé. πατρός pov for πέμψαντός με (from τ. 39) with 
 NBCDLTU against A. 
 
 51. Omit ἣν ἐγὼ δώσω after ἐστίν, with NBCDLT against the mass 
 of later MSS. A is defective here. 
 
 55. ἀληθής for ἀληθῶς twice: Origen substitutes ἀληθίνη. 
 
 57. tyoe for ζήσεται. The future of {dw occurs 20 times in N.T. 
 In 6 quotations from LXX. ξήσομαι is used: 4 times in S. John (v. 25, 
 vi. 57, 58, xiv. 19) ἕήσω is used; so also probably in vi. 51. ἕήσεται 
 occurs xi. 25. 
 
 63. λελάληκα for λαλῶ, with all the oldest MSS., versions, and 
 Fathers. 
 
 69. ὁ ἅγιος Tov θεοῦ for 6 Χριστὸς ὁ vids τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος (from 
 Matt. xvi. 16), with NBC!DL against the mass of later MSS. ἃ and T 
 are defective. 
 
 71. ᾿Ισκαριώτου for ᾿Ισκαριώτην, with the earlier MSS. and best 
 copies of the Vulgate. 
 
 We see more and more as we go on, that this Gospel makes no at- 
 tempt to be a complete or connected whole. There are large gaps in 
 the chronology. The Evangelist gives us not a biography, but a series 
 of typical scenes, very carefully selected, and painted with great accu- 
 racy and minuteness, but not closely connected. As to what guided 
 him in his selection, we know no more than the general purpose stated 
 xx. 31, and it is sufficient for us. Those words and works of Jesus, 
 which seemed most calculated to convince men that He ‘is the Christ, 
 the Son of God,’ were recorded by the beloved Apostle. And the fact 
 that they had already been recorded by one or more of the first Evan- 
 gelists did not deter him from insisting on them again; although he 
 naturally more often chose what they had omitted. In this chapter we 
 have a notable instance of readiness to go over old ground in order 
 to work out his own purpose. The miracle of feeding the Five 
 Thousand is recorded by all four Evangelists, the only miracle that 
 is so. Moreover, it is outside the Judaean ministry; so that for this 
 reason also we might have expected S. John to omit it. But he 
 needs it as a text for the great discourse on the Bread of Life; and 
 this though spoken in Galilee was in a great measure addressed to 
 Jews from Jerusalem; so that both text and discourse fall naturally 
 within the range of 8. John’s plan. Moreover by producing an out- 
 burst of popular enthusiasm (v. 15) it shewed how utterly the current 
 ideas about the Messiah were at variance with Christ’s work. 
 
 ST JOHN IK 
 
146 S. JOHN. [VI. 1— 
 
 As in chap. v. Christ is set forth as the Source of Life, so in this 
 chapter He is set forth as the Support of Life. In the one the main 
 idea is the Son’s relation to the Father, in the other it is the Son’s 
 relation to the believer. 
 
 Cuap. VI. Curist tHe Support oF LIFE. 
 
 This chapter, like the last, contains a discourse arising out of a 
 miracle. It contains moreover an element wanting in the previous 
 chapter,—the results of the discourse. Thus we obtain three divi- 
 sions; 1. The Sign on the Land, the Sign on the Lake, and the 
 Sequel of the Signs (1—25). 2. The Discourse on the Son as the 
 COT) of Life (26—59). (3) The opposite Results of the Discourse 
 
 0—71). . 
 
 1—15. Tue Sicn on THE LAND; FEEDING THE Five THOUSAND. 
 
 1. μετὰ ταῦτα. See on v. 1. How long after we cannot tell; but if 
 the feast in v.1 is rightly conjectured to be Purim, this would be 
 about a month later in the same year, which is probably a.p. 29. 
 But 5. John is not careful to mark the precise interval between the 
 various scenes which he gives us. Comp. the indefinite transitions 
 from the First Passover to Nicodemus, ii. 23, iii. 1; from Nicodemus 
 to the Baptist’s discourse, iii. 22, 25; from that to the scene at Sychar, 
 iv. 1- 4. &c., &c. The chronology is doubtless correct, but it is not 
 clear: chronology is not what S. John cares to give us. The historical 
 connexion with what precedes is not the same in the four accounts. 
 Here it is in connexion with the miracles at Bethesda and probably 
 after the death of the Baptist: in 5. Matthew it is in connexion with 
 the death of the Baptist: in 5. Mark and S. Luke it is after 
 the death of the Baptist, but in connexion with the return of the 
 Twelve. The notes on Matt. xiv. 13—21, Mark vi. 40—44, and 
 Luke ix. 10—17 should be compared throughout. 
 
 ἀπῆλθεν. Departed, we do not know from what place. The scene 
 suddenly shifts from Judaea (v.18) to Galilee; but we are told nothing 
 about the transit or the reason for it. 
 
 From the Synoptists we gather that the murder of the Baptist 
 (Matt. xiv. 13), and the curiosity of Herod (Luke ix. 9), rendered it 
 expedient to leave Herod’s dominions; moreover the return of the 
 Twelve (Luke ix. 10) made retirement easy and perhaps desirable 
 (Mark vi. 30, 31). Thus the four narratives combine. 
 
 τῆς Τιβεριάδος. Here, v. 23 and xxi. lonly. The name is added 
 to describe the sea more exactly, especially for the sake of foreign 
 readers. Another slight indication that this Gospel was written out- 
 side Palestine: inside Palestine such minute description would be less 
 natural. The Greek geographer Pausanias writes λίμνη TiBepis; Jose- 
 phus uses one or other of the names here combined by 8. John; 
 5. Matt. and 5. Mark have θάλ. τῆς Γαλιλαίας ; S. Luke λίμνη Τεννη- 
 σαρέτ. Perhaps we are to understand that the southern half of the 
 lake is specially intended; for here on the western shore Tiberias was 
 situated. . The name Tiberias is not found in the first three Gospels. 
 
VL 7) NOTES. 147 
 
 The magnificent town was built during our Lord’s lifetime by Herod 
 Antipas, who called it Tiberias out of compliment to the reigning 
 Emperor; one of many instances of the Herods paying court to Rome. 
 Comp. Bethsaida Julias, where this miracle took place, called Julias 
 by Herod Philip after the infamous daughter of Augustus, and Sebaste, 
 so called in honour of Augustus (see on iv. 7). The new town would 
 naturally be much better known and more likely to be mentioned 
 when 5. John wrote than when the earlier Evangelists wrote. 
 
 2. ἠκολούθει. Imperfects of continued action throughout the verse 
 in contrast to ἀπῆλθεν and ἀνῆλθεν in vv. land 3, *H@edpovv implies 
 reflecting attention; v. 19, ii. 23, vii. 3, xii. 45, xiv. 19, xvi. 16. The 
 multitude went round by land, while Jesus crossed the lake: it would 
 be all the greater because the Baptist was no longer a counter-attraction, 
 and the Twelve had returned from a mission which must have excited 
 attention. Jesus kept on working miracles (ἐποίει), and these con- 
 tinually attracted fresh crowds. 
 
 3. τὸ ὅρος. The mountain, or the mountainous part, of the district: 
 the article indicates familiarity with the neighbourhood (v.15). We 
 cannot determine the precise eminence. The object is retirement, 
 
 4. ἡ ἑορτὴ τ. “I. The feast of the Jews. Possibly a mere date to 
 mark the time. As already noticed (see on ii. 13), S. John groups his 
 narrative round the Jewish festivals. But the statement may also be 
 made as a further explanation of the multitude. Just before the Pass- 
 over large bands of pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem would be 
 passing along the east shore of the lake. But we find that the multi- 
 tude in this case are quite ready (v. 24) to cross over to Capernaum, 
 as if they had no intention of going to Jerusalem; so that this inter- 
 pretation of the verse is uncertain. Equally doubtful is the theory 
 that this verse gives a key of interpretation to the discourse which 
 follows, the eating of Christ’s Flesh and Blood being the antitype of the 
 Passover. From vi. 1 it would seem that Jesus did not go up to 
 Jerusalem for this Passover. 
 
 δ. ἔρχεται. Is coming; present of graphic description. The quiet 
 which He sought is being invaded; yet He welcomes the opportunity 
 and at once surrenders His rest to His Father’s work, as in the case of 
 Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman. But why does He address 
 Philip? Because he was nearest to Him; or because his forward 
 spirit (xiv. 8) needed to be convinced of its own helplessness; or 
 because, as living on the lake (i. 44), he would know the neighbour- 
 hood. Any or all of these suggestions may be correct. Throughout 
 we see how Jesus uses events for the education cf His disciples. As 
 Judas kept the purse it is not likely that Philip commonly provided 
 food for the party. A more important question remains: ‘ we notice 
 that the impulse to the performance of the miracle comes in the 
 Synoptists from the disciples; in 8. John, solely from our Lord Him- 
 self.” This is difference, but not contradiction: S. John’s narrative 
 does not preclude the possibility of the disciples having spontaneously 
 applied to Christ for help either before or after this conversation with 
 
 K2 
 
148 | S. JOHN. [VL 5= 
 
 Philip. ‘For the rest the superiority in distinctness and precision is 
 all on the side of S. John. He knows to whom the question was put; 
 he knows exactly what Philip answered; and again the remark of 
 Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother...... Some memories are essentially 
 pictorial; and the Apostle’s appears to have been one of these. It is 
 wonderful with what precision every stroke is thrown in. Most minds 
 would have become confused in reproducing events which had occurred 
 so long ago; but there is no confusion here” (Sanday). 
 
 ἀγοράσωμεν. Must we buy: deliberative subjunctive. 
 
 6. πειράζων. This need not mean more than to try whether he 
 could suggest anything; but more probably, to test his faith, to prove 
 to him how imperfect it still was in spite of His having been so long 
 with him (xiv. 9). Jesus had no need to inform Himself as to Philip’s 
 faith: He ‘knew what was in man.’ In Philippo non desideravit 
 panem, sed fidem (8. Augustine). 
 
 αὐτός Without suggestions from others; xv. 27. The Evangelist 
 knows the Lord’s motives (ii. 24, 25, iv. 1—3, v. 6, vii. 1, xiii. 1, 3, 
 11, xvi. 19, xviii. 4, xix. 28). Unless this is most audacious inven- 
 tion it almost amounts to proof that the Evangelist is the Apostle 
 S. John. 
 
 τί ἔμελλεν ποιεῖν. The miracle and the lesson deduced from it, 
 
 7. ϑιακοσίων δην. Two hundred shillingsworth would fairly repre- 
 sent the original. The denarius was the ordinary wage for a day’s 
 work (Matt. xx. 2; comp. Luke x. 35); in weight of silver it was less 
 than a shilling; in purchasing power it was more. Two hundred 
 denarii from the one point of view would be about £7, from the other, 
 nearly double that. §S. Philip does not solve the difficulty; he merely 
 states it in a practical way; a much larger amount than they can 
 command would still be insufficient. See on Mark viii. 4. 
 
 8. εἷς ἐκ τ. pa. Of course this does not imply that Philip was 
 not a disciple; the meaning rather is, that a disciple had been ap- 
 pealed to without results, and now a disciple makes a communication 
 out of which good results flow. The name of this second disciple 
 comes in as a sort of afterthought. There seems to have been some 
 connexion between 5. Andrew and 5, Philip (i. 44, xii. 22). In the 
 lists of the Apostles in Mark iii. and Acts i. 5. Philip’s name imme- 
 diately follows 8. Andrew’s. On 5. Andrew see notes on i. 40, 41. 
 The particulars about Philip and Andrew here are not found in the 
 Synoptists’ account. 
 
 9. παιδάριον. A little lad, or (less probably) servant. The ἕν 
 of some MSS., if genuine, would emphasize the poverty of their 
 resources; the provisions of a.single boy. 83. Andrew has been 
 making enquiries; which shews that the disciples had considered the 
 matter before Jesus addressed 8. Philip, as the Synoptists tell us, 
 
 κριθίνους. The ordinary coarse food of the lower orders; Judg. vii. 
 13. 5. John alone mentions their being of barley, and that they 
 
VI. 13.] NOTES. 149 
 
 belonged to the lad, who was probably selling them. With homely 
 food from so scanty a store Christ will feed them all. These minute 
 details are the touches of an eyewitness. 
 
 ὀψάρια. The force of the diminutive is lost; fishes, not ‘small 
 fishes.’ The word occurs in this Gospel only (v. 11, xxi. 9, 10, 13), 
 and literally means a little relish, i.e. anything eaten with bread or 
 other food: and as salt fish was most commonly used for this pur- 
 pose, the word came gradually to mean ‘fish’ in particular. 8. Philip 
 had enlarged on the greatness of the difficulty; S. Andrew insists 
 rather on the smallness of the resources for meeting it, 
 
 10. χόρτος πολύς. As we might expect early in April (v. 4). S. 
 Mark (vi. 39, 40) mentions how they reclined in parterres (πρασιαὶ 
 mpacvat), by hundreds and by fifties, on the green grass. This arrange- 
 ment would make it easy to count them. 
 
 ot ἄνδρες. The men, as distinct from the women and children, who 
 would not be very numerous: τοὺς ἀνθρώπους, the people, includes all 
 three. 8S. Matthew (xiv. 21) says that the 5000 included the men 
 only. Tov ἀριθμόν, accusative of closer definition; Winer, p. 288. 
 
 11. edxaptor. The usual grace before meat said by the head of 
 the house or the host. ‘He that enjoys aught without thanksgiving, 
 is as though he robbed God.’ Talmud. But it seems clear that this 
 giving of thanks or blessing of the food (Luke ix. 16) was the means of 
 the miracle, because (1) all four narratives notice it; (2) it is point- 
 edly mentioned again v. 23; (3) it is also mentioned in both accounts 
 of the feeding of the 4000 (Matt. xv. 36; Mark viii. 6). It should be 
 remembered that this act is again prominent at the institution of the 
 Kucharist (Matt. xxvi. 26; Mark xiv. 22; Luke xxii. 17, 19; 2 Cor. 
 xi, 24). It is futile to ask whether the multiplication took place in 
 Christ’s hands only: the manner of the miracle eludes us, as in the 
 turning of the water into wine. That was a change of quality, this 
 of quantity. This is a literal fulfilment of Matt. vi. 33. 
 
 12. συναγάγετε. S. John alone tells of this command, though 
 the others tell us that the fragments were gathered up. It has been 
 noticed as a strong mark of truth, most unlikely to have been in- 
 vented by the writer of a fiction. We do not find the owner of For- 
 tunatus’ purse careful against extravagance. How improbable, from 
 a human point of view, that one who could multiply food at will 
 should give directions about saving fragments! 
 
 13. κοφίνους. All four Evangelists here use κόφινος for basket, as 
 does 5. Matthew (xvi. 9) in referring to this miracle. It is the wallet 
 which every Jew carried when on a journey, to keep himself inde- 
 pendent of Gentile food (Juv. 111. 14). In the feeding of the 4000 
 (Matt. xv. 37; Mark viii. 8), and in referring to it (Matt. xvi. 10), 
 σπυρίς is the word for basket. See on Mark viii. 8; Acts ix. 25. 
 
 dpr. τ. κριθ. 5. John insists on the identity of the fragments 
 with the original loaves, He mentions the bread only, because only 
 
150 S.. JOHN, [V1. 13— 
 
 the bread has a symbolical meaning in the subsequent discourse. 
 S. Mark says that fragments of fish were gathered also. Each of the 
 Twelve filled his wallet full, so that the remnants far exceeded the 
 original store. For the plural verb with a neut. nom. comp. xix. 31. 
 
 The expedients to evade the obvious meaning of the narrative are 
 worth mentioning, as shewing how some readers are willing to ‘vio- 
 late all the canons of historical evidence,’ rather than admit the pos- 
 sibility of a miracle: (1) that food had been brought over and con- 
 cealed in the boat; (2) that some among the multitude were abund- 
 antly supplied with food and were induced by Christ’s example to 
 share their supply with others; (3) that the whole is an allegorical 
 illustration of Matt. vi. 33. How could either (1) or (2) excite even 
 a suspicion that He was the Messiah, much less kindle such an 
 enthusiasm as is recorded in v.15? And if the whole is an allegory 
 what meaning can be given to this popular enthusiasm ? 
 
 14. ot οὖν av9p. The people therefore, the whole multitude. 
 The plural, ἃ ἐπ. σημεῖα, which some authorities read, includes the 
 effect of previous miracles. The imperf., é\eyov, indicates that this 
 was repeatedly said. ‘O’Ingois has been inserted here, as elsewhere, 
 in some MSS., because this was once the beginning of a lesson read 
 in church. The same thing has been done in our own Prayer Book 
 in the Gospels for Quinquagesima and the 3rd Sunday in Lent: in 
 the Gospel for S. John’s day the names of both Jesus and Peter have 
 been inserted; and in those for the 5th 5. in Lent and 2nd S. after 
 Easter the words ‘Jesus said’ have been inserted. In all cases a 
 desire for clearness has caused the insertion. Comp. viii. 21. 
 
 ὁ mp. ὁ épx. The Prophet that cometh; the Prophet of Deut. xviii. 
 15 (see on i. 21 and xi. 27). The miracle perhaps reminded them of 
 the manna, and Moses, and his promise of a greater than himself. 
 S. John alone tells us of the effect of the miracle on the spectators 
 (comp. 11. 11, 23). It exactly corresponds with what we know of the 
 prevailing Messianic expectations, and explains the strange fluctua- 
 tions of opinion about Jesus. His ‘signs’ pointed to His being the 
 Messiah, or at least a great Prophet: but He steadfastly refused to 
 act the part expected from the Messiah. 
 
 15. μέλλουσιν. Are about to (v. 6) take Him by force and make 
 Him king; carry Him, whether He will or no, to Jerusalem and pro- 
 claim Him king at the Passover. They will have a σωτηρία according 
 to their own ideas, not according to God’s decree: earthly deliverance 
 and glory, not spiritual regeneration. This also is peculiar to S. John; 
 but 53. Luke (ix. 11) tells us that He had been speaking of ‘the 
 kingdom of God;’ and this would turn their thoughts to the Messianic 
 King. The whole incident explains the remarkable expression ‘ He 
 immediately compelled (ἠνάγκασε) His disciples to embark’ (Matt. xiv. 
 22; Mark vi. 45). There was danger of the Twelve being infected 
 with this wrongheaded enthusiasm. Some such command is implied 
 here; for they would not have left Him behind without orders. 
 
 In his Divine Epic 8. John points out the steady increase of the 
 enmity against Jesus; and nothing increased it so much as popular 
 
VI. 21] 3 NOTES: 151 
 
 enthusiasm for Him:,iii. 26, iv. 1—3, vii. 40, 41, 46, viii. 30, ix. 80 
 —38, x. 21, 42, xi. 45, 46, xii. 9—11, 
 
 πάλιν. He had come down to feed them: ‘again’ refers to v. 3. 
 After dismissing first the disciples and then the bulk of the multi- 
 tude, He ascended again, but this time alone, to pray (Matt. xiv. 23; 
 Mark vi. 46). 
 
 16—21. Tue Sicn on THE Lake; WALkING oN THE WATER. 
 
 16. ὀψία. The second (6 p.m. to dark) of the two evenings which 
 S. Matthew (xiv. 15, 23) gives in accordance with Jewish usage. The 
 narrative here makes a fresh start: κατέβησαν does not imply that the 
 disciples went up again with Jesus; this is excluded by αὐτὸς μόνος. 
 
 17. ἤρχοντο. The imperfect expresses their continued efforts to 
 reach Capernaum. §. Mark says ‘unto Bethsaida,’ which was close to 
 Capernaum, See on Matt. iv. 13; Luke νυ. 1. 
 
 οὔπω. Not yet, implying that they expected Him. Perhaps they 
 had arranged to meet Him at some place along the shore. He is 
 training them gradually to be without His visible presence; in the 
 earlier storm He was with them (Matt. viii. 23—26). The descrip- 
 tion is singularly graphic. Darkness had come on; their:Master was 
 not there; a storm had burst on them, and the lake was becoming 
 very rough: 25 or 30 furlongs would bring them about ‘the midst of 
 the sea’ (Mark vi. 47), which is 6 or 7 miles across. Many travellers 
 have testified to the violent squalls to which the lake is subject. 
 
 19. ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης. Although this might mean ‘on the sea- 
 shore’ (xxi. 1), yet the context plainly shews that here it means ‘on 
 the surface of the sea.’ Winer, p. 468. Would they have been fright- 
 ened by seeing Jesus walking on the shore? §S. Mark says it was 
 about the fourth watch, i.e. between 3.0 and 6.0 a.m. 8S. Matthew alone 
 gives S. Peter’s walking on the sea. 85. Luke omiis the whole incident. 
 
 20. ἐγώ εἰμι. All three narratives preserve these words; we infer 
 that they made a deep impression. Comp, viii, 24, 28, 58, xiii. 13, 
 19, xviii. 5, 6, 8. 
 
 21. ἤθελον. They were willing therefore to receive Him. The 
 ‘willingly received’ of A.V. is perhaps due to Beza, who substitutes 
 volente animo receperunt for the Vulgate’s volwerunt recipere. ᾿Ἤθελον 
 λαβεῖν αὐτόν here seems to contrast with ἤθελεν παρελθεῖν αὐτούς in 
 Mark vi. 48. His will to pass them by was changed by their will to 
 receive Him. But (comp. i. 43, v. 35) 8. John does not mean that 
 He did not enter the boat: he is not correcting 5. Matthew and 
 5. Mark: this would require ἀλλ᾽ εὐθέως κιτ.λ., ‘but (before He could 
 enter) the boat was at the land.’ Ἦλθον conjectured by Michaelis for 
 ἤθελον, and found in the Sinaiticus, is an attempt to avoid a difficulty. 
 Ew@éws probably points to something miraculous: He who had just 
 imparted to 5. Peter His own royal power over gravity and space, 
 now does the like to the boat which bore them all. 
 
152 S. JOHN. [VI. 21— 
 
 ὑπῆγον. Were going, or intending to go; comp. ἤρχοντο (v. 17). 
 The imperfects mark the contrast between the difficulty of the first 
 part of the voyage, when they were alone, with the ease of the last part, 
 when He was with them. ‘Then are they glad, because they are at 
 rest: and so He bringeth them unto the haven where they would be.’ 
 Ὑ πάγειν implies departure, and looks back to the place left (v. 67, 
 vii. 33, xii. 11, xviii. 8). 
 
 The Walking on the Sea is no evidence that the writer was a Docetist, 
 i.e. believed that Christ’s Body was a mere phantom: on the contrary, 
 the event is narrated as extraordinary, quite different from their usual 
 experience of His bodily presence. A Docetist would have presented 
 it otherwise, and would hardly have omitted the disciples’ ery, φάντασμά 
 ἐστι (Matt. xiv. 26; comp. Mark vi. 49). Docetism is absolutely ex- 
 cluded from this Gospel by i. 14 and by the general tone throughout; 
 see on xix. 34, 35, xx. 20, 27. The whole incident should be compared 
 with Luke xxiv. 36—41; in both Christ’s supernatural return aggra- 
 vates their distress, until they know who He is. And the meaning of 
 both is the same. In times of trouble Jesus is near His own, and His 
 presence is their deliverance and protection. 
 
 22—25. THe SEQUEL OF THE Two SIGNs. 
 
 The people had wished to make Jesus a Jewish king. He has just 
 manifested Himself to His disciples as King of the whole realm of 
 nature. The wrongheaded multitude, to which we return, are now 
 taught in parables. 
 
 22—24. A complicated sentence very unusual in S. John (comp. 
 xiii. 1—4) ; but its very intricacy is evidence of its accuracy. A writer 
 of fiction would have given fewer details and stated them with greater 
 freedom. S. John explains what is well known to him. 
 
 22. πέραν τ. 0, On the eastern side, where the miracle took place. 
 
 23. This awkward parenthesis explains how there came to be boats 
 to transport the people to the western shore. 
 
 εὐχαριστ. Unless the thanksgiving (υ. 11) was the turning-point of 
 the miracle, it is hard to see why it is mentioned again here. 
 
 24. εἶδεν. A fresh seeing; not a resumption of εἶδον in τυ. 22. 
 
 eis τὰ tA. The boats from Tiberias, driven in probably by the con- 
 trary wind (Matt. xiv. 24; Mark vi. 48) which had delayed the Apostles. 
 There is no need to suppose that all the 5000 crossed over. 
 
 25. πέραν τ. 0. This is now the western shore, Capernaum (v. 59). 
 
 πότε ὧδε y.; Comp.i.15. They suspect something miraculous, but 
 He does not gratify their curiosity. If the feeding of the 5000 taught 
 them nothing, what good would it do them to hear of the crossing of 
 the lake? 
 
 26—59. THE DIscouRSE ON THE SON AS THE SUPPORT OF LIFE. 
 
 God’s revealed word and created world are unhappily alike in this; 
 that the most beautiful places in each are often the scene and subject 
 
VI. 26.] NOTES. 153 
 
 of strife. This marvellous discourse is a well-known field of contro- 
 versy, as to whether it does or does not refer to the Eucharist. That 
 it has no reference whatever to the Eucharist seems incredible, when 
 we remember (1) the startling words here used about eating the Flesh 
 of the Son of Man and drinking His Blood; (2) that just a year from 
 this time Christ instituted the Eucharist; (3) that the primitive Church 
 is something like unanimous in interpreting this discourse as referring 
 to the Eucharist. A few words are necessary on each of these points. 
 (1) Probably nowhere in any literature, not even among the luxuriant 
 imagery of the East, can we find an instance of a teacher speaking of 
 the reception of his doctrine under so astounding a metaphor as eating 
 his flesh and drinking his blood. Something more than this must at 
 any rate be meant here. The metaphor ‘eating a man’s flesh’ else- 
 where means to injure or destroy him. Ps. xxvii. 2 (xiv. 4); James 
 v. 3. (2) The founding of new religions, especially of those which 
 have had any great hold on the minds of men, has ever been the 
 result of much thought and deliberation. Let us leave out of the 
 account the Divinity of Jesus Christ, and place Him for the moment 
 on a level with other great teachers. Are we to suppose that just 
 a year before the Eucharist was instituted, the Founder of this, the 
 most distinctive element of Christian worship, had no thought of it 
 in His mind? Surely for long beforehand that institution was in His 
 thoughts; and if so, ‘Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and 
 
 τ drink His Blood, ye have no life in you’ cannot but have some reference 
 
 to ‘Take eat, this is My Body,’ ‘Drink ye all of it, for this is My 
 Blood.’ The coincidence is too exact to be fortuitous, even if it were 
 probable that a year before it was instituted the Eucharist was still 
 unknown to the Founder of it. That the audience at Capernaum 
 could not thus understand Christ’s words is nothing to the point: 
 He was speaking less to them than to Christians throughout all ages, 
 How often did He utter words which even Apostles could not under- 
 stand at the time. (3) The interpretations of the primitive Church 
 are not infallible, even when they are almost unanimous: but they 
 carry great weight. And in a case of this kind, where spiritual in- 
 sight and Apostolic tradition are needed, rather than scholarship and 
 critical power, patristic authority may be allowed very great weight. 
 
 But while it is incredible that there is no reference to the Eucharist 
 in this discourse, it is equally incredible that the reference is solely 
 or primarily to the Eucharist, The wording of the larger portion of 
 the discourse is against any such exclusive interpretation; not until 
 v. 51 does the reference to the Eucharist become clear and direct. 
 Rather the discourse refers to all the various channels of grace by 
 means of which Christ imparts Himself to the believing soul: and who 
 will dare to limit these in number or efficacy? 
 
 To quote the words of Dr Westcott, the discourse ‘‘cannot refer 
 primarily to the Holy Communion; nor again can it be simply pro- 
 phetic of that Sacrament. The teaching has a full and consistent 
 meaning in connexion with the actual circumstances, and it treats 
 essentially of spiritual realities with which no external act, as such, 
 can be coextensive, The well-known words of Augustine, crede et man- 
 
154 5. JOHN. [VI 26— 
 
 ducasti, ‘believe and thou hast eaten,’ give the sum of the thoughts in 
 a luminous and pregnant sentence. 
 
 ‘But, on the other hand, there can be no doubt that the truth which 
 is presented i in its absolute form in these discourses is presented in a 
 specific act and in a concrete form in the Holy Communion; and yet 
 further that the Holy Communion is the divinely appointed means 
 whereby men may realise the truth. Nor can there be any difficulty 
 to any one who acknowledges a divine fitness in the ordinances of the 
 Church, an eternal correspondence in the parts of the one counsel of 
 God, in believing that the Lord, while speaking intelligibly to those 
 who heard Him at the time, gave by anticipation a commentary, so 
 to speak, on the Sacrament which He afterwards instituted.” Speaker’s 
 Commentary, N.T. Vol. τι. p. 113. 
 
 The discourse has been thus divided; 1. 26—34, Distinction between 
 the material bread and the Spiritual Bread; 11. 35—50 (with two 
 digressions, 37—40; 43—46), Identification of the Spiritual Bread 
 with Christ; m1. 51—58, Further definition of the identification as 
 consisting in the giving of His Body and outpouring of His Blood. 
 On the language and style see introductory note to chap. iii. 
 
 26—34. Distinction between the material bread and the Spiritual Bread. 
 
 26. ἀμὴν ἀμήν. See oni. 52, As so often, He answers, not the 
 question, but the thought which prompted it (ii. 4, iii. 3, 10, iv. 16): 
 not because ye saw signs. They had seen the miracle, but it had not 
 been a sign to them: instead of seeing a sign in the bread, they had 
 seen only bread in the sign; it had excited mere curiosity and greed. 
 Σημεῖα may be the generic plural and refer only to the Feeding; or 
 it may include the previous miracles (v. 2). As in the case of λαλιά 
 (iv. 42), we are in doubt whether there is any shade of disparagement 
 in ἐχορτάσθητε, were fed as with fodder. Luke xv. 16, xvi. 21; Rev. 
 xix. 21 incline us to think so; Matt. v. 6, xiv. 20 and parallels, Mark 
 vil. 27 incline us to think not. Quam multi non quaerunt Jesum, nisi 
 ut illis faciat bene secundum tempus...Vix quaeritur Jesus propter 
 Jesum (S. Augustine). 
 
 27. ἐργάζεσθε. Work, not ‘labour,’ to keep up the connexion with 
 vv. 28—30. They keep harping on the word ‘work.’ The meaning 
 
 ‘work for’ is rare: épy. χρήματα, Herod. I. 24. Comp. ‘Whosoever 
 drinketh of this water shall thirst again’ (iv. 18). The discourse 
 with the woman should be compared. throughout: ‘the food which 
 abideth’ (see on i. 33) corresponds with ‘the living water’ (see on 
 iv. 14); ‘the food that perisheth’ with the water of the well, ‘Perish- 
 eth’ not only in its sustaining power but in itself; it is digested and 
 dispersed (Matt. xv. 17; 1 Cor. vi. 18). Comp. ‘Take no thought what 
 ye shall eat’ (Matt. vi. 25). Work, however, is needed to win the food 
 that abides, Comp. the lines of Joan. Audenus ; 
 
 Mandere qui panem jubet in sudore diurnum 
 Non dabit aeternas absque labore dapes. 
 ὁ vids τ. dvOp. See oni. 52. It is as the perfect Man that Christ 
 in His communion with men sustains the life which He has bestowed 
 
4 
 
 VI. 33.) NOTES. 155 
 
 (v. 25). Hence He says, ‘the Father’ (of men as well as of Himself, 
 xx. 17), not ‘My Father.’ 
 
 τοῦτον yap. Keep the emphatic order ; for Him the Father sealed, 
 even God. ‘To God belongs the authority to seal: He sealed, i.e. au- 
 thenticated (iii. 33) Christ as the true giver of the food that abideth 
 (1) by direct testimony in the Scriptures, (2) by the same in the voice 
 from Heaven at His Baptism, (3) by indirect testimony in His miracles 
 and Messianic work. 
 
 28. τί ποιῶμεν...; What must we do (v. 5) that we may work? 
 Perhaps they understood Him to mean that they must earn what they 
 desire; certainly they see that Christ’s words have a moral meaning; 
 
 they must do the works required by God. But how? 
 
 29. τὸ ἔργον. They probably thought of works of the law, tithes, 
 sacrifices, &c. He tells them of one work, one moral act, from which 
 all the rest derive their value, continuous belief (πιστεύητε, not πιστεύ- 
 onre) in Him whom God has sent. Comp. Acts xvi. 81, On ἵνα and 
 ἀπέστειλεν see on i. 8, 33, iv. 47, xvii. 3. 
 
 30. tl...cbonp.; Σύ 15 emphatic: ‘Thou urgest us to work; what 
 doest Thou on Thy part?’ They quite see that in ὃν ἀπέστ. ἐκ. He is 
 claiming to be the Messiah, and they require proof. The feeding of 
 the 5000 was less marvellous than the manna, and the Messiah musi 
 shew greater signs than Moses. They demand ‘a sign from heaven,’ 
 as so often in the Synoptists. Note that whereas He used the strong 
 πιστεύειν εἰς ὅν they use the weak πιστεύειν σοι (see on i. 12): πιστεύειν 
 τινί occurs iv, 21, v. 24, 38, 46, xiv. 11; comp. ii. 22, iv. 50; it means 
 no more than to believe a man’s statements, as distinct from trusting 
 in his person and character. 
 
 τί ἐργάζῃ; They use the very word that He used in v. 29, 
 ργαξῃ 
 
 81. ἐστιν γεγραμ. See on ii. 17. What follows is a rough quota- 
 tion of ‘had rained down manna upon them to eat’ (Ps. Ixxviii. 24), 
 or possibly of Neh. ix. 15. In either case they artfully suppress the 
 nominative, ‘God,’ and leave ‘Moses’ to be understood. The ἐκ points 
 to Neh, ix. 15; not merely from above, but out of heaven itself. 
 
 32. Μωυσῆς. See oni. 17. Christ answers their thought rather 
 than their questions, ri ποιεῖς; τί ἐργάζῃ; He shews them that He un- 
 derstands their insinuation, that He is inferior to Moses, and He 
 denies both their points; (1) that Moses gave the manna; (2) that the 
 manna was in the truest sense bread out of heaven. 
 
 τὸν dpToy...rov ἀληθινόν. Emphatic repetition of the article; the 
 bread out of heaven, the true bread; ‘true’ in the sense of ‘real’ and 
 ‘perfect,’ a complete realisation of what it professes to be; see oni. 9. 
 The manna was only a type, and therefore imperfect. Note the change 
 from ἔδωκεν to δίδωσιν : God is continually giving the true bread; it is 
 not given at one time and then no more, like the manna, 
 
 _ 33. ὁ καταβαίνων. That which cometh down. Jesus has not yet 
 identified Himself with the Bread, which is still impersonal, and hence 
 
156 5. JOIN. [VI. 33— 
 
 the present participle: contrast v.41. There is a clear reference to 
 this passage in the Ignatian Epistles, Romans vii.; the whole chapter 
 is impregnated with the Fourth Gospel. See on iv. 10, iii. 8, x. 9. 
 
 τῷ κόσμῳ. See oni. 10. Not to the Jews only, but to all. We 
 have evidence (the γάρ introduces an argument) that it is the Father 
 who gives the really heavenly Bread, for it is His Bread that quickens 
 the whole human race. 
 
 34. κύριε. ‘Lord’ is too strong, making the request too much 
 like the prayer of a humble believer: as in iv. 11, 15, 19, ‘Sir’ would 
 be better (see on iv. 11). Not that the request is ironical, the mocking 
 prayer of the sceptic. Rather it is the selfish petition of those whose 
 beliefs and aspirations are low, Like the Samaritan woman (iv, 15) 
 they think that this wonderful food is at any rate worth having. He 
 fed them yesterday, and they are hungry again. He speaks of bread 
 that abideth, and it will be well to obtain it. But their only idea of 
 ‘abiding’ is a supply constantly (πάντοτε) repeated, like the manna; 
 and for this they ask in good faith, They do not disbelieve in His 
 power, but in His mission. 
 
 35—50. Identification of the Spiritual Bread with Christ. 
 
 35. ἐγώ εἰμι. Comp. vv. 41, 48, 51: the pronoun is very emphatic 
 as in iv. 56. As in v. 30, He passes from the third person to the 
 first. These identifications are characteristic of this Gospel: Christ 
 declares Himself to be the Light of the world (viii. 12), the Door 
 of the Fold (x. 7, 9), the Good Shepherd (x. 11, 14), the Resur- 
 rection and the Life (xi. 25), the Way, the Truth, and the Life 
 (xiv. 6),the True Vine (xv. 1,5). Ὃ ἄρτος τ. ζωῆς means ὁ dpr. ξωὴν 
 διδούς : comp. τὸ ὕδωρ τ. £, Rev. xxi. 6 (xxii. 1), and τὸ ξύλον τ. ὗ., 
 Gen. li. 9, 111. 22, 24. ‘He that cometh to Me’=‘he that believeth 
 on Me,’ and ‘shall in no wise hunger’=‘ shall in no wise ever thirst’ 
 (πώποτε, not, as in iv. 14, εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα); 1.6, the believer shall 
 experience the immediate and continual satisfaction of his highest 
 spiritual needs, Christ’s superiority to the manna is this, that it 
 satisfied only bodily needs for a time, He satisfies spiritual needs for 
 ever, Note the Hebraic parallelism, 
 
 36. εἶπον ὑμῖν. When? no such saying is recorded. Ewald thus 
 finds some slight evidence for his theory that a whole sheet of this 
 Gospel has been lost between chapters v. and vi. But the reference 
 may easily be to one of the countless unrecorded sayings of Christ, 
 or possibly to the general sense of v. 3744. In the latter case ‘you’ 
 must mean the Jewish nation, for those verses were addressed to Jews 
 at Jerusalem. Or the reference may be to the spirit of v. 26, which 
 accuses them of having seen His miracles without believing that they 
 were signs. 
 
 Kal ἑωράκ. See on i. 18, Ye have even seen Me (not merely heard 
 of Me) and (yet) do not believe. The tragic tone again (see on i, 
 5), followed by a pause, The next sentence has no conjunction, 
 
VI. 40.] NOTES. 157 
 
 37—40. Digression on the blessedness of those who come to Christ 
 as believers. 
 
 37. πᾶν δ... τὸν épx. Note the significant change of gender. 
 What is given (see on ili. 35) is treated as impersonal and neuter, 
 mankind en masse (comp. iil. 6); what comes, with free will, is 
 masculine. Men are given to Christ without being consulted; but 
 each, if he likes, can refuse to come, as the Jews did: there is no 
 coercion. Comp. xvii. 2; i. 11. Note also the different verbs for 
 ‘come’; ἥκω expresses the arrival (Rev. xv. 4), ἔρχομαι the coming. 
 Comp. ‘Come unto Me, all ye that labour’ (Matt. xi. 28). 
 
 οὐ μὴ ἐκβ. Litotes (iii. 19, viii. 40): so far from casting out, will 
 keep and protect, x. 28. Quale intus illud est, unde non exitur foras? 
 Magnum penetrale et dulce secretum (S. Augustine). 
 
 38. ὅτι kataB. Because I am come down. Four times in this 
 discourse Christ declares His descent from heaven; vv. 38, 50, 51, 
 58. The drift of vv. 383—40 is; ‘ How could I cast them out, seeing 
 that Iam come to do My Father’s will, and He wills that they should 
 be received?’ See on viii. 31. 
 
 39. τὸ θέλημα... ἵνα. See oni. 8, iv. 47, xvii. 3, and comp. v. 29. 
 
 πᾶν. Casus pendens: comp. vii. 38, xv. 2, xvii. 2; Luke xxi. 6. 
 ‘Credentes dantur, credentibus datur.’ μὴ ἀπολέσω. His care for 
 the fragments (v. 12) would not. be greater than His care for men’s 
 souls. With ἐξ αὐτοῦ comp. ἐκ τῶν τ. in 2 John 4, ἐξ ὑμῶν Rev. ii. 10. 
 
 ἀναστήσω. The same gracious utterance is repeated as a kind 
 of refrain, vv. 40, 44, 54: but here ἀναστήσω probably depends on 
 iva, although it may be an independent future as in vv. 44, 54. This 
 is the ἀνάστασις ζωῆς (Vv. 29), ἡ ἀν. ἡ πρώτη (Rev. xx. 5, 6), ἡ ἀν. τῶν 
 δικαίων (Luke xiv. 14); the ultimate end of Christ’s work. 
 
 τῇ éox. ἡμέρᾳ. The phrase is peculiar to 5. John; vv. 40, 44, 54, 
 xi. 24, xii. 48; comp. vil. 57. Elsewhere ἡ ἡμέρα τῆς κρίσεως (1 John 
 iv. 17); ἡ mu. ἡ μεγάλη (Rev. vi. 17; comp. xvi. 14); ἐκείνη ἡ ἡμ. 
 (Matt. vil. 22); ἡ mu. τ. κυρίου (1 Cor. v. δ); ἡ τ. θεοῦ ju. (2 Pet. 
 ili. 12); mu. Χριστοῦ (Phil. i. 10); nu. αἰῶνος (2 Pet. iii, 18); or simply 
 ἡ ἡμέρα (Heb, x, 25). The phrases from 2 Peter occur nowhere else. 
 
 40. τοῦτο γὰρ...πατρός pov. This is the true reading; but the 
 opening words of vv. 39 and 40, being very similar, have become 
 confused in inferior MSS. The best have πατρός in v. 40, where 
 the Son is mentioned, not in v. 39, where He is not. Moreover 
 v. 40 is explanatory of v. 39, and opens with ydp; it shews who are 
 meant by πᾶν ὃ δέδ. μοι, viz. every one that contemplateth the Son 
 and believeth on Him. Not ὁρῶν but θεωρῶν: the Jews had seen 
 Jesus; they had not contemplated Him so as to believe. Θεωρεῖν 
 is frequent in 8. John and the Acts, elsewhere not; vii. 3, xii. 45, 
 xiv. 19, xvi. 10, 16, 19, xvii. 24, xx. 6, 12, 14. 
 
 ἀναστήσω. Here, still more easily than in v. 39, ἀναστήσω may 
 be future. *Eyo is very emphatic; ‘by My power as Messiah.’ 
 
158 S. JOHN. [VI. 41— 
 
 Some think that a break in the discourse must be made here; 
 vv. 25—40 being spoken on the shore of the lake, vv. 41—58 in the 
 synagogue at Capernaum to a somewhat different audience. 
 
 41. éydyyvfov. Talked in an undertone respecting Him: the 
 word in itself does not necessarily mean that they found fault, but 
 the context shews that they did (comp. v. 61, vii. 12; Matt. xx. 11; 
 Luke v. 30). Moreover, O.T. associations have given this shade of 
 meaning to the word, which is frequent in LXX. for the murmurings 
 in the wilderness, especially in the compound διαγογγύζξω : comp. 
 1 Cor. x. 10. Some members of the hostile party (οἱ ᾽Τουδαῖοι), and 
 possibiy some of the Sanhedrin, were now present; but we are not 
 to understand that the whole multitude were hostile, though earnally- 
 minded and demanding a further sign: i. 19, ii. 18, v. 10, vii. 11, &e. 
 
 ἐγώ εἰμι... οὐρανοῦ. They put together wv. 33, 35, 38. 
 
 42. οὗτος. Contemptuous; this fellow. ‘We know all about His 
 parentage; there is nothing supernatural about His origin.’ Nothing 
 can be inferred from this as to Joseph’s being still alive (see on 
 ii. 1). ‘Hpets is emphatic; ‘we know it for ourselves.’ This is in 
 favour of the speakers being of Galilee rather than from Jerusalem. 
 
 43—46. Digression on the difficulty of coming to Christ as a believer. 
 
 43. Christ does not answer their objections or explain. Even 
 among the first Christians the fact of His miraculous conception 
 seems to have been made known only gradually, so foul were the 
 calumnies which the Jews had spread respecting His Mother. This 
 certainly was not the place to proclaim it. He directs them to some- 
 thing of more vital importance than the way by which He came into 
 the world, viz. the way by which they may come to Him. 
 
 44. οὐδεὶς δύναται. It is a moral impossibility: comp. iii. 3, 5, 
 v. 44, vill. 43, xii. 39, xiv. 17, xv. 4, 5. The οὐδείς corresponds to 
 the πᾶν in v. 37, as ἑλκύσῃ to δίδωσιν : all that are given shall reach 
 Christ; none but those who are drawn are able to come to Him. The 
 aor. ἐλθεῖν expresses the result, rather than the process, as in τὸν 
 ἐρχόμενον (v. 37), and ἔρχεται (v. 45). 
 
 ἑλκύσῃ. Comp. xii. 32, πάντας ἑλκύσω πρὸς ἐμαυτόν. Unlike σύρειν, 
 ‘to drag’ (Acts vill. 3, xiv. 19, xvii. 6), ἑλκύειν does not necessarily 
 imply force, but mere attraction of some kind, some inducement to 
 come. Comp. Jer, xxxi. 3, ‘with lovingkindness have I drawn thee’ 
 (εἵλκυσά ce), and Virgil’s trahit sua quemque voluptas. ‘EXxioy ex- 
 presses the internal process, δίδωσιν (v. 37) the result. 
 
 kayo, The Father begins the work of salvation, the Son completes 
 it. The Father draws and gives; the Son receives, preserves, and 
 raises up to eternal life. 
 
 45. ἔστιν yeyp. See on 11. 17. Here, as in xiii. 18 and xix. 37, the 
 quotation agrees with the Hebrew against the LXX. This is evidence 
 that the writer knew Hebrew, and was probably a Jew of Palestine. 
 
¥E50.} - NOTES. 159 
 
 ἐν τοῖς προφήταις. In the division of the Scriptures, so called as 
 distinct from the Law (i. 45), and the Psalms or Hagiographa (Luke 
 xxiv. 44): comp. Acts xiii. 40, and (ἐν βίβλῳ τῶν mp.) vil. 42. The 
 direct reference is to Isa. liv. 13, which may have been part of the 
 synagogue-lesson for the day (Luke iv. 17); but comp. Jer. xxxi. 33, 
 34; Joel iii. 16,17. The quotation explains how the Father draws 
 men, viz. by enlightening them. Note that Jesus does not derive 
 His teaching from the O. T. but confirms it by an appeal to the O. T. 
 Comp. viii. 17, 56, x. 34. 
 
 διδακτοὶ θεοῦ. In classical Greek διδακτός is applied to doctrine 
 rather than pupils, the things that can be taught rather than the 
 persons taught. The Hebrew limmiid in Is, liv. 18 is perhaps a sub- 
 ‘stantive, and hence the genitive here without ὑπό ; ‘ God’s instructed 
 ones,’ z.e. prophets in the wider sense. Comp. διδακτοῖς πνεύματος (1 
 Cor. ii. 13) for the genitive, and θεοδίδακτοι (1 Thes. iv. 9) for the 
 meaning. 
 
 πᾶς ὁ ak....K. pad, Every one that hath heard and hath learned 
 from (viii. 26, 40, xv. 15) the Father, and no others; only those 
 who have been ‘taught of God’ can come to the Son. The οὖν 
 after πᾶς in T. R. is not genuine; very common in 8. John’s nar- 
 rative, it is very rare in discourses. Omit with NBCDLST against A. 
 
 46. ἑώρακεν. See on i. 18. Hearing is not the same as seeing, and 
 in order to hear and learn from the Father it is not necessary to 
 see Him. The result of hearing is to lead men to the only One 
 who has seen (i. 18), and in whom the Father may be seen (xiv. 9). 
 
 ὁ ὧν παρὰ τ. 6. The expression, as in vii. 29, implies a per- 
 manent relation, and points to the generation rather than the mission 
 of the Son. On οὗτος see on 111. 32. 
 
 47—50. Christ returns from answering the Jews to the main subject. 
 
 47. ἀμὴν ἀμ. With the authority of Him who alone has seen the 
 Father, Jesus solemnly assures them that the believer is already in 
 possession (ἔχει) of eternal life: see on 111, 36, v. 24. 
 
 48, ἐγώ εἰμι. See on v. 35 andi, 21. 
 
 49. ἔφαγον... ἀπέθ. Ate the manna...and they died, see on vilii. 
 52. The point is, not that they are dead now, but that they died 
 then; the manna did not save them. He answers them out of their 
 own mouths. On the other hand, the Bread of Life is a perma- 
 nent source of spiritual life here and a pledge of resurrection hereafter. 
 
 50. οὗτος. May be subject or predicate; the latter seems to be 
 better, as in xv. 12, xvii. 3; 1 John v. 3, where αὕτη anticipates ἵνα. 
 Of this purpose is the Bread which cometh down (see on v. 58) from 
 heaven that a man may eat thereof and (so) not die (comp. 111. 19). 
 The ἵνα indicates the Divine intention (see on i. 9, iv. 47); the 
 indefinite τις shews the unbounded character of the offer. 
 
 μὴ ἀποθάνῃ The ἀπέθανον in v. 49 seems to shew that physical 
 death is intended, otherwise the antithesis fails. The death of the 
 
160 S. JOAN. [VI. 50— 
 
 believer is only sleep: he has partaken of the Bread of Life and will 
 be raised up at the last day; vv. 40, 44, 54; comp. viii. 51, xi. 25, 26. 
 
 51—58. Further definition of the identification of the Spiritual 
 Bread with Christ as consisting in the giving of His Body and the out- 
 pouring of His Blood. 
 
 In vv, 35—50 Christ in His Person is the Bread of Life: here He 
 is the spiritual food of believers in the Redemptive work of His 
 Death. 
 
 51. ὁ ζῶν. Τῆς ζωῆς referred to its effects, like the Tree of Life, 
 which was a mere instrument; ὁ ζῶν refers to its nature; not merely 
 the Bread of life (v. 48), the life-giving Bread, but the living Bread, 
 pe life in itself, which life is imparted to those who partake of 
 the Bread. 
 
 ὁ ἐκ τ. odp. καταβάς. At the Incarnation. Now that the Bread 
 is identified with Christ, we have the past tense of what took place 
 once for all. Previously (verses 33, 50) the present tense is used of 
 what is continually going on. In one sense Christ is perpetually 
 coming down from heaven, in the other He came but once. He is 
 ever imparting Himself to man; He only once became man. 
 
 ζήσ. εἰς τ. αἰῶνα. Just 85 ὁ ἐῶν is stronger than τῆς ζωῆς, 50 ζήσ. 
 εἰς τ. αἰῶνα is stronger than μὴ ἀποθάνῃ. With ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ἐκ τ. οὐρ. 
 k., ὃν ἐγὼ δώσω Comp. γευσαμένους τ. δωρεᾶς τ. ἐπουρανίου, Heb. vi. 4, 
 
 ἡ σάρξ μου ἐστίν. The Sinaiticus transfers these words to the end 
 of the verse to avoid the harsh construction. Later MSS. insert ἣν 
 ἐγὼ δώσω between ἐστίν and ὑπέρ, with the same object. Both are 
 corruptions of the true text, which is quite in S. John’s style, ὑπὲρ τ. 
 τ. k. ζωῆς being an expansion of what is expressed in the main sen- 
 tence. Note the xal...dé...But, moreover, or Yea and indeed (He will 
 tell them this startling truth right out to the end) the Bread which I 
 will give you is my Flesh,—for the life of the world. Comp. viii. 16, 
 17, xv. 27; and esp. 1 Johni. 3. Note also the emphatic ἐγώ; ‘I, in 
 contrast to Moses.’ That in these words Christ looked onwards to 
 the Eucharist, and that in thus speaking to believers throughout all 
 time He included a reference to the Eucharist, has already been stated 
 to be highly probable. (See above, Introduction to 26—58.) But 
 that the reference is not exclusively nor even directly to the Eucha- 
 rist is shewn from the use of σάρξ and not σῶμα. In all places where 
 the Eucharist is mentioned in N.T. we have σῶμα, not σάρξ; Matt. 
 xxvi. 26; Mark xiv. 22; Luke xxii. 19; 1 Cor. xi. 24 ff. Moreover the 
 words must have had some meaning for those who heard them at 
 Capernaum. Evidently they have a wider range than any one Sacra- 
 ment. Christ promises to give His Flesh (by His bloody death soon 
 to come) for the benefit of the whole world. But this benefit can 
 only be appropriated by the faith of each individual; and so that 
 which when offered by Christ is His Flesh appears under the figure of 
 bread when partaken of by the believer, The primary reference 
 therefore is to Christ’s propitiatory death; the secondary reference is 
 
VI. 55.] NOTES. 161 
 
 to all those means by which the death of Christ is appropriated, 
 especially the Eucharist. 
 
 ἡ σάρξ. Human nature regarded from its lower side (see on i. 14): 
 here it is Christ’s perfect humanity given to sustain the spiritual life 
 of mankind. He proceeds to state (53—58) how it is given. 
 
 τοῦ κόσμου. The true Paschal Lamb is for the whole human race: 
 contrast, ‘There shall no stranger eat thereof’ (Exod. xii. 43—45). 
 
 52. πρὸς ἀλλήλους. One with another (iv. 33, xvi. 17): their ex- 
 citement increases; they have got beyond murmuring about Him 
 (v. 4), but they are not all equally hostile (vii. 12, 43; x. 19). ‘‘They 
 strove, and that with one another, for they understood not, neither 
 wished to take the Bread of concord”’ (S. Augustine). 
 
 IIés. This is the old vain question (iii. 4, 9) which continues to 
 distract the Church and the world. All that men need know is the 
 fact; but they insist in asking as to the manner. ‘Cur’ et ‘Quo- 
 modo’ exitiales voculae—‘Why’ and ‘How’ are deadly little words 
 (Luther). Οὗτος is contemptuous (v. 42): φαγεῖν is their own addition; 
 they wish to bring out in full the strangeness of His declaration. 
 
 53. πίητε αὖτ. τ. αἷμα. Christ not only accepts what they have 
 added to His words, but still further startles them by telling them 
 that they must drink His Blood; an amazing statement to a Jew, 
 who was forbidden to taste even the blood of animals (Gen. ix. 4; 
 Lev. xvii. 1O—16). These words are the answer to their πῶς; by an 
 expansion of the previous statement (comp. the answer to the πῶς; 
 of Nicodemus, iv. ὅδ. The words point still more distinctly to His 
 propitiatory death; for ‘the blood is the life’ which He offered up for 
 the sins of the world. The eating and drinking are not faith, but 
 the appropriation of His death; faith leads us to eat and drink and is 
 the means of appropriation. Taken separately, the Flesh represents 
 sacrifice and sustenance, the Blood represents atonement and life, 
 life by means of His death. 
 
 ἐν ἑαυτοῖς. In yourselves; for the source of life is absent. 
 
 54. The gracious positive of the previous minatory negative. 
 From warning as to the ruinous consequences of not partaking He 
 goes on to declare the blessed consequences of partaking, viz. eternal 
 life, and that at once, with resurrection among the just hereafter. 
 
 ὁ τρώγων. Present; it is a continuous action, not one that may 
 be done once for all (v. 45). Φαγεῖν has no present, so that the same 
 word could not be used; but the change to τρώγειν rather than to 
 ἐσθίειν is not meaningless: τρώγειν is ‘to eat with enjoyment’ (Matt. 
 
 xxiv. 38); see on xiii. 18, Excepting these two texts the word occurs 
 here only (vv. 54—58) in N.T. 
 
 65. ἀληθής. This reading has the highest authority; ἀληθῶς and 
 ἀληθινή are corrections to make the passage easier. In iv. 37 we had 
 ἀληθινός where we might have expected ἀληθής. The eating and 
 drinking is no misleading metaphor, but a fact. See oni. 9. 
 
 ST. JOHN L 
 
162 S. JOHN. [VI. 56— 
 
 56. ἐν ἐμοὶ μένει, κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ. This is one of S. John’s very 
 characteristic phrases to express the most intimate mutual fellowship 
 and union; xiv. 10, 20, xv. 4, 5, xvii. 21; 1 John iii. 24, iv. 15, 16. 
 Christ is at once the centre and the circumference of the life of the 
 Christian; the source from which it springs and the ocean into which 
 it flows. See oni. 33, 
 
 57. Nota mere repetition, but an enlargement. In 8. John there 
 are no mere repetitions; the thought is always recut or reset, and 
 frequently with additions. The result of this close union is perfect 
 life, proceeding as from the Father to the Son, so from the Son to all 
 believers. For xa@ds...xal...comp. xiii. 15, 1 John ii. 6, iv. 17. 
 
 ὁ ζῶν πατήρ. The absolutely Living One, the Fount of all life. 
 The expression occurs here only, Comp. Matt. xvi. 16; 2 Cor. vi. 16; 
 Heb. vii. 25. 
 
 διὰ τὸν ....50 ἐμέ. Because of the Father, because the Father is 
 the Living One (v. 26); because of Me, because he thus derives life 
 from Me. ‘By the Father...by Me’ would require the genitive. 
 
 6 tp. pe. Instead of the Flesh and Blood we have Christ Himself: 
 the two modes of partaking are merged in one, the more appropriate 
 of the two being retained. 
 
 κἀκεῖνος. Healso. The retrospective pronoun repeats and empha- 
 sizes the subject: xiv. 12 (where again it immediately follows the 
 subject), i. 18, 33, v. 11, 39, ix. 37, x. 1, xii. 48, xiv. 21, 26, xv. 26. 
 
 58. A general summing-up of the whole, returning from the Flesh 
 and Blood to the main theme,—the Bread from heaven and its superi- 
 ority to the highest earthly food. Οὗτος again may be subject or pre- 
 dicate; there is no iva (v. 50) or ὅτι to lead up to, but the οὐ καθὼς 
 k.T.A. seems to shew that οὗτος is the predicate. ‘O καταβάς corre- 
 sponds to ἀπέστειλε in v. 57; both aorists refer to the historic fact of 
 the Incarnation. In this sense Christ came once for all: in another 
 sense He is always coming, ὁ καταβαίνων (v. 50). 
 
 ov καθὼς «.t.A. Irregularly expressed contrast to οὗτος: Of this 
 nature (giving eternal life) is the Bread which came down from heaven; 
 not as the fathers did eat and died (v. 49). Comp. 1 John iii. 11, 12. 
 
 59. ἐν συναγωγῇ. In synagogue (no article), as we say ‘in church;’ 
 comp. xviii. 20. The verse is a historical note, stating definitely 
 what was stated vaguely in v. 22 as ‘on the other side of the sea,’ 8. 
 John cannot forget the cireumstances of this solemn discourse, and 
 he records them one by one; ‘these things He said—in full syna- 
 gogue—while teaching—in Capernaum;’ a very early gloss (D) adds 
 ‘ona sabbath.’ The verse shews that the Evangelist is aware of the 
 Synoptic ministry in Galilee. ‘These things’ naturally refers to the 
 whole discourse from v. 26; we have no sufficient evidence of a break 
 between v. 40 and v. 41. On the other hand there is strong evidence 
 that from v. 26 to v. 58 forms one connected discourse spoken at one 
 
VI. 62.] NOTES. 163 
 
 time in the synagogue at Capernaum. The site of Capernaum is not 
 undisputed (see on Matt. iv. 13); but assuming Tell Him to be cor- 
 rect, the ruins of the synagogue there are probably those of the very 
 building in which these words were uttered. On one of the stones a 
 pot of manna is sculptured. 
 
 60—71. Opposite RESULTS OF THE DISCOURSE. 
 
 60. τών μαθητῶν. The more numerous and somewhat shifting 
 company out of which He had chosen the Twelve. 
 
 σκληρός. Not hard to understand, but hard to accept: σκληρός 
 (σκέλλω) means originally ‘dry’ and so ‘rough;’ and then in a 
 moral sense, ‘rough, harsh, offensive.’ Nabal the churl is σκληρός, 
 1 Sam. xxv. 3, and the slothful servant calls his master σκληρός, 
 Matt. xxv. 24. Λόγος is more than ‘saying’ (iii. 34), and might cover 
 the whole discourse, It was the notion of eating His Flesh and 
 drinking His Blood that specially scandalized them: ‘This is a re- 
 volting speech; who can listen to it?? Αὐτοῦ no doubt refers to 
 λόγος; but it might mean ‘listen to Him.’ A century later we find 
 the same thing: not only opponents but disciples take offence at such 
 language; ‘‘They abstain from (public) thanksgiving and prayer, 
 because they allow not that the Eucharist is the Flesh of our Saviour 
 Jesus Christ, which Flesh suffered for our sins.” Ignat. Smyrn. v1. 
 
 61. ἐν ἑαυτῷ: They talked in a low tone, but He knew without 
 hearing; see on v. 41 and ii. 24. As ini. 42, 47, iv. 18, v.14, 42, 
 vi. 26, &c., Jesus reads men’s hearts. For σκανδαλίζει see on xvi. 1. 
 
 62. ἐὰν οὖν 6. Literally, If therefore ye should behold the Son of 
 man ascending where He was before? The sentence breaks off (apo- 
 siopesis) leaving something to be understood: but what is to be under- 
 stood? The answer to this depends on the meaning assigned to 
 ‘behold the Son of man ascending.’ The most literal and obvious 
 interpretation is of an actual beholding of the Ascension: and in 
 that case we supply; ‘Would ye still take offence then?’ The As- 
 cension would prove that their carnal interpretation of the eating 
 and drinking must be wrong. Against this interpretation it is urged 
 (1) that 5. John does not record the Ascension. But it is assumed, 
 if not here and iii. 13, yet certainly xx. 17 as a fact; and in all three 
 cases it is in the words of our Lord that the reference occurs. 
 S. John throughout assumes that the main events of Christ’s life and 
 the fundamental elements of Christianity are well known to his 
 readers. (2) That none but the Twelve witnessed the Ascension, 
 while this is addressed to a multitude of doubting disciples. But 
 some of the Twelve were present: and Christ speaks hypothetically; 
 ‘if ye should behold,’ not ‘when ye shall behold.’ (3) That in 
 this case we should expect ἀλλά instead of οὖν. Possibly, but not 
 necessarily. The alternative interpretation is to make the ‘ ascend- 
 ing’ refer to the whole drama which led to Christ’s return to glory, 
 especially the Passion (comp. vii. 33, xiii. 3, xiv. 12, 28, xvi. 5, 28, 
 
 L2 
 
164 S. JOHN. [VI. 62— 
 
 xvii. 11, 13): and in that case we supply; ‘Will not the sight of a 
 suffering Messiah offend you still more?’ Winer, p. 750. 
 
 63. τὸ ζωοποιοῦν] That maketh to live or giveth life. ‘Quicken- 
 eth’ obscures the connexion with {wy ἐστιν. 
 
 ἡ σάρξ. Not ἡ σάρξ μου, which would contradict v. 51. The state- 
 ment is quite general, affirming the superiority of what is unseen and 
 eternal to what is seen and temporal (2 Cor. iv. 18, iii. 6; 1 Cor. xv. 
 45), but with a reference to Himself. ‘My flesh’ in v. 51 means ‘My 
 human nature sacrificed in death,’ to be spiritually appropriated by 
 every Christian, and best appropriated in the Eucharist. ‘The 
 flesh’ here means the flesh without the spirit; that which can only be 
 appropriated physically, like the manna, In this sense even Christ’s 
 flesh ‘profiteth nothing.’ ‘‘The flesh was a vessel,” says 5. Augus- 
 tine; ‘‘consider what it held, not what it was.” Comp. ili. 6. Per- 
 haps there is a reference to their carnal ideas about the Messiah. 
 
 τὰ ῥήματα. See on iii. 34. The authoritative ἐγώ, so frequent 
 throughout this discourse (vv. 35, 40, 41, 44, 48, 51, 54), appears 
 again: I, in contrast to mere human teachers. «Δελάληκα, have spoken, 
 in the discourse just concluded. 
 
 64. ἐξ ὑμῶν τινες. Of you some; for the order comp. ἐξ ὑμ. εἷς, 
 v.70. Some followed Him without believing on Him. 
 
 ἐξ ἀρχῆς. The meaning of ἀρχή always depends on the context 
 (see on i. 1, xv. 27). Here the most natural limit is ‘from the begin- 
 ing of their discipleship.’ Comp. ii. 24, 25. Οἱ ov mior. expresses a 
 fact, of μὴ 7. a thought; ‘those, whoever they might be, who believed 
 not:’ v. 33, xiv. 24, xv. 24. 
 
 τίς ἐστιν ὁ π. αὖ. Who it was that would betray Him. To ask, 
 ‘Why then did Jesus choose Judas as an Apostle?’ is to ask in a spe- 
 cial instance for an answer to the insoluble enigma ‘ Why does Omni- 
 science allow wicked persons to be born? Why does Omnipotence 
 allow evil to exist?? The tares once sown among the wheat, both 
 ‘osrow together till the harvest,’ and share sunshine and rain alike. 
 Παραδίδοναι means to ‘hand over, deliver up;’ xviii. 30, 35, xix. 16. 
 
 65. Διὰ τοῦτο. For this cause; v. 16, 18, vii. 22, viii. 47, ix. 23, 
 x. 17, xii. 18, 27, 39, &c. 
 
 οὐδεὶς δύναται. See on vv. 44, 37. The necessity for the internal 
 preparation, the drawing by the Father, was strongly shewn in the 
 case of Judas, who would be still more alienated by Christ’s refusal 
 to be made a king (v. 15) and by the σκληρὸς λόγος (v. 60). The ἐκ 
 indicates the Father as the source of conversion; except it have been 
 given him from the Futher: comp. iti. 27. 
 
 66. ἐκ τούτου Combines the notions of ‘from that time’ and ‘in 
 consequence of that;’ Upon this: we are to understand a continual 
 drifting away. The phrase occurs in N.T. here and xix. 12 only. 
 
VI. 70] NOTES. 165 
 
 ἀπῆλθον εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω. Not only deserted Him, but went back to 
 their old life. This is the κρίσις, the separation of bad from good, 
 which Christ’s coming necessarily involved; iii. 18, 19. 
 
 οὐκέτι. No longer. ‘No more’ may mean ‘never again,’ which 
 οὐκέτι does not mean; some may have returned again. Ilepierdrou 
 graphically expresses Christ’s wandering life; comp. vii. 1, xi. 54, 
 Luke viii. 1, ix. 58. 
 
 67. τοῖς δώδεκα. The first mention of them; 5. John speaks of 
 them familiarly as a well-known body, assuming that his readers are 
 well acquainted with the expression (see on v. 02). This is a mark of 
 truth: all the more so because the expression does not occur in the 
 earlier chapters; for it is probable that down to the end of chap. iv. 
 at any rate ‘the Twelve’ did not yet exist. Pilate, Martha and Mary, 
 and Mary Magdalene are introduced in the same abrupt way as per- 
 sons well-known (xviii, 29, xix. 25). Οὖν, in consequence of the 
 
 , frequent desertions, 
 
 μὴ K. op. θέλετε. Surely ye also do not wish to go: we must 
 avoid rendering θέλειν by the ‘will’ of the simple future: comp, vii. 
 17, viii. 44. Christ knows not only the unbelief of the many, but the 
 belief and loyalty of the few. 
 
 68. Σίμων Ilérpes. See oni. 42. 8. Peter, as leader, primus inter 
 pares, answers here as elsewhere in the name of the Twelve (see on 
 Mark iii. 17), and with characteristic impetuosity. His answer con- 
 tains three reasons in logical order why they cannot desert their 
 Master: (1) there is no one else to whom they can go; the Baptist is 
 dead. Even if there were (2) Jesus has all that they need; He has 
 ‘sayings of eternal life.’ And if there be other teachers who have 
 them also, yet (3) there is but one Messiah, and Jesusis He. Contrast 
 his earlier utterance, ‘Depart from me’ (Luke v. 8). 
 
 ᾿ς ῥήματα ἵ. αἰων. See on ili. 34. No article; the expression is quite 
 general, and seems to be an echo of v. 63, the truth of which §S. Peter’s 
 experience could already affirm. It may mean either utterances about 
 eternal life, or leading to eternal life. The analogy of the Bread of 
 life, Light of life, Tree of life, and Water of life (v. 35, viii. 12; Rev. 
 ii, 7, xxi. 6) is strongly in favour of the latter. 
 
 69. ἡμεῖς. Emphatic; we (in contrast to the deserters) have be- 
 lieved and have come to know (vii. 17, 26, viii. 32, 51): this has been 
 the case for some time. Note the order; by believing they have come 
 to know; sometimes (1 John iv. 16) knowledge precedes faith. 
 
 e 
 
 ὁ ἅγιος τι ©. §. Peter’s confessions are worth comparing. 
 1. ‘Thou art the Son of God’ (Matt. xiv. 33); in this tke other 
 Apostles joined. 2. ‘Thou art the Holy One of God’ (John vi. 69). 
 3. ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God’ (Matt. xvi. 16). 
 They increase in fulness, as we might expect. For the last he is pro- 
 nounced ‘blessed’ by Christ. See oni. 21. 
 
 70. αὐτοῖς. He replies to all, not to their spokesman only, 
 
166 S. JOHN. [VI. 70— 
 
 οὐκ ἐγὼ ὑμᾶς τ. δ. ἐξ. Note the order throughout. Did not I choose 
 (xiii, 18, xv. 16) you the Twelve? Here probably the question ends: 
 and of you one is a devil is best punctuated without an interrogation; 
 it is a single statement in tragic contrast to the preceding question 
 (comp. vii. 19). It would be closer to the Greek to omit the article 
 before ‘devil’ and make it a kind of adjective; and of you one is devil, 
 i.e. devilish in nature: but this is hardly English. The words contain 
 a half-rebuke to 8. Peter for his impetuous avowal of loyalty in the 
 name of them all. The passage stands alone in the N.T. (comp. 
 Matt. xvi. 23), but its very singularity is evidence of its truth. S. John 
 is not likely to have forgotten what was said, or in translating to have 
 made any serious change. 
 
 71. ἔλεγεν δέ. Now He spake, was meaning. For the accusative 
 instead of περί c. gen. comp, viii. 54, ix. 19, i. 15. 
 
 ᾿Ισκαριώτου. Here and in xiii. 26 the true reading adds Iscariot not 
 to the name of Judas {xil. 4, xiii. 2, xiv. 22), but to that of his father. 
 If Iscariot means ‘man of Kerioth,’ a place in Judah (Josh. xv. 25), 
 or possibly Moab (Jer. xlviii. 24), it would be natural for both father 
 and son to have the name, In this case Judas was the only Apostle 
 who was not a Galilean, and this would place a barrier between him 
 and the Eleven, 
 
 ἔμελλεν. Was about to; xii. 4; Luke xxii. 23; comp. v. 64. There 
 is no need to include either predestinarian views on the one hand or the 
 intention of Judas on the other. What has taken place, when viewed 
 from a point before the event, may be regarded as sure to take place. 
 εἷς ἐκ τ. δ. is in tragic contrast with what precedes; for he was to be- 
 tray Him—one of the Twelve. ‘‘Clean and unclean birds, the dove 
 and the raven, are still in the Ark” (S. Augustine). 
 
 With regard to the difficulty of understanding Christ’s words in this 
 sixth chapter, Meyer’s concluding remark is to be borne in mind. 
 ‘* The difficulty is partly exaggerated; and partly the fact is overlooked 
 that in all references to His death and the purpose of it Jesus could 
 rely upon the light which the future would throw on these utterances: 
 and sowing, as He generally did, for the future in the bosom of the 
 present, He was compelled to utter much that was mysterious, but 
 which would supply material and support for the further development 
 and purification of faith and knowledge. The wisdom thus displayed 
 in His teaching has been justified by History.” 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 8. Omit ταύτην after first ἑορτήν. Between οὔπω (BLT) and οὐκ 
 (SDKM) before ἀναβαίνω it is impossible to decide with certainty. 
 
 10. εἰς τὴν ἑορτήν, τότε καὶ αὐτὸς ἀνέβη for τότε κ. αὐ. ἀν. εἰς τ. Eop. 
 on overwhelming evidence, 
 
VIL. 1.] NOTES. 167 
 
 26. Omit ἀληθώς after ἐστιν. 
 
 32. οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ of Φαρισαῖοι (S. John’s invariable order; v. 45, 
 xi. 47, 57, xviii. 3) for of ®. x. of dpx., on overwhelming evidence. 
 
 39. After πνεῦμα omit ἅγιον (assimilation to xx. 22), with NT. 
 D adds ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς and B adds δεδομένον after ἅγιον. Οὔπω for οὐδέπω. 
 
 46. ἐλάλησεν οὕτως for οὕτως ἐλ. Omit ὡς οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος after 
 ἄνθρωπος, with BLT: other MSS. exhibit great variation. 
 
 50. πρὸς αὐτὸν πρότερον for νυκτὸς πρὸς αὐτόν. Here also there is 
 much variation in the readings, 
 
 52. ἐγείρεται for ἐγήγερται. 
 
 ‘*Chapter vii., like chapter vi., is very important for the estimate of 
 the fourth Gospel. In it the scene of the Messianic crisis shifts from 
 Galilee to Jerusalem; and, as we should naturally expect, the crisis 
 itself becomes hotter. The divisions, the doubts, the hopes, the jea- 
 lousies, and the casuistry of the Jews are vividly portrayed. We see 
 the mass of the populace, especially those who had come up from 
 Galilee, swaying to and fro, hardly knowing which way to turn, inclined 
 to believe, but held back by the more sophisticated citizens of the me- 
 tropolis. These meanwhile apply the fragments of Rabbinical learning 
 at their command in order to test the claims of the new prophet. In 
 the background looms the dark shadow of the hierarchy itself, en- 
 trenched behind its prejudices and refusing to hear the cause that it 
 has already prejudged. A single timid voice is raised against this in- 
 justice, but is at once fiercely silenced” (Sanday). 
 
 As in chapters v. and vi. Christ is set forth as the Source and Support 
 of Life, so in chapters vii. viii. and ix. He is set forth as the Source 
 of Truth and Light. The Fulfiller of the Sabbath and of the Passover 
 fulfils the Feast of Tabernacles also. 
 
 Cuap. VII. Curist THE Source oF TRUTH AND LIGHT. 
 
 Chap. vii. has three main divisions: 1. The controversy with His 
 brethren (1—9); 2. His teaching at the Feast of Tabernacles (10—3%); 
 3. The opposite results; division in the multitude and in the Sanhe- 
 drin (40—52). 
 
 1—9. Tuer CoNnTROVERSY WITH His BRETHREN. 
 
 1. μετὰ ταῦτα. See on iii. 22. The interval is again vague (In- 
 troduction to Chap. vi.): it covers five or six months, the interval be- 
 tween the Passover (vi. 4) and the Feast of Tabernacles. 
 
 περιεπάτει. See on vi. 66. The imperfects imply continued action. 
 To this ministry in Galilee, which S, John thus passes over, much of 
 Matt. xiv. 34—xvili. 35 belongs. 
 
168 5. JOHN. [VII 1— 
 
 ov γὰρ κιτιλ. See v.18, From this we understand that He did not 
 go up to Jerusalem for the Passover of vi. 4. ‘Jewry’ is found here in 
 all English Versions except Wiclif’s; it was common in the earlier 
 translations. But in A.V. it has been retained (probably by an over- 
 sight) only here, Luke xxiii, 5, and Dan. v. 13: elsewhere Judea has 
 been substituted. In Dan. v. 13 the same word is translated both 
 ‘Jewry’ and ‘Judah’! Comp. the Prayer-Book version of Ps, 
 lxxvi. 1, 
 
 2. ἡ €op. τ. Ἴουδ. ἡ ox. Tabernacles, or ‘the Feast of the 7th 
 month,’ or ‘of ingathering,’ was the most joyous of the Jewish 
 festivals. It had two aspects: (1) a commemoration of their dwell- 
 ing in tents in the wilderness, (2) a harvest-home. It was therefore 
 a thanksgiving (1) for a permanent abode, and especially for a per- 
 manent place of worship, (2) for the crops of the year. Celebrebant 
 hoc Judaei, velut reminiscentes beneficia Domini, qui occisuri erant 
 Dominum (8. Augustine). It began on the 15th of the 7th month, 
 Ethanim or Tisri (about our September), and lasted seven days, 
 during which all who were not exempted through illness or weak- 
 ness were obliged to live in booths, which involved much both of the 
 discomfort and also of the merriment of a picnic. The distinctions 
 between rich and poor were to a large extent obliterated in the general 
 encampment, and the Feast thus became a great levelling institution. 
 On the eighth day the booths were broken up and the people returned 
 home: but it had special sacrifices of its own and was often counted 
 as part of the Feast itself. The Feast is mentioned here, partly as a 
 date, partly to shew what after all induced Christ to go up to Jerusa- 
 lem, partly perhaps for its symbolical meaning. ‘The Word was made 
 flesh and tabernacled among us’ (i. 14). Tabernacles was a type of the 
 Incarnation, as the Passover of the Passion. 
 
 3. otv. Beeause He had not attended the previous Passover. 
 
 οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ. See on ii. 12. The bluntness of this suggestion, 
 given almost as a command, shews that they presumed upon their near 
 relationship. It would be more natural in the mouths of men older 
 than Christ, and therefore is in favour of their being sons of Joseph by 
 a former marriage rather than sons of Joseph and Mary (comp. Mark 
 iii. 21, 81). They shared the ordinary beliefs of the Jews about the 
 Messiah, and therefore did not believe in their Brother. But His 
 miracles perplexed them, and they wished the point brought to a de- 
 cisive issue. There is no treachery in their suggestion; its object is 
 not to put Him in the power of His enemies. Comp. li. 3, 4, where 
 His Mother’s suggestion and His treatment of it are somewhat similar 
 to what we have here. 
 
 οἱ μαθηταί σου. Any of them, whether pilgrims to Jerusalem for 
 the Feast or living there. His brethren seem to imply that they 
 themselves are not disciples. Θεωρήσουσιν, not merely ‘see,’ but ‘con- 
 template ;’ see on vi. 40. 
 
 4. οὐδεὶς y. For no man doeth anything in secret and himself 
 seeketh to be in openness: or, according to BD!, and seeketh it (αὐτό) to 
 
VII. 8.] NOTES. 169 
 
 be in openness. They imply that He works miracles to prove His 
 Messiahship and hides them from those who would be convinced by 
 them. To conceal His miracles is to deny His Messiahship; the 
 Messiah must assert His position. Winer, p. 786. 
 
 ἐν παῤῥησίᾳ. Here and xvi. 29 only with a preposition; see on v. 13. 
 
 εἰ ταῦτα ποιεῖς. Jf Thou doest these things, not ‘If Thou do these 
 things ;’ no doubt as to the fact of His miracles is expressed. ‘If 
 Thou doest miracles at all, do them before the whole nation, instead 
 of in obscure parts of Galilee.’ 
 
 φανέρωσον σ. Manifest Thyself; see on i. 31 and xxi. 1. 
 
 οὐδὲ y. Evidence of the Evangelist’s candour; he admits that those 
 who were thus closely connected with Jesus did not put their trust in 
 Him: For not even did His brethren (as one would certainly expect) 
 believe on Him. It is marvellous that in the face of this verse any one 
 should have maintained that three of His brethren (James, Simon, 
 and Judas) were Apostles, This verse is also fatal to the common 
 theory, that these ‘brethren’ are really our Lord’s cousins, the sons of 
 Alpheus. Certainly one of the sons of Alpheus (James) was an 
 Apostle ; probably a second was (Matthew, if Levi and Matthew are 
 the same person, as is almost universally admitted); possibly a third 
 was (Judas, if ‘Judas of James’ means ‘Judas, brother of James,’ as 
 is commonly supposed). By this time the company of the Twelve was 
 complete (vi. 67, 70, 71); so that we cannot suppose that some of the 
 Twelve have still to be converted. If then one, two, or three sons of 
 Alpheus were Apostles, how could it be true that the sons of Alpheus 
 ‘did not believe on Him?’ ‘His brethren’ cannot be the sons of Al- 
 pheus. They seem to have been converted by the Resurrection. 
 Immediately after the Ascension we find them with the Apostles and 
 the holy women (Acts i. 14; comp. 1 Cor. ix. 5; Gal. i. 19). 
 
 - 6 ὁ καιρὸς ὁ ἐμ. See on vili. 31. My time for manifesting Myself 
 to the world is not yet present; with special reference to the Passion. 
 It is inadequate to interpret it of the time for going up to the Feast. 
 Moreover, what sense would there be in ‘Your time for going up to the 
 Feast is always ready?’ Whereas ‘ You can always manifest yourselves’ 
 makes excellent sense. See last note on ii. 4. Καιρός, frequent in the 
 Synoptists, occurs here only in 5. John, v. 4 being a gloss: S. John’s 
 word is ὥρα. Καιρός is Christ’s opportunity on the human side, wpa is 
 His hour on the Divine side, i.e. as ordained by God. 
 
 7. &Kdopos. Unbelievers; the common use in §. John: in v, 4 it 
 meant all mankind (see on i. 10). He takes up their word and gives 
 it a meaning far deeper than theirs. The world cannot hate them 
 because they are part of itself (xv. 19). Hence it is that they can 
 always manifest themselves; they can always count upon a favourable 
 reception. As in ili. 3, 5, v. 19, vi. 44, 65, οὐ δύναται expresses a moral 
 impossibility; comp. vv. 34, 36, vili. 21, 43, xii, 39, xiii. 33, 36, xiv. 
 17, xvi. 12, For μαρτυρῶ see on i. 7. 
 
 8. ὑμεῖς. Emphatic; you, with all your fondness for publicity. 
 
170 5. JOHN, [VII 8— 
 
 ἐγὼ οὐκ ἀν. Οὔπω, certainly very ancient, is possibly a correction. 
 It may have been substituted for οὐκ to avoid the charge of the heathen 
 critic Porphyry, that Jesus here shews fickleness or deceit, and there- 
 fore cannot be Divine. But the sense is the same, whether we read 
 οὐκ or οὔπω; ‘I am not going now, publicly, in the general caravan of 
 pilgrims; not going with you, who do not believe on Me.’ He does 
 not say ‘I shall not go.’ The next two verses shew exactly what the 
 negative means. 
 
 9. Once more we see (v. 1, i. 43, ii. 1, 12, iv. 2, 43, vi. 1, 59) that 
 5. John is quite aware that Galilee is the main scene of Christ’s 
 ministry, as the Synoptists represent. The gaps in his narrative 
 leave ample room for the Galilean ministry. 
 
 10—39. Tue Discourses AT THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES, 
 Of this section vv. 10—13 are introductory. 
 
 10. εἰς τὴν ἑορτήν. These words, transposed in T.R., belong to 
 ἀνέβησαν, not ἀνέβη. We are not told that Christ went up to the Feast, 
 i.e. to keep it; so that His words ‘I go not up to this Feast’ may be 
 true even in the sense ‘I shall not go up for it at all.’ All that is 
 certain is that He appeared when the Feast was half over (v. 14). 
 
 οὐ φανερῶς. Not manifestly; He did not follow the worldly advice 
 of His brethren: comp. φανέρωσον in v. 4. Had He gone in the 
 general caravan there might have been another outburst of enthusiasm 
 (vi. 14, 15), such as actually took effect at the next Passover (xii. 
 12—18). Perhaps He went by a different route (e.g. through Samaria, 
 as in iv. 4, instead of down the eastern bank of Jordan), or several 
 days later. One suspects that traces of Docetism are difficult to find 
 in this Gospel when it is maintained that this verse contains such. 
 See on i. 14, vi. 21, xix. 35. 
 
 11. οἱ οὖν I. The hostile party therefore; because they did not 
 find Him in the caravan of pilgrims from Galilee. Note the im- 
 perfects, implying continued action. 
 
 éxetvos. That man of whom we have heard so much; ix. 12, 28. 
 
 12. γογγυσμός. Muttering; see on vi. 41. Some are for and 
 some are against Him. 
 
 ἐν τοῖς ὄχλοις. Perhaps, in the bands of pilgrims. Here only does 
 8. John use ὄχλοι; ὄχλος is frequent, and is read here in ND. 
 
 πλανᾷ. Leadeth astray. 
 
 13. οὐδεὶς μέντοι. Quite literally; no man dared speak openly either 
 for or against Him, they were so afraid of the hierarchy. Experience 
 had taught them that it was dangerous to take any line which the 
 rulers had not formally sanctioned; and though the rulers were known 
 to be against Christ, yet they had not committed themselves beyond 
 recall, and might turn against either side. ‘‘A true indication of 
 an utterly jesuitical domination of the people” (Meyer). See on iv, 27. 
 
VII. 17.] NOTES. 171 
 
 13. παῤῥησίᾳ. The word occurs nine times in the Gospel and four 
 in the First Epistle, not in Matt. or Luke, and only once in Mark, 
 It means either ‘without reserve’ (v. 4, x. 24, xi. 14, xvi. 25, 29, 
 xviil. 20), or ‘without fear’ (vv. 13, 26, xi. 54). Originally it was 
 confined to unreserved or fearless speech, but v. 4 and xi. 54 break 
 through this restriction. 
 
 Sid τὸν >. τ. *I. Because of the (prevalent) fear of the Jews. 
 Thus ‘the sins of the teachers are the teachers of sin.’ 
 
 14—39. We have (1) a discourse in the midst of the Feast in which 
 three groups take part; ‘the Jews’ (14—24); some of the people of 
 Jerusalem (25—31); the envoys of the Sanhedrin (32—36): (2) a 
 discourse on the last day of the Feast (837—39). The report is no 
 doubt greatly condensed, but the divisions a vacillations in the 
 multitude are vividly preserved. 
 
 14. ἤδη δὲ τ. & μ. But when it was already the midst of the 
 feast ; a about the fourth day. Whether He had been in Jerusalem 
 for the first half is uncertain: see on v. 10. Once more the Lord, 
 whom they sought, suddenly visits His Temple, and perhaps for the 
 first time teaches in public there: at the cleansing (ii. 13—17) He 
 delivered no discourse. Note the change from aorist to imperfect. 
 
 15. οὗτος. Contemptuous, as in vi. 32. Their question is so 
 eminently characteristic, that it is very unlikely that a Greek writer 
 of the second century would have been able to invent it for them; 
 he would probably have made them too cautious to commit them- 
 selves to any expression of astonishment about Him. The substance 
 of His doctrine excites no emotion in them, but they are astounded 
 that He should possess learning without having got it according 
 to ordinary routine. He had never attended the schools of the 
 Rabbis, and yet His interpretations of Scripture shewed a large amount 
 of biblical and other knowledge. That does excite them. Their 
 questions and comments throughout this section are too exactly in 
 keeping with what we know of the Jews in our Lord’s time to be 
 the invention of a Greek a century or more later. By γράμματα is 
 meant literature in general, not merely the Scriptures, which would 
 be τὰ ἱερὰ yp. (2 Tim. iii. 15), or ai γραφαί (v. 39; Acts xviii. 24, 28, 
 &c.), Comp. τὰ πολλά σε γράμματα εἰς μανίαν περιτρέπει, Acts xxvi. 24. 
 
 16. οὐκ ἔστιν ἐμή. Jewish teachers commonly quoted their au- 
 thorities. These Jews thought that Jesus was self-taught, and 
 marvelled at His literary proficiency. Jesus here gives the authority 
 for His teaching and accounts for its power. ‘My teaching does not 
 originate with Me; that is why I have no need to learn in the schools. 
 He who sent Me communicates it to Me.’ 
 
 17. ἐάν τις θέλῃ. If any man willeth to do His will; see on i. 
 44, vi. 67, vill. 44. The mere mechanical performance of “God's will 
 is ‘not enough; there must be an inclination towards Him, a wish 
 to make our conduct agree with His will; and without this agreement 
 Divine doctrine cannot be recognised as such. There must be a moral 
 
172 S. JOHN. [ VII. 17— 
 
 harmony between the teaching and the taught, and this harmony is in 
 the first instance God’s gift (vi. 44, 45), which each can accept or 
 refuse at will. Comp. xiv. 21. Doing the will of God means personal 
 holiness, not mere belief: it is the ποιεῖν τὴν ἀλήθειαν of 111. 21. 
 
 γνώσεται. He will come to know, recognise; comp. v. 26, viii. 32. 
 No time is stated; but sooner or later the knowledge will come. 
 ‘Will’ rather than ‘shall’; the words are partly a promise, partly 
 a statement of fact. The test would be a strange one to men who 
 were always seeking for ‘ signs,’ i.e. miraculous proofs. 
 
 πότερον ἐκ τ. ©. Whether it proceeds from God (as its Fount), 
 or I speak from Myself. Note the change from ἐκ to ἀπό and comp. 
 v. 19,30, xv. 4. ὁ 
 
 18. Proof almost in the form of a syllogism that He does not speak 
 of Himself. It applies to Christ alone. Human teachers who seek 
 God’s glory are not thereby secured from erroneous teaching. These 
 verses (16—18) remind us, and might remind some of His hearers, 
 of an earlier discourse delivered in Jerusalem some seven months 
 before: comp. v. 19, 30, 37, 44. 
 
 οὗτος ἀληθής ἐστιν. Emphatic retrospective pronoun; see on iii, 
 32. Any one who speaks from himself seeks his own glory: but 
 an ambassador who speaks from himself is not only vain-glorious but 
 false; he claims his master’s message as his own. The ambassador 
 who seeks his master’s glory is true. 
 
 ἀδικία. Unrighteousness is not in him. 8. John does not say 
 ‘falsehood’ as we might expect, but uses a wider word which points 
 out the moral root of the falsehood. Comp. viii. 46. Throughout 
 5. John’s writings the connexion between truth and righteousness, 
 falsehood and unrighteousness, is often brought before us. Hence 
 his peculiar phrases ‘to do the truth’ (1 John i. 6), ‘to do a lie’ 
 (Rev. xxi. 27, xxii. 15). 
 
 There is no need to suppose that anything is omitted between 18 
 and 19, though the transition is abrupt. Christ has answered them 
 and now takes the offensive. He exposes the real meaning of their 
 cavillings; they seek His life. 
 
 19. οὐ M. %&. ὑ τ. νόμον; Here the interrogation probably ends 
 (comp. vi. 70); the next clause is a statement of fact. The words are 
 possibly an allusion to the custom of reading the Law in public every 
 day of the Feast of Tabernacles, when the Feast fell in a Sabbatical 
 year (Deut, xxxi. 10—13). The argument is similar to v. 45; Moses 
 (see on i, 17) in whom they trust condemns them. Moreover it is an 
 argumentum ad hominem; ‘Ye are all breakers of the law, and yet 
 would put Me to death as a breaker of it.’ 
 
 20. Δαιμ. ἔχεις. Thou hast a demon (see on viii. 48). The mul- 
 titude from the provinces know nothing of the designs of the hier- 
 archy, although dwellers in Jerusalem (v. 25) are better informed. 
 These provincials think He must be possessed to have such an idea. 
 
VII. 23.] NOTES. 173 
 
 Comp. x. 20, and also Matt. xi, 18, where the same is quoted as said 
 of the Baptist. In both cases extraordinary conduct is supposed to 
 be evidence of insanity, and the insanity is attributed to demoniacal 
 possession, the κακοδαιμονᾷν of the Greeks. In viii. 48 the same 
 remark is made, but in a much more hostile spirit, and there Christ 
 answers the charge. Here, where it is the mere ignorant rejoinder of 
 a perplexed multitude, He takes no notice of the interruption. 
 
 21. ἕν ἔρ. ἔπ. I did one work; the healing at Bethesda, which 
 (He reminds them) excited the astonishment and indignation of all, 
 not of the rulers only, as being wrought on the Sabbath. “Ev, a 
 single work, in contrast to frequent circumcisions on the Sabbath, 
 or possibly to the many works which excited comparatively little 
 attention: ἕν balances πάντες, one act sets all in amazement. 
 
 Many modern editors add διὰ τοῦτο from v. 22 to this verse; ‘and 
 ye all marvel on accouni of this.’ But this is cumbrous, and unlike 
 S. John, who begins sentences with διὰ τοῦτο (v. 16, 18, vi. 65, viii. 
 47, x. 17, xii. 18, 39) rather than ends them with it. 
 
 22. διὰ τ. M. For this cause M. hath given you: the perfect in- 
 dicates that the gift abides, the present result of a past act. 
 
 οὐκ ὅτι. Not that; the sentence is a parenthesis, and ὅτι does not 
 answer to διὰ τοῦτος. The meaning is not, ‘For this cause M. hath 
 given you circumcision, because it originated (ἐκὴ not with him but 
 with the fathers:’ which spoils the argument. Διὰ τοῦτο means, ‘in 
 order to teach the same lesson as I do.’ It is not easy to determine 
 the object of the parenthesis: whether it states (1) a mere matter of 
 fact; or (2) the reason why circumcision on the eighth day (as being 
 the older law, reaffirmed side by side with the later one) prevailed 
 over the Sabbath; or (3) a reason why it might have been expected 
 that the Sabbath (as being of Moses and in the Decalogue, whereas 
 circumcision was not) would have prevailed over the law about cir- 
 cumcision. Anyhow the national conscience felt that it was better 
 that the Sabbath should be broken, than that circumcision, the sign 
 of the covenant and token of sanctification, should be postponed, 
 and Jesus claims this right instinct as justifying Him. If then the 
 Sabbath could give way to ceremonial ordinance, how much more to 
 a work of mercy? The law of charity is higher than any ceremonial 
 law. ’Ev σάββατῳ, on a Sabbath; any that fell on the eighth day. 
 
 28. ἵνα μὴ ἃ. év. M. The law about cireumcision on the eighth 
 day (Lev. xii. 3), which was a re-enactment of the patriarchal law 
 (Gen. xvil, 12). Some adopt the inferior rendering in the margin; 
 ‘without breaking the law of Moses,’ or ‘without the law of Moses 
 being broken;’ in which case ‘the law of Moses’ means the law about 
 the Sabbath. But this is not the natural meaning of wa μή. Comp. 
 vy. 18, and see on x. 35, 
 
 χολᾶτε. Here only in N.T. It signifies bitter resentment. 
 
 ὅτι... σαββάτῳ. Because I made a whole man sound on a Sabbath, 
 whereas circumcision purified one part only. 
 
174 S. JOIN. [VII 24— 
 
 24. κατ᾽ ov. According to appearance Christ’s act was a breach 
 of the Sabbath. “Oys may mean ‘face,’ as in xi. 44 (see note there); 
 but there is no reference to Christ’s having ‘no form nor comeliness,’ 
 as if He meant ‘Judge not by My mean appearance.’ 
 
 τὴν Sux. kp. The righteous judgment; there is only one, 
 
 25. ἐλ. οὖν τ. Some therefore of them of Jerusalem said; i.e. in 
 consequence of Christ’s vindication of Himself. Living in the capi- 
 tal, they know better than the provincials (v. 20) what the intentions 
 of the hierarchy are. ἱἹεροσολυμῖται occurs only here and Mark i. 5, 
 
 26. ἴδε παῤῥησίᾳ. See on 1. 29 and vii. 13. 
 
 μήποτε κιτιλ. Can it be that the rulers indeed have come to know 
 that this man is the Christ? Surely they have not; and yet why do 
 they allow such language? Comp. v. 31, iv. 29, 33, and see on i. 48, 
 The suggestion is only momentary: they at once raise a technical 
 difficulty which suffices with them to cancel the moral impression 
 produced by His words. 
 
 27. 6 δὲ Xp. ὅταν ἔρχ. But when the Christ cometh; see oni. 20. 
 οὐδεὶς γινώσκει. No one cometh to know (v. 26) or perceiveth. Note the 
 change from οἴδαμεν to γινώσκει and comp, viii. 55, xiii. 7, xiv. 7, xxi. 17. 
 Πόθεν does not refer to the Messiah’s birthplace, which was known (vv. 41, 
 42); nor to His remote descent, for He was to be the Son of David 
 (ibid.); but to His parentage (vi. 42), immediate and actual. This 
 text is the strongest, if not the only evidence that we have of the 
 belief that the immediate parents of the Messiah would be unknown: 
 but the precision and vivacity of this passage carry conviction with 
 them, and shew how familiar the ideas current among the Jews at that 
 time were to 8S. John. It never occurs to him to explain. The belief 
 might easily grow out of Isai. 1111. 8, ‘Who shall declare His genera- 
 tion?’ Justin Martyr tells us of a kindred belief, that the Messiah- 
 ship of the Messiah would be unknown, even to Himself, until He 
 was anointed by Elijah (Trypho, pp. 226, 336). 
 
 28. ἔκραξεν οὖν. Jesus therefore (moved by their gross miscon- 
 ceptions) cried aloud. The word expresses loud expression of strong 
 emotion; comp. v. 37, i. 15, xii. 44. §. John well remembers that 
 moving cry in the midst of Christ’s teaching in the Temple. The 
 scene is still before him and he puts it before us, although neither ἐν 
 τῷ ἱερῷ nor διδάσκων is needed for the narrative (v. 14). 
 
 κἀμὲ οἴδ. k.t.A. Various constructions have been put upon this: 
 (1) that it is a question; (2) ironical; (3) a mixture of the two; (4) a 
 reproach, i.e. that they knew His Divine nature and maliciously con- 
 cealed it. None of these are satisfactory. The words are best under- 
 stood quite simply and literally. Christ admits the truth of what 
 they say: they have an outward knowledge of Him and His origin 
 (vi. 42); but He has an inner and higher origin, of which they know 
 nothing. So that even their self-made test, for which they are willing 
 to resist the evidence both of Scripture and of His works, is com- 
 plied with ; for they know not His real immediate origin. 
 
VII. 32.] NOTES. 175 
 
 καὶ dm ἐμαυτοῦ. Καί introduces a contrast, as so often in 8S. John 
 (v. 30); ἀπ. ἐμ. is emphatic; and (yet) of Myself I am not come (viii. 
 42). ‘Ye know My person, and ye know My parentage; and yet of 
 the chief thing of all, My Divine mission, ye know nothing.’ 
 
 ἀληθινὸς ὃ w.] He that sent Me is a true Sender, One who in 
 the most real and perfect sense can give a mission; or possibly, a 
 really existing Sender, and not a fiction, In either case the meaning 
 is ‘I have a valid commission.’ 
 
 29. ἐγώ. Emphatic, in contrast to the preceding emphatic ὑμεῖς. 
 
 ὅτι παρ᾽ av. εἰμι. Because I am from Him, and He, and no other, 
 sent Me. Jesus knows God (1) because of His Divine generation, 
 (2) because of His Divine mission. Comp. the very remarkable 
 passage, Matt. xi. 27. 
 
 30. ἐζήτουν οὖν. They sought therefore, in consequence of His 
 claiming Divine origin and mission; for though He has not mentioned 
 God, they understand His meaning. Imperfect of continued action 
 (xi. 27), the nominative being οἱ ἄρχοντες or of Ἰουδαῖοι, not ὁ ὄχλος. 
 Πιάζειν occurs Rev. xix. 20, and 7 times in this Gospel; elsewhere only 
 Acts iii. 7, xii. 4; 2 Cor. xi. 32. See oni. 14, iv. 6, xi. 44 and xix. 37. 
 
 Kal οὐδεὶς ἐπ. And (yet) no one laid hands. That καί in 5. John 
 often = ‘and yet,’ as here and v. 28, is most true; that καί ever= ‘but’ 
 is true neither of 5. John nor of any other Greek writer. In A.V. καί 
 is rendered ‘but’ here and in v. 26, while in v. 31 δέ is rendered ‘and.’ 
 See on i. 5 and viii. 20. 
 
 ἡ ὥρα av. The hour appointed by God for His Passion (xiii. 1), 
 this meaning being clearly marked by the context (see on v. 6 and 
 ii. 4). The immediate cause of their not seizing Him was that they 
 were as yet afraid to do so; but S. John passes through proximate 
 causes to the prime cause of all, the Will of God. When the hour was 
 come God no longer allowed their fear, which still existed (Matt. xxvi. 
 5), to deter them, 
 
 31. ἐκ τ. ὀχλ. δὲ π. But (on the other hand, ie. in contrast to the 
 rulers) of the multitude many believed on Him (as the Messiah) and 
 kept saying (in answer to objectors), When the Christ (see on v. 27 
 and i. 20) cometh, will He do more signs than those which this man did? 
 They express, not their own doubts, but those of objectors in saying, 
 ‘when the Christ cometh:’ they believe that He has come. Some of 
 them perhaps had witnessed the numerous Galilean miracles; they 
 have at any rate heard of them, and it is on them, not on His teach- 
 ing and work, that their faith is based; hence its weakness. Winer, 
 p. 641. 
 
 32. ‘yoyyvfovros. Here, as in v. 12, mere muttering, as distinct 
 from murmuring, seems to be meant: see on vi. 41. But they are 
 restless at all this uncertainty. The Pharisees (comp. iv. 1) hear what 
 they say and report it to the Sanhedrin, which orders His arrest. 
 
 ἀρχιερεῖς. First mention of them by 8. John. The word signifies, 
 not the heads of the 24 courses of priests, but Caiaphas, Annas, and 
 
176 S. JOHN. [ VII. 32— 
 
 the other ex-high-priests, with, perhaps, their relations in the San- 
 hedrin (Acts iv. 6). See on xi, 48, xviii. 13. Note that in this the 
 reckless hierarchy, who were mainly Sadducees, combine with the 
 Pharisees; comp. v. 45, xi. 47, 57, xviii. 3. On πιάσωσιν see on v. 80. 
 
 33. εἶπεν οὖν ὁ “I. Therefore said Jesus, i.e. in consequence of 
 their sending to arrest Him: probably He recognised the officers 
 waiting for an opportunity to take Him. Christ’s words are addressed 
 to the officers and those who sent them, and it is very difficult to 
 decide on their precise meaning. Perhaps the simplest interpretation 
 is the best. ‘I must remain on earth a little while longer, and during 
 this time ye cannot kill Me: then ye will succeed, and I shall go to 
 My Father. Thither ye will wish to come, but ye cannot; for ye know 
 Him not (v. 28), and such as ye cannot enter there.’ This is the first 
 formal attempt upon His life. It reminds Him that His death is not 
 far off, and that it will place a tremendous barrier between Him and 
 those who compass it. It is the beginning of the end; an end that 
 will bring a short-lived loss and eternal triumph to Him, a short-lived 
 triumph and eternal loss to them. 
 
 Xpov. μικρόν. About six months; from the F. of Tabernacles 
 to the Passover. 
 
 ὑπάγω. The voluntariness of His dying is implied in the word: see 
 on x, 17, 18, xix. 30, 34, and on xvi. 7. 
 
 πρὸς τ. πέμψ. pe. See oni. 33. One suspects that here 5. John 
 is translating Christ’s words into plainer language than He actually 
 used. Had He said thus clearly ‘unto Him that sent Me,’ a phrase 
 which they elsewhere understand at once of God (see on v. 30), they 
 could scarcely have asked the questions which follow in v. 35. Unless 
 we are to suppose that they here pretend not to understand; which is 
 unlikely, as they speak not to Him but ‘among themselves.’ 
 
 34. ζητήσετέ με. In spite of vv. 1, 19, 20, 25, 30, v. 18, viii. 37, 40, 
 x. 39, xi. 8, it seems clear from xiii, 33 that these words are not to be 
 understood of seeking His life: no infinitive is added here; in all the 
 other cases we have ἀποκτεῖναι, πιάσαι, or λιθάσαι. Nor can repentance 
 be meant; repentance could not be in vain. Rather distress is meant; 
 they will seek for help at His hands and not find it (comp. viii. 21). 
 But it is best not to limit the application to any particular occasion, 
 such as the destruction of Jerusalem, the great hour of Jewish need. 
 
 ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγώ, ὑμεῖς. The pronouns are again in emphatic opposition 
 as in vv. 28, 29; comp. vv. 7, 8. Hiul, not εἶμι, which does not occur 
 in N.T. Winer, p. 61. The present tense implies His continual pre- 
 sence with the Father; ‘where I am,’ not ‘where I shall be.’ 
 
 οὐ δύνασθε. It is morally impossible: see on v. 7. 
 
 Ποῦ οὗτος μέλλει. Where is this fellow (iii. 26, vi. 42, 52) about to 
 (vi. 71) go, seeing that we shall not find Him. Is He about to go unto 
 the Dispersion among the Gentiles? ‘H διασπορά τ. ‘EX\X. means those 
 Jews who were dispersed among the heathen outside Palestine; the ab- 
 stract for the concrete, like ἡ περιτομή for the Jews generally. Διασπορά 
 
EE 2} NOTES. 177 
 
 occurs James i. 1 and 1 Pet. i, 1 (see notes there), and nowhere else in 
 N.T. There were three chief colonies of these ‘dispersed’ or ‘scat- 
 tered’ Jews, in Babylonia, Egypt, and Syria, whence they spread over 
 the whole world. ‘Moses from generations of old hath in every city 
 them that preach him,’ Acts xv. 21. These opponents of Christ, there- 
 fore, suggest that He means to go to the Jews scattered among the 
 Gentiles in order to reach the Gentiles and teach them—the very mode 
 of proceeding afterwards adopted by the Apostles; so that their saying, 
 like that of Caiaphas (xi. 50), was an involuntary prophecy. But here 
 it is spoken in sarcasm. Christ’s utter disregard of Jewish exclusiveness 
 and apparent non-observance of the ceremonial law gave a handle to 
 the sneer; which would be pointless if Ἑλλήνων were rendered ‘Hel- 
 lenists,’ i.e. Grecised Jews. “EdAnves in N.T. always means Gentiles 
 or heathen. See on xii. 20. 
 
 36. ὁ λόγος οὗτος. Οὗτος is again contemptuous, like ‘this precious 
 word.’ But they cannot shake the impression which it has made on 
 them. Their own scornful suggestion does not satisfy them, for they 
 know that it is not true. 
 
 57. ἐψοις; μεγάλῃ. Now on the last day, the great day. This was 
 probably not tee sev as day, but the eighth day, which according to 
 Ley. xxiii. 36, 39; Num. xxix. 35; Neh. viii. 18, was reckoned along 
 with the seven days of the feast proper. To speak of the seventh day 
 as ‘the great day of the feast’ would not be very appropriate; whereas 
 the eighth day on which the people returned home was, like the first 
 day, kept as a Sabbath (Lev. xxiii. 39), and had special sacrifices 
 (Num. xxix. 36—38). Comp. 2 Macc. x. 6. In keeping with the 
 solemnity of the day Christ solemnly takes up His, position and cries 
 aloud with deep emotion (see on v. 28). The εἱστήκει and ἔκραξεν are 
 very graphic: comp. i. 35, xviii. 5, 16, 18, xix. 25, xx.11. He was 
 standing, beholding the multitude engaged in the ceremonies of the 
 last day of the Feast, and moved by the sight He cried aloud. 
 
 ἐάν τις Supa. The words recall Isa. lv. 1 and Rev. xxii. 17, ὁ διψῶν 
 ἐρχέσθω. See onv, 30. The conjectured reference to the custom of 
 pouring water at the Feast of Tabernacles is probably correct. On 
 all seven days water was brought from the pool of Siloam and poured 
 into a silver basin on the western side of the altar of burnt offering, 
 a ceremony not mentioned in O.T. Apparently this was not done on 
 the eighth day. Accordingly Christ comes forward and fills the gap, 
 directing them to a better water than that of Siloam. The fact that 
 the water was poured and not drunk, does not seem to be a reason for 
 denying the reference, especially when we remember how frequently 
 Christ took an external fact as a text (comp. iv. 10, v. 17, 19, vi. 26, 
 27, (viii. 12?) ix. 39, xiii. 8, 10, 12—17; Mark x. 15, 16, 23, 24, &c.). 
 The pouring of the water would be suggestive enough, especially as it 
 represented the water from the rock (1 Cor. x. 4). In such cases there 
 is no need for the analogy to be complete, and in the present case it 
 would add point to the reference that it was not complete. Mere 
 
 ST JOHN. M 
 
178 5. JOHN. [VII. 37— 
 
 pouring of water could not quench even bodily thirst; Christ could 
 satisfy spiritual thirst. ‘Therefore with joy shall ye draw water out 
 of the wells of salvation.’ Isa, xii. 3. Thus 8. John, having shewn 
 us Christ as typified by the Brazen Serpent (iii. 14) and the Manna 
 (vi. 51), now shews Him as the Rock. 
 
 38. ὁ πιστεύων, Nominativus pendens; comp. vi. 39; xv. 2. 
 
 καθὼς εἶπεν ἡ yp. As the scripture said; as if some passage to this 
 effect had recently been read. See on ii. 22. The phrase undoubtedly 
 refers to the words that follow: but inasmuch as no such text is found 
 in Scripture, some have tried to force the phrase into connexion with 
 what precedes, as if the meaning were ‘He that believeth on me in 
 the way that Scripture prescribes.’ Although the exact words are not 
 found in Scripture there are various texts of similar import: Isa. xliv. 
 3, lviii. 11; Zech. xiii. 1, xiv. 8, &e. But none of them contain the 
 very remarkable expression ‘out of his belly.’ Godet contends for 
 Ex. xvii. 6 and Num. xx. 11, and thinks that ‘out of it’ (Heb. ‘from 
 within him’) is the source of ἐκ τῆς κοιλίας αὐτοῦ, and ‘abundant waters’ 
 of ποταμοὶ ὕδατος, while ‘I will stand’ may possibly be alluded to in 
 ‘Jesus was standing.’ In the LXX. there is no resemblance to the 
 Greek here. Ποταμοί stands first with great emphasis; rivers out of 
 his belly shall flow, rivers of living water; in marked contrast to the 
 ewer of water poured each day of the Feast. (For the form ῥεύσουσιν 
 see Winer, p. 109.) Note how, as so often in S. John, the conclusion 
 of one thought is the starting-point of another. As in vi. 35, ‘coming 
 to Christ’ is equivalent to ‘believing on Christ;’ and believing on Him 
 is far in advance of thirsting for spiritual satisfaction, for a man may 
 thirst and refuse to believe. But the believer cannot end in satisfying 
 his own thirst; he at once becomes a fount whence others may derive 
 refreshment. Whether he wills to be a teacher or no, the true Chris- 
 tian cannot fail to impart the spirit of Christianity to others. Thus 
 we have three stages; (1) thirsting; (2) coming or believing; (3) being 
 filled and supplying others. 
 
 39. περὶ τ. mv. §. John’s interpretation is to be accepted, what- 
 ever may be our theory of inspiration, (1) because no better interpreter 
 of Christ’s words ever lived, even among the Apostles; (2) because it 
 is the result of his own inmost experience. The principle of Christian 
 activity has ever been the Spirit. He moves the waters, and they 
 overflowed at Pentecost. Till then ‘the Spirit was not yet;’ the dis- 
 pensation of the Spirit had not come, 
 
 οὗ ἔμελλον. Which they that believed on Him were about to (vi. 71) 
 receive; οἱ πιστεύσαντες, those who did believe, the first disciples. 
 
 οὔπω γὰρ ἦν mv. As ini. 33 and xx. 22 there is no article, and an 
 influence of the Spirit rather than the Third Person is meant: the 
 spiritual life was not yet. Christus Legis, Spiritus Evangelii comple- 
 mentum; Christ completes the Law, the Spirit completes the Gospel. 
 
VII. 45.] NOTES. 179 
 
 ὅτι... ἐδοξάσθη. Comp. xvi. 7, xvii. 1, 5; Ps. Ixviii. 18. The Spirit, 
 ‘*though given in His fulness to Christ Himself (iii. 34), and operating 
 through Him in His people (vi. 63), was not, until after Christ’s return 
 to glory, to be given to the faithful as the Paraclete and representative 
 of Christ for the carrying on of His work” (Meyer). Christ did not 
 send the Paraclete until He Himself had resumed the fulness of Di- 
 vinity; and the Spirit did not give Christ to be the life of the Church 
 until Christ was perfected. 
 
 40—52. Opposite RESULTS OF THE DISCOURSES. 
 
 40. ἐκ τ. ὄχλ. οὖν. Of the multitude, therefore, some, when they 
 heard these words, kept saying, or, began to say. For ἐκ τῶν as a 
 nominative comp. i. 24, xvi. 17, and as an accusative 2 John 4; Rev. 
 ii. 10. The λόγοι probably mean the discourses from v. 14 onwards. 
 
 ὁ προφήτης. The Prophet of Deut. xviii. 15, who is here dis- 
 tinguished from the Messiah. See oni, 21 and vi. 14. 
 
 41. μὴ ydp...6 Xp. éo. We have here an instance how little at- 
 tention our translators paid to the Greek article; in the same verse 
 they translate the article in one place and ignore it in another. In 
 the next verse they ignore it again. In all three places it should be 
 ‘the Christ’ (see on i. 20). What, doth the Christ come out of Galilee? 
 Comp. Nathanael’s difficulty (i. 46). It is quite inadmissible to infer, 
 because 5. John does not correct this mistake of supposing that Jesus 
 came from Galilee, that he is either ignorant of the truth or indifferent 
 to it. He knew that his readers would be well aware of the facts, and 
 he leaves the error without comment to their pity or disdain; comp. 
 1. 45, vi. 42, 43, vil. 20, 52. On the other hand, could a Greek of the 
 second century invent these discussions of the Jewish multitude? 
 
 42. ékt. om. A. Ps. cxxxii. 11; Jer. xxiii, 5; Isa. xi. 1,10. See 
 on ii. 22, 
 
 ἀπὸ Βηθλεέμ. Mic. v. 2; 1 Sam. xvi. 1; comp. Matt. 11. 6, Like 
 Oedipus they are tragically ignorant that the very test which they so 
 confidently apply tells against them. 
 
 43. σχίσμα. Whence our word ‘schism.’ It means a serious 
 and possibly violent division: ix. 16, x. 19; 1 Cor. i. 10, xii. 25; 
 comp. Acts xiv. 4, xxiii. 7. In N.T.it is never used in the modern 
 sense of a separation from the Church, but of parties in the Church. 
 In the Synoptists it is used only in its original sense of physical 
 severing; ‘a worse rent is made;’ Matt. ix. 16; Mark ii. 21. 
 
 44. τινές. Not the officers, but some zealots who would have ar- 
 rested Him on their own responsibility. See on xi. 27. 
 
 45. ἦλϑ. οὖν οἱ ὑπ. Therefore came the officers, i.e. because neither 
 they nor any of the multitude had ventured to arrest Him. Under 
 the control of God’s providence (v. 30), they had been unable to find 
 any good opportunity for taking Him, and had been overawed by the 
 
 M2 
 
180 S. JOHN. [VIL 45— 
 
 majesty of His words (υ, 46). The influence which Christ exercised 
 over His enemies shews again and again that they had no power over 
 Him until He and His Father willed to allow it; comp. xiii. 27, xviii. 
 6, xix. 11. It would seem as if the Sanhedrin had continued sitting, 
 waiting for the return of its officers; an extraordinary proceeding on 
 so great a day (see on v. 37), shewing the intensity of their hostility. 
 Their question is quite in harmony with this. See on v, 32. The 
 omission of τούς before dap. shews that the chief priests and Pharisees 
 are now regarded as one body. 
 
 ἐκεῖνοι. The pronoun marks the Evangelist’s aversion: comp, x. 6. 
 
 47. οἱ Pap. That part of the Sanhedrin which was most jealous 
 of orthodoxy, regarded both by themselves and others as models of 
 correct belief, therefore answered them; Surely ye also have not. been 
 led astray (v. 12), ye, the officers of the Sanhedrin! ὑμεῖς is very em- 
 phatic. Comp. vv. 26, 31, 41, vi. 67. Πλανᾶσθαι implies funda- 
 mental departure from the truth, not mere error; 1 John i. 7, ii. 26, 
 iii. 7; Rev. passim, 
 
 48. What right have you to judge for yourselves, contrary to the 
 declared opinion of the Sanhedrin and of the orthodox party? What 
 right have you to wear our livery and dispute our resolutions? Note 
 the singular; Hath any one? ‘Have any’ weakens it. 
 
 49. ὁ ὄχ. οὗτος. Very contemptuous; this multitude of yours, 
 iste (35, 36), whose ignorant fancies you prefer to our deliberate deci- 
 sions. 
 
 ὁ μὴ ytv. The «implies censure; knoweth not when it ought to 
 know. They ought to know that a sabbath-breaker cannot be the 
 Messiah. ‘O οὐ yw. would express a mere fact; comp. vi. 64. 
 
 ἐπάρατοι. A mere outburst of theological fury. A formal excom- 
 munication of the whole multitude by the Sanhedrin (comp, ix. 22) 
 would be impossible. How could such a sentence be executed on the 
 right individuals? It was reserved for a Christian hierarchy to invent 
 the interdict. Excommunication en masse was unknown to the Jews. 
 Rabbinical writings abound in contempt for the ‘‘people of the earth.” 
 
 50. 6 ἐλθὼν πρότερον. See on iii 1,2. His being ‘one of them’ 
 answers the challenge in v. 48, ‘Hath any one of the rulers believed 
 on Him?’ But he does not yet declare himself His disciple. Comp. 
 the attitude of Gamaliel, Acts v. 34—42. 
 
 51. μὴ ὁ νόμος. ‘O νόμος is emphatic, ‘You condemn the mul- 
 titude for not knowing the law; but are we not forgetting the law in 
 condemning a man unheard?’ These learned theologians and law- 
 yers were forgetting such plain and simple texts as Deut. i. 16, 17, 
 xvii. 8, xix. 15, involving the most elementary principles of justice. 
 
 τὸν dv@p. The man (prosecuted), except it first hear from him- 
 self, or perhaps hear his defence. 
 
VII. 52] NOTES. 181 
 
 52. μὴ καὶ σύ. ‘Surely thow dost not sympathize with Him as 
 being a fellow-countryman?’ They share the popular belief that 
 Jesus was by birth a Galilean (see on v. 41), 
 
 ép. κ. ἴδε. Search and see; i.e. search and thou wilt see: like Di- 
 vide et impera. The ὅτι may be either ‘that’ after ‘see,’ or ‘because :’ 
 the former seems better. 
 
 ἐκ τ. Γαλ... οὐκ ἐγείρεται. Jonah of Gath-hepher (2 Kings xiv. 25) 
 was certainly of Galilee; Nahum of Elkosh may have been, but the 
 situation of Elkosh is uncertain; Hosea was of the northern king- 
 dom, but whether of Galilee or not is unknown; Abelmeholah, 
 whence Elisha came, was in the north part of the Jordan valley, pos- 
 sibly in Galilee. Anyhow, their statement is only a slight and very 
 natural exaggeration (comp. iv. 29). Moreover they speak of the 
 present and future, rather than of the past; ἐγείρεται, not (as T. BR.) 
 ἐγήγερται. Judging from the past, Galilee was not very likely to 
 produce a prophet, much less the Messiah. 
 
 Of the various questions which arise respecting the paragraph 
 that follows (vii. 53—viii. 11) one at least may be answered with 
 something like certainty,—that itis no part of the Gospel of S. John. 
 (1) In both tone and style it is very unlike his writings. His favour- 
 ite words and expressions are wanting; others that he rarely or never 
 uses are found. (2) It breaks the course of the narrative by severing 
 the two closely connected declarations of Christ, ’Edv τις διψᾷ x.7.X. 
 and Ἐγώ εἰμι τὸ φῶς τ. κόσμου, with the two equally closely connected 
 promises, ὁ πιστεύων eis ἐμὲ κιτ.λ. and ὁ ἀκολουθῶν μοι K.T.X. (Vil. 37, 38, 
 viii. 12); and hence a few of the MSS. which contain it place it at the 
 end of the Gospel, and one places it after vii. 36. (3) All the very serious 
 amount of external evidence (see Appendix D.) which tells against the 
 passage being part of the Gospel narrative at all of course tells against 
 its being by S. John, and in this respect is not counterbalanced by 
 other considerations. So that the internal and external evidence when 
 put together is overwhelmingly against the paragraph being part of the 
 Fourth Gospel. 
 
 With regard to the question whether the section is a genuine portion 
 of the Gospel history, the internal evidence is wholly in favour of its 
 being so, while the balance of external testimony is decidedly on the 
 same side. (1) The style is similar to the Synoptic Gospels, espe- 
 cially to S. Luke; and four inferior MSS. insert the passage at the 
 end of Luke xxi., the place in the history into which it fits best. (2) 
 It bears the impress of truth and is fully in harmony with Christ’s 
 conduct on other occasions; yet it is quite original and cannot be a 
 divergent account of any other incident in the Gospels. (8) It is easy 
 to see how prudential reasons might in some cases have caused its 
 omission (the fear of giving, as 8. Augustine says, peccandi impunita- 
 tem mulieribus); difficult to see what, excepting its truth, can have 
 caused its insertion. But ‘the utmost licence of the boldest transcribers 
 never makes even a remote approach to the excision of a complete 
 
182 S. JOHN. (VII. 52— 
 
 narrative from the Gospels” (W. and H.). (4) Though it is found in 
 no Greek MS. earlier than the sixth century, nor in the earliest ver- 
 sions, nor is quoted as by 8. John until late in the fourth century, yet 
 Jerome says that in his time it was contained ‘in many Greek and 
 Latin MSS.’ (Adv. Pelag. τι. 17). But if it be thought that these 
 must have been as good as the best MSS. which we now possess, we 
 must remember that most of the worst corruptions of the text were 
 already in existence in Jerome’s time. 
 
 The question as to who is the author, cannot be answered. There 
 is not sufficient material for a satisfactory conjecture, and mere guess- 
 work is worthless. The extraordinary number of various readings (80 
 in 183 words) points to more than one source. 
 
 One more question remains. How is it that nearly all the MSS. 
 that do contain it (several uncials, including the Cambridge MS., and 
 more than 300 cursives) agree in inserting it here? This cannot be 
 answered with certainty. Similarity of matter may have caused it to 
 have been placed in the margin in one copy, and thence it may have 
 passed, as other things have done, into the text of the Cambridge 
 and other MSS. In chap. vii. we have an unsuccessful attempt to 
 ruin Jesus: this paragraph contains the history of another attempt, 
 equally unsuccessful. Or, the incident may have been inserted in 
 the margin (very possibly from Papias) in illustration of viii. 15, and 
 hence have got into the text. 
 
 53. That this verse, as well as viii. 1, 2, is omitted in most MSS. 
 shews that prudential reasons could not explain the omission of the 
 paragraph in more than a very limited number of cases. It is a mi- 
 nority of MSS. which omit only viii. 3—11. 
 
 καὶ ἔπορ. ἕκαστος. See on viii. 1. And they went each man unto 
 his own house. But Jesus went, ὥς. It is unfortunate that the verse 
 should have been placed at the end of this chapter instead of at the 
 beginning of the next: this arrangement destroys the contrast be- 
 tween Jesus and the others, and creates an impression that the verse 
 records the breaking up of the meeting of the Sanhedrin. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 1—11. The number of various readings in this section is very 
 large, and we have not the data for constructing a satisfactory text. 
 
 4 κατείληπται for κατελήφθη. 
 
 δ. λιθάζειν for λιθοβολεῖσθαι. 
 
 1. ἀνέκυψεν καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς for ἀνακύψας εἶπε πρὸς αὐτούς, and πρῶ- 
 Tos ἐπ᾿ αὐτὴν βαλέτω λίθον for mp. τὸν λ. ἐπ᾽ αὐτῇ β. 
 
 9. Omit καὶ ὑπὸ τῆς συνειδήσεως ἐλεγχόμενοι after ἀκούσαντες, and 
 ἕως τῶν ἐσχάτων after πρεσβυτέρων (both obvious glosses). Οὖσα for 
 ἑστῶσα. 
 
VIII. 3.] NOTES. 183 
 
 10. Omit καὶ μηδένα θεασάμενος πλὴν τῆς γυναικός after ᾿Ιησοῦς, and 
 ἐκεῖνοι of κατήγοροί σου after εἰσιν. Τύναι for ἡ γυνή. 
 
 11. ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν for καί. 
 
 106. ἀληθινή (BDLTX) for ἀληθής (from vv. 18, 14). 
 
 20, 21. Omit (NBDLT) ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς : comp. iii. 2, iv, 46, vi. 14. 
 26. λαλῶ (NBDLTX) for λέγω (E). 
 
 29. Omit (SBDLTX) ὁ πατήρ after μόνον (a gloss). 
 
 38. ἃ ἐγώ for ἐγὼ 8. Omit μου after πατρί. ἃ ἠκούσατε for ὃ 
 ἑωράκατε and τοῦ πατρός for τῷ πατρὶ ὑμῶν (both for the sake of har- 
 mony with the first clause). 
 
 39. ἐστε (NBDLT) for ἦτε (C). Omit ἄν after ἐποιεῖτε. 
 
 41. οὐκ ἐγεννήθημεν (BD) for οὐ γεγεννήμεθα (CD?), 
 
 51. τὸν ἐμὸν λόγον for τ. λ. τ. ἐμ. (S. John’s common use). 
 54. ἡμῶν (ABC) for ὑμῶν (BIDFX); ὑμῶν seems preferable. 
 
 Omit διελθὼν διὰ μέσου αὐτῶν καὶ παρῆγεν οὕτω after ἱεροῦ (an 
 addition from ix. 1 combined with Luke iv. 30) with N1BD against 
 SA. Other MSS. have the addition in another form. No English 
 Version earlier than 1611 recognises the addition. 
 
 1. τὸ ὄρος τῶν "EH. The M. of Olives, which is mentioned 10 
 times by the Synoptists, is not mentioned by 8. John (comp. xviii. 1); 
 and when he introduces a new place he commonly adds an explana- 
 tion: i. 44, iv. 5, v. 2, vi. 1, xix. 13,17. Πορεύεσθαι εἰς, frequent in 
 the Synoptists, does not occur in 3. John. 
 
 2. ὄρθρου δὲ κιτλ. Comp. Luke xxi. 38; καὶ πᾶς ὁ λαὸς ὥρθριζε 
 πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ ἀκούειν αὐτοῦ. 8. John never uses πᾶς ὁ λαός, 
 S. Luke frequently does. S. John uses λαός only twice; it occurs 
 more than 30 times in 85. Luke, more than 20 in the Acts: ᾿καθίζειν is 
 frequent in the Synoptists and the Acts; only twice in 8. John: καθί- 
 σας ἐδίδασκεν occurs Luke v. 3. He ‘sat to teach with authority ; 
 Matt. v. 1, xxiii. 2; Mark ix. 35. Ὄρθρου, ὀρθρινός, ὀρθρίζειν occur 
 Luke xxiv. 1, 22, xxi, 38; none of them in S. John, who uses πρωΐ 
 or mpwias and πρωϊνός (xviii. 33, xxi. 4; Rev. ii. 28, xxii. 16). See on 
 vii. 20. 
 
 3. ot ypapp. κ. οἱ Pap. This phrase occurs in all three Synoptists, 
 in S. Luke thrice. §. John nowhere mentions the scribes. He speaks 
 of the hierarchy as οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς or ol ἄρχοντες with or without οἱ Φαρι- 
 gator, or else simply as οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι. This is probably not an official 
 deputation from the Sanhedrin; there is nothing to shew that the 
 woman had been before the Sanhedrin. Their bringing her was 8 
 wanton outrage both on her and all generous and modest spectators. 
 She might have been detained while the case was referred to Christ. 
 
_ 
 
 184 5, JOHN. [VIIT. 4— 
 
 4, κατείληπται. Hath been taken. The vividness of this, and 
 
 still more of ἐπαυτοφώρῳ (literally, ‘in the very act of theft’), is 
 another piece of brutal indelicacy. 
 
 δ. ἐν δὲ τῷ νόμῳ. Of the two texts given in the margin of our 
 Bible, Ley. xx. 10 and Deut. xxii. 22, probably neither is correct. It 
 is often assumed that ‘put to death’ in Jewish Law means stoning: 
 such however is not Jewish tradition. The Rabbis taught that it 
 meant strangulation; i.e. the criminal was smothered in mud and 
 then a cord was twisted round his neck. But, for the case of a be- 
 trothed woman sinning in the city, stoning is specified as the punish- 
 ment (Deut. xxii. 23, 24), and this is probably what is indicated here. 
 Such cases would be rare, and therefore all the better suited for a 
 casuistical question. 
 
 σὺ οὖν τί λέγεις; What therefore sayest Thou? This is the only 
 place in the whole paragraph where S. John’s favourite particle οὖν 
 occurs; and that not in the narrative, where 5. John makes such 
 frequent use of it, but in the dialogue, where he very rarely employs 
 it. Scarcely anywhere in this Gospel are there 12 verses of narrative 
 without an οὖν; but see ii, 1—17, and contrast iv. 1—26, xx. 1—49. 
 
 6. πειράζοντες. This verb is frequent in the Synoptists of trying 
 to place Christ in a difficulty; never so used by 5. John, who, however, 
 uses it once of Christ ‘proving’ Philip (vi. 6). 
 
 ἵνα ἔχ. κατ. This clause must be borne in mind in determining 
 what the difficulty was in which they wished to place Him. It seems 
 to exclude the supposition that they hoped to undermine His popu- 
 larity, in case He should decide for the extreme rigour of the law; 
 the people having become accustomed to a lax morality (Matt. xii. 39; 
 Mark viii. 38). Probably the case is somewhat parallel to the ques- 
 tion about tribute, and they hoped to bring Him into collision either 
 with the Law and Sanhedrin or with the Roman Government. If He 
 said she was not to be stoned, He contradicted Jewish Law; if He 
 said she was to be stoned, He ran counter to Roman Law, for the 
 Romans had deprived the Jews of the right to inflict capital punish- 
 ment (xviii. 31). The Sanhedrin might of course pronounce sentence 
 of death (Matt. xxvi. 66; Mark xiv. 64; comp. John xix. 7), but it 
 rested with the Roman governor whether he would allow the sentence 
 to be carried out or not (xix. 16): see on xviii. 31 and xix. 6. 
 
 κάτω κύψας κιτιλ. It is said that this gesture was a recognised 
 sign of unwillingness to attend to what was being said; a call for a 
 change of subject. McClellan quotes Plut. 11. 532: ‘Without uttering 
 a syllable, by merely raising the eyebrows, or stooping down, or fixing 
 the eyes upon the ground, you may baffle unreasonable importunities.’ 
 Karéypagev means ‘kept writing’ (comp. vil. 40, 41), or ‘began to 
 write, made as though He would write’ (comp. Luke i. 59), Either 
 rendering would agree with this interpretation, which our translators 
 have insisted on as certain by inserting the gloss (not found in any 
 earlier English Version except the Bishops’ Bible), ‘as though He 
 
VHL9}] ὁ NOTES. 185 
 
 heard them not.’ The Greek is μὴ προσποιούμενος, which Stephens 
 admitted into his editions of 1546 and 1549, but not into that of 1550, 
 which became the Textus Receptus. But it is just possible that by 
 writing on the stone pavement of the Temple He wished to remind 
 them of the ‘tables of stone, written with the finger of God’ (Ex. 
 xxxi. 18; Deut. ix. 10). They were hoping that He would explain 
 away the seventh commandment, in order that they themselves might 
 break the sixth. 
 
 7. They will not take the hint; and therefore with marvellous 
 skill He lifts the whole question from the judicial sphere, into which 
 He declined to enter (comp. Luke xii, 14), to the moral one, in which 
 their guilty consciences rendered them powerless. Thus the self- 
 made judges were foiled, while the majesty of the Law remained 
 intact. The abruptness of the reply reminds us of ii. 19. 
 
 ἀναμάρτητος. Quite classical, but here only in N.T. It may 
 mean either ‘free from the possibility of sin, impeccable;’ or ‘free 
 from actual sin, sinless ;’ if the latter, it may mean either ‘free from 
 sin in general, ‘guiltless,’ or ‘free from a particular sin, not guilty.’ 
 The context shews that the last is the meaning here, ‘free from the 
 sin of impurity:’ comp. ‘sin no more,’ v.11, and ‘sinner,’ Luke vii. 
 37, 39. The practical maxim involved in Christ’s words is that of 
 Matt. vii. 1—5; Rom. xiv. 4. As to its application to them comp. 
 Matt. xii. 39; Mark viii. 38. He is contending not against punish- 
 ment being inflicted by human law, but against men taking the law 
 into their own hands. 
 
 λίθον. Some authorities have τὸν λίθον, the stone required for exe- 
 cuting the sentence. Others take it of the first stone, which in ston- 
 ing for idolatry was to be thrown by the witnesses (Deut. xiii. 9, xvii. 
 7); probably as a check on rash testimony. Thus in stoning Stephen 
 the witnesses take off their upper garments in order to throw the 
 better (Acts vil. 58). 
 
 8. πάλιν κ. ἔς, He again refuses to have the office of judge thrust 
 upon Him. ‘The Reader of men’s hearts knew how His challenge 
 would work: no one would respond to it. 
 
 ἔγραφεν. Imperfect, asin v.6. A Venetian MS. ascribed to the 
 10th century has the remarkable reading ‘wrote on the ground the 
 sins of each one of them.’ The same strange idea appears in Jerome 
 and elsewhere, shewing how soon men began to conjecture what He 
 wrote. Others suppose that He wrote the answer in v. 7. As has 
 been shewn on v, 6, it is not certain that He wrote anything. 
 
 9. The variations in this verse are considerable, but the substance 
 is the same. Καὶ ὑπὸ τ. συνειδήσεως ἐλεγχόμενοι is probably a gloss 
 like μὴ προσποιούμενος in v. 6. Another gloss here is ‘understanding 
 His upbraiding.’ Both additions are right as interpretations. The 
 word of God, ‘sharper than any two-edged sword,’ had pierced them 
 and proved ‘a discerner of the thoughts of their hearts’ (Heb. iv. 12). 
 
186 S. JOHN. [VIII. 9— 
 
 apt. ἀπὸ τ. πρεσβυτέρων. The elders in years, not the official 
 Elders. Meyer suggests that the oldest would be shrewd enough to 
 slip away without compromising themselves further: certainly they 
 would have the largest experience of life and its temptations. 
 
 μόνος. The multitude may or may not have withdrawn with the 
 woman’s accusers; the disciples probably had not moved. But of the 
 actors in the scene only two were left, she who needed compassion 
 and He who could bestow it: relicti sunt duo, misera et Misericordia 
 (S. Augustine). The woman was in the midst, where the brutality of 
 her accusers had placed her (v. 8). 
 
 10. A gloss, καὶ μηδένα θεασάμενος πλὴν τῆς γυναικός, has been in- 
 serted here, as in vv. 6 and 9: πλήν occurs nowhere in 5. John’s 
 writings excepting Rev. ii. 25. ᾿Εκεῖνοι οἱ κατήγοροί cov is another in- 
 sertion. 
 
 οὐδείς σε κατέκρινεν; Did no man condemn thee? shewing how 
 long He had waited for an answer to His challenge. Karaxpivw occurs 
 nine times in the Synoptists, but not in 5. John, who uses κρίνω. 
 
 11. οὐδείς, κύριε. We must remember that κύριε need not mean 
 more than ‘Sir’ (see on vi. 34): but as we have no such ambiguous 
 word in English, ‘Lord,’ though possibly too strong, is best. 
 
 οὐδὲ ἐγώ. Ἐγώ is very emphatic, ‘not even I, though dvaudpryros.’ 
 He maintains in tenderness towards her the attitude which He had 
 assumed in sternness towards her accusers: He declines the office of 
 judge. He came not to condemn, but to seek and to save. And yet 
 He did condemn, as 5. Augustine remarks, not the woman, but the 
 sin. With regard to the woman, though He does not condemn, yet 
 He does not pardon: He does not say ‘thy sins have been forgiven 
 thee’ (Matt. ix. 2; Luke vii. 48), or even ‘ go in peace’ (Luke vii. 50, 
 viii. 48). ‘‘ We must not apply in all cases a sentence, which requires 
 His Divine knowledge to make it a just one’ (Alford). He knew, 
 what her accusers did not know, whether she was penitent or not. 
 
 ἀπὸ τ. v. μ. ἁμάρτανε. From henceforth continue no longer in 
 sin (see on vy. 14). The contrast between the mere negative declara- 
 tion and the very positive exhortation is striking. There ἰδ. πάρεσις, 
 but not ἄφεσις, τῶν ἁμαρτημάτων (Rom, 111. 25); her sins are passed by 
 for the present, while she has time to amend. 
 
 VIII. 12—IX. 41. Curist rHe Source or TrutrH anp Lieut. 
 (Continued.) 
 In viii. 12—46 ἀλήθεια occurs 7 times, ἀληθής 4 times, ἀληθινός and 
 ἀληθῶς each once, 
 
 12. πάλιν οὖν. The paragraph vii. 53—viii. 11 being omitted, 
 these words must be connected with vii. 52. The officers have made 
 their report to the Sanhedrin, leaving Jesus unmolested. After an 
 interval He continues His discourse: again, therefore, Jesus spake unto 
 them, i.e. because the attempt to interfere with Him had failed. How 
 long the interval was we do not know, but probably a few hours, 
 
VIII. 13.] NOTES. 187 
 
 ἐγώ εἰμι τ. φῶς τ. κ- See on vi. 35. Once more we have a possible 
 reference to the ceremonies of the Feast of Tabernacles, somewhat less 
 probable than the other (see on vii. 37), but not improbable. Large 
 candelabra were lighted in the Court of the Women on the evening of 
 the first day of the Feast in memory of the pillar of fire at the Exodus, 
 and these flung their light over the whole city. Authorities differ as to 
 whether this illumination was repeated, but all are agreed that it did 
 not take place on the last evening. Here, therefore, there was once 
 more a gap, which Christ Himself may have designed to fill; and 
 while the multitude were missing the festal light of the great lamps, 
 He declares, ‘I am the Light of the world.’ ‘Light,’ according to 
 tradition, was one of the names of the Messiah. In the case of the 
 water we know that it was poured on each of the seven days, and that 
 Christ spoke the probable reference to it on the last day of the Feast. 
 But in this case the illumination took place possibly on the first night 
 only, and Christ certainly did not utter this possible reference to it 
 until the last day of the Feast, or perhaps not until the Feast was all 
 over. But the fact that the words were spoken in the Court of the 
 Women (see on v. 20) makes the reference not improbable; and πάλιν 
 may point to this: Jesus having appropriated the type of the Rock, 
 now appropriates that of the Pillar of Fire. 
 
 ὁ ἀκολουθῶν. This expression also is in favour of the reference, 
 ‘The Lord went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud to lead them 
 the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light’ (Exod. 
 xiii, 21). So Christ here declares that those who follow Him shall in 
 nowise walk in the darkness. The negative (οὐ μή) is very strong. 
 This use of ‘darkness’ for moral evil is peculiar to S. John: see on 
 i, 5, where (as here) we have light and life (v. 4) closely connected, 
 while darkness is opposed to both. 
 
 ἕξει. Not only with him but in him, so that he also becomes a 
 source of light. See on vii. 38 and comp. ‘Ye are the light of the 
 world’ Matt. v. 14. Τῆς gwys means ‘giving life’ not merely ‘leading 
 to life :’ see on vi. 35 andi. 4. Note that as in the case of the living 
 bread and ‘the living water so also here the believer is not a mere 
 passive recipient; he has to eat and to drink to appropriate the 
 heavenly food, and here he has to follow to appropriate the heavenly 
 light. In the early Church candidates for baptism first turned to the 
 West and renounced Satan and his works and then to the East, ‘the 
 place of light,’ and professed allegiance to Christ (the Light of the 
 world and the Sun of righteousness) and a belief in the Trinity 
 (Dionys. Areop. Eccl. Hier.; S. Cyril Cat. Myst.1.) From this very 
 ancient custom the practice of turning to the east at the Creed is 
 derived. Comp. Tert. Apol. xv1.; In Valent. u1.; Apost. Const. τι. Vii. 
 57; Clem. Alex. Strom. vit. vii.; ὅσο. 
 
 13—59. A comparison of the discourses in chapters v.—viii. shews 
 how the conflict increases in intensity. In v. and vi, Christ proceeds 
 almost without interruption, and the Jews demur rather than con- 
 tradict. In vii. the interruptions are stronger, Here He is interrupted 
 and contradicted at every turn. 
 
188 S. JOHN. [VIII. 13— 
 
 13. paptupets. Bearest witness (see on i. 7). The Pharisees try to 
 cancel the effect of His impressive declaration by a formal objection, 
 the validity of which He had been heard to admit (v. 31). 
 
 14. κἀν ἐγὼ p. Even if I should bear witness. Strong emphasis on 
 ἐγώ. God can testify respecting Himself, and there are truths to which 
 He alone can testify. Yet He condescends to conform to the standard 
 of human testimony, and adds to His witness the words and works of 
 His incarnate Son; who in like manner can bear witness of Himself, 
 being supported by the witness of the Father (v. 16). 
 
 ποῦ ὑπάγω. By Death and Ascension. Ὑμεῖς is emphatic: they 
 knew neither the whence nor the whither of their own lives, and how 
 could they know His? Throughout the chapter we find ἐγώ and ὑμεῖς 
 in constant opposition. 
 
 15. κατὰ τ. σάρκα. According to His humanity, the form of a 
 servant: comp. vii. 24; vi. 63, Treating Him as a mere man they had 
 condemned His witness concerning Himself as invalid. Kplyw acquires 
 an adverse sense from the context: comp. 111, 17, 18, vii. 51. 
 
 οὐ Kp. οὐδένα. Neither κατὰ τ. σάρκα nor anything else is to be sup- 
 plied. No such addition can be made in v. 16, and therefore cannot 
 be made here. The words are best taken quite literally. ‘My mission 
 is not to condemn, but to save and bless.’ Comp. xii. 47; 111. 17. 
 
 16. καὶ ἐὰν kp. δὲ ἐγώ. But even if I should judge, like ‘even if 
 I should bear witness’ (v. 14). ‘I judge no man; not because I have 
 no authority, but because judging is not what Icame todo, Even if 
 I do in exceptional cases judge, My judgment is a genuine and autho- 
 ritative one (see on i, 9), not the mock sentence of an impostor. It is 
 the sentence not of a mere man, nor even of one with a divine commis- 
 sion yet acting independently; but of One sent by God acting in union 
 with His Sender.’ Comp. v. 30. For καὶ...δέ comp. v. 17, vi. 51, 
 xv. 27; 1 John i. 8: Matt. xvi. 18; Acts xxii. 29; Heb. ix. 21; 2 Pet. 
 i. 5. It is important to note which of the two conjunctions connects 
 the clauses and leads: here and xv. 27 it is δέ, but in vi. 51 καί. See 
 on v. 81. 
 
 17. καὶ ἐν τ. ν. δέ. But in the law also, your law (about which. 
 you profess to be so jealous), it is written. Comp. ‘Thou art calleda 
 Jew and restest on the Law’ (Rom, ii. 17). The Sinaiticus here gives 
 S. John’s usual γεγραμμένον ἐστίν (see on ii. 17), instead of γέγραπται, 
 which he uses nowhere else of O.T. quotations; comp. xx. 31, 
 
 δύο ἀνθρώπων. Not so much a quotation as a reference to Deut. 
 xix. 15, xvii. 6. Note that the Law speaks of ‘two or three witnesses :’ 
 here we have ‘two men.’ The change is not accidental, but introduces 
 an argument ἃ fortiori: if the testimony of two men is valid, how much 
 more the testimony of two Divine Witnesses. Comp. ‘If we receive 
 the witness of men, the witness of God is greater; for this is the 
 witness of God which He hath testified of His Son’ (1 John y.9). 
 
VIII. 22.] NOTES. 189 
 
 18. ἐγώ εἰμι, There is I who bear witness of Myself (in My words 
 and works), and there beareth witness of Me the Father (in Scripture 
 and the voice from Heaven), 
 
 19. ποῦ ἐστίν. They do not ask ‘who’ but ‘where;’ they know 
 well enough by this time the meaning of Christ’s frequent reference 
 to ‘Him that sent Me:’ v. 23, 24, 30, 37, 38, vi. 38, 39, 40, 44, vii. 16, 
 18, 28, 33. They ask, therefore, in mockery, what Philip (xiv. 8) asks 
 with earnest longing, ‘Shew us the Father: we see one of Thy two 
 witnesses; shew us the other. Any liar can appeal to God.’ 
 
 οὔτε ἐμὲ ofS. Ye know neither Me...If ye knew Me, ye would know, 
 as in v, 42: here and in συ. 46 the A.V. translates imperfects as aorists. 
 it is in the Son that the Father reveals Himself: xiv. 9, xvi. 3. By 
 learning to know the Son the disciples came to know the Father: the 
 Jews could not know the Father because they refused to know the Son. 
 
 20. ἐν τῷ yalod. At the treasury is an admissible and in one 
 respect safer translation. It is not certain that there was a separate 
 building called the treasury, but comp. 1 Mace. xiv. 49; and if there 
 was, it is not probable that Christ would be able to address the multi- 
 tude there. But the thirteen brazen chests, into which people put 
 their offerings for the temple and other charitable objects, stood in 
 the Court of the Women (see on Mark xii. 41), and these chests seem 
 to have been called ‘the treasury.’ The point appears to be that in so 
 public and frequented a place as this did He say all this, and yet no 
 man laid hands on Him (see on vii. 30), Moreover the Hall Gazith, 
 where the Sanhedrin met, was close to the Court of the Women; so 
 that He was teaching close to His enemies’ head-quarters. 
 
 Kal οὐδεὶς ἔπ. And (yet) no one took Him; see on yii. 30. Comp. 
 vi. 70, ix. 30, xvi, 32. 
 
 21. εἶπεν οὖν πάλιν. He said therefore again. The ‘therefore’ 
 does not compel us to place what follows on the same day with what 
 precedes ; ‘ therefore’ merely signifies that, as no one laid hands on Him, 
 He was able to address them again. ‘Again’ shews that there is 
 some interval, but whether of minutes, hours, or days, we have no 
 means of determining. The connexion is in thought rather than in 
 time. There is no distinct mark of time between vii. 37 (the close of 
 the Feast of Tabernacles) and x. 22 (the Feast of the Dedication), an 
 interval of two months. See introductory note to chap. vi. 
 
 ὑπάγω. Comp. v. 14 and vii. 33, Possibly in all three places there 
 is a side reference to the Jews who were now leaving Jerusalem in 
 great numbers, the Feast of Tabernacles being over. 
 
 ζητήσετε. See on vii. 33, 34. Here Christ is more explicit: so far 
 from finding Him and being delivered by Him, they will perish most 
 
 miserably; in your sin shall ye die. The singular means ‘state of sin.’ 
 Note the order, and contrast υ. 24. 
 
 22. μήτι ἀποκτενεῖ ἑαυτόν. They see that He speaks of a voluntary 
 departure, and perhaps they suspect that He alludes to His death. So 
 
190 S. JOHN. [VIIT. 22— 
 
 with sarcasm still more bitter than the sneer in vii. 35 they exclaim 
 ‘Surely He does not mean to commit suicide? We certainly shall 
 not be able to follow Him if He takes refuge in that!’ 
 
 23. ἐκ τῶν κάτω ἐστέ. At first sight it might seem as if this meant 
 ‘ye are from hell.’ Christ uses strong language later on (v. 44), and 
 this interpretation would make good sense with what precedes. ‘Ye 
 suggest that I am going to hell by self-destruction: it is ye who come from 
 thence.’ But what follows forbids this. The two halves of the verse 
 are manifestly equivalent, and ‘ye are from beneath’= ‘ye are of this 
 world.’ They were σὰρξ ἐκ τῆς σαρκός (iii. 6) and judged xara τ. σάρκα 
 (v. 15): He was ἐκ τοῦ οὐράνου (iii. 81). The pronouns throughout are 
 emphatically opposed. The whole verse is a good instance of ‘the 
 spirit of parallelism, the informing power of Hebrew poetry,’ which 
 runs more or less through the whole Gospel. Comp. xiii. 16, xiv. 27. 
 
 24. ἀποθανεῖσθε. This is the emphatic word here, not ἐν τ. auapr., 
 as in v. 21. The plural expresses the separate sins of each. ‘‘No 
 reckoning made, but sent to your account with all your imperfections 
 on your head.” But the sentence is not irreversible ; it is pronounced 
 conditionally, unless ye believe. Comp. i. 12, iii. 15—18, vi. 40. 
 
 ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι. That I am, implying the self-existence of Divinity. 
 Here and in wv. 24, 28, 58, xiii. 19, the context supplies no predicate; 
 elsewhere (iv. 26, ix. 9, xviii. 5, 6, 8) it does. Iam is the great Name, 
 which every Jew understood; Ex. iii. 14; Deut. xxxii. 39; Isa. xliii. 10, 
 
 25. ovis et; It is incredible that the Jews can have failed to 
 understand. Christ had just declared that He was from above, and 
 not of this world. Even if the words ‘I am’ were ambiguous in them- 
 selves, in this context they are plain enough. As in v. 19, they pretend 
 not to understand, and contemptuously ask, Thou, who art Thou? 
 The pronoun is scornfully emphatic. Comp. Acts xix. 15. Possibly 
 both in v. 19 and here they wish to draw from Him something more 
 definite, more capable of being stated in a formal charge against Him. 
 The tone of their question must be considered in determining the 
 meaning of Christ’s reply. 
 
 τὴν ἀρχὴν 6 τι kal λαλῶ ὑμῖν. The meaning of this obscure passage 
 (comp. v. 44) cannot be determined with certainty. There is doubt as 
 to (1) whether it is a question or not; (2) whether we should read 6 τι 
 or ὅτι; (3) the meaning of every word except ὑμῖν. Under (3) the chief 
 doubt is whether τὴν ἀρχήν is to be taken as an adverb (‘altogether, 
 absolutely,’ or ‘first of all,’ or possibly ‘from the first’), or as a sub- 
 stantive (‘the Beginning’). The chief renderings of the whole sen- 
 tence will be found in Godet, Meyer, or Westcott. Three may be 
 noticed here. (i) How is it that I even speak to you at 811) Τὴν ἀρχήν 
 has the meaning of ‘at all’ in negative sentences, and the question or 
 exclamation makes the sentence virtually negative. The Greek Fathers, 
 whose authority in interpreting Greek dialogue is very great, seem 
 almost to have taken this rendering for granted as the only one that 
 occurred to them. It may remind us of Matt, xvii. 17, ‘O faithless and 
 
VIII. 28.] NOTES. QI 
 
 perverse generation! How long shall I be with you? How long shall 
 I suffer you?’ Comp. οὐκ ἀγαπᾷς ὅτι σοι καὶ λαλῶ ; Art thou not con- 
 tent that I condescend to speak to thee? Ach. Tat. vi. 20. (ii) What 
 I from the beginning am even speaking to you of, or even that which 
 1 have spoken to you all along ; i.e. My words from the first have been 
 and are a revelation of My Person. This may be made interrogative 
 by understanding ‘Do ye ask?’ before ‘what.’ Comp. Quis igitur ille 
 est? Quem dudum dizi a principio tibi. Plaut. Captiv. m1. iv. 91. 
 (iii) The Beginning (Rev. xxi. 6), that which I am even saying to you, 
 which seems to be the interpretation of the early Latin Fathers; Ini- 
 tium quod et loquor vobis. But this would require \éyw; λαλῷ means 
 ‘I speak,’ never ‘I say.’ Moreover, the attraction of τὴν ἀρχήν from 
 the nominative (‘I am the Beginning’) to the accusative is awkward. 
 The later Latin rendering of 8. Augustine and others, Principium, 
 quia et loquor vobis, ‘The Beginning, because I even (humble Myself 
 to) speak with you,’ ignores the Greek. 
 
 26. Here again we have a series of simple sentences, the precise 
 meaning of which and their connexion with one another cannot be de- 
 termined with certainty. See on vii. 33. The following seems to be 
 the drift of the verse: ‘I have very much to speak concerning you, very 
 much to blame. But I keep to My immediate task of speaking to the 
 world those truths which before the world was I heard from God that 
 cannot lie, Who sent Me: i.e. Christ will not desist from teaching 
 Divine truth in order to blame the Jews. Itis as the Truth and the 
 Light that He appears in these discourses. Ifthis seems unsatisfactory, 
 we may adopt: ‘I have very much to speak and to blame concerning 
 you. It will offend you still more. But nevertheless it must be 
 spoken; for He who cannot lie commissioned Me thus to speak,’ i.e. 
 it is both true in itself and is spoken with authority. Note the em- 
 phatic position of πόλλα. 
 
 κἀγὼ ἃ ik. And the things which I heard from Him, these I on 
 My part speak unto the world: literally, ‘into the world,’ so as to be 
 sounded through it. Christ speaks as ‘not of the world’ (v. 23). 
 
 27. οὐκ ἔγνωσαν. They perceived not that He wasspeaking. This 
 statement of the Evangelist has seemed to some so unaccountable 
 after v. 18, that they have attempted to make his words mean some- 
 thing else. But the meaning of the words is quite unambiguous, and 
 is not incredible. Even Apostles were sometimes strangely wanting. 
 We have seen that there is an interval, possibly of days, between v. 20 
 and v. 21. The audience may have changed very considerably: but if 
 not, experience shews that the ignorance and stupidity of unbelief are 
 sometimes almost unbounded, Still we may admit that the dulness 
 exhibited here is extraordinary; and it is precisely because it is so 
 extraordinary that 8. John records it. 
 
 e 
 
 28. εἶπεν οὖν ὁ ᾽Ὶ. Jesus therefore said; because of their gross dulness. 
 
 ὑψώσητε. On the Cross: see on iii. 14 and xii, 82. The Crucifixion 
 was the act of the Jews, as 5. Peter tells them (Acts iii. 13—15). 
 
192 S. JOHN. [ VIII. 28— 
 
 τότε γνώσεσθε. Then shall ye perceive, as in v. 27; the same verb 
 is purposely used in both places (comp. v. 43). Had they known the 
 Messiah they would have known His Father also (xiv. 9). But when 
 by crucifying Him they have brought about His glory, then and not 
 till then will their eyes be opened, Then will facts force upon them 
 what no words could teach them. Comp. xii. 32. 
 
 ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι. That I am (see on v. 24), and (that) of Myself I do 
 nothing (v. 19), but (that) even as the Father taught Me, I speak these 
 things. The construction depends on γνώσεσθε pr obably, as far as λαλῶ, 
 and possibly as far as ἐστιν: but it would be quite in S. J ohn’s style 
 to begin an independent sentence with each καί. These aorists, ἤκουσα 
 (vv. 26, 40; 111, 32, xv. 15) and ἐδίδαξεν, refer back to the point before 
 the Incarnation when the Son was commissioned and furnished for 
 His work. Ταῦτα λαλῶ is not put for οὕτω λαλώ (xii. 50), There is a 
 reminiscence ot this verse in the Ignatian Epistles (Magn. v11.); ὁ κύριος 
 ἄνευ τοῦ πατρὸς οὐδὲν ἐποίησεν. See on v. 29, x. 9. 
 
 29. ἀφῆκεν. It will depend on the interpretation whether the aorist 
 or perfect is to be used in English. If it refers to God sending the 
 Messiah into the world, then, as in the cases of ἤκουσα and ἐδίδαξεν, 
 we musi keep the aorist; He left. But if it refers to Christ’s experi- 
 ence in each particular case, the perfect may be substituted; He hath 
 left. In some cases (comp. xiii, 13, 34, xv. 9,12) it is the idiom in 
 English to use the perfect where the aorist is used in Greek, and then 
 to translate the Greek aorist by the English aorist would be misleading. 
 See on xvi. 32 and comp. οὐκ ἀμάρτυρον αὐτὸν ἀφῆκεν (Acts xiv. 17). 
 
 ὅτι ἐγὼ κιτιλ, Because the things pleasing to Him I always do: 
 πάντοτε is emphatic, and means ‘on every occasion,’ which is some- 
 what in favour of the second interpretation of οὐκ ἀφῆκέν we: ‘He hath 
 never left Me alone because in every case I do what pleaseth Him.’ 
 _ The emphasis on ἐγώ is perhaps in mournful contrast to the Jews. 
 In any case it is a distinct claim to Divinity. What blasphemous ef- 
 frontery would such a declaration be in the mouth of any but the In- 
 carnate Deity! The theory that Jesus was the noblest and holst of 
 teachers, but nothing more, shatters against such words as these. 
 What saint or prophet ever dared to say, ‘The things which are 
 pleasing to God I in every instance do’? Comp. v. 46, xiv. 30, xv. 10. 
 And if it be said, that perhaps Jesus never uttered these words, then 
 it may also be said that perhaps He never uttered any of the words 
 attributed to Him, We have the same authority for what is accepted 
 as His as for what is rejected as not His. History becomes impossible 
 if we are to admit evidence that we like, and refuse evidence that we 
 dislike. Comp. 1 John iii. 22, and Ign. Magn. viit.; ὃς κατὰ πάντα 
 εὐηρέστησεν τῷ πέμψαντι αὐτόν. See on 111. 8, iv. 10. 
 
 30. ἐπίστευσαν εἰς αὐτόν. Not merely αὐτῷ; see oni. 12. Nothing 
 exasperated His enemies so much as His success; and therefore in 
 leading us on to the final catastrophe, the Evangelist carefully notes 
 the instances in which He won, though often only! for a time, adherents 
 and believers. See on vi, 15. 
 
VIII. 33.] NOTES. 193 
 
 31. Besides the ‘many’ who had full faith in Him there were some 
 of His opponents disposed to believe His statements. Their faith, 
 poor as it proves, is better than that of the many in ii. 23; belief that 
 results from teaching is higher than that which results from miracles, 
 Jesus recognises both its worth and its weakness, and applies a test, 
 which might have raised it higher, but under which it breaks down. 
 
 πεπιστ. αὐτῷ. The change from ‘believed on Him’ to the weaker 
 had believed Him is significant, as if 5. John would prepare us for their 
 collapse of faith. The expression of rer. αὐτῷ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι is remarkable; 
 in this Gospel it almost amounts to a contradiction in terms. 
 
 ἐὰν ὑμεῖς p. If ye abide (i. 33) in My word, ye are truly (i. 48) My 
 disciples. Hmphasison ‘ye’ and ‘My;’ ‘you on your part’—‘the word 
 that is Mine.’ ‘If ye abide in My word, so that it becomes the per- 
 manent condition of your life, then truly are ye My disciples, and not 
 merely in appearance under a passing impulse.’ Comp. v. 38, vi. 56, 
 xv.4—10. The form of expression, ὁ λόγος ὁ ἐμός, the word that is 
 Mine (vv. 48, 51), is very frequent in this Gospel: comp. ἡ χαρὰ ἡ ἐμή 
 (iii. 29, xv. 11, xvii. 13), ἡ κρίσις ἡ ἐμή (Vv. 30, Vili. 16), τὸ θέλημα τὸ ἐμόν 
 (v. 30, vi. 38), ὁ καιρὸς ὁ ἐμός (vil. 6, 8), ἡ εἰρήνη ἡ ἐμή (Xiv. 27), ai ἐντολαὶ 
 αἱ ἐμαί (xiv. 15), ὁ διάκονος ὁ ἐμός (xii. 26), ἡ ἀγάπη ἡ ἐμή (xv. 9), ἡ δόξα 
 ἡ ἐμή (xvii. 24), ἡ βασιλεία ἡ ἐμή (Xvili. 36). 
 ' 82. γνώσεσθε. Ye shall come to know (vi. 69, vii. 17, 26), 
 
 τὴν ἀλήθειαν. Divine doctrine (i. 17, xvii. 17) and Christ Himself 
 (xiv. 6, v. 33), ‘whose service is perfect freedom.’ See xviii. 37. 
 
 ἐλευθερώσει. Free from the moral slavery of sin. The power of 
 sin is based on a delusion, a fascination, the real nature of which the 
 truth exposes, and so breaks the spell. Truth and freedom are inse- 
 parable. Truth destroys the bondage to appearances, whether at- 
 tractive or repulsive; the seductions of sin and the servile fears of an 
 ignorant conscience. Socrates taught that vice is ignorance, and the 
 Stoics that the wise man alone is free. Plato Rep. 1x. 5898. 
 
 33. ἀπεκρίθησαν πρὸς av. They answered unto Him. The subject 
 is of πεπιστευκότες αὐτῷ I. (v. 31): it is quite arbitrary to suppose any 
 one else. The severe words which follow (v. 44) are addressed to them, 
 for turning back, after their momentary belief, as well as to those who 
 had never believed at all. 
 
 σπέρμα “ABp. Comp. ‘kings of peoples shall be of her’ (Sarah), 
 and ‘thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies’ (Gen. xvil. 16, 
 xxii. 17). On texts like these they build the proud belief that Jews 
 have never yet been in bondage to any man. But passion once more 
 blinds them to historical facts (see on vii.52). The bondage in Egypt, 
 the oppressions in the times of the Judges, the captivity in Babylon, 
 and the Roman yoke, are all forgotten. ‘‘They have an immovable 
 love of liberty, and maintain that God is their only ruler and master” 
 (Josephus, Ant. xv11. i. 6). Some, who think such forgetfulness in- 
 credible, interpret ‘we have never been lawfully in bondage.’ ‘The 
 Truth’ would not free them from enforced slavery. It might free them 
 from voluntary slavery, by teaching them that it was unlawful for them 
 
 ST JOHN N 
 
194 8. JOHN. [VIII. 33— 
 
 to be slaves. ‘But we know that already.’ This, however, is some- 
 what subtle, and the more literal interpretation is not incredible. The 
 power which the human mind possesses of keeping inconvenient facts 
 out of sight is very considerable. In either case we have another 
 instance of gross inability to perceive the spiritual meaning of Christ’s 
 words. Comp. iil. 4, iv. 15, vi, 34. 
 
 34. ᾿Αμὴν ἀμήν. With great solemnity He points them to a bond- 
 age far worse than political servitude. See oni. 52. 
 
 πᾶς ὁ Toy τ. ἅμ. Everyone who continueth to do sin is the bond- 
 servant of sin. Christ does not say that a single act (ὁ ποιήσαΞ) of sin 
 enslaves; it is a life of sin that makes a man a slave and the child of 
 the devil (1 John iii. 8). Ποιεῖν τὴν ἁμαρτ. is the opposite of ποιεῖν τὴν 
 ἀλήθειαν (iii. 21) and of π. τὴν δικαιοσύνην (1 John ii. 29, 111. 7). 
 ‘Servant’ is a good rendering of δοῦλος where nothing degrading is 
 implied (Rom. 1. 1; Phil. i. 1; Tit. 1.1, &c.), but is too weak, where, 
 as here, the degradation is the main point. Moreover, the connexion 
 with δεδουλεύκαμεν must be preserved; ‘have been in bondage’ or ‘in 
 slavery,’ and ‘bond-servants’ or ‘slaves,’ must be our renderings, 
 
 Some have thought that we have here an echo of Rom. vi. 16, which 
 5. John may have seen. But may not both passages be original? The 
 idea that vice is slavery—tot dominorum quot vitiorum—is common in 
 all literature: frequent in the classics, 2 Pet. ii. 19 is probably an 
 echo of this passage or of Rom. vi. 16. Comp. Matt. vi. 24. 
 
 35. ὁ δὲ δοῦλος. The transition is somewhat abrupt, the mention of 
 ‘bond-servant’ suggesting a fresh thought. Now the bond-servant 
 (not the bond-servant of sin, but any slave) abideth not in the house for 
 ever; the son (not the Son of God, but any son) abideth for ever. It 
 is perhaps to avoid this abruptness that some important authorities 
 omit τῆς ἁμαρτίας. 
 
 36. ἐὰν οὖν ὁ vids. As before, any son is meant. ‘If the son 
 emancipates you, your freedom is secured; for he is always on the 
 spot to see that the emancipation is carried out.’ The statement is 
 general, but with special reference to the Son of God, who frees men 
 by granting them ashare in His Sonship. If they will abide in His word 
 (v.31), He will abide in them (vi. 56), and will take care that the bond- 
 age from which He has freed them is not thrust upon them again, 
 
 ὄντως. Here only in 5. John: comp. Luke xxiii. 47, xxiv. 34; 
 1 Tim. v. 3, 5, 16. It expresses reality as opposed to appearance; 
 ἀληθῶς (v. 31, iv. 42, vi. 14, vii. 40) implies that this reality is known. 
 
 37. Having answered the conclusion οὐδενὶ δεδουλεύκαμεν πώποτε 
 (v. 33), Jesus proceeds to deal with the premise from which it was 
 drawn. He admits their claim in their own narrow sense. They are 
 the natural descendants of Abraham: his children in any higher sense 
 they are not (υ. 39). Comp. ‘neither, because they are the seed of 
 Abraham, are phey all children’ (Rom, ix. 8). 
 
 οὐ χωρεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν. Maketh no advance in you. His word had found 
 place in them for a very short time; but it made no progress in their 
 
VIII. 41.] NOTES. 195 
 
 hearts: it did not abide in them and they did not abide in it (v. 31), 
 They had stifled it and cast it out. See on v, 81. 
 
 38. The text is somewhat uncertain. The things which I (in My 
 own Person) have seen (see on i, 18) with the Father I speak: ye also, 
 therefore, do the things which ye heard from your father. We are 
 uncertain whether ποιεῖτε is indicative or imperative: if indicative, 
 παρὰ τ. π. means ‘from your father,’ the devil, as in τ. 41; if impe- 
 rative, it means ‘from the Father,’ as in the first half of the verse. 
 In the former case οὖν (rare in discourses) is severely ironical; ‘I 
 speak those truths of which I have direct knowledge from all eternity 
 with the Father: you, therefore, following My relation to My Father, 
 are doing those sins which your father suggested to you.’ In the 
 latter case the ovv is simple; ‘I in My words follow the Father, of 
 whom I have direct knowledge: you also, therefore, in your acts must 
 follow the Father, of whom you have had indirect knowledge.’ This 
 appeal to Christ’s having seen God is peculiar to 8. John; it is made 
 sometimes by Christ Himself (iii. 11, vi. 46), sometimes by the Evan- 
 gelist or the Baptist (i. 18, iti. 32). The connexion of v. 38 with v. 37 
 is not quite obvious: perhaps it is—‘My words make no progress in 
 you, because they are so opposite in origin and nature to your deeds.’ 
 
 39. ᾽Αβρ. ἐστε. They see that He means some other father than 
 Abraham; but they hold fast to their descent. 
 
 ei ..ἐστε. If yearechildrenof Abraham: ἐστέ has been altered to τε 
 in some MSS. to bring the protasis into harmony with the supposed 
 apodosis ἐποιεῖτε or ἐποιεῖτε dv. But the true reading is probably 
 ποιεῖτε, either imperative or indicative: ‘If ye are children of Abraham, 
 do the works of Abraham,’ or ‘ye do the works of Abraham;’ and these 
 they manifestly did not do, and therefore could not be his children. 
 Authorities are much divided between ἐστέ and ἦτε, ποιεῖτε and ἐποιεῖτε 
 or ἐποιεῖτε ἄν. 
 
 40. ‘But, as it is, ye seek to commit murder of the most heinous 
 kind. Ye would kill One who is your fellow-man, and that for telling 
 you the truth, truth which He heard from God.’ The insertion of 
 ἄνθρωπον, Which the Lord nowhere else uses of Himself, involves His 
 claim to their sympathy, and perhaps anticipates v. 44, where they are 
 ore the children of the great ἀνθρωποκτόνος, lusting like him for 
 
 ood, 
 
 τοῦτο "AB. οὐκ ἐποί. Litotes, or understatement: comp. iii. 19, 
 vi. 87. Abraham’s life was utterly unlike theirs. What had ‘the 
 Friend of God’ (Jas, ii. 23) in common with the foes of God’s Son? 
 
 41. ὑμεῖς π. t.ép. Ye are doing the works of your father: ὑμεῖς in 
 emphatic contrast to ᾿Αβραάμ. This shews them that He means 
 spiritual not literal descent; so they accept His figurative language, 
 but indignantly deny any evil parentage. ‘Thou art speaking of 
 spiritual parentage. Well, our spiritual Father is God.’ 
 
 ἡμεῖς ἐκ πορνείας. The meaning of this is very much disputed. 
 The following are the chief explanations: (1) Thou hast denied that 
 we are the children of Abraham, then we must be the children of some 
 
 N2 
 
τοῦ S. JOIN. (VIII. 41— 
 
 one sinning with Sarah: which is false.’ But this would be adultery, 
 
 not fornication. (2) ‘We are the children of Sarah, not of Hagar.’ 
 
 But this was lawful concubinage, not fornication. (3) ‘Weare nota 
 
 mongrel race, like the Samaritans; we are pure Jews.’ This is far-. 
 fetched, and does not suit the context. (4) ‘We were not born of 
 fornication, as Thou art.’ But His miraculous birth was not yet 
 commonly known, and this foui Jewish lie, perpetuated from the 
 
 second century onwards (Origen, c. Celswm 1. xxxii.), was not yet in 
 
 existence. (5) ‘We were not born of spiritual fornication; our son- 
 
 ship has not been polluted with idolatry. If thou art speaking of 
 spiritual parentage, we have one Father, even God.’ This last seems 
 
 the best. Idolatry is so constantly spoken of as whoredom and forni- 
 
 cation throughout the whole of the O. T., that in a discussion about 
 
 spiritual fatherhood this image would be perfectly natural in the mouth 
 
 ofa Jew. Exod. xxxiv. 15, 16; Lev. xvii. 7; Judg. ii. 17; 2 Kgs, ix. 
 
 22; Ps. lxxili. 27; Isa. 1. 21; Jer. iii. 1,9, 20; Ezek. xvi. 15; &c. &e. 
 
 See esp. Hos. ii. 4. There is a proud emphasis on ‘ we;’—‘we are not 
 
 idolaters, like Thy friends the Gentiles’ (comp. vii. 35). “Eva also is 
 
 emphatic: One Father we have, in contrast to the many gods of the 
 
 heathen and of the first Samaritans (2 K. xvii. 33): comp. v. 48. 
 
 42. Moral proof that God is not their Father ; if He were, they 
 would love His Son. Comp. xy. 23 and ‘Every one that loveth Him 
 that begat loveth Him also that is begotten of Him’ (1 John νυ. 1). 
 Here, as in v. 19, v. 46, ix. 41, xv. 19, xiii. 36, we have imperfects, not 
 aorists: contrast iv. 10, xi. 21, 32, xiv. 28. 
 
 ἐκ. τ. 0. ἐξῆλθον k. ἥκω. I came out from God and am here from 
 God among you. See on xvi. 28, the only other place where ἐκ τ. Θ. 
 ἐξῆλθον occurs: it includes the Divine Generation of the Son. In the 
 highest and fullest sense He is ‘of God:’ if they were God’s children 
 they would recognise and love Him. 
 
 οὐδὲ γάρ. Proof of His Divine origin: for not even of Myself have 
 I come. ‘So far from having come from any other than God, I have 
 not even come of My own self-determination.’ 
 
 43. τ. λαλιὰν τ. ἐμ...τ. λόγον τ. ἐμ. See onv. 31. Λαλιά is the 
 outward expression, the language used: ἡ λαλιά cov δῆλόν σε ποιεῖ 
 (Matt. xxvi. 73), ἡ λαλιά σου ὁμοιάζει (Mark xiv. 70). Elsewhere λαλιά 
 occurs only iv. 42 and here. Λόγος is the meaning of the expression, 
 the thoughts conveyed in the language. They perpetually misunder- 
 stand His language because they cannot appreciate His meaning. 
 They are ἐκ τῶν κάτω (v. 23), and He is speaking of τὰ ἄνω (Col. iii. 1) ; 
 they are ἐκ τ. κόσμου τούτου (υ. 23), and He is telling of τὰ ἐπουράνια 
 (iii. 12); they are ψυχικοί, and He is teaching πνευματικά (1 Cor. ii. 13; 
 see notes there), They ‘cannot hear:’ it is a moral impossibility (see 
 on vi. 44): they have their whole character to change before they can 
 understand spiritual truths. ᾿Ακούειν, as in v. 47, means ‘listen to, 
 obey:’ comp. Ps, lxxxi. 11. 
 
 44. ὑμεῖς ἐκ τ. π. τ. ὃ. ἐστέ. At last Christ says plainly, what He 
 has implied in vv. 88 and 41. ‘Ye’ is emphatic; ‘ye, who boast that 
 
VIII. 44.) ’ NOTES. 197 
 
 ye have Abraham and God as your Father, ye are morally the deyil’s 
 children.’ 1 Johniii. 8, 10 is perhaps an echo of Christ’s words. 
 
 This passage seems to be conclusive as to the real personal existence 
 of the devil. It can scarcely be an economy, a concession to ordinary 
 modes of thought and language. Would Christ have resorted to a 
 popular delusion in a denunciation of such solemn and awful severity ? 
 Comp. ‘the children of the wicked one’ (Matt. xiii. 38); ‘ye make him 
 twofold more the child of hell than yourselves’ (Matt. xxiii. 15). With 
 this denunciation generally comp. Matt. xi. 20—24, xxiii, 13—36. 
 
 A monstrous but grammatically possible translation of these words 
 is adopted by some who attribute a Gnostic origin to this Gospel ;— 
 ‘ye are descended from the father of the devil.’ This Gnostic de- 
 monology, according to which the father of the devil is the God of the 
 Jews, is utterly unscriptural, and does not suit the context here, 
 
 θέλετε ποιεῖν. Ye will to do: see on vi. 67, vii. 17; comp. v. 40. 
 ‘Ye love to gratify the lusts which characterize him, especially the 
 lust for blood; this shews your moral relationship to him.’ The 
 θέλετε brings out their full consent and sympathy, 
 
 ἀνθρωποκτόνος. See onv. 40. The devil was a murderer by causing 
 the Fall, and thus bringing death into the world. In the Gospel of 
 Nicodemus, he is called ἡ τοῦ θανάτου ἀρχή. Comp. ‘God created man 
 to be immortal, and made him to be an image of His own eternity. 
 Nevertheless, through envy of the devil came death into the world, and 
 they that do hold of his side shall find it’ (Wisd. ii. 23, 24): and ‘Cain 
 was of that wicked one and slew his brother:’ and ‘ whosoever hateth 
 his brother is a murderer’ (1 John iii. 12, 15). 
 
 οὐχ ἕστηκεν. Standeth not in the truth (iii. 29, vi. 22, &c.). The 
 true reading however is probably ἔστηκεν, imperf. of στήκειν (i. 26; 
 Rom. xiv. 4), a stronger form; stood firm. The truth is a region from 
 which the devil has long since departed, because truth (no article) is 
 not in him. In §. John the most complete union is expressed by 
 mutual indwelling, ‘I in you, and you in Me:’ this is the converse of 
 it. The devil is not in the truth because truth is not in him: there is 
 absolute separation. The truth cannot be possessed by one who is 
 internally alien to it. 
 
 τὸ ψεῦδος. Falsehood as a whole as opposed to ἡ ἀλήθεια as a 
 whole: in English we speak of ‘the truth,’ but not of ‘the falsehood.’ 
 But the article may mean ‘the lie that is natural to him:’ whenever 
 he speaketh his lie. 
 
 ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων. Out of his own resources, or nature: the outcome is 
 what may be expected from him: comp. 2 Cor. iii. 5. 
 
 ὅτι Ψ. ἐ. κι ὁ π. ad. Because he is a liar and the father thereof, 
 either of the liar, or of the lie. Thus he lied to Eve, ‘Ye shall not 
 surely die” (Gen. ili. 4). The article before πατήρ does not at all 
 prevent πατήρ being included in the predicate. It is, however, possible 
 to take this obscure sentence (comp. v. 26) very differently, and to 
 make ὁ πατήρ the subject of the last clause; Whenever a man speaketh 
 his lie, he speaketh of his own, for his father also is a liar: i.e. a 
 
108 S. JOHN. (VIII. 44— 
 
 man by lying proclaims himself to be a child of the devil acting in 
 harmony with his parentage. But the change of subject from ‘the 
 devil’ to ‘a man’ understood is very awkward. And here again a 
 monstrous misinterpretation is grammatically possible ;—‘ for the 
 devil is a liar, and his father also.’ It is not strange that Gnostics of 
 the second and third centuries should have tried to wring a sanction 
 for their fantastic systems out of the writings of 8. John. It is strange 
 that any modern critics should have thought demonology so extrava- 
 gant compatible with the theology of the Fourth Gospel. 
 
 45. ἐγὼ δὲ ὅτι. But as for Me, because I say the truth, ye believe 
 Me not: ἔγώ is in emphatic contrast to the ψεύστης. Just as the 
 devil ‘stood not in the truth’ because of his natural alienation from 
 it, so they do not accept the truth when Jesus offers it to them. 
 They will listen to the devil (v. 38); they will believe a lie: but the 
 Messiah speaking the truth they will not believe. The tragic tone 
 once more, but more definitely expressed: comp. i. 5, 10, 11, ii. 24; 
 ili. 10, 19. 
 
 46. τίς ἐξ ὑ. ἐλέγχει. Which of you convicteth Me of sin? See 
 on ili. 20, xvi. 8. For περὶ comp. x. 33; 1 John ii. 2. Many rebuked 
 Christ and laid sin to His charge: none brought sin home to His 
 conscience. There is the majesty of Divinity in the challenge. What 
 mortal man would dare to make it? See on v. 29, and comp. xiv. 30, 
 xv. 10; 1 John 11, 5; 1 Pet. i. 19, ii. 22, Note the implied connexion 
 between sin generally and falsehood, as between righteousness and 
 truth, vii. 18. Perhaps we are to understand a pause in which He 
 waits for their answer to His challenge. But they are as unable to 
 charge Him with sin as to acquit themselves (v. 7) of it: and he 
 makes the admission implied by their silence the basis for a fresh 
 question. ‘If I am free from sin (and none of you can convict Me 
 of it), Iam free from falsehood. Therefore, if I say truth why do ye 
 on your part not believe Me?’ 
 
 47. There is a pause, and then Christ answers His own question 
 and gives a final disproof of their claim to be God’s children (v. 41). 
 
 ὁ ὧν ἐκ τ. 8 The true child of God, deriving his whole being 
 from Him: comp. Ὁ. 23, ili. 31, xv. 19, xvii. 14, 16, xviii. 36, 37. 
 
 τὰ ῥήματα τ. 8. See on iii. 34. Christ here assumes, what He 
 elsewhere states, that He speaks the words of God (v. 26, vii. 16, 
 xvii. 8). 
 
 διὰ τοῦτο. For this cause: see on vii. 21, 22. 5. John uses the 
 same test; ‘We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that 
 is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit ‘of truth 
 and the spirit of error’ (1 John iv. 6). 
 
 48. ot ᾿Ιουδαῖοι. Not those who for the moment believed on Him 
 (v. 31), but the hostile party as a whole. This denial of their na- 
 tional prerogative of being sons of God seems to them malicious 
 frenzy. He must be an enemy of the Chosen People and be possessed. 
 Kahais=‘rightty ;’ comp. iv. 17, xiii, 13, xviii. 23: ἡμεῖς is emphatic; 
 
VIII. 51.] NOTES. 199 
 
 ‘we at any rate are right.” For the position of ἡμεῖς comp. 1 John 
 i. 4 
 
 Zapap. εἶ σύ. Σύ last, with contemptuous emphasis. The pas- 
 sage implies that this was a common reproach, but it is stated no- 
 where else. Yet it was most natural that one whose teaching so often 
 contradicted Jewish traditions and Jewish exclusiveness should be 
 called a Samaritan. It is therefore a striking touch of reality, and 
 another instance of the Evangelist’s complete familiarity with the 
 ideas and expressions current in Palestine at this time. Possibly this 
 term of reproach contains a sneer at His visit to Samaria in chap. iv., 
 and at His having chosen the unusual route through Samaria, as He 
 probably did (see on vii. 10), in coming up to the Feast of Taberna- 
 cles. The parable of the Good Samaritan was probably not yet 
 spoken. The two reproaches possibly refer to what He had said 
 against them. He had said that they were no true children of Abra- 
 ham; they say that He is a Samaritan. He had said that they were 
 not of God: they say that He has a demon. 
 
 ϑαιμόνιον. It is unfortunate that we have not two words in our 
 Bible to distinguish ὁ διάβολος, ‘the Devil’ (v. 44, xiii. 2; Matt. iv. 1; 
 Luke viii. 12, &c.), from δαιμόνιον (vii. 20, x. 20, Matt. vii. 22, &c.) 
 and δαίμων (Matt. viii. 31; Mark v. 12; Luke viii. 29; Rev. xviii. 2), 
 ‘a devil,’ or ‘unclean spirit.’ ‘Fiend,’ which Wiclif sometimes em- 
 ploys (Matt. xii. 24, 28; Mark i. 34, 39, &c.), might have been used, 
 had Tyndale and Cranmer adopted it: demon would have been better 
 still. But here Tyndale, Cranmer, and the Geneva Version make the 
 confusion complete by rendering ‘and hast the devil,’ a mistake 
 which they make also in vii. 20 and x. 20. The charge here is more 
 bitter than either vii. 20 or x. 20, where it simply means that His 
 conduct is so extraordinary that He must be demented. We have 
 instances more similar to this in the Synoptists; Matt. ix. 34, xii. 24; 
 Mark iii. 22; Luke xi. 15. 
 
 49. ἐγὼ ὃ. οὐκ ἔχω. He does not notice the charge of being a 
 Samaritan. For Him it contained nothing offensive, for He knew 
 that Samaritans might equal or excel Jews (iv. 39—42; Luke x. 33, 
 xvii. 16) in faith, benevolence, and gratitude. There is an emphasis 
 on ‘I,’ but the meaning of the emphasis is not ‘I have not a demon, 
 but ye have ;’? which would require οὐκ ἐγώ for ἐγὼ οὐκ. Rather it 
 means ‘I have not a demon, but honour My Father; while you on the 
 contrary dishonour My Father through Me.’ 
 
 50. ἐγὼ δὲ ov ζ. Butitis not I who seek. ‘It is not because I 
 seek glory for Myself that I speak of your dishonouring Me: the 
 Father seeks that for Me and pronounces judgment on you.’ Comp. 
 v. 54 andy. 41. There is no contradiction between this and v. 22. 
 In both cases God’s law operates of itself: the wicked sentence them- 
 selves, rather than are sentenced by Him or by the Son. 
 
 51. ἐμὸν λόγον τηρήσῃ. Keep My word. The connexion with 
 vv. 31, 43 and v. 24 must be preserved by retaining the same transla- 
 tion for λόγος: ‘keeping My word’ here corresponds to ‘ abiding in 
 
200 S. JOHN. [ VIII. 51— 
 
 My word’ in v. 81. Τὸν λόγον τηρεῖν is a phrase of frequent occur- 
 rence in 3. John; vv. 52, 55, xiv. 23, xv. 20, xvii. 6; Rev. iii. 8, 10: 
 τοὺς λόγους τηρεῖν, xiv. 24; Rev. xxii. 7, 9: so also the analogous 
 phrase τὰς ἐντολὰς τηρεῖν; xiv. 15, 21, xv. 10; 1 John ii. 3, 4, 5, iii, 
 22, 24, v. 2,3; Rev. xii. 17, xiv. 12. Of the three phrases the first is 
 the most comprehensive; τὸν λόγον τ. is to observe the Divine revela- 
 tion as a whole; τοὺς X. or τὰς évr. τ. is to observe certain definite 
 injunctions. Τηρεῖν is not merely keeping in mind, but being on the 
 watch to obey and fulfil. Comp. φυλάσσειν (τὸν νόμον, τὰ δόγματα, 
 τὴν παραθήκην), Which is being on the watch to guard and protect. 
 By ‘keeping His word’ they may escape the judgment just mentioned. 
 There is no need to suppose, therefore, that vv. 49, 50 are addressed 
 to His opponents, and v. 51 to a more friendly group; a change of 
 which there is no hint. 
 
 θ. οὐ μὴ 8. els τ. αἰῶνα. Shall certainly not behold death for ever: 
 i.e. shall never behold or experience death, His 7. αἰῶνα belongs like 
 οὐ μὴ to θεωρήσῃ, not to θάνατον: it does not mean ‘he shall see 
 death,’ but ‘death shall not be eternal.’ This is evident from iv. 14, 
 which cannot mean ‘shall thirst,’ but ‘the thirst shall not be eternal,’ 
 and from xiii. 8, which cannot mean ‘shalt wash my feet,’ but ‘the 
 washing shall not be eternal.’ In all three cases the meaning is 
 ‘shall certainly never.’ Comp. x. 28, xi. 26; 1 Cor. viii. 13. 
 
 θεωρήσῃ. Θεωρεῖν θάνατον occurs here only in N.T. It is stronger 
 than ἰδεῖν day. (Luke ii. 26; Heb. xi. 5) and ἰδεῖν διαφθοράν (Acts ii. 27, 
 31, xili. 35), expressing fixed contemplation and full acquaintance. 
 Just as ‘keep My word’ here corresponds to ‘abide in My word’ in 
 νυ. 31, so ‘exemption from death’ here corresponds to ‘freedom’ 
 there: εἰς τ. αἰῶνα occurs in both passages. The firm believer has (not 
 shall have) eternal life and real freedom, and shall never lose either. 
 Of this Christ solemnly (ἀμὴν ἀμήν vv. 34, 51) assures them. 
 
 52. viv ἐγνώκαμεν. ‘It was somewhat of a conjecture before 
 (v. 48), but now we have come to know it :’ comp. v. 55, v. 42, vi. 69. 
 First they thought it; then they said it; then they knew it. 
 
 ἀπέθανεν. Died. As in vi. 49, the point is that he perished then, 
 not that he is dead now: keeping God’s word did not save him, 
 
 γεύσηται. They misunderstand and therefore exaggerate His lan- 
 guage, all the more naturally as ‘taste of death’ was a more familiar 
 metaphor than ‘contemplate death.’ The believer does taste of death, 
 though he does not have a complete experience of it; to him it is but 
 a passing phase. The metaphor ‘taste of death’ is not taken from a 
 death-cup, but from the general idea of bitterness; Matt. xvi. 28; 
 Heb, ii. 9; comp. xviii. 11; Rev. xiv. 10. 
 
 53. μὴ σὺ μείζων, Exactly parallel toiv. 12. ‘Surely Thou, the 
 mad Galilean, art not greater than our father Abraham, seeing that 
 he died? and the prophets died.’ The anacoluthon, like their exag- 
 geration, is very natural. The sentence should run καὶ τ. προφήτων 
 οἵτινες ἀπέθανον. For ὅστις comp. 1 John i. 2; Heb. x. 35. For 
 
a ¢ ΒΥ, . NOTES. 201 
 
 σεαυτὸν ποιεῖν comp, v. 18, x, 33, xix. 7, 12; 1 John i. 10: it is 8 
 Johannean phrase, meaning to declare oneself to be such by word and 
 deed. 
 
 54—56. Christ first answers the insinuation that He is vain- 
 glorious, implied in the question ‘whom makest Thou Thyself? 
 Then He shews that He really is greater than Abraham. 
 
 54. ἐὰν ἐγὼ δοξ. Jf I shall have glorified Myself, My glory is 
 nothing. There is (v. 50) My Father who glorifieth Me—in miracles 
 and the Messianic work generally. In translation distinguish be- 
 tween τιμᾷν (v. 49) and δοξάζειν. See on vi. 71. 
 
 55. ἐγνώκατε... οἶδα. And ye have not learned to know Him (v.52); 
 but I know Him. Οἶδα refers to His immediate essential knowledge 
 of the Father, ἐγνώκατε to the progressive knowledge of mankind by 
 means of revelation. Here and elsewhere (vii. 15, 17, 26, 27, xiii. 7, 
 xxi. 17) A.V. obliterates the distinction between the two verbs. Comp. 
 xiv. 7. ἔσομαι... ψεύστης. Preserve the order; I shall be like unto 
 you, a liar: referring back to v. 44. Winer, p. 243, 
 
 τ. X. av. τηρῷς Christ’s whole life is a continual practice of obedi- 
 ence (Heb. v. 8; Rom. v. 19; Phil. ii. 8): His relation to the Father 
 is analogous to that of the believer to Christ (xv. 10, xvii. 11, 18). 
 
 56. ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν. Whom you so confidently claim (vv. 39, 53): 
 ke rejoiced in expecting One whom ye scornfully reject. 
 
 ἠγαλλιάσατο ἵνα ἴδῃ. Exulted that he might see My day; the 
 object of his joy being represented as the goal to which his heart 
 is directed. This is a remarkable instance of 3. John’s preference 
 for the construction expressing a purpose, where other constructions 
 would seem more natural. Comp. iv. 34, 47, vi. 29, 50, ix. 2, 3, 22, 
 xi. 50, xvi. 7. Abraham exulted in anticipation of the coming of the 
 Messiah through implicit belief in the Divine promises. Winer, p. 426. 
 ‘My day’ is most naturally interpreted of the Birth of Christ: comp. 
 Luke xvii. 22. The aorists εἶδεν and ἐχάρη point to a definite event. 
 
 καὶ εἶδεν Kk. ἐχάρη. A very important passage with regard to the 
 intermediate state, shewing that the soul does not, as some maintain, 
 remain unconscious between death and the Day of Judgment. The 
 Old Testament saints in Paradise were allowed to know that the 
 Messiah had come. How this was revealed to them we are not told; 
 but here is a statement of the fact. "Exdpy expresses a calmer, less 
 emotional joy than ἠγαλλιάσατο and therefore both are appropriate: 
 ‘exulted’ while still on earth; ‘was glad’ in Hades: ‘exulted’ in 
 tumultuous anticipation; ‘was glad’ in calm beholding. Thus the 
 ‘Communion of Saints’ is assured, not merely in parables (Luke xvi. 
 27, 28), but in the plain words of Scripture. Heb, xii. 1. 
 
 57. πεντήκοντα ἔτη. The reading τεσσαράκοντα which Chrysos- 
 tom and a few authorities give, is no doubt incorrect. It has arisen 
 from a wish to make the number less wide of the mark; for our 
 Lord was probably not yet thirty-five, although Irenaeus preserves a 
 
202 S. JOHN. (VIII. 57— 
 
 tradition that He taught at a much later age. He says (11. xxii. 5), 
 a quadrigesimo autem et quinquagesimo anno declinat jam in aetatem 
 seniorem, quam habens Dominus noster docebat, sicut evangelium et 
 omnes seniores testantur qui in Asia apud Joannem discipulum Domini 
 convenerunt. By ‘evangelium’ he probably means this passage. But 
 ‘fifty years’ is a round number, the Jewish traditional age of full 
 manhood (Num. iv. 3, 39, vili. 24, 25). There is no reason to sup- 
 pose that Jesus was nearly fifty, or looked nearly fifty. In com- 
 paring His age with the 2000 years since Abraham the Jews would 
 not care to be precise so long as they were within the mark. 
 
 ἑώρακας. See on 1. 18, They again misunderstand and misquote 
 His words. Abraham’s seeing Christ’s day was not the same as Christ 
 seeing Abraham. 
 
 58. ᾿Αμὴν ἀμήν. For the third time in this discourse (vv. 34, 51) 
 Jesus uses this asseveration, Having answered the charge of self- 
 glorification (vv. 54, 55), and shewn that Abraham was on His side 
 not theirs (v. 57), He now solemnly declares His superiority to him, 
 
 πρὶν "ABp. y. ἐγώ εἰμι. Here A.V. has lamentably gone back from 
 earlier translations, Cranmer has, ‘Ere Abraham was born, I am,’ 
 perhaps following Erasmus’ Antequam nasceretur A., Ego sum; and 
 the Rhemish has, ‘Before that Abraham was made, I am,’ following the 
 Vulgate, Antequam Abraham fieret, Ego sum, See notes on ἣν in 1. 
 1,6. ‘Iam,’ denotes absolute existence, and in this passage clearly 
 involves the pre-existence and Divinity of Christ, as the Jews see. 
 Comp. vv. 24, 28; Rev. i. 4, 8; and see on v, 24. ‘I was’ would have 
 been less comprehensive, and need not have meant more than that 
 Christ was prior to Abraham. In O.T. we have the same thought, 
 πρὸ Tou ὄρη γενηθῆναι...σὺ εἶ, Ps. xc. 2; cil. 27. 
 
 59. ἦραν οὖν. They took up therefore; i.e. in consequence of His 
 last words. They clearly understand Him to have taken to Himself 
 the Divine Name, and they prepare to stone Him for blasphemy. 
 Building materials for completing and repairing the Temple would 
 supply them with missiles (comp. x. 31—33): Josephus mentions a 
 stoning in the Temple (Ant. xvi1. ix. 3). They would not have stoned 
 Him for merely claiming to be the Messiah (x. 24). 
 
 ἐκρύβη x. ἐξῆλθεν. Probably we are not to understand a miraculous 
 withdrawal as in Luke iv. 30, where the ‘passing through the midst of 
 them’ seems to be miraculous. Comp. ἄφαντος ἐγένετο, Luke xxiv. 31. 
 ‘Here we need not suppose more than that He drew back into the 
 crowd away from those who had taken up stones. The Providence 
 which ordered that as yet the fears of the hierarchy should prevail over 
 their hostility (vii. 30, viii. 20), ruled that the less hostile in this mul- 
 titude should screen Him from the fury of the more fanatical. It is 
 quite arbitrary to invert the clauses and render, ‘Jesus went out of 
 the Temple and hid Himself.’ 
 
 As a comment on the whole discourse see 1 Pet. ii. 22, 23, remem- 
 bering that S. Peter was very possibly present on the occasion, 
 
FX. τ] NOTES. 203 
 
 ‘‘The whole of the Jews’ reasoning is strictly what we should expect 
 from them. These constant appeals to their descent from Abraham, 
 these repeated imputations of diabolic possession, this narrow intelli- 
 gence bounded by the letter, this jealousy of anything that seemed in 
 the slightest degree to trench on their own rigid monotheism—all these, 
 down to the touch in v. 57, in which the age they fix upon in round 
 numbers is that assigned to completed manhood, give local truth and 
 accuracy to the picture; which in any case, we may say confidently, 
 must have been drawn by a Palestinian Jew, and in all probability by 
 a Jew who had been himself an early disciple of Christ’’ (Sanday). 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 4. ἡμᾶς for ἐμέ (a correction to harmonize with we) with N'BL 
 ae NPAC. 
 6. ἐπέχρισεν αὐτοῦ for éréypice. Omit τοῦ τυφλοῦ (explanatory 
 gloss) after ὀφθαλμούς with NBL against AC. 
 
 8. προσαίτης (all the best MSS. and versions) for τυφλός. 
 
 10. ἠνεῴχθησαν (NBCD) for ἀνεωχθησαν (AKUS). For this triple 
 augment comp. Matt. ix. 30, Acts xvi. 26, Rey. xix. 11, 
 
 11. After ἐκεῖνος omit καὶ εἶπεν with XBCDL against A. ὁ ἄνθρωπος 
 ὁ λεγόμενος (NBL) for ἄνθρ. Ney. (AD). τὸν (NBDLX) for τὴν κολυμ- 
 βήθραν τοῦ (A). 
 
 14. ἐν ἡ ἡμέρᾳ for ὅτε (simplification) with NBLX against AD. 
 
 36. Insert καὶ before ris. Confusion with κύριε may have caused 
 
 the omission. KAI and KE (=KYPIE) are easily confounded, and 
 ke τις ἐστιν κε Would seem to have a superfluous κύριε. 
 
 CuRIst THE SouRCE oF TRUTH AND LIGHT ILLUSTRATED BY A SIGN. 
 
 Light is given to the eyes of the man born blind and the Truth is 
 revealed to His soul, The Jews who cast Him out for accepting the 
 Truth rejected by themselves are left in their blindness, the faith of 
 those who began to believe on Him (viii. 30) having failed under the 
 test applied by Jesus (viii. 31—59). 
 
 1—5. Tue PRELUDE Τὸ THE SIGN. 
 
 1. καὶ παράγων. Possibly on His way from the Temple (viii. 59), 
 or (if ἐγένετο τότε be the right reading in x, 22) more probably on ὃ 
 later occasion near the F, of the Dedication. Comp. καὶ παράγων εἶδε 
 Aeviy (Mark ii, 14). We know that this man was a beggar (v. 8), and 
 that beggars frequented the gates of the Temple (Acts iii. 2), as they 
 frequent the doors of foreign churches now; but we are not told whee 
 this man was begging, 
 
204 S. JOHN. [Χ.1-- 
 
 ἐκ γενετῆς. The phrase occurs nowhere else in N.T. Justin Martyr 
 uses 1t twice of those healed by Christ; Trypho tx1x.; Apol. τ. xxii. 
 No source is so probable as this verse, for nowhere else is Christ said 
 to have healed a congenital disease. See oni. 23 δηᾷ 111. 3. There 
 is an indubitable reference to this passage in the Clementine Homilies 
 (X1x. xxli.), the date of which is c. a.p. 150. See on x. 9, 27. For 
 other instances of Christ giving sight to the blind see Matt. ix. 27, xx. 
 29; Mark viii. 22, 
 
 2. Rabbi. See oni. 39, iv. 31. 
 
 ἵνα τ. γεννηθῇ. That he should be born blind, in accordance with 
 the Divine decree; comp. iy. 34, vi. 29, 40, and see on viii. 56. They 
 probably knew the fact from the man himself, who would often state 
 it to the passers-by. This question has given rise to much discussion. 
 It implies a belief that some one must have sinned, or there would 
 have been no such suffering: who then was it that sinned? Possibly 
 the question means no more than this; the persons most closely con- 
 nected with the suffering being specially mentioned, without much 
 thought as to possibilities or probabilities. But this is not quite satis- 
 factory. The disciples name two very definite alternatives; we must 
 not assume that one of them was meaningless. That the sins of the 
 fathers are visited on the children is the teaching of the Second Com- 
 mandment and of every one’s experience. But how could a man be 
 born blind for his own sin ? 
 
 Four answers have been suggested. (1) The predestinarian notion 
 that the man was punished for sins which God knew he would commit 
 in his life. This is utterly unscriptural and scarcely fits the context. 
 
 (2) The doctrine of the transmigration of souls, which was held by 
 some Jews: he might have sinned in another body. But it is doubtful 
 whether this philosophic tenet would be familiar to the disciples. 
 
 (3) The doctrine of the pre-existence of the soul, which appears 
 Wisdom viii. 20: the man’s soul sinned before it was united to the 
 body. This again can hardly have been familiar to illiterate men. 
 
 (4) The current Jewish interpretation of Gen. xxv. 22, Ps. li. 5, 
 and similar passages; that it was possible for a babe yet unborn to have 
 emotions (comp. Luke i. 41—44) and that these might be and often 
 were sinful. On the whole, this seems to be the simplest and most 
 natural interpretation, and v, 34 seems to confirm it. 
 
 3. Christ shews that there is a third alternative, which their ques- 
 tion assumes that there is not. Moreover He by implication warns 
 them against assuming, like Job’s friends, a connexion between suffer- 
 ing and sin in individuals (see on v.14). Neither did this man sin 
 (not ‘hath sinned’), nor his parents. The answer, like the question, 
 points to a definite act of sin causing this retribution. 
 
 ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα. But he was born blind in order that; Jesus affirms the 
 Divine purpose. This elliptical use of ‘but (in order) that’ is common 
 in 8. John, and illustrates his fondness for the construction expressing 
 a@ purpose: see oni. 8, Winer, p. 398. 
 
 φανερωθῇ. First for emphasis: see oni, 31. 
 
ix δ NOTES. 205 
 
 τὰ ἔργα τ. 8, Including not only the miracle but its effects. 
 
 4, ‘pds Set...ye. The readings are doubtful as to whether ἡμᾶς or 
 ἐμέ, we or ἡμᾶς is right in each place. The more difficult reading is 
 the best supported: We must work the works of Him that sent Me. 
 Some copyists changed ἡμᾶς to ἐμέ to agree with we; others changed 
 με to ἡμᾶς to agree with ἡμᾶς. ‘We must work:’ Christ identifies 
 Himself with His disciples in the work of converting the world. ‘Him 
 that sent Me:’ Christ does not identify His mission with that of the 
 disciples. They were both sent, but not in the same sense: the Son 
 is sent by the Father, the disciples by the Son. So also He says 
 ‘My Father’ and ‘your Father,’ ‘My God’ and ‘your God;’ but not 
 ‘our Father,’ or ‘our God’ (xx.17). Ta ἔργα refers to v. 3. 
 
 ἕως ἡμέρα ἐστίν. So long as it is day, i.e. so long as we have life, 
 Day and night here mean, as so often in literature of all kinds, life 
 and death. Other explanations, e.g. opportune and inopportune mo- 
 ment, the presence of Christ in the world and His withdrawal from 
 it, —are less simple and less suitable to the context. Jf all that is re- 
 corded from vii. 37 takes place on one day, these words would probably 
 be spoken in the evening, when the failing light would add force to the 
 warning, night cometh (no article), when no one can work; not even 
 Christ Himself as man upon earth: comp. xi. 7—10; Ps. civ. 23. 
 
 5. ὅταν ἐν τ. κι ὦ Whensoever 1 am in the world: distinguish he- 
 tween ἕως ἐστί and ὅταν ὦ. Ὅταν is important; it shews the compre- 
 hensiveness of the statement. The Light shines at various times and 
 in various degrees, whether the world chooses to be illuminated or not. 
 Comp. i. 5, viii. 12. Here there is special reference to His giving 
 light both to the man’s eyes and to his soul. The Pharisees prove the 
 truth of the saying that ‘the darkness comprehended it not.’ 
 
 φῶς εἰμὶ τ. x. 1 am light to the world; not quite the same as τὸ φ. 
 τ. k. (Viil. 2), the Light of the world. Note also the absence of ἐγώ in 
 both clauses: it is not Christ’s Person, but the effect of His presence 
 that is prominent here. 
 
 6—12. Tue Sicn. 
 
 6. ἐπέχρισεν αὐτοῦ τ. mw. Hither spread the clay thereof (made with. 
 the spittle), or spread His clay (made by Him) upon his eyes. Jewish 
 tradition expressly forbade putting spittle to the eyes on the Sabbath: 
 of course it would forbid making clay on the Sabbath: comp. v. 10. 
 Regard for Christ’s truthfulness compels us to regard the clay as the 
 means of healing; not that He could not heal without it, but that He 
 willed this to be the channel of His power. Elsewhere He uses spittle; 
 to heal a blind man (Mark viii. 23); to heal a deaf and dumb man 
 (Mark vii. 33). Spittleywas believed to be a remedy for diseased eyes 
 (comp. Vespasian’s reputed miracle, Tac. Hist. 1v. 8, and other in- 
 stances); clay also, though less commonly. So that Christ selects an 
 ordinary remedy and gives it success in a case confessedly beyond its 
 supposed powers (v. 82). This helps us to conclude why He willed to 
 use means, instead of healing without even a word; viz. to help the 
 
206 S. JOHN. [1Χ. 6— 
 
 faith of the sufferer. It is easier to believe, when means can be per- 
 ceived; it is still easier, when the means seem to be appropriate. 
 
 Perhaps the whole act was symbolical. To the man’s natural blind- 
 ness Jesus added an artificial blindness, and pointed out a cure for the 
 latter, which, being accepted by the man’s faith, cured the former also, 
 To the natural blindness of the Jews Jesus added an artificial blind- 
 ness by teaching in parables (Mark iv. 11, 12). The interpretation of 
 the teaching would have cured both forms of blindness. But the Jews 
 rejected it. 
 
 7. νίψαι εἰς τ. x. Either, Wash the clay off into the pool, or, Go to 
 the pool and wash, Nimrw, Attic vifw, besides vv. 11, 15 and xiii, 5—14 
 occurs only Matt. vi. 17, xv. 2; Mark vii. 3; 1 Tim. v. 10, and is always 
 used of washing part of the body. For bathing the whole either λούειν 
 (xiii. 10; Acts ix. 37; Heb. x. 22; 2 Pet. 11. 22; Rev. i. 5) or βαπτίζειν 
 is used; the latter in N.T. always of ceremonial immersion (i. 25—33, 
 &e.). Πλύνειν (Rev. vii. 14, xxii. 14; Luke vy. 2) is to wash inanimate 
 objects, as clothes and nets. Comp, LXX. in Ley. xv, 11, τὰς χεῖρας 
 οὐ νένιπται ὕδατι, πλυνεῖ Ta ἱμάτια, Kal λούσεται τὸ σῶμα. See on xiii, 
 10. The washing was probably part of the means of healing (comp. 
 Naaman) and was a strong test of the man’s faith. 
 
 Σιλωάμ. Satisfactorily identified with Birket Silwan in the lower 
 Tyropoean valley, S.E. of the hill of Zion. This is probably the Siloah 
 of Neh. iii. 15 and the Shiloah of Isa. viii. 6. ‘The tower in Siloam’ 
 (Luke xiii. 4) was very possibly a building connected with the water; 
 perhaps part of an aqueduct. 
 
 ὁ épp. ἀπεσταλμένος. Which is interpreted, Sent. The interpreta- 
 tion is admissible; but the original meaning is rather Sending, Missio 
 or Emissio aquarum, ‘outlet of waters.’ Comp. ‘the waters of Shiloah 
 that go softly’ (Isa. viii. 6). S.John sees in the word ‘nomen et omen’ 
 of the man’s cure: and he also appears to see that this water from the 
 rock is again (see on vil. 37) an image of Him who was sent (iii. 17, 
 viii. 42, xviii. 3, &c.) by the Father, τὸν ἀπόστολον (Heb. iii. 1). 
 
 ἀπῆλθεν... ἦλθεν. He went away to Siloam and came home, as what 
 follows seems to shew. Jesus had gone away (v. 12); the man did 
 not return to Him. Has any poet attempted to describe this man's 
 emotions on first seeing the world in which he had lived so long ? 
 
 8. ot θεωροῦντες. They who used to behold him aforetime, that 
 (iv. 19, xii, 19) he was a beggar, or because he was a beggar, and was 
 therefore often to be seen in public places. 
 
 9. ἄλλοι ἐλ. οὐχί. A third group said, No, but he is like him. 
 The opening of his eyes would greatly change him: this added to the 
 improbability of a cure made them doubt his identity. 
 
 11. ἐκεῖνος. S. John’s fondness for this pronoun has been re- 
 marked, Here and in vv. 25, 36 it marks the man’s prominence in 
 the scene. Comp. i. 8, ii. 21, xiii, 25, xviii, 17, 25, xx. 15, 16. 
 
 ὁ avOp. ὁ Aey. The man that is called; implying that Jesus was 
 well known. Was he thinking of the meaning of the name ‘Jesus’? 
 
IX. 16.] NOTES. 207 
 
 πηλὸν ἐπ. He had not seen how: the rest he tells in order. 
 
 ἀνέβλεψα. This may mean either ‘I looked up’ (Mark vi. 41, vii. 
 34, xvi. 4, &c.); or ‘I recovered sight’ (Matt. xi. 5; Mark x. 51, 52, 
 &c.). ‘I looked up’ does not suit vv. 15 and 18, where the word occurs 
 again: and though ‘I recovered sight’ is not strictly accurate of a man 
 born blind, yet it is admissible, as sight is natural to man. 
 
 Note the gradual development of faith in the man’s soul, and compare 
 it with that of the Samaritan woman (see on iv. 19) and of Martha (see 
 on xi. 21). Here he merely knows Jesus’ name and the miracle; in 
 v. 17 he thinks Him ‘a Prophet;’ in v. 33 He is ‘of God;’ in v. 39 He 
 is ‘the Son of God.’ What writer of fiction in the second century 
 could have executed such a study in psychology? 
 
 12. ἐκεῖνος. That strange Rabbi who perplexes us so much: comp. 
 o. 28, vii. 12, xix. 21. 
 
 οὐκ οἶδα rather implies that He did not return to Jesus (v. 7). 
 
 13—41. Opposite RESULTS OF THE SIGN. 
 
 13. ἄγουσιν. These friends and neighbours are perhaps well- 
 meaning people, not intending to make mischief. But they are un- 
 comfortable because work has been done on the Sabbath, and they 
 think it best to refer the matter to the Pharisees, the great authorities 
 in matters of legal observance and orthodoxy (comp. vii. 47,48). This 
 is not a meeting of the Sanhedrin. S. John’s formula for the San- 
 hedrin is of ἀρχιερεῖς x. (ol) Pap, (vil. 32, 45, xi. 47, 57, xviii. 3), Pos- 
 sibly one of the smaller Synagogue Councils is here meant, Appa- 
 rently this is the day after the miracle. 
 
 14. ἦν δὲ σ. ἐν ἡ ip. Now it was a Sabbath on the day on which: 
 τ. πηλὸν ἐποίησεν is specially stated as being an aggravation of the 
 offence of healing on the Sabbath: see on v. 9. There were seven 
 miracles of mercy wrought on the Sabbath: 1. Withered hand (Matt. 
 xii. 9); 2. Demoniac at Capernaum (Mark i. 21); 3. Simon’s wife’s 
 mother (Mark 1. 29); 4. Woman bowed down 18 years (Luke xiii. 14); 
 5. Dropsical man (Luke xiv. 1); 6. Paralytic at Bethesda (John v. 10) ; 
 7. Man born blind. In all cases, excepting 2 and 3, the Jews charged 
 the Lord with breaking the Sabbath by healing on it. 
 
 15. πηλὸν ἐπ. The man is becoming impatient of this cross-ques- 
 tioning and answers more briefly than at first. He omits the aggra- 
 vating circumstance of making the clay as well as the sending to 
 Siloam. 
 
 16. οὗτος. Contemptuous: comp. 111. 26, vi. 42, 52, vii. 15, 35, 49, 
 xii. 84, The fact of the miracle is as yet not denied; but it cannot 
 have been done with God’s help. Comp. ‘He casteth out devils 
 through the prince of the devils’ (Matt. ix. 34); like this, an argument 
 of the Pharisees, 
 
 πῶς δύναται. The less bigoted, men like Nicodemus (iii. 2) and 
 Joseph of Arimathea, shew that the argument cuts both ways. They 
 also start from the ‘sign,’ but arrive at an opposite conclusion. Their 
 timidity in contrast with the man’s positiveness is very characteristic. 
 
208 S. JOIN. (Ix. 16— 
 
 Comp. Nicodemus’ question, v.51. Perhaps Christ’s teaching about 
 the Sabbath (v. 17—23) has had some effect. 
 
 σχίσμα ἦν. See on vii. 43 and comp. x. 19. 
 
 17. There being a division among them they appeal to the man 
 himself, each side wishing to gain him. ‘They’ includes both sides, 
 the whole body of Pharisees present. Their question is not twofold, 
 but single; not ‘What sayest thou of Him? that He hath opened 
 thine eyes?’ but What sayest thou of Him, because He opened thine 
 eyes?, Comp. ii. 18. ‘Thou’ is emphatic: ‘thou shouldest know 
 something of Him.’ They do not raise the question of fact; the mira- 
 cle is still undisputed. His answer shews that only one question is 
 asked, and that it is not the question of fact. 
 
 προφήτης. i.e. one sent by God to declare His will; a man witha 
 special and Divine mission; not necessarily predicting the future. 
 Comp. iv. 19, iii. 2. His answer is short and decided. 
 
 18. οὐκ ἐπ. οὖν ot "I. The Jews therefore did not believe. The 
 man having pronounced for the moderates, the bigoted and hostile 
 party begin to question the fact of the miracle. Note that here and 
 in τ. 22 5. John no longer speaks of the Pharisees, some of whom 
 were not unfriendly to Christ, but ‘the Jews,’ His enemies, the official 
 representatives of the nation that rejected the Messiah (see on i. 19). 
 
 αὐτοῦ τ. dvaBA. Of the man himself that had received his sight. 
 
 19. Three questions in legal form. Is this your son? Was he 
 born blind? How does he now see? 
 
 ὃν ὑμεῖς A. Of whom ye say that he was born blind (see on vi. 71). 
 The emphatic ὑμεῖς implies ‘we do not betieve it.’ 
 
 20. In their timidity they keep close to the questions asked, 
 
 21. τὶς ἤνοιξεν. This is the dangerous point, and they become 
 more eager and passionate. Hitherto there has been nothing emphatic 
 in their reply; but now there is a marked stress on all the pronouns, 
 the parents contrasting their ignorance with their son’s responsibility. 
 ‘Who opened his eyes, we know not: ask himself; he [himself] is of 
 full age; he himself will speak concerning himself.’ See on v. 23. 
 
 22. συνετέθειντο. It does not appear when; but the tense and ἤδη 
 indicate some previous arrangement, and probably an informal 
 agreement among themselves. A formal decree of the Sanhedrin 
 would be easily obtained afterwards, Συντίθεσθαι occurs in Luke xxii. 
 5 of the compact with Judas, and in Acts xxiii. 20 of the Jews’ compact 
 to kill 5. Paul, and nowhere else. 
 
 ἀποσυνάγωγος. Put away from the synagogue, or excommunicated. 
 The wordis peculiar to 5. John, occurring here, xii. 42, and xvi. 2, only. 
 The Jews had three kinds of anathema, (1) Excommunication for 
 thirty days, during which the excommunicated might not come within 
 four cubits of any one. (2) Absolute exclusion from all intercourse 
 and worship for an indefinite period. (3) Absolute exclusion for ever: 
 an irrevocable sentence. This third form was very rarely if ever used. 
 It is doubtful whether the second was in use at this time for Jews; 
 
IX, 28.] NOTES. 209 
 
 but it would be the ban under which all Samaritans were placed. 
 This passage and ‘separate’ in Luke vi. 22 probably refer to the first 
 and mildest kind of anathema. The principle of all anathema was 
 found in the Divine sentence on Meroz (παρ. v. 23): comp. Ezra x. 8. 
 
 23. διὰ τοῦτο. For this cause: i. 31, v. 16, 18, vi. 65, viii. 47, &e. 
 
 mAuk. ἔχ. av. ἐς This is the right order here: in T.R. the clauses 
 have been transposed in v. 21 to match this verse. 
 
 24. ἐφών. οὖν. They called, therefore, a second time. Having 
 questioned the parents apart from the son, they now try to brow- 
 beat the son, before he learns that his parents have not discredited his 
 story. 
 
 δὸς ὃ. τ. 8. Give glory to God. ‘Glory,’ not ‘praise’ (xii. 43), 
 which would be aivos or ἔπαινος (Matt. xxi. 16; Luke xviii. 43; Rom. 
 ii. 29), nor ‘honour’ (vy. 41, 44, viil. 54), which would be τιμή (iv. 44; 
 Rev. iv. 9, 11, v. 12,13). Hven thus the meaning remains obscure: but 
 ‘Give God the praise’ is absolutely misleading. The meaning is not 
 ‘Give God the praise for the cure;’ they were trying to deny that there 
 had been any cure: but, ‘Give glory to God by speaking the truth.’ 
 The words are an adjuration to confess. Comp. Josh. vii. 19; 1 Sam. 
 vi. 5; Ezra x. 11; 1 Esdr. ix. 8; 2 Cor. xi. 31. Wiclif, with the Ge- 
 nevan and Rhemish Versions, is right here. Tyndale and Cranmer 
 have misled our translators, See on Jer. xiii. 16. 
 
 ἡμεῖς οἴδαμεν. Ἡμεῖς is emphatic. ‘We, the peoplein authority, who 
 have a right to decide, know that this person (contemptuous, as in v. 
 16) is a Sabbath-breaker. It is useless, therefore, for you to maintain 
 that He is a Prophet.’ 
 
 25. ἐκεῖνος. See onv. 11. He will not argue or commit himself, 
 but keeps to the incontrovertible facts of the case. 
 
 τυφλὸς ὦν. As in ili. 13 and xix. 38, we are in doubt whether the 
 participle is present or imperfect; either ‘being by nature a blind 
 man,’ or ‘ being formerly blind:’ so also in v. 8. Winer, p. 429. 
 
 ἄρτι. Now, in contrast to the past; see on ii. 10. 
 
 26. Being baffled, they return to the details, either to try once 
 more to shake the evidence, or for want of something better to say. 
 
 27. Kal οὐκ ἠκούσατε. Possibly interrogative, Did ye not hear? 
 This avoids taking ἀκούειν in two senses; (1) ‘hearken,’ (2) ‘hear.’ The 
 man loses all patience, and will not go through it again. 
 
 μὴ καὶ ὑμεῖς. Surely ye also do not wish to become: comp. iv. 29, 
 vi. 67, vii. 35, 52. For θέλειν comp. v. 40, vi. 67, vil. 17, viii. 44. For 
 γένεσθαι comp. 1. 6, viii. 58, x. 19. The meaning of ‘also’ has been 
 misunderstood. It can scarcely mean ‘as well as I:’ the man has 
 not advanced so far in faith as to count himself a disciple of Jesus ; 
 and if he had, he would not avow the fact to the Jews. ‘Also’ means 
 ‘as well as His well-known disciples.’ That Christ had a band of 
 followers was notorious, 
 
 28. ἐλοιδόρησαν. The word occurs here only in the Gospels: 
 comp. 1 Pet. ii. 23. Argument fails, so they resort to abuse. 
 
 ST JOHN O 
 
210 S. JOHN. [Χ. 28— 
 
 ἐκείνου. That man’s disciple: the pronoun expresses that they have 
 nothing to do with Him: comp. v. 12, vii. 12, xix. 21 
 
 The pronouns are emphatic in both v. 28 and v. 29: ‘ Thou art His 
 disciple ; but we are Moses’ disciples. We know that God hath spoken 
 to Moses; but as for this fellow, &c.’ See on v. 16 andi. 17. 
 
 29. λελάληκεν. Hath spoken, i.e. that Moses received a revelation 
 which still remains, This is a frequent meaning of the perfect tense— 
 to express the permanent result of a past action. Thus the frequent 
 formula γέγραπται 15 strictly ‘it has been written,’ or ‘it stands written:’ 
 i.e. it once was written, and the writing still remains. But as there are 
 cases where the Greek aorist is best represented by the English perfect 
 (viii. 10, 29), so there are cases where the Greek perfect is best repre- 
 sented by the English aorist; and this perhaps is one. The meaning . 
 is, Moses had a mission plainly declared by God. 
 
 οὐκ οἴδ. πόθεν. We know neither His mission, nor who sent Him. 
 In a different sense they declared the very opposite, vii. 27. Comp. 
 Pilate’s question (xix. 9), and Christ’s declaration (vill. 14). As at 
 Capernaum (vi. 31, 32), He is compared unfavourably with Moses. 
 
 30. τὸ θαυμαστόν. The marvellous thing, or the marvel, ‘You, 
 the very people who ought to know such things (iii. 10), know not 
 whether He is from God or not, and yet He opened my eyes.’ ‘You’ 
 is emphatic, and perhaps is a taunting rejoinder to their ‘we know 
 that this man is a sinner’ (v, 24) and ‘ we know that God hath spoken 
 to Moses’ (v. 29). The man gains courage at their evident discom- 
 fiture: moreover, his controversy with them developes and confirms 
 his own faith. For ydp see Winer, p. 559. 
 
 31. οὐκ ἀκούει. Heareth not wilful, impenitent sinners. Of course 
 it cannot mean ‘God heareth no one who hath sinned,’ which would 
 imply that God never answers the prayers of men. But the man’s 
 dictum, reasonably understood, is the plain teaching of the O.T., 
 whence he no doubt derived it. ‘The Lord is far from the wicked; 
 but He heareth the prayer of the righteous’ (Prov. xv. 29). Comp. 
 Ps, lxvi. 18, 19; Job xxvii. 8, 9; Isai. i, 11—15. Note οἴδαμεν, which 
 reproduces their own word (vv. 24, 29), but without the arrogant ἡμεῖς. 
 
 θεοσεβής. God-fearing, devout, religious: here only in N.T. The 
 man thinks that miracles are answers to prayer: only good men can 
 gain such answers: and only a very good man could gain such an 
 unprecedented answer as this. 
 
 32. ἐκ τ. αἰῶνος. Here only: Col. i. 26 we have ἀπὸ τῶν αἰώνων, 
 There is no healing of the blind in O.T. 
 
 33. οὗτος. He uses their pronoun without their οὐ 
 meaning (vv. 24, 29). On παρὰ Θεοῦ see on i. 6. 
 
 ovSév. Nothing like this, no miracle. For the construction see 
 Winer, p. 382. 
 
 34. ἐν ἅμαρτ. σύ. Emphatic: ‘In sins wast thou born altogether; 
 thou art a born reprobate; and thou, dost thou teach us?’ 
 
IX. 36.] NOTES, 21 
 
 ὅλος. ‘Every part of thy nature (comp. xiii. 10) has been steeped 
 in sins from thy birth.’ They hold the same belief as the disciples, that 
 sin before birth is possible, and maliciously exclude not only the alter- 
 native stated by Christ (v. 3) but even the one stated by the disciples 
 (v. 2), that his parents might have sinned. Their passion blinds them 
 to their inconsistency. They had contended that no miracle had been 
 wrought; now they throw his calamity in his face as proof of his sin. 
 
 Godet points out the analogy between these Jews and modern im- 
 pugners of miracles. The Jews argued: God cannot help a Sabbath- 
 breaker; therefore the miracle attributed to Jesus is a fiction. The 
 opponents of the miraculous argue: The supernatural cannot exist; 
 therefore the miracles attributed to Jesus and others are fictions, In 
 both cases the logic of reason has to yield to the logic of facts. 
 
 ἐξέβαλον. They put him forth: see on x. 4. This probably does 
 not mean excommunication. (1) The expression is too vague. (2) 
 There could not well have been time to get a sentence of excommuni- 
 cation passed. (3) The man had not incurred the threatened penalty; 
 he had not ‘confessed that He was Christ’ (v. 22). Provoked by his 
 sturdy adherence to his own view they ignominiously dismiss him— 
 turn him out of doors, if (as the ‘out’ seems to imply) they were 
 meeting within walls. What follows illustrates Luke vi. 22. 
 
 35. σὺ πιστ. Comp. xi. 26. ‘Dost thou, though others blaspheme 
 and deny, believe?’ See oni. 12, viii. 30, 31. Ἐὑρών, as in i. 44, v. 14, 
 xi. 17, xii. 14, probably implies previous seeking. 
 
 τ. υἱὸν τ. 8. Again there is much doubt about the reading. The 
 balance of MSS. authority (including both the Sinaitic and the Vatican 
 MSS.) is in favour of τ. vi. τ. ἀνθρώπου, which moreover is the expres- 
 sion that our Lord commonly uses respecting Himself in all four 
 Gospels (see on i. 52), But the reading τ. vi. τ. Θεοῦ is very strongly 
 supported, and is at least as old as the second century; for Tertullian, 
 who in his work Against Praxeas quotes largely from this Gospel, in 
 chap. xxii. quotes this question thus, Tu credis in Filiwm Dei? In x. 
 36 and xi. 4 there is no doubt about the reading, and there Christ calls 
 himself ‘the Son of God.’ Moreover, this appellation seems to suit 
 the context better, for the man had been contending that Jesus came 
 ‘from God’ (υ. 33), and the term ‘Son of man’ would scarcely have 
 been intelligible to him. Lastly, a copyist, knowing that the ‘Son of 
 man’ was Christ’s usual mode of designating Himself, would be very 
 likely to alter ‘the Son of God’ into ‘the Son of man.’ Neither title, 
 however, is very frequent in St John’s Gospel. For all these reasons, 
 therefore, it is allowable to retain the common reading. But in any 
 case we once more have evidence of the antiquity of this Gospel. If 
 both these readings were established by the end of the second century, 
 the original text must have been in existence long before, Corruptions 
 take time to spring up and spread. See oni. 13, 18, iii, 6, 13. 
 
 36. ἐκεῖνος. See onv. 11, 
 καὶ τίς ἐστιν. And who is he? or, Whois he then? The καὶ inten- 
 sifies the question. Winer, p. 545. Comp. καὶ ris ἐστί μου πλησίον ; 
 
 O02 
 
212 S. JOHN. ΠΧ. 36— 
 
 (Luke x. 29); καὶ ris δύναται σωθήναι ; (xviii. 26); καὶ τὶς ὁ εὐφραίνων με; 
 (2 Cor. ii. 2). Κύριε should perhaps be rendered ‘ Sir,’ as in iv. 11, 15, 
 19, 49, v. 7: see on iy. 11 and vi. 84, But the man’s reverence in- 
 creases, like that of the woman at the well. 
 
 ἵνα mor. He asks, not from curiosity, but in order to find the 
 object of faith mentioned. He has faith, and more is given to him; 
 he seeks and finds. Winer, p. 774. 
 
 37. Kal ἑώρακας. Winer, p. 342. We are uncertain whether the 
 first καὶ anticipates the second, ‘ Thou hast both seen Him,’ or empha- 
 sizes the verb, ‘Thou hast even seen Him:’ the latter seems better, 
 
 ἐκεῖνος. S. John’s characteristic use of ἐκεῖνος to reproduce a pre- 
 vious subject with emphasis (see on i. 18): He that speaketh with thee 
 is He. Comp. iv. 26. ‘‘This spontaneous revelation to the outcast 
 from the synagogue finds its only parallel in the similar revelation to 
 the outcast from the nation” (Westcott), Not even Apostles are told 
 so speedily. 
 
 38. πιστ. κύριε. I believe, Lord: the order is worth keeping. Comp. 
 the centurion’s confession (Matt. xxvii. 54). There is no need to sup- 
 pose that in either case the man making the confession knew any- 
 thing like the full meaning of belief in the Son of God: even Apostles 
 were slow at learning that. The blind man had had his own unin- 
 formed idea of the Messiah, and he believed that the realisation of 
 that idea stood before him. His faith was necessarily imperfect, a 
 poor ‘two mites ;’ but it was ‘all that he had,’ and he gave it readily, 
 while the learned Rabbis of their abundance gave nothing. It is quite 
 gratuitous to suppose that a special revelation was granted to him. 
 There is no hint of this, nor can one see why so great an exception to 
 God’s usual dealings with man should have been made. 
 
 προσεκύνησεν. This shews that his idea of the Son of God 
 includes attributes of Divinity. ἹΠροσκυνεῖν occurs elsewhere in this 
 Gospel only in iv. 20—24 and xii. 20, always of the worship of God. 
 
 e 
 
 39. καὶ εἶπ. ὁ Ὶ. There is no need to make a break in the narra- 
 tive and refer these words to a subsequent occasion. This is not 
 natural. Rather it is the sight of the man prostrate at His feet, 
 endowed now with sight both in body and soul, that moves Christ to 
 say what follows. His words conyey His own authority for finding a 
 symbolical meaning in His miracles. They are addressed to the 
 bystanders generally, among whom are some of the Pharisees. 
 
 els κρίμα. Κρίμα occurs nowhere else in this Gospel. As distinct 
 from κρίσις, the act of judging (v. 22, 24, 27, 30), it signifies the result, 
 a sentence or decision (Matt. vii. 2; Mark xii. 40; Kom. ii. 2, 3, &.). 
 Christ came not to judge, but to save (iii, 17, viii. 15); but judgment 
 was the inevitable result of His coming, for those who rejected Him 
 passed sentence on themselves (iii. 19). See on i. 9 and xviii. 37. 
 The ἐγώ is emphatic; I, the Light of the world (v. δ), I, the Son of 
 God (υ. 35). See on xi, 27. 
 
IX. 41.] NOTES. 213 
 
 ot μὴ βλέπ. They who are conscious of their own blindness, who 
 know their deficiencies; like ‘they that are sick’ and ‘sinners’ in 
 Matt. ix. 12, 13, and ‘babes’ in Matt. xi. 25. This man was aware 
 of his spiritual blindness when he asked, ‘Who is He then, that I 
 may believe on Him?’ Βλέπωσιν means may see, may pass from the 
 darkness of which they are conscious, to light and truth. 
 
 ot βλέπ. They who fancy they see, who pride themselves on their 
 superior insight and knowledge, and wish to dictate to others; like 
 ‘they that be whole,’ and ‘righteous’ in Matt. ix. 12, 13, and ‘the 
 wise and prudent’ in Matt. xi. 25. These Pharisees shewed this proud 
 self-confidence when they declared, ‘we know that this man is a 
 sinner,’ and asked ‘ Dost thou teach us ?’ 
 
 τυφλοὶ γένωνται. May become blind: much stronger than μὴ βλέ- 
 πωσιν. Οἱ μὴ Br. can see, but do not; of τυφλοί cannot see. These 
 self-satisfied Pharisees must pass from fancied light into real dark- 
 ness (Isa. vi. 10). 
 
 40. ἐκ τ. Φ... ὄντες. Those of the P. who were with Him, who 
 still considered themselves in some degree His disciples, 
 
 μὴ kal jp. Surely we also are not blind: comp. v. 27, vi. 67. Of 
 course they understand Him to be speaking figuratively. It is 
 strange that any should have understood their question as referring 
 to bodily sight. They mean that they, the most enlightened among 
 the most enlightened nation, must be among ‘those who see.’ ‘Have 
 we not recognised Thee as a teacher come from God (iii. 2) and 
 listened to Thee until now? Are we also blind?’ 
 
 41. εἰ τ. ἦτε. ‘If ye were blind, 1.6. if ye were conscious of 
 your spiritual darkness and yearned for the light, ye would not have 
 sin (xv. 22); for either ye would find the light, or, if ye failed, the 
 failure would not lie at your door.’ Others interpret, ‘If ye were 
 really blind, and had never known the light, ye would not be respon- 
 sible for rejecting it. But by your own confession ye see, and the 
 sin of rejection abideth.’? For the construction comp, v. 46, viii. 19, 
 42, xv. 19, xviii. 36; for ἔχειν ἁμαρτίαν see on xv. 22, Perhaps there 
 is a pause after βλέπομεν. 
 
 ἡ ἁμαρτία tp. p. Your sin abideth (see oni. 33). ‘Ye profess to 
 see: your sin in this false profession and in your consequent rejection 
 of Me abideth.’ It was a hopeless case. They rejected Him because 
 they did not know the truth about Him; and they would never learn 
 the truth because they were fully persuaded that they were in pos- 
 session of it. Those who confess their ignorance and contend against 
 it (1) cease to be responsible for it, (2) have a good prospect of being 
 freed from it. Those who deny their ignorance and contend against 
 instruction, (1) remain responsible for their ignorance, (2) have no 
 prospect of ever being freed from it. Comp. ili, 36. 
 
214 S. JOHN. [xX.— 
 
 CHAPTER X. , 
 
 3. φωνεῖ (all the best MSS.) for καλεῖ. 
 4. πάντα (BDLX) for πρόβατα (A). 
 
 δ. ἀκολουθήσουσιν for -cwow (correction to more usual construc- 
 tion, comp. iv. 14; Luke x. 19). 
 
 12. ἔστιν for εἰσί (comp. ἤκουσαν, v. 8). Omit τὰ πρόβατα ὁ δὲ 
 μισθωτὸς φεύγει after σκορπίζει with NBDL against A. 
 
 14. γινώσκουσίν pe τὰ ἐμά for γινώσκομαι ὑπὸ τῶν ἐμῶν. 
 26. Omit καθὼς εἶπον ὑμῖν with NBKLM}. 
 
 27. ἀκούουσιν for ἀκούει (grammatical correction) with NBLX 
 against AD. 
 
 29. ὅ (NB!L) for és (AB), and πάντων μεῖζον for μείξων πάντων. 
 
 38. πιστεύετε (NBDKLU) for πιστεύσατε, and γινώσκητε for πισ- 
 τεύσητε (to avoid apparent repetition) with BLX against A; δὲ has 
 πιστεύητε. 
 
 Curist 1s Love. 
 
 In chapters v. and vi. two miracles, the healing of the paralytic 
 and the feeding of the 5000, formed the introduction to two dis- 
 courses in which Christ is set forth as the Source and the Support of 
 Life. In chapters vii. and viii. we have a discourse in which He is 
 set forth as the Source of Truth and Light, and this is illustrated (ix.) 
 by His giving physical and spiritual sight to the man born blind. In 
 chap. x. we again have a discourse in which Christ is set forth as 
 Love, under the figure of the Good Shepherd giving His life for the 
 sheep, and this is illustrated (xi.) by the raising of Lazarus, a work 
 of Love which costs Him His life, As already stated, the prevailing 
 idea throughout this section (v.—xi.) is truth and love provoking 
 contradiction and enmity. The more clearly the Messiah manifests 
 Himself, and the more often He convinces some of His hearers of His 
 Messiahship (vii. 40, 41, 46, 50, viii. 30, ix. 30—38, x. 21, 42, xi. 45), 
 the more intense becomes the hostility of ‘the Jews’ and the more 
 determined their intention to kill Him. 
 
 1—18. ‘‘The form of the discourse in the first half of chap. x. is 
 remarkable. It resembles the Synoptic parables, but not exactly. 
 The parable is a short narrative, which is kept wholly separate from 
 the ideal facts which it signifies. But this discourse is not a narra- 
 tive; and the figure and its application run side by side, and are 
 interwoven with one another all through. It is an extended meta- 
 
ei NOTES. 215 
 
 phor rather than a parable. If we are to give it an accurate name we 
 should be obliged to fall back upon the wider term ‘ allegory,’ 
 
 This, and the parallel passage in chap. xv., are the only instances 
 of allegory in the Gospels. They take in the Fourth Gospel the place 
 which parables hold with the Synoptists. The Synoptists have no 
 allegories distinct from parables, The fourth Evangelist has no para- 
 bles as a special form of allegory. What are we to infer from this? 
 The parables certainly are original and genuine. Does it follow that 
 the allegories are not? 
 
 (1) We notice, first, that along with the change of form there is a 
 certain change of subject. The parables generally turn round the 
 ground conception of the kingdom of heaven. They...... do not enlarge 
 on the relation which its King bears to the separate members...... 
 Though the royal dignity of the Son is incidentally put forward, there 
 is nothing which expresses so closely and directly the personal relation 
 of the Messiah to the community of believers, collectively and indivi- 
 dually, as these two ‘allegories’ from 5. John. Their form seems in an 
 especial manner suited to their subject-matter, which is a fixed, per- 
 manent and simple relation, not a history of successive states. The 
 form of the allegories is at least appropriate. 
 
 (2) We notice next that even with the Synoptists the use of the 
 parable is not rigid. All do not conform precisely to the same type. 
 There are some, like the Pharisee and Publican, the Good Samaritan, 
 &c., which give direct patterns for action, and are not therefore 
 parables in the same sense in which the Barren Fig-tree, the Prodigal 
 Son, ὅθ. are parables..... If, then, the parable admits so much devia- 
 tion on the one side, may it not also on the other? 
 
 (3) Lastly, we have to notice the parallels to this particular figure 
 of the Good Shepherd that are found in the Synoptists. These are 
 indeed abundant. The parable of the Lost Sheep (Luke xv. 4—7; 
 Matt. xvii. 12, 13)...... ‘IT am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the 
 house of Israel’ (Matt. xv. 24)...... ‘But when He saw the multitudes, 
 He was moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and 
 were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd’ (Matt. ix. 36), 
 which when taken with Matt. xi. 28, 29 (‘Come unto Me all ye that 
 labour,’ &c.), gives almost an exact parallel to the Johannean alle- 
 gory.” Sanday. 
 
 1—9. Tue ALLEGORY oF THE Door oF THE FoLpD. 
 
 1. ἀμὴν ἀμήν. This double affirmation, peculiar to this Gospel 
 (see on 1. 52), never occurs at the beginning of a discourse, but either 
 in continuation, to introduce some deep truth, or in reply. This 
 verse is no exception. There is no break between the chapters, 
 which should perhaps have been divided at ix. 34 or 38 rather than 
 here. The scene continues uninterrupted from ix. 35 to x. 21, where 
 we have a reference to the healing of the blind man. Moreover x. 6 
 seems to point back to ix. 41; their not understanding the allegory 
 was evidence of seli-complacent blindness. This chapter, therefore, 
 although it contains a fresh subject, is connected with the incidents 
 in chap. ix. and grows out of them. The connexion seems to be that 
 
216 S. JOHN. (xe 
 
 the Pharisees by their conduct to the man had proved themselves bad 
 shepherds; but he has found the Good Shepherd: they had cast him 
 out of doors; but he has found the Door: they had put him forth to 
 drive him away; the Good Shepherd puts His sheep forth to lead 
 them. We are not told where these words are spoken; so that it is 
 impossible to say whether it is probable that a sheepfold with the 
 shepherds and their flocks was in sight. There is nothing against 
 the supposition. Be this as it may, Jesus, who has already appro- 
 priated the types of the Brazen Serpent, the Manna, the Rock, and 
 the Pillar of Fire (iii. 14, vi. 50, vii. 37, viii. 12) here appropriates the 
 type of the Shepherd (Ps. xxiii.; Ezek. xxxiv.; Zech. xi.). 
 
 διὰ τῆς θύρας. Oriental sheepfolds are commonly walled or pali- 
 saded, with one door or gate. Into one of these enclosures several 
 shepherds drive their flocks, leaving them in charge of an under- 
 shepherd or porter, who fastens the door securely inside, and remains 
 with the sheep all night. In the morning the shepherds come to the 
 door, the porter opens to them, and each calls away his own sheep. 
 
 τ. αὐλὴν τ. wp. The fold of the sheep. Comp. ἡ θύρα τ. mp. (v. 7). 
 ἀλλαχόθεν. Literally, from another quarter; here only in N.T. 
 
 ἐκεῖνος. 5. John’s characteristic use: comp. i. 18, 33, v.11, 39, 
 vi. 57, ix. 37, xii, 48, xiv. 12, 21, 26, xv. 26. 
 
 κλέπτης... λῃστής. Everywhere in this Gospel (vv. 8, 10, xii. 6, 
 xviii. 40) and in 2 Cor. xi. 26 κλέπτης is rightly rendered ‘thief’ and 
 λῃστής ‘robber’ in A.V. But elsewhere (Matt. xxi. 13, xxvi. 55, xxvii. 
 38, &c. ἄς.) λῃστής is translated ‘thief.’ The λῃστής is a brigand, 
 more formidable than the κλέπτης : the one uses violence and is some- 
 times chivalrous, the other employs cunning, and is always mean. 
 
 2. ποιμήν ἐστιν τ. wp. Is a shepherd of the sheep. There is more 
 than one flock in the fold, and therefore more than one shepherd to 
 visit the fold. The Good Shepherd has not yet appeared in the alle- 
 gory. The allegory indeed is twofold, or even threefold; in the first 
 part (I—5), which is repeated (7—9), Christ is the Door of the fold; 
 in the second part (11—18) He is the Shepherd; v. 10 forming a link 
 between the two main parts, 
 
 3. 6 θυρωρός. Ostiarius. The ‘porter’ is the door-keeper or 
 gate-keeper, who fastens and opens the one door into the fold. In 
 the allegory the fold is the Church, the Door is Christ, the sheep are 
 the elect, the shepherds are God’s ministers. What does the porter 
 represent? Possibly nothing definite. Much harm is sometimes 
 done by trying to make every detail of an allegory or parable signifi- 
 cant. There must be background in every picture. But if it be 
 insisted that the porter here is too prominent to be meaningless, it is 
 perhaps best to understand the Holy Spirit as signified under this 
 figure; He who grants opportunities of coming, or of bringing others, 
 through Christ into the Kingdom of God. Comp. 1 Cor. xvi. 9; 
 2 Cor. ii, 12; Col. iv. 3; Acts xiv. 27; Rev. iii. 8: but in all these 
 passages ‘door’ does not mean Christ, but opportunity. 
 
X. 6] | NOTES. 217 
 
 τ. wp....aKovel, All the sheep, whether belonging to his flock or 
 not, know from his coming that they are about to be led out. His 
 own sheep (first for emphasis) he calleth by name (Exod. xxxiii. 12, 
 17; Isai, xiii. 1, xlv. 8, xlix. 1; Rev. iii. 5), and leadeth them out to 
 pasture. Even in this country shepherds and shepherds’ dogs know 
 each individual sheep; in the East the intimacy between shepherd 
 and sheep is still closer. The naming of sheep is a very ancient 
 practice: see Theocritus v. 102. Φωνεῖ implies more directly personal 
 invitation (i. 49, ii. 9, iv. 16, ix. 19, 24, xi. 28, xiii. 13, xviii. 33) than 
 καλεῖ (T. B.), which would express a general summons (Matt. iv. 21, 
 xx, 8, xxii. 9, xxv. 14). The blind man had been called out from the 
 rest, and had heard His voice. 
 
 4. ὅταν τὰ ἴδια πάντα ἐκβ. When he hath put forth all his own. 
 ‘There shall not an hoof be left behind’ (Exod. x. 26). ᾿Εκβάλῃ is 
 remarkable, as being the very word used in ix. 34, 35 of the Pharisees 
 putting forth the man born blind: here we might have expected ἐξά- 
 yew rather than ἐκβάλλειν. The false shepherds put forth sheep to 
 rid themselves of trouble; the true shepherds put forth sheep to feed 
 them. But even the true shepherds must use some violence to their 
 sheep to ‘compel them to come’ (Luke xiv. 23) to the pastures. This 
 was true at this very moment of the Messiah, who was endeavouring 
 to bring His people out of the rigid enclosure of the Law into the 
 free pastures of the Gospel. But there are no ‘goats’ in the alle- 
 gory; all the flock are faithful. It is the ideal Church composed 
 entirely of the elect. The object of the allegory being to set forth 
 the relations of Christ to His sheep, the possibility of bad sheep is not 
 taken into account. That side of the picture is treated in the 
 parables of the Lost Sheep, and of the Sheep and the Goats. 
 
 ἔμπροσθεν. As soon as they are out he does not drive but leads 
 them, as Oriental shepherds do still: and they follow, because they 
 not only hear (v. 3) but know his voice. Note the change from sing. 
 ἀκολουθεῖ to plur. οἴδασιν; Winer, p. 646. 
 
 5. ἀλλοτρίῳ δὲ od μή. But a stranger they will in no wise follow: 
 strong negative, as in iv. 14, 48, vi. 35, 37, viii. 12, 51, δῶ. The ἀλλό- 
 Tpwos is anyone whom they do not know, not necessarily a thief or 
 robber: they meet him outside the fold. There is a story of a Scotch 
 traveller who changed clothes with a Jerusalem shepherd and tried to 
 lead the sheep; but the sheep followed the shepherd’s voice and not 
 his clothes. 
 
 6. παροιμίαν. Allegory or similitude. The Synoptists never use 
 παροιμία; ὃ. John never uses παραβολή; and this should be preserved 
 in translation. A.V. renders both words sometimes ‘parable’ and 
 sometimes ‘proverb.’ In LXX. both are used to represent the He- 
 brew mashal; in the title to the Book of Proverbs, Prov. i. 1 and xxv. 
 1, παροιμίαι; elsewhere almost always παραβολή. The two words 
 appear together in Keclus. xxxix. 3; xlvii. 17. In A.V. we have 
 
 ‘parable’ and ‘proverb’ indifferently for mashal. In N.T. παροιμία 
 occurs only here, xvi. 25, 29, and 2 Pet. ii. 22. It means something 
 beside the way (oluwos); hence, according to some, a trite ‘ way-side 
 
218 S. JOHN. [X. 6— 
 
 saying;’ according to others, a figurative ‘out-of-the-way saying.’ 
 For παραβολή see on Mark iv. 2. 
 
 ἐκεῖνοι. The pronoun (vii. 45) separates them from the Teacher. 
 
 οὐκ ἔγνωσαν. Did not recognise the meaning. The idea that they 
 were strangers, or even robbers, instead of shepherds to the sheep did 
 not come home to them at all, 
 
 7. εἶπεν οὖν. Jesus therefore said again. Because they did not 
 understand He went through it again, explaining the main features. 
 
 ἀμὴν dp. This is the important point: the one Door, through 
 which both sheep and shepherds enter, is Christ. ᾿Εγώ is very em- 
 phatic; I (and no other) am the Door: comp. ‘I am the Way’ (xiv. 6). 
 For ἐγώ εἰμι see on vi, 8, 
 
 ἡ 0. τ. προβάτων. The Door for the sheep (v. 9) and also the Door 
 to the sheep (vv. 1, 2). Sheep and shepherds have one and the same 
 Door. The elect enter the Church through Christ; the ministers 
 who would visit them must receive their commission from Christ. 
 Jesus does not say ἡ θ. τ. αὐλῆς, but ἡ 0.7. προβάτων. The fold has 
 no meaning apart from the sheep. 
 
 8. πάντες ὅσοι ἦλθον mpd ἐμοῦ. These words are difficult, and 
 some copyists seem to have tried to avoid the difficulty by omitting 
 either πάντες or mpd ἐμοῦ. But the balance of authority leaves no 
 doubt that both are genuine. Some commentators would translate 
 πρὸ ἐμοῦ ‘instead of Me.’ But this meaning of πρό is not common, 
 and perhaps occurs nowhere in N.T. Moreover ‘instead of Me’ 
 ought to include the idea of ‘for My advantage;’ and that is impos- 
 sible here. We must retain the natural and ordinary meaning of 
 ‘before Me:’ and as ‘ before Me in dignity’ would be obviously inap- 
 propriate, ‘before Me in time’ must be the meaning. But who are 
 ‘all that came before Me’? ‘The patriarchs, prophets, Moses, the 
 Baptist cannot be meant, either collectively or singly. ‘Salvation is 
 of the Jews’ (iv. 22); ‘they are they which testify of Me’ (v. 39); ‘if 
 ye believed Moses, ye would believe Me’ (v. 46); ‘John bare witness 
 unto the truth’ (v. 33): texts like this are quite conclusive against 
 any such Gnostic interpretation. Nor can false Messiahs be meant: 
 it is doubtful whether any had arisen at this time. Rather it refers 
 to the ‘ravening wolves in sheep’s clothing’ who had been, and still 
 were, the ruin of the nation, ‘who devoured widows’ houses,’ who 
 were ‘full of ravening and wickedness,’ who had ‘taken away the key 
 of knowledge,’ and were in very truth ‘thieves and robbers’ (Matt. vii. 
 15, xxiii. 14; Luke xi. 39, 52). These ‘came,’ but they were not 
 sent. Some of them were now present, thirsting to add bloodshed to 
 robbery, and this denunciation of them is no stronger than several 
 passages in the Synoptists: e.g. Matt. xxiii. 33; Luke xi. 50, 51. The 
 tense also is in favour of this interpretation; not were, but ‘are thieves, 
 and robbers.’ 
 
 οὐκ ἤκουσαν. For they found no authority, no living voice in 
 their teaching (Matt. vii. 29). Comp. ‘To whom shall we go?’ (vi. 68). 
 
X. 10.] NOTES. 219 
 
 Hearers there were, but these were not the sheep, but blind followers, 
 led by the blind. For the plural verb see Winer, p. 646. 
 
 9. There is a very clear reference to this verse in the Ignatian 
 Epistles, Philad. ix.: αὐτὸς ὧν θύρα τοῦ πατρός, δι’ ἧς εἰσέρχονται 
 ᾿Αβραὰμ κ. Ἰσαὰκ x. ᾿Ιακὼβ x. οἱ προφῆται x. οἱ ἀπόστολοι κ. ἡ ἐκκλησία. 
 In the message to the Philadelphian Church (Rey. iii. 8) we find ἰδοὺ 
 δέδωκα ἐνώπιόν σου θύραν ἀνεῳγμένην. For other early adaptations of 
 this image comp. Hegesippus (Kus. H. ΕἸ. τι. xxiii. 8), τίς ἡ θύρα τοῦ 
 Ἰησοῦ, Hermas 111. Sim. ix. 12, ἡ πύλη ὁ vids τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐστί, and Clem. 
 Rom. 1. xlviii. See on iii. 8, iv. 10, vi. 33, viii. 28, 29. 
 
 Sv ἐμοῦ. Placed first for emphasis; ‘through Me and in no other 
 way.’ The main point is iterated again and again, each time with 
 great simplicity and yet most emphatically. ‘‘The simplicity, the di- 
 rectness, the particularity, the emphasis of 5. John’s style give his 
 writings a marvellous power, which is not perhaps felt at first. Yet 
 his words seem to hang about the reader till he is forced to remember 
 them. Each great truth sounds like the burden of a strain, ever 
 falling upon the ear with a calm persisteney which secures attention.” 
 Westcott, Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, p. 250. 
 
 ἐάν tis. Jf anyone: there is no limit of sex or nationality. Comp. 
 vi. 51, viii. 51, iii. 15, xi. 25, xii. 46. ‘ 
 
 σωθήσεται. It is interesting to see how this has been expanded in 
 the Clementine Homilies (111. lii.); ᾿Εγώ εἰμι ἡ πύλη τῆς ζωῆς ὁ Ov ἐμοῦ 
 εἰσερχόμενος εἰσέρχεται εἰς τὴν ζωήν. ὡς οὐκ οὔσης ἑτέρας τῆς σώζειν δυνα- 
 μένης διδασκαλίας. See on v. 27 andix.1. These passages place the 
 reference to the Fourth Gospel beyond a doubt. Σωθήσεται and νομὴν 
 εὑρήσει seem to shew that this verse does not refer to the shepherds 
 only, but to the sheep also. Although ‘find pasture’ may refer to the 
 shepherd’s work for the flock, yet one is inclined to think that if the 
 words do not refer to both, they refer to the sheep only. 
 
 εἰσελεύσεται κ. ἐξ. These words also are more appropriate to the sheep 
 than to the shepherds; but comp. Num. xxvii. 17; 1 Sam. xviii. 13; 
 2 Chron.i.10. ‘To go in and out’ includes the ideas of security and 
 liberty (Jer. xxxvii. 4). The phrase is a Hebraism, expressing the free 
 activity of life, like versari (Deut, xxvili. 6, 19; xxxi. 2; Ps. cxxi. 8; 
 Acts i. 21, ix. 28). 
 
 10. Just as v. 9 refers back to v. 2, so this refers back tov. 1. It 
 is the same allegory more fully expounded. Note the climax; κλέψῃ, 
 steal and carry off; θύσῃ, slaughter as if for sacrifice (LXX. in Is, xxii. 
 13; 1 Mace. vii. 19); ἀπολέσῃ utterly consume and destroy. In what 
 follows (wiv ἔχ. is opposed to θύσῃ x. ἀπολέσῃ, περισσὸν éx. to κλέψῃ: 
 instead of taking life, He gives it; instead of stealing, He gives abun- 
 dance. 
 
 ἐγὼ ἦλθον. I came that they may have life, and that they may have 
 abundance. “Eyw is in emphatic contrast to ὁ κλέπτης. This is the 
 point of transition from the first part of the allegory to the second. 
 The figure of the Door, as the one entrance to salvation, is dropped; 
 and that of the Good Shepherd, as opposed to the thief, is taken up; 
 
220 S. JOHN. [x. 10— 
 
 but this intermediate clause will apply to either figure, inclining 
 towards the second one. In order to make the strongest possible 
 antithesis to the thief, Christ introduces, not a shepherd, but Himself, 
 the Chief Shepherd. The thief takes life; the shepherds protect life; 
 the Good Shepherd gives it. 
 
 11—18. Tue ALLEGORY OF THE GoopD SHEPHERD. 
 
 11. ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ π. ὁ κ. See on vi. 35: καλός cannot be adequately trans- 
 lated: it means ‘beautiful, noble, good,’ as opposed to ‘foul, mean, 
 wicked.’ It sums up the chief attributes of ideal perfection ; comp. x. 
 82, ii. 10. Christ is the Perfect Shepherd, as opposed to His own im- 
 perfect ministers; He is the true Shepherd, as opposed to the false 
 shepherds, who are hirelings or hypocrites; He is the Good Shepherd, 
 who gives His life for the sheep, as opposed to the wicked thief who 
 takes their lives to preserve his own. Thus in Christ is realised the 
 ideal Shepherd of O.T. Ps. xxiii.; Isa. xl. 11; Jer. xxili.; Ezek. 
 xxxiv., xxxvii. 24; Zech. xi. 7. The figure sums up the relation of 
 Jehovah to His people (Ps. lxxx. 1); and in appropriating it Jesus 
 proclaims Himself as the representative of Jehovah. Perhaps no 
 image has penetrated more deeply into the mind of Christendom: 
 Christian prayers and hymns, Christian painting and statuary, and 
 Christian literature are full of it, and have been from the earliest ages. 
 And side by side with it is commonly found the other beautiful image 
 of this Gospel, the Vine: the Good Shepherd and the True Vine are 
 figures of which Christians have never wearied. 
 
 τ. Ψ. av. τίθησιν. Layeth down His life. A remarkable phrase 
 and peculiar to 8. John (vv. 15, 17, xiii. 37, 38, xv. 13; 1 John iii. 16), 
 whereas δοῦναι τ. Ψ. αὐτοῦ occurs Matt. xx. 28; Mark x. 45. ‘To lay 
 down’ perhaps includes the notion of ‘to pay down,’ a common mean- 
 ing of the word in classical Greek; if so it is exactly equivalent to the 
 Synoptic ‘to give as a ransom’ (λύτρον). Others interpret, ‘to lay aside’ 
 (xiii. 4), i.e. to give up voluntarily. In this country the statement 
 ‘the good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep’ seems extravagant 
 when taken apart from the application to Christ. Not so in the 
 East, where dangers from wild beasts and armed bands of robbers are 
 serious and constant. Gen. xiii. 5, xiv. 12, xxxi. 39, 40, xxxii. 7, 8, 
 xxxvii. 33; Job i. 17; 1 Sam. xvii. 34, 35. “Ὑπέρ, ‘on behalf of.’ 
 
 12. ὁ μισθωτός. The word occurs nowhere else in N.T. excepting of 
 the ‘hired servants’ of Zebedee (Mark i. 20). The Good Shepherd was 
 introduced in contrast to the thief. Now we have another contrast to 
 the Good Shepherd given, the hired shepherd, a mercenary, who tends 
 a flock not his own for his own interests. The application is obvious; 
 viz., to those ministers who care chiefly for the emoluments and ad- 
 vantages of their position, and retire when the position becomes 
 irksome and dangerous. In one respect the hireling is worse than the 
 thief, for he is false to his pledge and betrays a trust. He sacrifices 
 his charge to save himself, whereas a true shepherd sacrifices himself 
 to save his charge. 
 
 Kal οὐκ ὧν π. And not a shepherd, as in v. 2. 
 
ΣΧ 6] NOTES. 221 
 
 τὸν λύκον. Any power opposed to Christ (v. 28). 
 
 ἀφίησιν k.t.r. Leaveth the sheep and fleeth; and the wolf snatcheth 
 them and scattereth (them); because he is an hireling, ὥς. The wolf 
 seizes some and scatters the rest. 
 
 14—18. Further description of the True Shepherd. (1) His intimate 
 knowledge of His sheep; (2) His readiness to die for them. This latter 
 point recurs repeatedly as a sort of refrain, like ‘I will raise him up at 
 the last day,’ in chap. vi. The passage, especially vv. 14, 15, is re- 
 markable for beautiful simplicity of structure: the parallelism of 
 Hebrew poetry is very marked. There should be no full stop at the 
 end of v, 14: I know Mine, and Mine know Me, even as the Father 
 knoweth Me and I know the Father. So intimate is the relation 
 between the Good Shepherd and His sheep that it may be compared 
 and likened (not merely ὥσπερ, but καθώς) to the relation between the 
 Father and the Son. The same thought runs through the discourses 
 in the latter half of the Gospel: xiv. 20, xv. 10, xvii. 8, 10, 18, 21. 
 Note that γίνωσκω, not ofda, is used: it is knowledge resulting from 
 experience and appreciation. Contrast Matt. vii. 23, ‘I never knew 
 you’ (ἔγνων) with Luke iv. 34, ‘I know Thee who Thou art’ (οἶδα). 
 
 16. ἄλλα πρόβατα. Not the Jews in heathen lands, but Gentiles, 
 for even among them He had sheep. The Jews had asked in derision, 
 ‘ Will He go and teach the Gentiles?’ (vii. 35). He declares here that 
 among the despised heathen He has sheep. He was going to lay down 
 His life, ‘not for that nation only’ (xi. 52), but that He might ‘draw 
 all men unto Him’ (xii. 82), Of that most heathen of heathen cities, 
 Corinth, He declared to S. Paul in a vision, ‘I have much people in 
 this city’ (Acts xviii. 10; comp. xxviii. 23). The Light ‘lightens every 
 man’ (i. 9), and not the Jews only. “Eyw, not ἕξω, like ἐστί μοι in Acts 
 xviii. 10: they are already His, given to Him (xvii. 7) by the Father. 
 He is their Owner, but not yet their Shepherd. 
 
 ἐκ τ. αὐλῆς τ Emphasis on αὐλῆς not on ταύτης; the Gentiles were 
 not in any fold at all, but ‘scattered abroad’ (xi. 52). 
 
 ἐκεῖνα. Not ταῦτα: they are still remote. 
 
 Set. Such is the Divine decree; see on iii. 14. It is the Father’s 
 will and the Messiah’s bounden duty. 
 
 dydyev. Lead, rather than ‘bring;’ comp. ἐξάγειν (v. 3). Christ 
 can lead them in their own lands. ‘Neither in this mountain, nor yet 
 at Jerusalem’ (iv. 21) is the appointed place. The spiritual gathering 
 into one (xi. 52) is not the idea conveyed here. 
 
 γενήσεται pia ποίμνη, εἷς ποιμήν. They shall become one flock, one 
 shepherd. The distinction between ‘be’ and ‘become’ is worth pre- 
 serving (see on ix. 27, 39), and that between ‘flock’ and ‘fold’ still 
 more so. ‘There shall hecome one fold’ would imply that at present 
 there are more than one: but nothing is said of any other fold. In 
 both these instances our translators have rejected their better pre- 
 decessors: Tyndale and Coverdale have ‘ flock,’ not ‘ fold;’ the Geneva 
 Version has ‘be made,’ not ‘be.’ The old Latin texts have ovile for 
 
222 S. JOHN. [X. 17— 
 
 αὐλή and grex for ποίμνη; so Cyprian and (sometimes) Augustine. 
 The Vulgate has ovile for both. Hence Wiclif has ‘fold’ for both; 
 and this error was admitted into the Great Bible of 1539 end A.V. of 
 1611. One point in the Greek cannot be preserved in English, the 
 cognate similarity between ποίμνη and ποιμήν. ‘One herd, one herds- 
 man’ would involve more loss than gain. ‘One flock, one flock- 
 master’ would do, if ‘flock-master’ were in common use. But the 
 rendering of ποίμνη by ovile and ‘fold’ is all loss, and has led to 
 calamitous misunderstanding by strengthening ‘the wall of partition’ 
 (Eph. ii. 14), which this passage declares shall be broken down. Even 
 0.T. Prophets seem to have had a presentiment that other nations 
 would share in the blessings of the Messiah: Mic. iv. 2; Isa, 111. 15. 
 The same thought appears frequently in the Synoptists; e.g. Matt. 
 viii. 11, xiii. 24—30, xxviii. 19; Luke xiii, 29. And if S. Matthew 
 could appreciate this side of his Master’s teaching, how much more 
 5. John, who had lived to see the success of missions to the heathen 
 and the results of the destruction of Jerusalem. It is therefore un- 
 reasonable to urge the universalism of the Fourth Gospel as an 
 argument against its authenticity. Here, as elsewhere in N.T., the 
 prior claim of the Jews is admitted, their exclusive claim is denied. 
 
 17. διὰ τοῦτο. For this cause: see on v. 16, vii.21. The Father’s 
 love for the incarnate Son is intensified by the self-sacrifice of the Son, 
 which was a προσφορὰ x. θυσία τῷ Θεῷ εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας (Eph. v. 2). 
 
 ἵνα π. λάβω avd. In order that I may take it again. This clause 
 is closely connected with the preceding one, ἵνα depending upon ὅτι 
 x.7.’. Christ died in order to rise again; and only because Christ was 
 to take His human life again was His death such as the Father could 
 have approved, Had the Son returned to heaven at the Crucifixion 
 leaving His humanity on the Cross, the salvation of mankind would 
 not have been won, the sentence of death would not have been reversed, 
 we should be ‘yet in our sins’ (1 Cor. xv. 17). Moreover, in that case 
 He would have ceased to be the Good Shepherd: He would have be- 
 come like the hireling, casting aside his duty before it was completed. 
 The office of the True Shepherd is not finished until all mankind be- 
 come His flock; and this work continues from the Resurrection to the 
 Day of Judgment. 
 
 18. οὐδεὶς αἴρει. No one taketh it from Me; not even God. See 
 on v, 28. Two points are insisted on; (1) that the Death is entirely 
 voluntary: this is stated both negatively and positively: see on i. 3; 
 (2) that both Death and Resurrection are in accordance with a com- 
 mission received from the Father. Comp. ‘Father, into Thy hands 
 I commend My spirit’ (Luke xxiii. 46). The precise words used by the 
 two Apostles of Christ’s death bring this out very clearly; παρέδωκεν τὸ 
 πνεῦμα (xix. 30); ἀφῆκεν τ. mv. (Matt. xxvii. 50). The ἐξέπνευσεν of 
 5. Mark and 8. Luke is less strong; but none use the simple ἀπέθανεν. 
 "Ey is emphatic; but I lay it down of Myself. 
 
 ἐξουσίαν ἔχω. 1 have right, authority, liberty: i. 12, v. 27, xvii. 2, 
 xix. 10. This authority is the commandment of the Father: and 
 
X. 22.] NOTES. 223 
 
 hence this passage in no way contradicts the usual N.T. doctrine that 
 Christ was raised to life again by the Father. Acts ii. 24. 
 
 τ. τ. ἐντολήν. The command to die and rise again, which He ‘re- 
 ceived’ at the Incarnation. Comp. iv. 34, v. 30, vi. 38. 
 
 19—21. Opposite RESULTS OF THE TEACHING. 
 
 19. σχίσμα πάλιν ἐγ. There arose (i. 6) a division (vii. 48) again 
 among the Jews, as among the Pharisees about the blind man (ix. 16), 
 and among the multitude at the Feast of Tabernacles (vii. 43). Here 
 we see that some even of the hostile party are impressed, and doubt the 
 correctness of their position: comp. xi. 45. 
 
 τ. λόγους τ. These words or discourses (sermones), whereas ῥήματα 
 (v. 21) are the separate sayings or utterances (verba): τ. λόγους is the 
 larger expression, 
 
 20. Sap. ἔχει. See last note on viii. 48 and comp. vii. 20. 
 
 τί av. dx. They are uneasy at the impression produced by these 
 discourses and seek to discredit their Author,—‘ poisoning the wells.’ 
 
 δαιμονιζ. Of one possessed with a demon. See on iii. 84, 
 
 μὴ ὃ. δ. Surely a demon cannot: comp. x. 40. A demon might 
 work a miracle, like the Egyptian magicians, but not so great and so 
 beneficent a miracle as this (comp. ix. 16). But here they stop: they 
 declare what He cannot be; they do not see, or will not admit, what 
 He must be. 
 
 22—38. Tue DiscouRSE AT THE FEAST OF THE DEDICATION. 
 
 Again we seem to have a gap in the narrative. Between vv. 21—22 
 (but see below) there is an interval of about two months; for the Feast 
 of Tabernacles would be about the middle of October, and that of the 
 Dedication towards the end of December. In this interval some would 
 place Luke x. 1—xiii. 21. If this be correct, we may connect the send- 
 ing out of the Seventy both with the Feast of Tabernacles and also with 
 John x. 16. Seventy was the traditional number of the nations of the 
 earth: and for the nations 70 bullocks were offered at the Feast of 
 Tabernacles—13 on the first day, 12 on the second, 11 on the third, and 
 soon. The Seventy were sent out to gather in the nations; for they 
 were not forbidden, as the Twelve were, to go into the way of the Gen- 
 tiles or to enter any city of the Samaritans (Matt. x. 5). The Twelve 
 were primarily for the twelve tribes; the Seventy for the Gentiles. The 
 words ‘other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must 
 lead,’ must have been spoken just before the mission of the Seventy. 
 
 Dr Westcott, on the strength of the strongly attested (B L 33 and the 
 Thebaic and Armenian Versions) ἐγένετο τότε τὰ éyx., At that time 
 there took place the F. of the Dedication, would connect chaps. ix. 
 and x. 1—21 with this later Feast rather than with Tabernacles, In 
 this case the interval of two months must be placed between chaps, 
 Vili. and ix. 
 
 Is it possible that τὰ ἐγκαίνια here means the Dedication of Solomon’s 
 Temple, which took place at the Feast of Tabernacles (1 Kings viii. 2; 
 
224 S. JOHN. [X. 22— 
 
 2 Chr. v. 3)? If so, there is no gap in the narrative. ᾿Εγκαίνια is used 
 in LXX. of the Dedication of the second Temple (Ezra vi. 16), and 
 ἐγκαινίζω is used of the first Temple (1 K. viii. 63; 2 Chr. vii. 5). At 
 the Feast of Tabernacles some commemoration of the establishment of 
 a permanent centre of national worship would be natural. 
 
 22. ἐγένετο δὲ τ. éyx. This is the reading of NAD X and the bulk 
 of MSS., with the Syriacand some old Latin texts: the best Latin texts 
 have neither τότε nor δέ: the Memphitic gives both τότε and δέ. It is 
 possible that -ro de produced tore. Now there took place at Jerusalem 
 the Feast of the Dedication; see on ii. 13. The mention of a feast of so 
 modern and local an origin and of ‘Solomon’s Porch’ indicate a Jewish 
 writer familiar with Jerusalem, The vivid description (χειμών, περε- 
 mare, ἐκύκλωσαν, &c) and the firm grasp of the strained situation indicate 
 an eyewitness. The Feast of Dedication might be celebrated anywhere, 
 and the pointed insertion of ‘at Jerusalem’ seems to suggest that in the 
 interval between v. 21 and v. 22 Christ had been away from the city. 
 It was kept in honour of the purification and restoration of the 
 Temple (Β.σ. 164) after its desecration by Antiochus Epiphanes ; 
 1 Mace. i. 20—60, iv. 36—59 (note esp. vv. 36 and 59); 2 Mace, x. 
 1—8. Another name for it was ‘the Lights,’ or ‘Feast of Lights,’ from 
 the illuminations with which it was celebrated. Christian dedication 
 festivals are its lineal descendants, 
 
 χειμὼν ἦν. For the asyndeton (the καί of T. R. is not genuine) 
 comp. wpa ἦν ws ἕκτη (iv. 6, xix. 14). Perhaps χειμὼν ἣν is to be con- 
 nected with what follows rather than with what precedes: It was 
 winter, and Jesus was walking, dc. Certainly the words explain why 
 He was teaching under cover, and are not a mere note of time. We 
 are in doubt whether they refer to the winter season (2 Tim. iv. 21), 
 or to the stormy weather (Matt. xvi. 3; Acts xxvii. 20). The latter 
 seems preferable. (1) The Feast of Dedication always began Kisleu 
 25th, i.e. late in December, so that there was no need to add ‘it was 
 winter,’ although 5. John might naturally state the fact for Gentile 
 readers, (2) ἦν δὲ νύξ (xiii. 30) is almost certainly added to symbolize 
 the moral darkness into which the traitor went out. Perhaps here 
 also χειμὼν ἦν is added as symbolical of the storm of doubt, passion 
 and hostility in the midst of which Christ was teaching. See on 
 xviii. 1. 
 
 23. ἐν τ. στ. &.] This was a cloister or colonnade in the Temple- 
 Courts, apparently on the east side. Tradition said that it was a 
 part of the original building which had survived the various de- 
 structions. No such cloister is mentioned in the account of Solomon’s 
 Temple, and perhaps the name was derived from the wall against which 
 it was built. It is mentioned again Acts iii. 11 and νυ. 12 as the re- 
 cognised place of worship for the first disciples. Foundations still 
 remaining may belong toit. For ἱερόν see on ii. 14, 19, 
 
 24. ἐκυκλ. οὖν] The Jews therefore compassed Him about (Luke 
 xxi. 20; Hebr. xi. 30; Rev. xx. 9) and kept saying to Him. For 
 change of tense comp, iv. 27, 30. They encircled Him in an urgent 
 
88} NOTES. 225 
 
 manner, indicating that they were determined to have an answer. 
 ‘ Therefore’ means ‘because of the good opportunity,’ 
 
 ἕως πότε K.T.A.] How long dost Thou excite our mind, or hold our 
 mind in suspense? If Thou art the Christ tell us with openness (see 
 on vii. 13). They put a point-blank question, as the Sanhedrin do at 
 the Passion (Luke xxii. 67). Their motives for urging this were no 
 doubt mixed, and the same motive was not predominant in each case. 
 Some were hovering between faith and hostility and (forgetting viii. 
 13) fancied that an explicit declaration from Him might help them. 
 Others asked mainly out of curiosity: He had interested them greatly, 
 and they wanted His own account of Himself. The worst wished for a 
 plain statement which might form material for an accusation: they 
 wanted Him to commit Himself. 
 
 25. elrov...murrevere. The change of tense is significant: His 
 declaration is past; their unbelief still continues. To a few, the 
 woman at the well, the man born blind, and the Apostles, Jesus 
 had explicitly declared Himself to be the Messiah; to all He had 
 implicitly declared Himself by His works and teaching. 
 
 τὰ ἔργα. See on v. 20, 36: all the details of His Messianic work. 
 Ἐγώ is an emphatie answer to the preceding σύ (‘If Thou art the 
 Christ’), and to the following ὑμεῖς : ταῦτα also is emphatic; ‘ the works 
 which I do...they...but ye believe not.’ For this retrospective use of 
 οὗτος see On iii, 32. 
 
 27, 28. Note the simple but very impressive coupling of the clauses 
 merely by καί and comp. vv. 8,12. The series forms a climax and 
 seems to fall into two triplets, as A. V., rather than three pairs, 
 
 27. ‘I know Mine, and Mine know Me’ (v. 14). Winer, p. 646. 
 
 28. δίδωμι. Not δώσω. Here as in iii. 15, v. 24 and often, the gift 
 of eternal life is regarded as already possessed by the faithful. It is 
 not a promise, the fulfilment of which depends upon man’s conduct, 
 but a gift, the retention of which depends upon ourselves. 
 
 οὐ μὴ ἀπόλ. εἰς τ. αἰ. Literally, Shall certainly not perish for ever: 
 see on viii. 51. The negative belongs to ἀπόλωνται, not to eis T. 
 ai., and the meaning is, they shall never perish, not ‘they may perish, 
 but shall not perish eternally :’ comp. xi. 26; Rom, viii. 38, 39. 
 
 καὶ οὐχ dpm. And no one shall snatch them. ‘No one’ rather 
 than ‘no man’ (as in v. 18) for the powers of darkness are excluded as 
 well as human seducers. ‘Snatch’ rather than ‘pluck,’ for it is the 
 same word as is used of the wolf in v.12, and this should be preserved 
 in translation. 
 
 This passage in no way asserts the indefectibility of the elect, and 
 gives no countenance to ultra-predestinarian views. Christ’s sheep 
 cannot be taken from Him against their will; but their will is free, 
 and they may choose to leave the flock. 
 
 χειρός. ‘‘ His hand protects, bears, cherishes, leads them’’ (Meyer). 
 ST JOHN P 
 
226 S. JOWN. [Χ. 29— 
 
 . 29. δέδωκεν. See on iii. 35 and comp. xvii. 6,24. That which the 
 Father hath given Me is greater than all. The unity of the Church is 
 invincible. But the reading is doubtful: ὃ 6. μ. μεῖζον has the most 
 ancient authority (B!, old Latin, Memphitic) and agrees with vi. 39, 
 xvii. 2: the common reading, ὃς δ. μ. μείζων, and ὁ δεδωκώς μ. μείζων (Ὁ), 
 are obvious corrections : that of NL, ὃ 6. μ. μείζων, is impossible: that 
 of AB*X, ὃς 6. μ. μεῖζον, is easy and may be right; My Father who 
 gave them to Me is a greater power than all (comp. Matt. xii. 6). 
 
 ἐκ τ. x. τ. πατρός] Emphatic repetition of πατήρ : ἐκ τ. x. αὐτοῦ 
 would have sufficed. ‘The souls of the righteous are in the hand of 
 God, and there shall no torment touch them’ (Wisd. iii. 1): comp. 
 Deut. xxxiii. 3; Isa. xlix. 2, li. 16. 
 
 30. ἐγὼ x. ὁ π. ἕν ἐσμεν. 1 and the Father are one; one Substance, 
 not one Person (eis). Comp. xvii. 22, 23, and contrast ἅπαντες yap 
 ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν xp. I.,—‘ are one man, one conscious agent’ (Gal. 111. 
 28); and τοὺς δύο κτίσῃ ἐν ἑαυτῷ eis ἕνα καινὸν ἄνθρωπον (Eph. ii. 15). 
 Christ has just implied that His hand and the Father’s hand are one, 
 which implies that He and the Father are one; and this He now 
 asserts. They are one in power, in will, and in action: this at the 
 very least the words must mean; the Arian interpretation of mere 
 moral agreement is inadequate. Whether or no Unity of Substance is 
 actually stated here, it is certainly implied, as the Jews see. They 
 would stone Him for making Himself God, which He would not have 
 done had He not asserted or implied that He and the Father were one 
 in Substance, not merely in will. And Christ does not correct them, 
 as assuredly He would have done, had their animosity arisen out of a 
 gross misapprehension of His words. Comp. Rey. xx. 6, xxil. 3. 
 S. Augustine is therefore right in stating that ἐσμέν refutes Sabellius, 
 who denied the distinction, while ἕν refutes Arius, who denied the 
 equality, between the Father and the Son. Comp. Tert. adv. Prax. 
 xxii.; Hippol. c. Noet. vil. 
 
 31. ἐβάστ. πάλιν. They prepare to act on Lev. xxiv. 16 (comp. 
 1K. xxi. 10). Πάλιν refers to vili. 59, where we have ἤραν for ἐβά- 
 στασαν. The latter implies more effort; ‘lifted up, bore:’ but we 
 cannot be sure whether it refers to raising from the ground or to 
 carrying from a distance. The change from ἵνα Bddwow ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν to 
 ἵνα λιθάσωσιν αὐτόν, as from ἦραν to ἐβάστασαν may indicate that this 
 was a more deliberate attempt to carry out the law of blasphemy. 
 5. John uses the classical λιθάζειν (vv. 32, 33, xi. 8), whereas the 
 Synoptists use the LXX. word λιθοβολεῖν (Matt. xxi. 35, xxill. 37; 
 Luke xiii. 34). In the Acts both words occur (vy. 26, vii. 58). 
 
 32. ἀπεκρίθη. Just as the Jews ‘answered’ His act of cleansing 
 the Temple (ii. 18), Jesus ‘answered’ their act of preparing to stone: 
 comp. v.17. The act in each case involved an assertion. 
 
 ἔργα καλά. Works morally beautiful, noble and excellent (v. 14). 
 Comp. καλῶς πάντα πεποίηκε (Mark vii. 37) and εἶδεν ὁ Θεὸς ὅτι καλόν 
 (Gen, i. 8, 10, 12, &c.). The noble works (v. 20, 36) proceed from 
 the Father and are manifested by the Son, 
 
X. 35.] NOTES. 227 
 
 ἔδειξα. Divine works are exhibitions of goodness, ‘signs’ of some- 
 thing above and beyond them. 
 
 διὰ ποῖον av. ἔρ. Literally, for what kind of work among these; 
 i.e. ‘what is the character of the work for which ye are in the act of 
 stoning me?’ It was precisely the character of the works which 
 shewed that they were Divine, as some of them were disposed to 
 think (υ. 21, vii. 26). Comp. Matt. xxii. 36, where the literal meaning 
 is, ‘what kind of a commandment is great in the law?,’ and 1 Cor. 
 xv. 35, ‘with what kind of body do they come?’ See on xii. 33, 
 Xviil. 32, xxi. 19. The ἐμέ is emphatic, ‘Me, the Representative and 
 . Interpreter of the Father.’ For the present tense see Winer, p. 332. 
 
 . 33. περὶ x. ἔρ. Concerning a good work: ‘That is not the subject- 
 matter of our charge.’ Comp. viii. 46, xvi. 8; 1 John ii. 2. 
 
 kat ὅτι. Καί is epexegetic, explaining wherein the blasphemy 
 consisted: it does not introduce a second charge. See on viii. 53. 
 
 34—38. Christ answers a formal charge of blasphemy by a formal 
 argument on the other side. 
 
 34. ἔστιν γεγραμμένον. See on ii. 17. 
 
 ἐν τ. νόμῳ vp. As in xii. 34, xv. 25 ‘the Law’ is used in its widest 
 sense for the whole of O. T. In all three places the reference is to 
 the Psalms: comp. Rom. iil. 19; 1 Cor. xiv. 21. Ὑμῶν means, ‘for 
 which you profess to have such a regard:’ comp. viii. 17. 
 
 ἐγὼ εἶπα, θεοί ἐστε. The argument is both ἃ fortiori and ad hominem. 
 In the Scriptures (Ps. lxxxii. 6) even unjust rulers are called ‘gods’ 
 on the principle of the theocracy, that rulers are the representatives 
 of God (comp. Ex. xxii, 8). If this is admissible without blasphemy, 
 how much more may He call Himself ‘ Son of God.’ 
 
 35. εἰ ἐκ. ef. 8. Probably, If it called them gods, viz. the Law. 
 ‘Them’ is left unexplained ; a Jewish audience would at once know 
 who were meant. But how incredible that any but a Jew should 
 think of such an argument, or put itin this brief way! These last eight 
 verses alone are sufficient to discredit the theory that this Gospel is 
 the work of a Greek Gnostic in the second century. 
 
 ὁ λόγος τ. 0. Practically the same as ‘the Scripture;’ i.e. the 
 word of God in these passages of Scripture. The Word in the 
 theological sense for the Son is not meant: this term appears no- 
 where in the narrative part of 5. John’s Gospel. But of course it was 
 through the Word, not yet incarnate, that God revealed His will to 
 His people. 
 
 οὐ δ. λυθῆναι. Literally, ‘cannot be undone’ or ‘unloosed.’ The 
 same word is rendered ‘ unloose’ (i, 27), ‘destroy’ (ii. 19; 1 John iii. 
 8), ‘break’ (v. 18 and vii. 23), ‘loose’ (xi. 44). i. 27 and xi. 44 are 
 literal, of actual unbinding; the others are figurative, of dissolution 
 or unbinding as a form of destruction. Here either metaphor, dis- 
 solution or unbinding, would be appropriate; either, ‘cannot be 
 explained away, made to mean nothing;’ or, ‘cannot be deprived of 
 its binding authority.’. _The latter seems better. The clause depends 
 
 P2 
 
228 S. JOHN, [X. 35— 
 
 upon ‘if,’ and is not parenthetical; ‘if the Scripture cannot be 
 broken,’ As in ii. 22, xvii. 12, xx. 9, ἡ γραφή probably means a 
 definite passage. Comp. vii. 38, 42, xiii. 18, xvii. 12, xix. 24, 28, 36, 
 37. Scripture as a whole is called αἱ γραφαί; v. 39. 
 
 36. ὃν ὁπ. hy. Of Him whom the Father sanctified: in emphatic 
 opposition to ‘them unto whom the word of God came.’ Men on 
 whom God’s word has conferred a fragment of delegated authority 
 may be called ‘gods’ (Elohim) without scruple; He, whom the 
 Father Himself sanctified and sent, may not be called Son of God (no 
 article before ‘Son’) without blasphemy. By ‘sanctified’ is meant 
 something analogous to the consecration of Jeremiah before his birth 
 for the work of a Prophet (Jer. i. 5). Comp. Ecclus. xlv. 4 (Moses), 
 xlix. 7 (Jeremiah) ; 1 Mace. 1. 25 (the Chosen People). When the Son 
 was sent into the world He was consecrated for the work of the 
 Messiah, and endowed with the fulness of grace and truth (see on i. 
 14), the fulness of power (iii. 35), the fulness of life (v. 26). Τὴ virtue 
 of this Divine sanctification He becomes ‘the Holy One of God?’ (vi. 
 69; Luke iv. 34). See on xvii. 17, 19, the only other passages in 
 5. John’s writings where the word occurs. 
 
 ὑμεῖς λέγετε. Ὑμεῖς, with great emphasis; ‘Do ye, in opposition to 
 the Scripture, dare to say?’ 
 
 37, 38. Having met their technical charge in a technical manner 
 He now justifies the assertion of His unity with the Father by an 
 appeal to His works. Deum non vides, tamen Deum agnoscis ex 
 operibus ejus (Cicero). 
 
 37. εἰ οὐ mow. Not εἰ μή, because the negative belongs to raw, 
 not to the sentence; if I omit to do: iii. 12, v. 47; Rev. xx. 15. 
 Comp. Soph, Ajaz, 1131. Winer, pp. 599, 600. 
 
 μὴ mor. μοι, A literal command: if His works are not those 
 which His Father works, they ought not (not merely have no need) 
 even to believe what He says (see on vi. 30), much less believe on 
 Him (see oni. 12), Comp. v. 24, 46, viii, 31, 45, xiv. 11. His works 
 are His Father’s (ix. 3, xiv. 10). 
 
 38. τ. ἔργοις π. ‘Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have 
 believed’ (xx. 29); but it is better to have the faith that comes with 
 sight than none at all. Thus we have four stages: 1. believing the 
 works; 2. believing Him on account of the works (xiv. 11); 8, be- 
 lieving on Him (viii. 30); 4. abiding in His word (viii. 31). 
 
 The true position of miracles among the Evidences of Christianity 
 is clearly stated here and xiv.11. They are not primary, as Paley 
 would have it, but secondary and auxiliary, Christ’s doctrine bears 
 the evidence of its Divine origin in itself. 
 
 ἵνα γνῶτε K. γινώσκητε. That ye may come to know and con- 
 tinually know; attain to knowledge and advance in knowledge in 
 contrast to their state of suspense (v. 24): the aorist denotes the 
 single act, the present the permanent growth, The apparent awk- 
 wardness of having the same yerb twice in the same clause has 
 
X. 40.] NOTES. 229 
 
 probably caused a large number of authorities to substitute πιστεύ- 
 onre in the second case. But the change of tense is full of meaning, 
 especially in reference to the Jews. Many of them attained to a 
 momentary conviction that He was the Messiah (ii. 23, vi. 14, 15, 
 vii. 41, vili. 30, x. 42, xi. 45); very few of them went beyond a 
 transitory conviction (11. 24, vi. 66, viii. 31). 
 
 κἀγὼ ἐν τ. πατρί. An instance of the solemnity and emphasis 
 derived from repetition so frequent in this Gospel. 
 
 39—42. Oppositr RESULTS oF THE DiIScoURSE. 
 
 39. ἐζήτουν οὖν πάλιν. Both οὖν and πάλιν are of somewhat 
 uncertain authority: the termination of ἐζήτουν might cause the 
 omission of οὖν. Πάλιν refers to vii. 30, 32, 44, and shews that 
 πιάσαι (See on vii. 30) means ‘arrest Him’ for the Sanhedrin, not 
 ‘take Him’ and stone Him. 
 
 ἐξῆλθεν ἐκ. Went forth out of. There being nothing in the text to 
 shew that His departure was miraculous, it is safest (as in viii. 59, 
 where also ἐξῆλθεν ἐκ occurs) to suppose that there was no miracle. 
 He withdrew through the less hostile among those who encircled 
 Him, while the others were making up their minds how to apprehend 
 Him. The majesty of innocence suffices to protect Him, His hour 
 not having come. They cannot snatch His sheep out of His hand 
 (v. 28), but He goes forth out of their hand. 
 
 40—42. ‘‘The chapter ends with a note of place which is evidently 
 and certainly historical. No forger would ever have thought of the 
 periphrasis ‘where John at first baptized’...‘John did no miracle: 
 but all things that John spake of this man were true.’ It would be 
 impossible to find a stronger incidental proof that the author of the 
 Gospel had been originally a disciple of the Baptist, or at least his 
 contemporary, and also that he is writing of things that he had heard 
 and seen. A Gnostic, writing in Asia Minor, even though he had 
 come into relation with disciples of John, would not have introduced 
 the Baptist in this way. In circles that had been affected by the 
 Baptist’s teaching, and were hesitating whether they should attach 
 themselves to Jesus, this is precisely the sort of comment that would 
 be heard” (Sanday). 
 
 40. mddwo.-.’I. Referring back toi. 28. The hostility of the 
 hierarchy being invincible and becoming more and more dangerous, 
 Jesus retires into Peraea for quiet and safety before His Passion. 
 This interval was between three and four months, from the latter 
 part of December to the middle of April. Comp. Matt. xix.1; Mark 
 x. 1. But some portion of this time was spent at Ephraim (xi. 54) 
 after going to Bethany in Judaea to raise Lazarus. Nothing is told 
 us as to how much time was given to Bethany or Bethabara in Peraea, 
 how much to Ephraim, 
 
 τὸ πρῶτον. John afterwards baptized at Aenon (iii. 23). 
 
230 S. JOHN. (x. 41— 
 
 41. πολλοὶ ἦλθον. The harvest (iv. 35—38). The testimony of 
 the Baptist, and perhaps the miraculous voice at Christ’s Baptism, 
 were still remembered there. Since then there had been the mission 
 of the Seventy and Christ’s own work in Galilee. 
 
 ἔλεγον. Kept saying or used to say: it was a common remark. 
 
 σ. ἐποίησεν οὐδέν. This is indirect evidence of the genuineness of 
 the miracles recorded of Christ, It is urged that if Jesus had wrought 
 no miracles, they would very possibly have been attributed to Him 
 after His death. Let us grant this; and at the same time it must be 
 granted that the same holds good to a very great extent of the 
 Baptist. The enthusiasm which he awakened, as a Prophet appear- 
 ing after a weary interval ef four centuries, was immense. Miracles 
 would have been eagerly believed of him, the second Elijah, and 
 would be likely enough to be attributed to him. But more than half 
 a century after his death we have one of his own disciples quite 
 incidentally telling us that ‘John did no sign;’ and there is no rival 
 tradition to the contrary. All traditions attribute miracles to Jesus. 
 
 ἐκεῖ. Last for emphasis. There, in contrast to Jerusalem which 
 had rejected Him, many believed on Him (i. 12), not merely believed 
 His words (vv. 37, 38). 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 19. πολλοὶ δέ for καὶ πολλοί (A), and τὴν for τὰς περί (AC#); both 
 on overwhelming evidence. 
 
 21. οὐκ dv ἀπέθανεν ὁ ἀδελφός pov for ὁ ἀδ. μ. οὐκ dv ἐτεθνήκει. 
 
 39. τετελευτηκότος for τεθνηκότος, with all the best MSS. 
 
 41. Omit οὗ ἣν ὁ τεθνηκὼς κείμενος (explanatory gloss) after λίθον. 
 45. Omit ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς after ἐποίησεν : comp. iv. 16, 46, vi. 14, viii, 21; 
 
 50. λογίζεσθε (NABDL) for διαλογίξεσθες. The compound is very 
 frequent in the Synoptists. 
 
 51. ἐπροφήτευσεν for προεφήτευσεν (correction to usual form), In 
 N.T. the better MSS. place the augment before the preposition 
 (Matt. vii. 22, xi, 13, xv. 7; Mark vii. 6; Luke i. 67; Acts xix. 6): 
 Jude 14 is possibly an exception. Winer, p. 84. 
 
 ἤμελλεν for ἔμελλεν ; comp. iv. 47, xii. 33, xviii. 32. In vi. 71 
 ἔμελλεν is better attested: comp. ἐδύνατο in v. 87. Winer, p. 82. 
 
 54. ἔμεινεν (NBL), 5. John’s favourite word, is probably to be 
 preferred to διέτριβεν (AD from iii. 22?) 
 
 57. ἐντολάς for ἐντολήν, with NBI®8M against AD. 
 
XI] NOTES. e35 
 
 Cuap. XI. Curist 1s LovE ILLUSTRATED BY A SIGN. 
 
 Christ’s love for His friends brings about His own death and shews 
 the voluntariness (v. 8) of His death, as declared x. 18. Expressions 
 ef affection and tenderness abound in the chapter; comp. vv. 3, 5, 
 11, 15, 35, 36. 
 
 We have now reached ‘the culminating point of the miraculous 
 activity of our Lord,’ and at the same time the ‘ crucial question’ of 
 this Gospel—the Raising of Lazarus. Various objections have been 
 urged against it, and through it against the Fourth Gospel as a 
 whole. The principal objections require notice. They are based (1) 
 on the extraordinary character of the miracle itself; (2) on the 
 silence of the Synoptists; (3) on the fact that in spite of what is 
 narrated vv. 47—53, no mention is made of the miracle in the 
 accusation of Jesus. 
 
 (1) The extraordinary character of the miracle is a difficulty of 
 modern growth. By the writers of N. T. raising the dead was 
 regarded as on the same level with other miracles, not as something 
 quite apart from all others. And surely the ancient view is both 
 more reverent and more philosophical than the modern one. Only 
 from a purely human standpoint can one miracle be regarded as more 
 ‘wonderful, i.e. more difficult of performance, than another. To 
 Omnipotence all miracles, as indeed all works, are equal: distinctions 
 of difficult and easy as applied to the Almighty are meaningless. 
 
 (2) It is certainly surprising that the Synoptists do not mention 
 this miracle, all the more so because 5. John tells us that it was the 
 proximate cause of Christ’s arrest and condemnation. But this sur- 
 prising circumstance has been exaggerated. It seems too much to say 
 that “it must always remain a mystery why this miracle, transcend- 
 ing as it does all other miracles which the Lord wrought,...should 
 have been passed over by the three earlier Evangelists.’? Two con- 
 siderations go a long way towards explaining the mystery. (i) The 
 Synoptical Gospels, though three in number, in the main represent 
 only one tradition, and that a very fragmentary tradition. That 
 fragmentary testimony should omit important facts is not surprising ; 
 and that out of three writers who make use of this defective evidence 
 not one should in this important instance have supplied the defi- 
 ciency, is not more than surprising. (ii) The Synoptists, until they 
 reach the last Passover, omit almost all events in or near Jerusalem: 
 the ministry in Galilee is their province. The omission of this 
 raising by them is very little more strange than the omission of the 
 other raisings by John. Each side keeps to its own scheme of 
 narration. 
 
 To explain that the Synoptists were silent in order not to draw 
 attention, and perhaps persecution (xii. 10, 11), on Lazarus and his 
 sisters, whereas when §S. John wrote they were dead (just as S. John 
 alone records that it was 5. Peter who cut off the high-priest’s 
 servant’s ear), is not very satisfactory. There is no evidence that 
 Lazarus and his sisters were living when the first Gospel was written, 
 
232 5. JOHN. [XI. 1— 
 
 still less when S. Luke wrote. And if they were alive, were the chief 
 priests alive, and their animosity still alive also? 
 
 (3) This last objection really tells in favour of the narrative. The 
 hierarchy would have stood self-condemned if they had made His 
 raising the dead a formal charge against Christ. The disciples had 
 fled, and could not urge the miracle in His favour; and Christ Him- 
 self would not break the majestic silence which He maintained before 
 His accusers to mention such a detail. 
 
 There are those who assume that miracles are impossible, and that 
 no amcunt of evidence can render a miracle credible. This miracle is 
 therefore dismissed, and we are to believe either that (1) Lazarus was 
 only apparently dead, i.e. that Christ was an impostor and 8. John a 
 dupe or an accomplice; or that (2) the parable of Lazarus and Dives 
 has been transformed into a miracle; or that (3) the narrative isa 
 myth, or (4) an allegory. (1) and (2) only need to be stated: of (3) 
 and (4) we may say with Meyer, ‘‘No narrative of the N. T. bears so 
 completely the stamp of being the very opposite of a later invention... 
 And what an incredible height of art in the allegorical construction of 
 history must we ascribe to the composer!’ Instead of an historical 
 miracle we have a literary miracle of the second century. Contrast 
 this chapter with the miracles of the Apocryphal Gospels, and it will 
 seem impossible that both can have come from the same source. 
 To tear out this or any other page from S. John, and retain the rest, 
 is quite inadmissible. ‘‘ The Gospel is like that sacred coat ‘ without 
 seam woven from the top throughout:’ it is either all real and true 
 or all fictitious and illusory; and the latter alternative is more 
 difficult to accept than the miracle” (Sanday). 
 
 1—33. THE PRELUDE TO THE SIGN, 
 
 1. ἦν ϑέτις do 8. Once more we note the touching simplicity of the 
 narrative. The δέ is perhaps ‘but’ rather than ‘now’: it introduces 
 a contrast to what precedes. Christ went into Peraea for retirement, 
 but the sickness of Lazarus interrupted it. And thus once more the 
 Lord’s repose is broken. Nicodemus breaks the quiet of the night 
 (iii, 2); the Samaritan woman interrupts the rest beside the well 
 (iv. 7); the importunate multitude invade the mountain solitude 
 (vi. 5); and now His friend’s death summons Him from His retreat 
 in Peraea. In all the claims of His Father’s work are paramcunt. 
 
 Λάζαρος. The theory that this narrative is a parable transformed 
 into a miracle possibly represents something like the reverse of the 
 fact. The parable of Dives and Lazarus was apparently spoken about 
 this time, i.e. between the Feast of Dedication and the last Passover, 
 and it may possibly have been suggested by this miracle. In no other 
 parable does Christ introduce a proper name. Some would identify 
 Lazarus of Bethany with the rich young ruler (Matt. xix. 16; Mark 
 x. 17; Luke xviii. 18), and also with the young man clad in a linen 
 cloth who followed Jesus in the Garden after the disciples had fled 
 (Mark xiv. 51; see note there), The name Lazarus is an abbreviated 
 Greek form of Eleazar=‘God is my help.’ It is commonly assumed 
 
XI 3] NOTES. 233 
 
 without much evidence that he was younger than his sisters: S. Luke’s 
 silence about him (x. 38, 39) agrees well with this. 
 
 Βηθανίας. A small village on the S.E. slope of the Mount of Olives, 
 about two miles from Jerusalem (see on Matt. xxi. 9). 
 
 ἐκ τ. κώμης. Acts xxiii. 34 and Rev. ix. 18 shew that no distinction 
 can be drawn between ἀπό and ἐκ either here or i. 45, as that ἀπό 
 refers to residence and ἐκ to birthplace. Comp. Luke xxi. 18 with 
 Acts xxvii. 34. But the change of preposition should be preserved 
 in translation; of Bethany, from the village of Mary. Κώμη is 
 used of Bethlehem (vil. 42), and in conjunction with πόλις (Luke 
 xii, 22). It is an elastic word; but its general meaning is ‘ village’ 
 rather than anything larger. Mary is here mentioned first, although 
 apparently the younger sister (Luke x. 28), because the incident men- 
 tioned in the next verse had made her better known. They are intro- 
 duced as well-known persons, like the Twelve (vi. 67), Pilate (xviii. 
 29), and Mary Magdalene (xix. 25). They would seem to have been 
 people of position from the village being described as their abode (to 
 distinguish it from the other Bethany in Peraea, to which Christ had 
 just gone), The guests at the funeral (wv. 31, 45), the feast, the 
 family burying-place (v. 38), and Mary’s costly offering (xii. 2, 3), 
 point in the same direction. 
 
 2. ἦν δὲ M. ἡ ἀλείψασα. Now Mary was she that anointed; or, 
 Now it was (the) Mary that anointed. This of course does not 
 necessarily imply that the anointing had already taken place, as 
 those who identify Mary with the ‘sinner’ of Luke vii. 37 would 
 insist: it merely implies that when 5. John wrote, this fact was well 
 known about her, as Christ had promised should be the case (Matt. 
 xxvi. 18). S. John tells two facts omitted in the earlier Gospels; (1) 
 that the village of Martha and Mary was Bethany, (2) that the 
 anointing at Bethany was Mary’s act. The identification of Mary of 
 Bethany with the ἁμαρτωλός of Luke vii. is altogether at variance 
 with what S. Luke and 5. John tell us of her character. Nor is there 
 any sufficient reason for identifying either of them with Mary 
 Magdalene. Mary of Bethany, Mary of Magdala, and the ‘sinner’ 
 of Luke vii. are three distinct persons. 
 
 8. ἀπέστειλαν οὖν. This shews that v. 2 ought not to be made a 
 parenthesis; ‘therefore’ refers to the previous statement. Because 
 of the intimacy, which every one who knew of the anointing would 
 understand, the sisters sent. Note that they are not further described; 
 S. John has said enough to tell his readers who are meant: but 
 would not a forger have introduced them with more description? 
 
 κύριε, ἴδε Sv dh. dob. Exquisite in its tender simplicity. The 
 message implies a belief that Christ could cure a dangerous sickness, 
 and no doubt (vv. 21, 32) would heal His friend. Swufficit ut noveris. 
 Non enim amas et deseris (S, Augustine). Thus of the seven typical 
 miracles with which 8. John illustrates the Lord’s ministry, the last, 
 like the first, has its scene in the family circle. Like His Mother 
 
234 δ: JOHN. [XE Se 
 
 (ii. 3), the sisters state the trouble, and leave the rest to Him: and 
 here, as there, He at first seems to refuse what He afterwards grants 
 in abundance. On ide see on i. 29; on φιλεῖς v. 5, ν. 20. 
 
 4. εἶπεν. Not ἀπεκρίθη: His words are not a mere answer to the 
 message, but a lesson to the Apostles also. 
 
 οὐκ ἔστιν πρὸς 8. Is not to have death as its final result: for ‘He 
 Himself knew what He would do’ (vi. 6). Christ foresaw both the 
 death and the resurrection, and (as so often) uttered words which His 
 disciples did not understand at the time, but recognised in their 
 proper meaning after what He indicated had taken place. Comp. 
 ii. 22, xii. 16, xxi. 23. 
 
 ἵνα δοξασθῇ. In two ways; because the miracle (1) would lead 
 many to believe that He was the Messiah; (2) would bring about His 
 death. δοξάζεσθαι is a frequent expression of this Gospel for Christ’s 
 Death regarded as the mode of His return to glory (vii. 39, xii. 16, 23, 
 xiii. 31, 32); and this glorification of the Son involves the glory of the 
 Father (v. 23, x. 30, 38). Comp. ix. 3; in the Divine counsels 
 the purpose of the man’s blindness and of Lazarus’ sickness is the 
 glory of God. 
 
 We ought perhaps to connect the special meaning of ‘glorified’ with 
 the first clause: ‘ This sickness is to have for its final issue, not the 
 temporal death of an individual, but the eternal life of all mankind.’ 
 
 It is worth noting that both the first and the last of the seven 
 miracles of the ministry recorded by S. John are declared to be 
 manifestations of glory (ii. 11, xi. 4, 40) and confirmations of faith 
 (ii. 11, xi. 15). 
 
 SU αὐτῆς, 1.6. διὰ τ. ἀσθενείας, not διὰ τ. δόξης τ. Θεοῦ. 
 
 5. ἠγάπα. The loss involved here, and still more in xxi. 15—17, 
 in translating both ἀγαπᾶν and φιλεῖν by ‘love’ cannot be remedied 
 satisfactorily. Φιλεῖν (amare) denotes a passionate, emotional warmth, 
 which loves and does not care to ask why; the affection which is 
 based on natural relationship, as of parents, brothers, lovers, and the 
 like. ᾿Αγαπᾶν (diligere) denotes a calm discriminating attachment, 
 which loves because of the excellence of the loved object; the affection 
 which is based on esteem, as of friends. Φιλεῖν is the stronger, but 
 less reasoning; ἀγαπᾶν the more earnest, but less intense. The 
 sisters naturally use the more emotional word (v. 3), describing their 
 own feeling towards their brother; the Evangelist equally naturally 
 uses the loftier and less impulsive word. The fact that the sisters are 
 here included is not the reason for the change of expression. Both 
 words are used of the love of the Father to the Son; φιλεῖν (v. 20), 
 because the love is founded on relationship; ἀγαπᾶν (iii. 35, x. 17, 
 xv. 9, xvli. 23, 24, 26), because of the character of the love. 
 
 τ. Μάρθαν κιτλ. The names are probably in order of age. This 
 and v. 19 confirm what is almost certain from Luke x. 38, that 
 Martha is the elder sister. The separate mention of each of the three 
 is touching and impressive, 
 
aT, 10. NOTES. 235 
 
 6. ὡς οὖν ἤκουσεν. The connexion is a little difficult. Οὖν after 
 the statement in v. 5 prepares us for a departure instead of a delay: 
 ‘He loved them; when therefore He heard...... He set out imme- 
 diately.’ But perhaps it means that His love for them made Him 
 delay until the time when His coming would do them most good. Or 
 οὖν may lead on to v. 7, and then we must place only a semicolon at 
 the end of v. 6. When therefore He heard that he is sick, at that 
 time indeed He abode two days in the place where He was; then after 
 this He saith, &e. The δέ after ἔπειτα, anticipated by τότε μέν, is felt, 
 though not expressed: ἔπειτα in part supplies the place of δέ as in 
 James iii. 17. Comp. xix. 32, Luke viii. 5, 6, where μέν is followed 
 by a simple καί.---Μὲν... ἔπειτα and pév...xaé are not rare in classical 
 Greek. Winer, p. 720. 
 
 7. ἔπειτα p. τ. See on iii. 22. The fulness of this expression 
 emphasizes the length of the delay, so trying to the sisters, and 
 perhaps to Jesus Himself. Winer, p. 754. But His life was a 
 perfect fulfilment of the Preacher’s rule; ‘To everything there is a 
 season, and a time to every purpose under heaven’ (Kcel. iii. 1; 
 comp. v. 9, ii. 4). There was a Divine plan, in conformity with 
 which He worked. 
 
 eis τ. Ὶ. πάλιν. The πάλιν refers us back to x. 40. His using the 
 general term, Judaea, instead of Bethany, leads to the disciples’ reply. 
 Judaea was associated with hostility, Bethany with love and friend- 
 ship. Perhaps He wishes to prepare the disciples for the consequences 
 of a return to Judaea. 
 
 8. Ῥαββί, viv «.7.A. Rabbi (see on iv. 31) just now the Jews 
 were seeking to stone Thee (x. 31) and art Thou going thither again? 
 ‘Again’ is emphatic. For νῦν comp. xxi. 10. 
 
 9. οὐχὶ δώδεκα. As so often, Christ gives no direct answer to the 
 question asked, but a general principle, involving the answer to 
 the question. Comp. ii. 6, 19, 111, 5, 10, iv. 13, 21, vi. 32, 53, viii. 7, 
 25, 54, x. 25. The meaning seems to be, ‘Are there not twelve 
 working-hours in which a man may labour without fear of stumbling? 
 I have not yet reached the end of My working-day, and so can safely 
 continue the work Icame todo. The night cometh, when I can no 
 longer work; but it has not yet come.’ Comp. ix. 4. Thus it is 
 practically equivalent to ‘Mine hour is not yet come;’ it is still right 
 for Him to work: but the figure here adopted is of wider application, 
 and contains a moral for the disciples and all Christians as well as an 
 application to Christ; ‘Add nothing and lose nothing, but use the 
 time that is allowed.’ The expression throws no light on 8. John’s 
 method of reckoning time. See on xix. 14. 
 
 προσκόπτει. Knock one’s foot against; offendere. 
 
 τὸ φῶς τ. κι τ, The sun: the words were spoken just before the 
 departure, which probably took place at dawn. 
 
 10. ἐν τῇ νυκτί. Christ’s night came when His hour came (xvii. 1). 
 Then the powers of darkness prevailed (Luke xxii. 53) and His enemies 
 
236 S. JOIN. με" Ὁ 
 
 became a stumbling-block in His path, bringing His work to a close 
 (xix. 30). ; 
 
 τ. φῶς οὐκ ἔστιν. The light is not in him. This shews that the 
 meaning has slid from the literal to the figurative. Td φώς in τ. 9 is 
 the physical light in the heavens; here it is the spiritual light in the 
 heart. Comp. 1 John ii. 10, 11. 
 
 11. μετὰ τοῦτο. Perhaps indicates a pause. See on iii. 22, 
 
 A. ὁ φίλος np. κεκ. Lazarus, our friend, is fallen asleep. Equal 
 in tender simplicity to the message (v. 3). Sleep as an image of death 
 is common from the dawn of literature; but the Gospel has raised the 
 expression from a figure to a fact. Paganism called death a sleep 
 to conceal its nature; the Lord does so to reveal its nature. A poetic 
 euphemism has become a gracious truth. Comp. Matt. xxvii. 52; Acts 
 vii. 50, xiii. 36; 1 Cor. vii. 39, xi. 30, xv. 6, 18; 1 Thess. iv. 13; 2 Pet. 
 iii, 4. The thoroughly Christian term ‘cemetery’ (=sleeping-place) in 
 the sense of a place of repose for the dead comes from the same root. 
 The exact time of Lazarus’ death cannot be determined, for we do not 
 know how long Christ took in reaching Bethany. Christ calls him 
 ‘our friend,’ as claiming the sympathy of the disciples, who had shewn 
 unwillingness to return to Judaea. 
 
 ἵνα ἐξ. This shews that no messenger has come to announce the 
 death. Christ sees the death as He foresees the resurrection (v. 4). 
 
 12. εἶπον οὖν av. of p. The disciples therefore said to Him;— 
 catching at any chance of escape from the dreaded journey. They 
 accept it as quite natural that Jesus should know that Lazarus sleeps, 
 and perhaps they think that He has caused the sleep. This slight 
 touch is strong proof of their belief in His power. 
 
 εἰ κεκ., σωθήσεται. If he is fallen asleep, he shall be saved. The 
 word σωθήσεται is perhaps purposely chosen as being capable of a 
 spiritual meaning. The whole narrative is symbolical of spiritual 
 death and resurrection; and §. John perhaps intimates that the 
 disciples, like Caiaphas (v. 50), spoke more truth than they themselves 
 knew. Of course they mean, ‘ He will recover.’ Comp. Ajax, 263, 
 
 ἀλλ᾽ ef πέπαυται, κάρτ᾽ av εὐτυχεῖν δοκῶ. 
 
 Their first thought probably was that Jesus meant to go and cure 
 Lazarus; and now they think that he will recover without His going, 
 and that therefore He need not go. The A.V. reads like an expostu- 
 lation against waking Lazarus, as if it meant ‘a sick man should not 
 be disturbed’: but they are too full of anxiety about πορεύομαι to 
 notice ἵνα ἐξυπνίσω αὐτόν. It is the going, not the wakening, that 
 perturbs them. For other instances in which the disciples grossly 
 misunderstand Christ, see iv. 33, xiv. 5, 8, 22; Matt. xvi. 7; and comp. 
 111. 4, 9, iv. 11, 15, vi. 34, 52, vii. 35, vill. 22, 33, 52. This candour in 
 declaring their own failings adds to our confidence in the veracity of 
 the Evangelists. It is urged that the misunderstanding here is too 
 gross to be probable; but they had not unnaturally understood Christ 
 
XL “16. NOTES. 23% 
 
 Himself to have declared that Lazarus would not die (v. 4); this being 
 so, they could not easily suppose that by sleep He meant death. 
 Moreover, when men’s minds are on the stretch the strangest misap- 
 prehensions become possible. 
 
 13. τ. κοιμ. τ. ὕπν. Recailing κεκοίμηται and ἐξυπνίσω in v. 11, 
 
 14. τότε οὖν. Then therefore said Jesus. Here, as in Rom. vi. 
 21, A.V. makes ‘then’ cover both τότε and οὖν, ‘then’ of time, and 
 ‘then’ of consequence, 
 
 παρρησίᾳ. Without metaphor: see on vii. 13. 
 
 Aat. ἀπέθανεν. The abruptness is startling. Contrast the aorist 
 ἀπέθανεν, which indicates the moment of transition from life to death, 
 with the perfect κεκοίμηται, which indicates the state of rest which has 
 begun and continues. 
 
 15. χαίρω. Christ rejoices, not at His friend’s death, but at His 
 own absence from the scene, for the disciples’ sake. Had He been 
 there, Lazarus would not have died, and the disciples would have lost 
 this great sign of His Messiahship. 
 
 ἵνα πιστεύσητε. §S. John’s favourite construction, indicating the 
 Divine purpose: see onix. 2,3. Would any forger have written this? 
 Would it not seem utterly improbable that at the close of His 
 ministry Christ should still be working in order that Apostles might 
 believe? Yet S. John, who heard the words, records them, and he 
 knew from sad experience (Mark xiv. 50, xvi. 11; Luke xxiv. 11, 21) 
 that this work was not superfluous. Just before the trial of faith 
 which His Passion and Death would bring to them, His disciples had 
 need of all the help and strength that He could give. See on ii, 11. 
 
 ἀλλὰ ἄγωμεν. He breaks off suddenly. Πρὸς αὐτόν is significant; 
 not to the mourning sisters, but to the sleeping friend. 
 
 16. Θωμᾶς, ὁλ. A. 5. John thrice (xx. 24, xxi. 2) reminds his readers 
 that Thomas is the same as he whom Gentile Christians called 
 Didymus; just as he interprets Meccias (iv. 25). Thomas is Hebrew, 
 Didymus is Greek, for a twin. In all probability he was a twin, 
 possibly of S. Matthew, with whom he is coupled in all three lists of 
 the Apostles in the Gospels: in the Acts he is coupled with 5. Philip. 
 That S. Thomas received his name from Christ (as Simon was called 
 Peter, and the sons of Zebedee Boanerges) in consequence of his 
 character, is pure conjecture. But the coincidence between the name 
 and his twin-mindedness (James i. 8, iv. 8) is remarkable. “In him 
 the twins, unbelief and faith, were contending with one another for 
 mastery, as Esau and Jacob in Rebecca’s womb” (Trench). It is 
 from 8. John that we know his character: in the Synoptists and the 
 Acts he is a mere name (see on i. 41). Not that 5. John purposely 
 sketches his character; the notices are too brief and too scattered for 
 that. But the character shines through the lifelike narrative. He 
 seems to have combined devotion to Christ with a tendency to see the 
 
238 S. JOHN. [xXDaee 
 
 dark side of everything. 85. John’s care in distinguishing him by his 
 Gentile name adds point to the argument derived from his never 
 distinguishing John as the Baptist (see on i. 6). 
 
 συμμαθηταῖς. The word occurs here only; perhaps it indicates 
 that they shared his feelings. It has been remarked that S. Thomas 
 would scarcely have taken the lead in this way had 8. Peter been 
 present, and that had 8. Peter been there he would probably have 
 appeared in the previous dialogue. If he was absent, we have an 
 additional reason for the absence of this miracle from 5. Mark’s 
 Gospel, the Gospel of S. Peter, and undoubtedly the representative of 
 the oldest form of the Synoptic narrative. 
 
 pet αὐτοῦ. Of course with Christ (v. 8). It is strange that any 
 should understand it of Lazarus. They could not die with him, for 
 he was dead already, and 53. Thomas knew this (v. 14). ‘The Hope 
 of Israel is going to certain death; there is nothing left for us but to 
 share it.’ The words fitly close a section, of which the prevailing 
 thought is death. 
 
 17. εὗρεν, 1.6. on enquiry: comp. i. 44, v. 14, ix. 35. It would 
 seem as if Christ’s miraculous power of knowing without the ordinary 
 means of information was not in constant activity, but like His other 
 miraculous powers was employed only on fitting occasions. It was 
 necessary to His work that He should know of Lazarus’ death; it 
 was not necessary that He should know how long he had been buried, 
 nor where he had been buried (νυ. 34). Comp. i. 48, iv. 18, ix. 35, 
 xvill. 84. Thus Peter’s prison-gate opens ‘of its own accord;’ Mary’s 
 house-door, which Rhoda could open, does not (Acts xii. 10—16). 
 
 τέσσ. 7. No doubt he had been buried the day he died, as is 
 usual in hot climates where decomposition is rapid ; moreover, he had 
 died of a malignant disease, probably a fever. Jehu ordered Jezebel 
 to be buried a few hours after death (2 Kings ix. 34); Ananias and 
 Sapphira were buried at once (Acts v. 6,10). If Christ started just 
 after Lazarus died, as seems probable, the journey had occupied four 
 days. This fits in well with the conclusion that Bethabara or Bethany 
 was in the north of Palestine, possibly a little south of the sea of 
 Galilee; near Galilee it must have been (comp. i. 28, 29, 43). But on 
 the other hand Lazarus may have died soon after Christ heard of his 
 illness; in which case the journey occupied barely two days. 
 
 ἐν τ. μνημείῳ. In the tomb. Our translators use three different 
 English words for μνημεῖον; ‘grave’ in this chapter, v. 28; Matt. xxvii. 
 52, &c.; ‘tomb’ Matt. viii. 28; Mark v. 2, vi. 29, &c.; ‘sepulchre’ of 
 Christ’s resting-place. Τάφος, used by 8. Matthew only, is rendered 
 ‘tomb’ xxill. 29, and ‘sepulchre’ xxiii. 27, xxvii. 61, 64, 66, xxviii. 
 1. ‘Tomb’ being reserved for μνημεῖον, τάφος might be rendered 
 ‘sepulchre.’ 
 
 18. ἣν δὲ ἡ B. Ἦν need not imply that when S. John wrote 
 Bethany had been destroyed, but this is the more probable meaning; 
 especially as no other Evangelist speaks of places in the past tense, 
 
XI. 20.] NOTES. 239 
 
 and §. John does not always do so. The inference is that he wrote 
 
 ter the destruction of Jerusalem; and that what was destroyed in 
 the siege he speaks of in the past tense; e.g. Bethany (here), the 
 Garden of Gethsemane (xviii. 1), Joseph’s garden (xix. 41), what 
 was not destroyed, in the present tense; 6. 4. Bethesda (v. 2, where 
 see note). ᾿ 
 
 ὡς ἀπὸ σταδ. δεκαπ. A Greek stade is 18 yards less than an Eng- 
 lish furlong; but the translation is sufficiently accurate, like ‘ firkin’ 
 (ii. 6). This distance, therefore, was under two miles, and is men- 
 tioned to account for the many Jews who came to condole with the 
 sisters; and also to point out the dangerous proximity into which 
 Jesus now entered. For the ἀπό comp. xxi. 8; Rey. xiv. 20: in all 
 three cases the preposition seems to have got out of place. We 
 should have expected ws σταδίους 6. ἀπὸ ἱΙεροσολύμων, as in Luke xxiv. 
 13. Comp. πρὸ & ἡμερῶν τοῦ πάσχα (xii. 1); and ante diem tertium 
 Kal. Mart. for tertio die ante Kal. Mart. Or possibly the distance is 
 looked at in the reverse way: Winer, p. 697. 
 
 19. ἐκ τῶν ’I. Fromamong the Jews. ‘The Jews,’ as usual, are 
 the hostile party: among the numerous acquaintances of the sisters 
 were many of the opponents of Jesus. This visit was yet another 
 opportunity for them to believe. 
 
 ἐλ. πρὸς τὴν M. κι M. Had come to M. and M. Some good au- 
 thorities support T. R. in reading πρὸς τὰς περὶ M. x. M., ‘to M. and 
 M. and their friends.’ Comp. oi περὶ τὸν Παῦλον, Paul and his com- 
 panions, Acts xiii. 13. 
 
 παραμυθήσωνται. ‘The empty chaff’ of conventional consolation 
 which so moved the spirit of Jesus (v. 33). It formed a barrier 
 between Him and the sorrow which He alone could console. Jewish 
 ceremonial required that many (ten at least) should come and con- 
 dole. Gen. xxvii. 35; comp. 2 Sam. xii. 17; Job 1]. 11. Τὸ is said 
 that the usual period of mourning was thirty days; three of weeping, 
 seven of lamentation, twenty of sorrow. But the instances in Serip- 
 ture vary: Jacob, seventy days with an additional seven (Gen. 1. 3, 
 10); Aaron and Moses, thirty days (Numb. xx. 29; Deut. xxxiv. 8); 
 Saul and Judith, seven days (1 Sam. xxviii. 13; Jud, xvi. 24; comp. 
 Ecclus, xxii. 12; 2 Esdr. v. 20). Josephus tells us that Archelaus 
 mourned for his father seven days, and the Jews for himself, thirty 
 days (B. J. τι. i. 1; m1. ix. 5), The Mishna prescribes seven days for 
 near relations. 
 
 20. ἡ οὖν Μάρθα. Martha therefore. As in Luke x. 40, she takes 
 the lead in entertaining, while Mary shrinks from it; and she was 
 probably now engaged in some duty of this kind. As elder sister, 
 and apparently mistress of the house (Luke x. 38), information would 
 naturally come to her first. Without waiting to tell her sister she 
 hurries out to meet Jesus. It is incredible that the coincidence 
 between S. John and S. Luke as regards the characters of the sisters 
 should be either fortuitous or designed. It is much easier to believe 
 that both give us facts about real persons, 
 
240 S. JOHN, [XI. 20— 
 
 ἔρχεται. Is coming; the exact word of the message. They were 
 perhaps still looking for His arrival, although they believed that it 
 was now too late for Him to aid. Unwilling to mingle at once in the 
 crowd of conventional mourners, He halts outside the village. 
 
 ἐκαθέζετο. The attitude of sorrow and meditation (Job ii, 13). 
 She does not know of Christ’s approach (vv. 28, 29): Martha, in dis- 
 charging the duties of hospitality to fresh arrivals, would be more 
 likely to hear of it. 
 
 21. εἰ ἧς ὧδε, κιτιλ. Notareproach, however gentle (she does not say 
 ‘hadst Thou come’), but an expression of deep regret. This thought 
 had naturally been often in the sisters’ minds during the last four 
 days (comp. v. 82). They believe that Christ could and would have 
 healed Lazarus: their faith and hope are not yet equal to anticipating 
 His raising him from the dead. The gradual progress of Martha’s 
 faith is very true to life, and reminds us of similar development in 
 the woman of Samaria (iv. 19), the βασιλικός (iv. 53), and the man 
 born blind (ix. 11), though she starts at a more advanced stage than 
 they do. If all these four narratives are late fictions, we have four 
 masterpieces of psychological study, as miraculous in the literature of 
 the second century as would be a Gothic cathedral in the architecture 
 of that age. For the construction comp. iv. 10, xiv. 28. 
 
 22. Kal νῦν οἶδα. And even now (that he is dead) I know. She 
 believes that had Christ been there, He could have healed Lazarus by 
 His own power (comp. iv. 47), and that now His prayer may prevail 
 with God to raise him from the dead. She has yet to learn that 
 Christ’s bodily presence is not necessary, and that He can raise the 
 dead by His own power. He gradually leads her faith onwards to 
 higher truth. Θεός at the end of both clauses seems to emphasize her 
 conviction that God alone can now help them: but it may be the repe- 
 tition so common in §, Jokn’s style. 
 
 αἰτήσῃ. Αἰτεῖσθαι, ‘to ask for oneself’ (xiv. 13, 14, xv. 7, 16, xvi. 
 23, 26; 1 John v. 14, 15), is a word more appropriate to merely 
 human prayer, and is not used by Christ of His own prayers or by the 
 Evangelists of Christ’s prayers. She thus incidentally seems to shew 
 her imperfect idea of His relation to God. Of His own prayers 
 Christ uses ἐρωτᾶν (xiv. 16, xvi. 26, xvii. 9, 15, 20), δεῖσθαι (Luke xxii. 
 32), προσεύχεσθαι (Matt. xxvi. 36; Mark xiv. 32), θέλω (xvii. 24). The 
 Synoptists commonly use προσεύχεσθαι of Christ’s prayers (Matt. 
 xxvi. 39, 42, 44; Mark xiv. 35, 39; Luke iii. 21, v. 16, vi. 12, ix. 18, 
 28, 29, xi. 1, xxii, 41, 44): 8. John never uses the word. 
 
 23. ἀναστήσεται. He uses an ambiguous expression as an exer- 
 cise of her faith, Some think that these words contain no allusion 
 to the immediate restoration of Lazarus, and that Martha (v. 24) 
 understands them rightly. More probably Christ includes the imme- 
 diate restoration of Lazarus, but she does not venture to do so, and 
 rejects the allusion to the final Resurrection as poor consolation, 
 
 24. οἶδα ὅτι dvacr. This conviction was probably in advance of 
 average Jewish belief on the subject, The O.T. declarations as to 
 
XI. 29.] NOTES. 241 
 
 a resurrection are so scanty and obscure, that the Sadducees could 
 deny the doctrine, and the Pharisees had to resort to oral tradition to 
 maintain it (see on Mark xii, 18; Acts xxiii. 8). But from Dan. xii. 2 
 and 2 Mace. vii. 9, 14, 23, 36, xii. 43, 44, a belief in a resurrection of 
 the good as an inauguration of the Messiah’s kingdom was very 
 general. For ἐν τ. ἐσχ. ἡμέρᾳ see on Vi. 39. 
 
 25. ἐγώ εἰμι. See on vi. 35. He draws her from her selfish grief 
 to Himself. ‘There is no need for Him to pray as man to God (v. 22); 
 He (and none else) is the Resurrection and the Life. There is no 
 need to look forward to the last day; He is (not ‘ will be’) the Resur- 
 rection and the Life. Comp. xiv. 6; Col. iii. 4. In what follows, 
 the first part shews how He is the Resurrection, the second how He is 
 the Life. ‘He that believeth in Me, even if he shall have died (phy- 
 sically), shall live (eternally). And every one that liveth (physically) 
 and believeth in Me, shall never die (eternally).? The dead shall live; 
 the living shall never die. Physical life and death are indifferent to 
 the believer; they are but modes of existence. 
 
 26. πᾶς. There is no limitation; 111, 15, xii.46. Comp.i.18, iv.14, 
 vi. 51, vili. 51, x. 9. For οὐ μὴ ἀπ. εἰς τ. αἰῶνα see on vill. 51. Πισ- 
 Teves τοῦτο ; is a searching question suddenly put. She answers with 
 confidence and gives the ground for her confidence. 
 
 27. vat, κύριε. With these words she accepts Christ’s declara- 
 tion respecting Himself, and then states the creed which has enabled 
 her to accept it. The change from πιστεύω (the natural answer) to 
 ἐγὼ πεπίστευκα is remarkable: I, even I whom thou art questioning, 
 have believed; i.e. have convinced myself and do believe; comp. vi. 
 69; 1 John iv. 16, v.10. The full meaning of her confession she 
 cannot have known: like the Apostles she shared the current imper- 
 fect views of the character and office of the Messiah. See on ix. 38, 
 
 ὁ εἰς τ. K. ἐρχόμενος. (Even) He that cometh into the world: comp. 
 vi. 14; Matt. xi. 3; Luke vii. 19; Deut. xviii. 15. She believes that 
 as the Messiah He has the powers mentioned vv. 25, 26. How these 
 will affect her own case, she does not know; but with a vague hope of 
 comfort in store for them all she returns to the house. Ἔρχεσθαι eis 
 τ. κόσμον is frequent in 3. John (i. 9, iii. 19, vi. 14, ix. 39, xii. 46, 
 xvi. 28, xviii. 37): as applied to Christ it includes the notion of His 
 mission (111..17, x. 36, xii. 47, 49, xvii. 18). Not in the Synoptists. 
 
 28. λάθρα. Because of the presence of Christ’s enemies (vv. 19, 
 31). Λάθρα with εἰποῦσα, rather than with ἐφώνησε (Matt, i. 19, 11, 7; 
 Acts xvi, 37). 
 
 6 Su8doKados. i. 39, xiii. 13, 14, xx. 16, iii. 10; Mark xiv. 14, 
 Their friendship is based on the relation between teacher and disciple. 
 She avoids using His name for fear of being overheard, 
 
 29. ταχύ. As was natural in one so fond of sitting at His feet. 
 Note the change from aorist to imperfect; the rising was momentary 
 (ἤγέρθη), the coming continuous (ἤρχετο) : comp. iv, 27, 30, 40, 47, 50, 
 v. 9, vi. 1, 2, 16, 17, 66, vii. 14, 30, 31, 44, ix. 22, xx. ὃ. 
 
 ST JOHN Q 
 
242 5, JOHN. pean 
 
 30. ἦν ἔτι. Was still in the place. By remaining outside He 
 could converse with the sisters with less fear of interruption: but the 
 Jews, by following her, interfere with the privacy. See Winer, p. 705. 
 
 31. κλαύσῃ. Stronger than δακρύειν (v. 35): it means to wail and cry 
 aloud, not merely shed tears (xx. 11, 13; Matt. ii. 18, xxvi. 75. It is 
 used of Mary Magdalene (xx. 11, 13), Rachel (Matt. ii. 18), 8. Peter 
 (Mark xiv. 72), the widow at Nain (Luke vii. 13). 
 
 32. ἔπεσεν. Nothing of the kind is told of Martha (v. 21). Here 
 again the difference of character between the two appears. 
 
 οὐκ ἄν pov ἀπ. The same words as those of Martha (v. 21); but 
 the pronoun is here more prominent, indicating how acutely personal 
 her loss was. No doubt the sisters had expressed this thought to one 
 another often in the last few days. Mary’s emotion is too strong for 
 her; she can say no more than this; contrast v. 22. The Jews 
 coming up prevent further conversation. For the construction comp. 
 v. 10, xiv. 28, 
 
 33—44. Tue Sen. 
 
 33. κλαίουσαν... κλαίοντας. The repetition emphasizes a contrast 
 which is the key to the passage. 
 
 ἐνεβριμήσατο τ. πνεύματι. Infremuit spiritu; He was angered, or 
 was moved with indignation in the spirit. ᾿Εμβριμᾶσθαι occurs five 
 times in N.T., here, v. 38; Matt. ix. 30; Mark i. 43, xiv. 5 (see notes 
 in each place). In all cases, as in classical Greek and in the LXX., it 
 expresses not sorrow but indignation or severity. It means (1) lite- 
 rally, of animals, ‘to snort, growl;’ then (2) metaphorically, ‘to be 
 very angry or indignant;’ (3) ‘to command sternly, under threat of 
 displeasure.’ What was He angered at? Some translate ‘at His 
 spirit,’ and explain (a) that He was indignant at the human emotion 
 which overcame Him: which is out of harmony with all that we know 
 about the human nature of Christ. Others, retaining ‘in His spirit,’ 
 explain (8) that He was indignant ‘at the unbelief of the Jews and 
 perhaps of the sisters:’ but of this there is no hint in the context. 
 Others again (y) that it was ‘at the sight of the momentary triumph 
 of evil, as death,...which was here shewn under circumstances of the 
 deepest pathos :’ but we nowhere else find the Lord shewing anger at 
 the physical consequences of sin. It seems better to fall back on the 
 contrast pointed out in the last note. He was indignant at seeing the 
 hypocritical and sentimental lamentations of His enemies the Jews 
 mingling with the heartfelt lamentations of His loving friend Mary 
 (comp. xii. 10): hypocrisy ever roused His anger. 
 
 The πνεῦμα is the seat of the religious emotions, the highest, inner- 
 most part of man’s nature, the ψυχή is the seat of the natural affec- 
 tions and desires. Here and in xiii. 21 it is Christ’s πνεῦμα that is 
 affected, by the presence of moral evil: in xii. 27; Matt. xxvi. 38; 
 Mark xiv. 34, it is His ψυχή that is troubled, at the thought of impend- 
 ing suffering: comp. x. 24. 
 
ΧΙ. 38.] NOTES. 243 
 
 ἐτάραξεν ἑαυτόν. Turbavit se ipsum; He troubled Himself. Nota 
 mere periphrasis for ἐταράχθη, turbatus est (xiii. 21). He allowed His 
 emotion to become evident by some external movement such as a 
 shudder. His emotions were ever under control: when they ruffled 
 the surface of His being (ii. 15), it was because He so willed it. Tur- 
 baris tu nolens: turbatus est Christus quia voluit (ὃ. Augustine). 
 
 34. ποῦ τεθ. αὐτόν: Again He does not use His supernatural 
 powers (v. 17). With ἔρχου x. ide contrast i. 47. On both sides 
 ‘‘ orief speaks in the fewest possible words.” 
 
 35. ἐδάκρυσεν. Literally, shed tears: here only inN.T. See on xiii. 
 30. His lamentation was less violent than that of the sisters and 
 their friends (vv. 31, 33). Once it is said of Him that He wailed 
 aloud (ἔκλαυσεν, Luke xix. 41); but that was not for the loss of a 
 friend, but for the spiritual death of the whole Jewish nation. Now 
 He sheds tears, not because He is ignorant or doubtful of what is 
 coming, but because He cannot but sympathize with His friends’ 
 grief. He who later shared the pains of death, here shares the sorrow 
 for death. “It is not with a heart of stone that the dead are raised.” 
 Comp. Heb. ii, 11. For the dramatic brevity comp. v. 9, xiii. 30, 
 xviii. 40. 
 
 36. ἔλεγον... ἐφίλει. Imperfects of continued action. As natu- 
 rally as the sisters (v. 3) they use φιλεῖν rather than ἀγαπᾶν (v. δ). 
 For “Ide see on 1. 29. 
 
 37. τινὲς δὲ ἐξ ad. But some of them, in contrast to those who 
 speak in v. 36, who are not unfriendly, while these sneer. The drift 
 of this remark is ‘He weeps; but why did He not come in time to 
 save His friend? Because He knew that He could not. And if He 
 could not, did he really open the eyes of the blind?’ Or possibly, ‘He 
 weeps; but why did He not take the trouble to come in time? His 
 tears are hypocritical.’ They use the death of Lazarus as an argu- 
 ment to throw fresh doubt on the miracle which had so baffled them 
 at Jerusalem; or else as evidence that His grief is feigned. Their 
 reference to the man born blind instead of to the widow’s son, or 
 Jairus’ daughter, has been used as an objection to the truth of this 
 narrative. It is really a strong confirmation of its truth. An in- 
 ventor would almost certainly have preferred more obvious parallels. 
 But these Jews of course did not believe in those raisings of the dead: 
 they much more naturally refer to a reputed miracle within their own 
 experience. Moreover they are not hinting at raising the dead, but 
 urging that if Jesus could work miracles He ought to have prevented 
 Lazarus from dying. 
 
 38. ἐμβριμ. ἐν éavra. This shews that ‘in His spirit,’ not ‘at His 
 spirit,’ is right in v. 33, to which πάλιν refers. Their sneering scep- 
 ticisnt rouses His indignation afresh. 
 
 It is remarkable that this chapter, which narrates the greatest ex- 
 hibition of Divine power in the ministry of Christ, contains peculiarly 
 abundant evidence of His perfect humanity. We have His special 
 affection for His friends (v. 5), His sympathy and sorrow (v. 35), His 
 
 Q2 
 
244 S. JOHN. [XI. 38— 
 
 indignation (vv. 33, 38). In the rest of this Gospel, which is so full 
 of the Divinity of Jesus, we have His humanity plainly set forth also; 
 His weariness (iv. 6), His thirst (iv. 7, xix. 28), His love for His disci- 
 ples (xx. 2), His special affection for ‘His own’ and for 5. John (xiii. 
 2, 23, xix. 26, xxi. 7, 20). 
 
 μνημεῖον. See onv.17. The having a private burying-place, like 
 the large attendance of mourners and the very precious ointment 
 (xii. 3), indicates that the family is well off. Eds is unto, not into. 
 
 ἐπ᾿ atte. Upon it, or against it. An excavation in the side of a 
 mound or rock may be meant. What is now shewn as Lazarus’ grave 
 is an excavation in the ground with steps down to it. The modern 
 name of Bethany, El-Azariyeh or Lazarieh, is derived from Lazarus, 
 
 39. ἄρατε τ. λίθον. Comp. τ. λίθον ἠἡρμέν ον (xx. 1) not ἀποκεκυλιὶσ- 
 μένον (Luke xxiv. 2: comp. Mark xvi. 4, Matt. xxviii. 2). The com- 
 mand would cause great surprise and excitement. 
 
 ἡ ἀδελφὴ τ. tereA. Not inserted gratuitously. It was because 
 she was his sister that she could not bear to see him or allow him to 
 be seen disfigured by corruption. The remark comes much more 
 naturally from the practical Martha than from the reserved and 
 retiring Mary. There is nothing to indicate that she was mistaken; 
 though some would have it that the miracle had begun from Lazarus’ 
 death, and that the corpse had been preserved from decomposition. 
 
 τεταρταῖος. Literally, of the fourth day; quadriduanus. Westcott 
 quotes a striking Jewish tradition: “‘The very height of mourning is 
 not till the third day. For three days the spirit wanders about the 
 sepulchre, expecting if it may return into the body. But when it sees 
 that the aspect of the face is changed, then it hovers no more, but 
 leave» the body to itself.”” And ‘‘ after three days the countenance is 
 changed.” 
 
 40. εἶπόν σοι. Apparently a reference to vv. 25, 26, and to the 
 reply to the messenger, v. 4: on both occasions more may have been 
 said than is reported. See on v. 4. 
 
 41. ἦραν οὖν τ. λίθον. ὁ δὲ “I. ἦρεν τ. ὀφθ. They lifted therefore 
 the stone. But Jesus lifted up His eyes: comp. xvii. 1. 
 
 ὅτι ἤκουσάς pov. That Thou didst hear Me. The prayer to which 
 this refers is not recorded. He thanks the Father as a public acknow- 
 ledgment that the Son can do nothing of Himself; the power which 
 He is about to exhibit is from the Father (v. 19—26). 
 
 42. ἐγὼ δὲ ἤδειν. But I (whatever doubts others may have had) knew. 
 No one must suppose from this act of thanksgiving that there are 
 any prayers of the Son which the Father does not hear. 
 
 διὸ τ. ὄχλον. Shewing that others were present besides ‘ the Jews’ 
 who had come tu condole. Εἶπον, I said the words, εὐχαρίστω σοι K.T.r. 
 His confidence in thanking God for a result not yet apparent proved 
 His intimacy with God. 
 
ΧΙ. 45.] NOTES. 245 
 
 ὅτι σύ. That Thou, and no one else: σύ is emphatic. Sce on 
 xx, 21: 
 
 43. ἐκραύγασεν. The word (rare in N.T. except in this Gospel) is 
 nowhere else used of Christ. It is elsewhere used of the shout of a 
 multitude; xii. 13, xvii. 40, xix. 6, 12, 15. Comp. Matt. xii. 19; 
 Acts xxii. 23. This loud cry was perhaps the result of strong emotion, 
 or in order that the whole multitude might hear. It is natural to 
 regard it as the direct means of the miracle, awakening the dead: 
 though some prefer to think that ‘I thank Thee’ implies that Lazarus 
 is already alive and needs only to be called forth. 
 
 44, ἐξῆλθεν. It is safest not to regard this as an additional miracle. 
 The winding-sheet may have been loosely tied round him, or each 
 limb may have been swathed separately: in Egyptian mummies some- 
 times every finger is kept distinct. 
 
 κειρίαις. The word occurs here only in N.T. Comp. Prov. vii. 16. 
 It means the bandages which kept the sheet and the spices round the 
 body. Nothing is said about the usual spices (xix. 40) here; and 
 Martha’s remark (v. 39) rather implies that there had been no embalm- 
 ing. If Lazarus died of a malignant disease he would be buried as 
 quickly as possible. 
 
 ὄψις. The word occurs in N.T. only here, vii. 24, and Rev. i. 16: 
 one of the small indications of a common authorship (see on i. 14, 
 iv. 6, v. 2, vii. 30, [viii. 2,] xiii. 8, xv. 20, xix. 37, xx. 16). 
 
 σουδαρίῳ. The Latin sudariwm, meaning literally ‘a sweat-cloth.’ 
 It occurs xx. 7; Luke xix. 20; Acts xix. 12. Here the cloth bound 
 under the chin to keep the lower jaw from falling is probably meant. 
 These details shew the eyewitness. 
 
 dere av. ὑπ. The expression is identical with ‘let these go their 
 way’ (xvili. 8); and perhaps ‘let him go his way’ would be better 
 here. Lazarus is to be allowed to retire out of the way of harmful 
 excitement and idle curiosity, Comp. Luke vii. 15, viii. 55. On all 
 three occasions Christ’s first care is for the person raised. 
 
 The reserve of the Gospel narrative here is evidence of its truth, 
 and is in marked contrast to the myths about others who are said to 
 have returned from the grave. Lazarus makes no revelations as to 
 the unseen world. The traditions about him have no historic value : 
 but one mentioned by Trench (Miracles, p, 425) is worth remembering. 
 It is said that the first question which he asked Christ after being 
 restored to life was whether he must die again; and being told that he 
 must, he was never more seen to smile. 
 
 45—57. OPpposITE RESULTS OF THE SIGN. 
 
 45. πολλοὶ οὖν k.7.A. The Greek is as plain as the English of 
 A.V. is misleading, owing to inaccuracy and bad punctuation. ᾿Εκ τ. 
 *Iovd. means of the Jews generally; of this hostile party ‘ many be- 
 lieved;’ and these ‘many’ were those ‘who came and beheld’ the 
 miracle. Many therefore of the Jews, even they who came to Mary 
 and beheld that which He (see on vi. 14) did, believed on Him. Of the 
 
246 8. JOILN. [XI. 45— 
 
 Jews who beheld, all believed. The reading 6 for d has the best 
 authority though both are well supported: it is the last supreme 
 miracle that is contemplated. 
 
 46. τινὲς δὲ ἐξ αὐτῶν. Again, of the Jews generally, rather than 
 of those who saw and believed. With what intention they went away 
 to the Pharisees, is not clear: possibly to convince them, or to seek 
 an authoritative solution of their own perplexity, or as feeling that 
 the recognised leaders of the people ought to know the whole case. 
 Comp. v. 15, ix. 13. The bad result of their mission has made some 
 too hastily conclude that their intention was bad. 
 
 47. συνέδριον. They summon a meeting of the Sanhedrin. Even the 
 adversaries of Jesus are being converted, and something decisive must 
 be done. The crisis unites religious opponents. The chief priests, 
 who were mostly Sadducees, act in concert with the Pharisees; jealous 
 ecclesiastics with religious fanatics (comp. vii. 32, 45, xviii. 3). 
 
 συνέδριον, common in the Acts and not rare in the Synoptists, 
 occurs here only in S. John; and here only without the article, as 
 meaning a meeting of the Sanhedrin, rather than the council itself. 
 It is the Greek equivalent of Sanhedrin, which though plural in form 
 is treated as a singular noun of multitude: see on Matt. xxvi. 3. 
 
 τί ποιοῦμεν; Not τί ποιῶμεν or ποιήσομεν, ‘What are we to do, if 
 anything?’ But, What are we doing? 1.6. something must be done, 
 and we are not doing it. 
 
 οὗτος. Contemptuous: see on ix. 16. 
 
 πολλὰ π. σημεῖα. Πολλά is emphatic. It is no longer possible to 
 question the fact of the signs. But instead of asking themselves what 
 these signs mean, their only thought is how to prevent others from 
 drawing the obvious conclusion. The contrast between their action 
 and His (ποιοῦμεν... ποιεῖ) is probably intended by the Evangelist, if 
 not by them. 
 
 48. ἐλεύσονται ot “Pop. An unconscious prophecy (comp. v. 50, 
 vii. 35, xix. 19) of what their own policy would produce. They do not 
 inquire whether He is or is not the Messiah: they look solely to the 
 consequences of admitting that He is. 
 
 ἡμῶν K. τ. τόπον K. τ. ἔθνος. Ἡμῶν is very emphatic and does not 
 depend on ἀροῦσιν: it belongs to both substantives; both our place 
 and our nation. ‘Place’ is perhaps best understood of Jerusalem, the 
 seat of the Sanhedrin, and the abode of most of the hierarchy. Other 
 interpretations are (1) the Temple, comp. 2 Mace. v. 19; (2) the 
 whole land; so that the expression means ‘our land and people,’ 
 which is illogical: the land may be taken from the people, or the 
 people from the land, but how can both be taken away? (3) ‘position, 
 raison @étre.’ In any case the sentiment is parallel to that of 
 Demetrius and his fellow-craftsmen (Acts xix. 27). They profess to 
 be very zealous for religion, but cannot conceal their interested 
 motives. For ἔθνος of the Jews comp. v. 50. 
 
XI. 51.] NOTES. 247 
 
 49. Καϊάφας. This was a surname; τοῦ λεγομένου Καϊάφα Matt. 
 xxvi. 3 (where see note on the Sanhedrin). His original name was 
 Joseph. Caiaphas is either the Syriac form of Cephas, a ‘rock,’ or 
 (according to another derivation) means ‘depression.’ The high-priest- 
 hood had long since ceased to descend from father to son. Pilate’s 
 predecessor, Valerius Gratus, had deposed Annas and set up in suc- 
 cession Ismael, Eleazar (son of Annas), Simon, and Joseph Caiaphas 
 (son-in-law of Annas); Caiaphas held the office from a.p. 18 to 36, 
 when he was deposed by Vitellius. Annas in spite of his deposition 
 was still regarded as in some sense high-priest (xviii. 13; Luke iii. 2; 
 Acts iv. 6), possibly as president of the Sanhedrin (Acts v. 21, 27, vii. 
 1, ix. 1, 2, xxii. 5, xxiii. 2, 4, xxiv. 1). Caiaphas is not president 
 here, or he would not be spoken of merely as ‘one of them.’ 
 
 τ. ἐνιαυτοῦ ἐκείνου. This has been urged as an objection, as if the 
 Evangelist ignorantly supposed that the high-priesthood was an 
 annual office,—a mistake which would go far to prove that the Evan- 
 gelist was not a Jew, and therefore not 8. John. But ‘that year’ 
 means ‘that notable and fatal year.’ The same expression recurs 
 νυ. 51 and xviii. 13. Even if there were not this obvious meaning 
 for ‘that year,’ the frequent changes in the office at this period would 
 fully explain the insertion without the notion of an annual change 
 being implied. There had been some twenty or thirty high-priests in 
 S. John’s lifetime. 
 
 ὑμεῖς οὐκ οἴδ. οὐδ. An inference from their asking ‘ What do we?’ 
 It was quite obvious what they must do. Ὑμεῖς is contemptuously 
 emphatic. The resolute but unscrupulous character of the man is 
 evident. We find similar characteristics in the Sadducean hierarchy 
 to which he belonged (Acts iv. 17, 21, v. 17, 18). Josephus comments 
 on the rough manners of the Sadducees even to one another: Zaddov- 
 καίων δὲ καὶ πρὸς ἀλλήλους TO ἦθος ἀγριώτερον (B. J. τι. vill. 14). 
 
 50. συμφέρει ὑμῖν. It is expedient for you half-hearted Pharisees : 
 ὑμῖν corresponds with the contemptuous ὑμεῖς, a point which is spoiled 
 by the inferior reading ἡμῖν. 
 
 ἵνα eis ἄνθ. ἀποθ. Literally, in order that one man should die; 
 5. John’s favourite construction pointing to the Divine purpose: see 
 on i. 8, iv. 34, 47, and comp. xvi. 7, vi. 29, 40, 50, ix. 2, 3, xii. 23, 
 xiii. 84. The high-priest thus singles out the Scapegoat. 
 
 τοῦ λαοῦ. The Jews as a theocratic community; whereas τὸ ἔθνος 
 (v. 48, xviii. 35) is the Jews as one of the nations of the earth (Luke 
 vii. 5; Acts x. 22. Ta ἔθνη of course means the Gentiles (Acts x. 45; 
 Rom. xi. 13, Gal. ii. 12, &c.). 
 
 51. ἀφ᾽ éav. οὐκ εἶπ. Like Saul, Caiaphas is a prophet in spite of 
 himself. None but a Jew would be likely to know of the old Jewish 
 belief that the high-priest by means of the Urim and Thummim was 
 the mouthpiece of the Divine oracle. The Urim and Thummim had 
 been lost, and the high-priest’s office had been shorn of much of its 
 glory, but the remembrance of his prophetical gift did not become 
 
248 S. JOHN. [XI. 51— 
 
 quite extinct (Hos. iii. 4); and ‘in that fatal year’ 5, John might well 
 believe that the gift would be restored. For ἤμελλεν see on vi. 71. 
 
 52. οὐχ ὑπὲρ τ. ἔθνους μόνον. S. John purposely uses the word which 
 describes the Jews merely as one of the nations of the earth distinct 
 from the Gentiles. We are not to understand that Caiaphas had any 
 thought of the gracious meaning contained in his infamous advice. 
 Balaam prophesied unwillingly, Caiaphas unconsciously. 
 
 συναγ. els ἕν. Gather together into one (x. 16, xvii. 21). The idea 
 of Jews scattered among Gentiles is here transferred to believers 
 scattered among unbelievers. For ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα see on i. 8, and for ra 
 τέκνα τ. Θεοῦ, 1 John iii. 10. The Gentiles are already such poten- 
 tially: they have the δύναμις, and will hereafter receive ἐξουσίαν τέκνα 
 Θεοῦ γένεσθαι (see on i. 12). 
 
 53. ἀπ᾽ ἐκείνης οὖν. From that (fatal) day therefore: it was in 
 consequence of Caiaphas’ suggestion that they practically, if not for- 
 mally, pronounced sentence of death. The question was how to get 
 the sentence carried out. 
 
 54. Ἶ. οὖν. Jesus therefore, because He knew that in raising His 
 friend He had signed His own death-warrant, and that He must wait 
 until His hour was come (xiii. 1). For παρρησίᾳ see on vii. 13; for 
 περιεπάτει, Vii. 1. The time for freedom of speech and freedom of 
 movement among them is over. 
 
 els τ. χώραν ἐγγὺς τ. ép. Into the country near the wilderness, a 
 place of greater retirement than Peraea (x. 40). The wilderness of 
 Judaea is probably meant. But Ephraim cannot be identified with 
 certainty. Eusebius makes it eight miles, Jerome twenty miles, N.E. 
 of Jerusalem: both make it the same as Ephron. If the Ephraim of 
 2 Chron. xiii. 19 and Josephus (B. J. Iv. ix. 9) be meant, the wilder- 
 ness would be that of Bethaven. 
 
 55. ἦν δὲ éyy. τ. 7. τ. °I. Now the passover of the Jews. ‘Of 
 the Jews’ is added with full significance: see on ii. 13 and vi. 4. 
 
 ἵνα ἁγνίσωσιν ἑαυ. (Acts xxi. 24.) Again we have evidence that 
 the Evangelist is a Jew. No purifications are ordered by the Law as 
 a preparation for the Passover. But to be ceremonially unclean was 
 to be excluded (xviii. 28); hence it was customary for those who were 
 so to go up to Jerusalem in good time, so as to be declared clean 
 before the Feast began. 
 
 56. ἐζήτουν οὖν. They sought therefore: because they had come 
 up expecting to see Him, but He remained in retirement. Note the 
 imperfects of continued action. The restless curiosity of these 
 country-folk, standing talking together in the Temple, whither many 
 of them had come to bring the offerings for their purification, and 
 where Jesus was so often to be found, is very lifelike. It is better to 
 make two questions than to take ὅτι after δοκεῖ: What think ye? 
 That He will not come to the Feast 3 
 
XIi.] NOTES. 249 
 
 57. οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς K. of Φ. See on vii. 32. The verse explains why 
 the people doubted His coming to the Feast. Note that once more 
 the Sadducean hierarchy takes the lead. Comp. v. 47, xii. 10, xviii. 
 8, 35, xix. 6, 15, 21. In the history of the Passion the Pharisees are 
 mentioned only once (Matt. xxvii. 62), and then, as here, after the 
 chief priests, 
 
 ἐντολάς. This is the better reading, which has been altered to 
 ἐντολήν because only one command was given: comp. our phrase ‘to 
 give orders.’ We have a similar use of ἐντολάς in Col. iv. 10, if évro- 
 das refers to ἐὰν ἔλθῃ δέξασθε αὐτόν. Here the plural may indicate 
 repetition of the order. 
 
 ἵνα...πιάσωσιν. See on iy. 47, vii. 30. The decree for His arrest 
 had been published; the sentence of death was probably kept secret. 
 But the Babylonian Gemara preserves a tradition that ‘‘ an officer for 
 40 days publicly proclaimed that this man, who had seduced the 
 people by his imposture, ought to be stoned, and that any one who 
 could say aught in his defence was to come forward and speak. But 
 no one doing so he was hanged on the eve of the Passover.” 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 1. Omit 6 τεθνηκώς after Adfapos, with NBLX against ADI*. 
 
 2. ἀνακειμένων σύν (NABD) for συνανακειμένων (frequent in the 
 Synoptists, not found in 5. John). 
 
 7. Insert ἵνα after αὐτήν δηα read τηρήσῃ for τετήρηκεν (changes to 
 escape a difficulty), with NBDKLQX against Α15, 
 
 13. éxpavyafov for ἔκραζον (from Matt. and Mark) with NBDLQ 
 against A. 
 
 18. ἤκουσαν for ἤκουσε (correction for uniformity). 
 
 25. ἀπολλύει (NBL) for ἀπολέσει (AD). 
 
 35, 36. ὡς for ἕως, and ἐν ὑμῖν for μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν. 
 
 40. ἐπώρωσεν for πεπώρωκεν, and ἰάσομαι for ἰάσωμαι (both correc- 
 tions for uniformity): στραφῶσιν for ἐπιστραφώσι (ἐπιστρέψωσιν in 
 LXX.). 
 
 41. ὅτι for ore: comp. v. 17. 
 
 47. φυλάξῃ for πιστεύσῃ, on overwhelming authority, 
 
250 S. JOHN. [ΣῈ dee 
 
 Cuar. XII. Tue Jupament. 
 
 We now enter upon the third section of the first main division of 
 this Gospel. It may be useful to state the divisions once more. THE 
 ProLocusE, i. 1—18; THe Ministry, i. 19—xii. 50, thus divided— 
 (1) THE TESTIMONY, i. 19—ii. 11; (2) THe Work, ii. 13—xi. 57; (3) 
 Tue JUDGMENT, xii. This third ‘section, which now lies before us, 
 may be subdivided thus—(a) the Judgment of men, 1—36; (8) the 
 Judgment of the Evangelist, 37—43; (y) the Judgment of Christ, 
 4450. 
 
 We have not sufficient data for harmonizing this latter portion of 
 5. John with the Synoptists. In the large gaps left by each there is 
 plenty of room for all that is peculiar to the others, §. John’s plan 
 is precise and consistent: but once more we have a blank of undefined 
 extent (see introductory note to chap. vi. and on vi. 1). This 
 chapter forms at once a conclusion to the Work and Conflict and an 
 introduction to the Passion. 
 
 1—36. THE JupGMENT oF MEN, 
 
 Note the dramatic contrast between the different sections of this 
 division; the devotion of Mary and the enmity of the priests, Christ’s 
 triumph and the Pharisees’ discomfiture, the Gentiles seeking the 
 Light and the Chosen People refusing to see it. 
 
 1. ὁ οὖν Ἴ. The οὖν simply resumes the narrative from the 
 point where it quitted Jesus, xi. 55. This is better than to make it 
 depend on xi. 57, as if He went to Bethany to avoid His enemies, 
 His hour is drawing near, and therefore He draws near to the ap- 
 eae scene of His sufferings. 
 
 po ἕξ ἡμ. τοῦ 7. The Passover began at sunset on Nisan 14: six 
 ele before this would bring us to Nisan 8, which day, Josephus 
 states, pilgrims often chose for arriving at J erusalem. Assuming the 
 year to be a.p. 30, Nisan 8 would be Friday, March 31. We may 
 suppose, therefore, that Jesus and His disciples arrived at Bethany 
 on the Friday evening a little after the Sabbath had commenced, 
 having performed not more than ‘a Sabbath-day’s journey’ on the 
 Sabbath, the bulk of the journey being over before the day of rest 
 began. But it must be remembered that this chronology is tentative, 
 not certain. For the construction see on xi. 18 and comp. xxi. 8 
 and πρὸ δύο ἐτῶν τοῦ σεισμοῦ (Amos i. 1): πρὸ μιᾶς ἡμέρας τῆς Mapéo- 
 χαικῆς ἡμέρας (2 Mace. xv. 86). Here aiso the preposition seems to 
 have been transposed; we should expect ἕξ ἡμέρας πρὸ τοῦ w. Perhaps 
 5. John wishes to contrast this last week with the first; see on ii. 1. 
 
 ὃν ἦγ. ἐκ v. "I. This descriptive phrase may have become a com- 
 mon designation of Lazarus (v. 9): comp. ὃν ἠγάπα ὁ ᾽1. (xiii. 23, xix. 
 26, xxi. 7, 20). 
 2—8. Tue Devotion or Mary, 
 
 2. ἐποίησαν οὖν. They made therefore; because of His great miracle 
 just mentioned (v. 1) and its consequences. The banquet is a generous 
 
XII. 5.] NOTES. 251 
 
 protest against the decree of the Sanhedrin (xi. 57). The nomina- 
 tive to ἐποίησαν is indefinite: if we had only this account we should 
 suppose that the supper was in the house of Martha, Mary, and 
 Lazarus; but 5. Mark (xiv. 3) and S. Matthew (xxvi. 6) tell us that 
 it was in the house of Simon the leper, who had possibly been healed 
 by Christ and probably was a friend or relation of Lazarus and his 
 sisters. Martha’s serving (comp. Luke x. 40) in his house is evidence 
 of the latter point (see the notes on 8. Matthew and S. Mark). 
 
 ὁ δὲ Adt. «.r.A. This is probably introduced to prove the reality 
 and completeness of his restoration to life: it confirms the Synoptic 
 accounts by indicating that Lazarus was guest rather than host. 
 
 3. λίτραν. S. John alone gives Mary’s name and the amount. 
 The pound of 12 ounces is meant. So large a quantity of a substance 
 so costly is evidence of her overflowing love. Comp, xix. 39. 
 
 νάρδου πιστικῆς. The expression is a rare one, and occurs else- 
 where only Mark xiv. 3, which 8. John very likely had seen: his 
 account has all the independence of that of an eyewitness, but may 
 have been influenced by the Synoptic narratives. The meaning of 
 the Greek is not certain: it may mean (1) ‘genuine nard’ (πίστι:), 
 and spikenard was often adulterated; or (2) ‘drinkable, liquid nard’ 
 (πίνω), and unguents were sometimes drunk; or (3) ‘ Pistic nard,’ 
 ‘Pistic’ being supposed to be a local adjective. But no place from 
 which such an adjective could come appears to be known. Of the 
 other two explanations the first is to be preferred. The English 
 ‘spikenard’ seems to recall the nardi spicati of the Vulgate in Mark 
 xiy. 3: here the Vulgate has nardi pistici. Winer, p. 121. 
 
 πολυτίμου. Horace offers to give a cask of wine for a very small 
 box of it; Nardi parvus onyx eliciet cadum (Carm. Iv. xii. 17). 
 
 τοὺς πόδας. The two Synoptists mention only the usual (Ps. xxiii. δ) 
 anointing of the head; S. John records the less usual act, which again 
 is evidence of Mary’s devotion. The rest of this verse is peculiar to 
 S. John, and shews that he was present. Note the emphatic repetition 
 of τοὺς πόδας. To unbind the hair in public wasa disgrace to a Jewish 
 woman ; but Mary makes this sacrifice also. In ἐκ τ. ὀσμῆς the ἐκ 
 expresses that owt of which the filling was produced: comp. LXX. in 
 Ps. cxxvil. 5; ὃς πληρώσει τὴν ἐπιθυμίαν αὐτοῦ ἐξ αὐτῶν. 
 
 4. ᾿Ιούδας ὁ Ἴσκ. S. Mark (xiv. 4) says, quite indefinitely, τινες ; 
 S. Matthew (xxvi. 8), of μαθηταί. Hach probably states just what he 
 knew; 5. Mark that the remark was made; 5. Matthew that it came 
 from the group of disciples ; 8. John that Judas made it, and why he 
 made it. §. John was perhaps anxious that the unworthy grumbling 
 should be assigned to the right person. For ὁ μέλλων αὐτὸν παρ. see 
 on vi. 71. 
 
 5. τριακοσίων Syv. Over £20, if we reckon according to the pur- 
 chasing power of the denarius: see on vi. 7. Πτωχοῖς (no article), to 
 poor people: comp, διάδος πτωχοῖς (Luke xviii. 22), 
 
252 S. JOHN. [ΧΙ]. 6— 
 
 6. γλωσσόκομον. More classical form γλωσσοκομεῖον, from κομέω. 
 It literally means a ‘case for mouthpieces’ of musical instruments, 
 and hence any portable chest. Its occurring in LXX. only of 
 the chest into which offerings for the Temple were put (2 Chron. 
 xxiv. 8, 10, 11) may have infiuenced 8. John in using it of the box 
 in which the funds of the little company, mainly consisting of offerings 
 (Luke viii, 3), were kept. The word occurs in N.T. only here and 
 xili. 29. 
 
 ἐβάσταζεν. Hither used to carry, or used to carry away, i.e. steal : 
 comp. xx. 15. The latter is more probable: he took what was put 
 therein. The καί after κλέπτης ἣν is epexegetic and introduces an 
 explanation of the way in which he was a thief. §. Augustine, com- 
 menting on ‘ portabat,’ which he found in the Italic Version, and 
 which survives in the Vulgate, says ‘ portabat an exportabat? sed 
 ministerio portabat, furto exportabat.”” We have the same play in 
 ‘lift,’ e.g. ‘ shop-lifting;’ and in the old use of ‘convey:’ ‘‘ To steal” 
 ...* Convey the wise it call.” Merry Wives of Windsor, 1. 3. “Ο good! 
 Convey ?—Conveyers are you all.” Richard II. 1v.1. The common 
 meaning, ‘used to carry,’ gives very little sense. Of course if he 
 carried the box he carried τὰ βάλλομενα, the gifts that were being put 
 into it from time to time: comp. Vv. 7, xiii. 2, xx. 25. 
 
 1. ἄφες αὐτήν, ἵνα. Let her alone, that for the day of the pre- 
 paration for My burial she may preserve it: or, more simply, Suffer 
 her to keep it for the day of My burial. But ἐνταφιασμός (here and 
 Mark xiv. 8 only) means the embalming and other preparations rather 
 than the actual entombment: comp. xix. 40. The meaning is not 
 clear: (1) Suffer her to keep what remains of it ; not, however, for the 
 poor, but for My burial, which is close at hand.’ But was there any 
 of it left? (2) ‘Let her alone; (she has not sold it for the poor) that 
 she may keep it for My burial.’ (8) ‘Suffer her to keep it (for she 
 intended to do so) for the day of My burial:’ i.e. do not find fault 
 with a good intention which she has unwittingly carried out. The 
 words are spoken from the point of view of the past, when Mary’s act 
 was still only a purpose. 
 
 8. τοὺς πτωχοὺς yap κιτιλ. Comp. Deut. xv. 11. Every word of 
 this verse occurs in the first two Gospels, though not quite in the 
 same order. Here the emphasis is on ‘the poor,’ there on ‘always.’ 
 The striking originality of the saying, and the large claim which it 
 makes, are evidence of its origin from Him who spake as never man 
 spake. Considering how Christ speaks of the poor elsewhere, these 
 words may be regarded as quite beyond the reach of a writer of fiction. 
 S. John, who gives Mary’s name, omits the promise of fame as wide 
 as Christendom. §. Matthew and 5. Mark, who give the promise, do 
 not give her name: see on ii. 19, xviii, 11, 
 
 9—11. Tuer Hosriniry or THE PRIESTs, 
 
 9. ὁ ὄχλος πολύς, Large caravans would be coming up for the 
 Passover, and the news would spread quickly through the shifting 
 
XII. 12.] NOTES. 253 
 
 crowds, who were already on the alert (xi. 55) about Jesus, and were 
 now anxious to see Lazarus. It is the ‘large multitude of 
 the Jews’ who come; i.e. of Christ’s usual opponents. This again 
 (comp. xi. 45—47) excites the hierarchy to take decisive measures. See 
 on v. 12. But perhaps here and in v. 12 ὄχλος πολύς is virtually a 
 compound word, the common people of the Jews, as distinct from the 
 i Ὄχλος, in Cretan πόλχος, seems to be akin to vulgus and 
 ‘ folk.’ 
 
 ὃν ἤγειρεν. See on v. 1. These repeated references to the raising of 
 Lazarus (xi. 45, 47, xii. 1, 9, 10,17) greatly strengthen the historical 
 evidence for the miracle. They are quite inconsistent with the theory 
 either of a misunderstanding or of deliberate fraud. 
 
 10. οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς. See on vii. 32. Nothing is here said about the 
 Pharisees (comp. xi. 47, 57), who are, however, not necessarily excluded. 
 Both would wish to put Lazarus out of the way for the reason given 
 in v. 11: but the chief priests, who were mostly Sadducees, would 
 have an additional reason, in that Lazarus was a living refutation of 
 their doctrine that ‘there is no resurrection’ (Acts xxiii. 8). 
 
 ἵνα καὶ τ. Λάζ. Whatever may be true about xi. 53, we must not 
 suppose that this verse implies a formal sentence of death: it does not 
 even imply a meeting of the Sanhedrin. 
 
 S. Augustine comments on the folly of the priests—as if Christ 
 could not raise Lazarus a second time! But this ignores the ‘also’: 
 the hierarchy meant to put both to death. Their folly consisted in 
 failing to see, not that He could raise Lazarus again, but that He 
 could raise Himself (ii. 19). Note that it is the unscrupulous hierarchy, 
 who attempt this crime. Comp. xviii. 35, xix. 6, 15, 21. 
 
 11. ὑπῆγον... ἐπίστευον. The imperfects express a continual pro- 
 cess: were going away and believing. It is best to leave ‘going 
 away’ quite indefinite; the idea of falling away from the hierarchy 
 lies in the context and not in the word. 
 
 The climax is approaching. Of ‘the Jews’ themselves many are 
 being won over to Christ, and are ready to give Him an enthusiastic 
 reception whenever He appears. The remainder become all the more 
 bitter, and resolve to sweep away anyone, however innocent, who con- 
 tributes to the success of Jesus. 
 
 12—18. THe ENTHUSIASM OF THE PEOPLE. 
 
 12. τῇ ἐπαύριον. From the date given v. 1, consequently Nisan 9, 
 from Saturday evening to Sunday evening, if the chronology given on 
 v. Liscorrect. §. John seems distinctly to assert that the Triumphal 
 Entry followed the supper at Bethany: 5. Matthew and 5. Mark both 
 place the supper after the entry, 5. Matthew without any date and 
 probably neglecting (as often) the chronological order, 8. Mark also 
 without date, yet apparently implying (xiv. 1) that the supper took 
 place two days before the Passover. But the date in Mark xiv. 1 
 covers only two verses and must not be carried further in contradiction 
 
254 S. JOHN. (XII. 12— 
 
 to 5. John’s precise and consistent arrangement. §. John omits all 
 details respecting the procuring of the young ass. 
 
 ὄχλος πολύς. Perhaps, as in v. 9, we should read ὁ ὄχλος πολύς, 
 and understand the expression as one word, the common people. In 
 both verses authorities are divided as to the insertion or omission of 
 the article. But ‘the common people’ here are not Judaeans, but 
 pilgrims from other parts, who have no prejudice against Jesus, 
 
 13. τὰ Bata τῶν ᾧφ. Literally, the palm-branches of the palm-trees ; 
 i.e. those which grew there, or which were commonly used at festivals. 
 Βαΐον (here only) means a palm-branch, apparently of Coptic origin. 
 S. Matthew (xxi. 8) has κλάδους ἀπὸ τ. δένδρων; ὃ. Mark (xi. 8) στιβά- 
 das ἐκ τ. 6. As often, it is 5. John who is the most precise. Comp. 
 Simon’s triumphal entry into Jerusalem (1 Mace. xiii. 51). The palm- 
 tree was regarded by the ancients as characteristic of Palestine. 
 ‘Pheenicia’ (Acts xi. 19, xv. 3) is probably derived from golmé The 
 tree is now comparatively rare, except in the Philistine plain: at 
 ‘Jericho, the city of palm-trees’ (Deut. xxxiv. 3; 2 Chron, xxxviii. 15) 
 there is not one. For kpavyd{w see on xviii. 40. 
 
 “Qeavvd. This is evidence that the writer of this Gospel knows 
 Hebrew. See on vi. 45. In the LXX. at Ps. cxvii. 25 we have a 
 translation of the Hebrew, σῶσον δή, ‘save we pray,’ not a translitera- 
 tion as here. (Comp. ‘Alleluia’ in Rey. xix. 1, 6). This Psalm was 
 sung both at the F. of Tabernacles and also at the Passover, and 
 would be very familiar to the people. It is said by some to have been 
 written for the F. of Tabernaeles after the return from captivity, by 
 others for the founding or dedicating of the second Temple. It was 
 regarded as Messianic, and both the Psalm and the palm-branches 
 seem to imply a welcoming of the Messiah. In what follows the better 
 reading gives Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord, even 
 the king of Israel. The cry of the multitude was of course not always 
 the same, and the different Evangelists give us different forms of it. 
 
 14. εὑρών. 5. John does not repeat the well-known story of the 
 finding: see on ix, 35. On ἐστιν γεγραμμένον see on ii. 17. 
 
 15. μὴ φοβοῦ. The quotation is freely made from Zech. ix. 9: 
 μὴ φοβοῦ is substituted for χαῖρε σφόδρα, and the whole is abbreviated. 
 In writing ὁ Bac. σον and πῶλον ὄνου the Evangelist seems to be 
 translating direct from the Hebrew. The best editions of LXX. omit 
 cov, and all have πῶλον νέον. Comp. i. 29, vi. 45, xix. 37. If the 
 writer of this Gospel knew the O.T. in Hebrew, he almost certainly 
 was a Jew. 
 
 16. οὐκ ἔγνωσαν. A mark of candour: see on ii. 22, xi. 12, xx. 9. 
 After Pentecost much that had been unnoticed or obscure before was 
 brought to their remembrance and made clear (xiv. 26). But would a 
 Christian of the second century have invented this dulness in 
 Apostles? Ταῦτα, with threefold emphasis, refers primarily to the 
 placing Him on the young ass, For ἐδοξάσθη see on vii. 39, xi. 4. 
 The nom. to ἐποίησαν is οἱ μαθηταί: they themselves had unwittingly 
 helped to fulfil the prophecy (Luke xix. 29, 37, 39). 
 
XII. 21.] NOTES. 255 
 
 17. ote r. Λάζ. See on v.9. The multitude, therefore, that was 
 with Him when He raised...were bearing witness. See on v. 41. This 
 special mention of the ‘calling from the tomb’ is very natural in one 
 who was there, and remembered the φωνὴ μεγάλη (xi. 43) and the ex- 
 citement which it caused; not so in a writer of fiction. 
 
 18. τοῦτο. Emphatic: other signs had made comparatively little 
 impression; this one had convinced even His enemies, There are two 
 multitudes, one coming with Jesus from Bethany, and one (13, 18) 
 meeting Him from Jerusalem. The Synoptists do not notice the 
 latter. 
 
 19. Tue DIscoMFITURE OF THE PHARISEES, 
 
 19. θεωρεῖτε. Hither (indic.) Ye behold, or Behold ye? or (imper.) 
 Behold. The first seems best: comp. v. 39, xiv. 1, xv. 18; 1 John 
 11, 27, 28, 29. ‘Ye see what a mistake we have made; we ought to 
 have adopted the plan of Caiaphas long ago.’ 
 
 We ὁ κόσμος. The exaggerated expression of their chagrin, which 
 in this Divine epic is brought into strong contrast with the triumph 
 of Jesus. Comp. a similar exaggeration from a similar cause 111. 26; 
 ‘all men come to Him.’ For ἴδε see on i, 29. ᾿Απῆλθεν, is gone 
 away, implies that Jesus’ gain is the Pharisees’ loss. The words are 
 perhaps recorded as another unconscious prophecy (xi. 50, vii. 35). 
 After this confession of helplessness the Pharisees appear no more 
 alone; the reckless hierarchy help them on to the catastrophe. 
 
 20—33. Tue DESIRE OF THE GENTILES AND THE VOICE FROM 
 HEAVEN. 
 
 20. “Ἕλληνες. In A.V. translated ‘Gentiles’ vii. 35 (where see 
 note), and ‘Greeks’ here. Care must be taken to distinguish in the 
 N.T. between Hellenes or ‘Greeks,’ 1.6. born Gentiles, who may or 
 may not have become either Jewish proselytes or Christian converts, 
 and Hellenistae or ‘Grecians,’ as our Bible renders the word, i.e. Jews 
 who spoke Greek and not Aramaic. Neither word occurs in the 
 Synoptists. Ἕλληνες are mentioned here, vii. 35, and frequently in 
 the Acts and in 5. Paul’s Epistles. ᾿Ἑλληνισταῖ are mentioned only 
 Acts vi. 1, ix. 29: in Acts xi. 20 the right reading is probably 
 “Ἕλληνας. 
 
 τῶν ἀναβαινόντων. That were wont to go up to worship. This 
 shews that they were ‘proselytes of the gate,’ like the Ethiopian 
 eunuch (Acts viii. 27): see on Matt. xxiii. 15. In this incident we 
 have an indication of the salvation rejected by the Jews passing to 
 the Gentiles: the scene of it was probably the Court of the Gentiles; 
 it is peculiar to S. John, who gives no note of time. 
 
 21. Φιλίππῳ] Their coming to 5. Philip was the result either 
 (1) of accident; or (2) of previous acquaintance, to which the mention 
 - of his home seems to point; or (3) of his Greek name, which might 
 attract them. See oni. 45, vi. 5, xiv. 8. In Κύριε they shew their 
 
256 5. JOHN. [XII 21— 
 
 respect for the disciple of such a Master (comp. iv. 11,15, 19). Their 
 desire to ‘come and see’ for themselves (θέλομεν ἐδεῖν) would at once 
 win the sympathy of the practical Philip. See on i. 46 and xiv. 8. 
 
 22. τῷ ᾿Ανδρέᾳλ͵ Another Apostle with a Greek name. They were 
 both of Bethsaida (i. 44), and possibly these Greeks may have come 
 from the same district. §. Philip seems to shrink from the responsi- 
 bility of introducing Gentiles to the Messiah, and applies in his diffi- 
 culty to the Apostle who had already distinguished himself by bringing 
 others to Christ (i. 41, vi. 8, 9). 
 
 23. ὁ δὲ “I. ἀποκρίνεται. He anticipates the Apostles and addresses 
 them before they introduce the Greeks. We are left in doubt as to 
 the result of the Greeks’ request. Nothing is said to them in par- 
 ticular, though they may have followed and heard this address to the 
 Apostles, which gradually shades off into soliloquy. 
 
 These men from the West at the close of Christ’s life set forth the 
 same truth as the men from the East at the beginning of it—that the 
 Gentiles are to be gathered in. The wise men came to His cradle, 
 these to His cross, of which their coming reminds Him; for only by 
 His death could ‘ the nations’ be saved. 
 
 ἐλήλυθεν ἡ Spa. The phrase is peculiar to 5. John; vii. 30, viii. 
 20, xui. 1, xvii. 1: contrast Matt. xxvi. 45; Luke xxii. 14. The verb 
 first for emphasis (iv. 21, 23), ‘it hath come—the fated hour.’ See on 
 Vii. 6, xiii. 1. The ἵνα indicates the Divine purpose (xiii. 1, xvi. 2, 32; 
 xi. 50); see Winer, p. 576. Δοξασθῇ, by His Passion and Death, 
 through which He must pass to return to glory (vil. 39, xi. 4; i. 52). 
 
 ἀμὴν ἀμήν. i, 52. Strange as it may seem that the Messiah 
 should die, yet this is but the course of nature: a seed cannot be 
 glorified unless it dies. A higher form of existence is obtained only 
 through the extinction of the lower form that preceded it. Except 
 the grain of wheat fall into the earth and die it abideth by itself 
 alone. 
 
 25. Ψυχήν.. ζωήν. Ψυχή is the life of the individual, ¢w7 life in 
 the abstract. By a noble disregard of the former we win the latter: 
 sacrifice of self is the highest self-preservation. See on Matt. x. 39, 
 xvi. 25; Mark viii. 35.; Luke ix. 24, xvii. 33. Most of these texts refer 
 to different occasions, so that this solemn warning must have been 
 often on His lips. This occasion is distinct from all the rest, 
 ᾿Απολλύει is either destroyeth it or loseth it: selfishness is self-ruin. 
 
 « 
 
 ὁ μισῶν. He who, if necessary, is ready to act towards his ψυχή as 
 if he hated it. Neither here nor in Luke xiv. 26 must μισεῖν be watered 
 down to mean ‘be not too fond of:’ it means that and a great deal 
 more, For ζωὴν αἰώνιον see on iil. 15, 16. 
 
 26. ἐμοὶ ἀκολουθείτω. In My life of self-sacrifice: Christ Himself 
 has set the example of hating one’s life in this world. These words 
 are perhaps addressed through the disciples to the Greeks listening 
 close at hand, If they ‘wish to see Jesus’ and know Him they must 
 
Sit 981 NOTES. 257 
 
 count the cost first. ’Euof is emphatic in both clauses. Note the 
 pronouns in what follows. Where I am, i.e. ‘in My kingdom, which 
 is already secured to Me:’ the phrase is peculiar to this Gospel (xiv. 3, 
 xvii, 24): Winer, p. 332. The ἐκεῖ possibly includes the road to the 
 kingdom, death. On ὁ ὃ. ὁ ἐμός see on viii. 31. 
 
 ἐάν ris. The offer is all-embracing: vi. 51, vii. 17, 37, viii. 52, x. 9. 
 Note the change of order. Here the verbs are emphatic, and balance 
 one another. Such service is not humiliating but honourable. The 
 verse is closely parallel to v. 25. 
 
 27. A verse of known difficulty : several meanings are admissible 
 and none can be affirmed with certainty. The doubtful points are (1) 
 the interrogation, whether it should come after τί εἴπω or ταύτης; 
 (2) the meaning of διὰ τοῦτο. 
 
 ψυχή μ. τετάρακται. My soul has been and still is troubled, It 
 is the ψυχή, the seat of the natural emotions and affections, that is 
 troubled; not the πνεῦμα, as in xi. 35. But, to bring out the con- 
 nexion with vv. 25, 26, we may render, Now is My life troubled. ‘He 
 that would serve Me must follow Me and be ready to hate his life ; 
 for My life has long since been tossed and torn with suffering and 
 sorrow.’ 
 
 τί εἴπυ; What must I say? This appears to be the best punctua- 
 tion; and the question expresses the difficulty of framing a prayer 
 under the conflicting influences of fear of death and willingness to 
 glorify His Father by dying. The result is first a prayer under the 
 influence of fear—‘save Me from this hour’ (comp. ‘ Let this cup pass 
 from Me,’ Matt. xxvi. 39), and then a prayer under the influence of 
 ready obedience—‘ Glorify Thy Name’ through My sufferings. But 
 σῶσόν με €k Means “ save me out of,’ i.e. ‘bring Me safe out of;’ rather 
 than ‘save Me from’ (σῶσόν με ato), i.e. ‘keep Me altogether away 
 from,’ as in ‘ deliver us from the evil one’ (Matt, vi.13). Note the aorist, 
 which shews that special present deliverance, rather than perpetual 
 preservation, is prayed for. §. John omits the Agony in the garden, 
 which was in the Synoptists and was well known to every Christian ; 
 but he gives us here an insight into a less known truth, which is still 
 often forgotten, that the agony was not confined to Gethsemane, but 
 was part of Christ’s whole life. Comp. Luke xii. 50. Others place 
 the question at ταύτης, and the drift of the whole will then be, ‘ How 
 can I say, Father, save Me from this hour? Nay, I came to suffer; 
 therefore My prayer shall be, Father, glorify Thy Name.’ 
 
 διὰ τοῦτο. These words are taken in two opposite senses; (1) that 
 I might be saved out of this hour; (2) that Thy Name might be 
 glorified by My obedience. Both make good sense. If the latter be 
 adopted it would be better to transpose the stops, placing a full stop 
 after ‘ from this hour’ and a colon after ‘ unto this hour.’ 
 
 28. ἦλθεν οὖν. There came therefore, i.e. in answer to Christ’s 
 prayer. There can be no doubt what S. John wishes us to understand ; 
 .—that a voice was heard speaking articulate words, that some could 
 
 ST JOHN R 
 
25 S. JOUN. (XII. 28— 
 
 distinguish the words, others could not, while some mistook the 
 sounds for thunder. To make the thunder the reality, and the voice 
 and the words mere imagination, is to substitute an arbitrary expla- 
 nation for the Evangelist’s plain meaning. For similar voices comp. 
 that heard by Elijah (1 Kings xix. 12, 13); by Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. 
 iv. 31); at Christ’s Baptism (Mark i. 11) and Transfiguration (Mark 
 ix. 7); at S. Paul’s Conversion (Acts ix. 4, 7, xxii. 9), where it would 
 seem that 8. Paul alone could distinguish the words, while his compa- 
 nions merely heard a sound (see on Acts ix. 4) ; and the mixed φωναὶ 
 καὶ βρονταί of the Apocalypse (iv. 5, viii. 5, xvi. 18). One of the con- 
 ditions on which power to distinguish what is said depends is sym- 
 pathy with the speaker. 
 
 ἐδόξασα. In all God’s works from the Creation onwards, especially 
 in the life of Christ; δοξάσω, in the death of Christ and its results. 
 
 30. ἀπεκρίθη. He answered their discussions about the sound, 
 and by calling it a voice He decides conclusively against those who 
 supposed it to be thunder. But those who recognised that it was a 
 voice were scarcely less seriously mistaken; their error consisted in 
 not recognising that the voice had a meaning for them. Not for My 
 sake hath this voice come, but for your sakes, i.e. that ye might 
 believe. Comp. xi. 42. 
 
 31. viv...viv. With prophetic certainty He speaks of the victory 
 as already won: comp. ὅπου εἰμί (v. 26). Κρίσις τ. κόσμου τ. is the 
 sentence passed on this world (iii. 17, v. 29) for refusing to believe. 
 The Cross is the condemnation of those who reject it. 
 
 ὁ ἄρχων τ. κι τ. The ruler of this world. This is one of the appa- 
 rently Gnostic phrases which may have contributed to render this 
 Gospel suspicious in the eyes of the Alogi (Introduction, Chap. τι. 
 i.): it occurs again xiv. 30, xvi. 11, and nowhere else. It was a 
 Gnostic view that the creator and ruler of the material universe was 
 an evil being. But in the Rabbinical writings ‘ prince of this world’ 
 was a common designation of Satan, as ruler of the Gentiles, in oppo- 
 sition to God, the Head of the Jewish theocracy. Yet just as the 
 Messiah is the Saviour of the believing world, whether Jew or Gentile, 
 so Satan is the ruler of the unbelieving world, whether Gentile or 
 Jew. He ‘shall be cast out’ (comp. vi. 37, ix. 34, 35), by the gradual 
 conversion of sinners, a process which will continue until the last day. 
 
 32. Kayo ἐὰν ὑψωθῶ. ᾿Εγώ in emphatic opposition to ὁ ἄρχων τ. κ. τ. 
 The glorified Christ, raised to ro by means of the Cross, will rule 
 men’s hearts in the place of the devil. We need not, as in iii, 14, 
 viii. 28, confine ὑψωθώ to the Crucifixion; ἐκ τῆς γῆς seems to point 
 to the Ascension. Yet the Cross itself, apparently so repulsive, has 
 through Christ’s death become an attraction ; and this may be the 
 meaning here. For the hypothetical ἐὰν ὑψωθῶ comp. ἐὰν πορευθῶ 
 (xiv. 8). In both Christ is concerned not with the time but the results 
 of the act; hence not ‘ when’ but ‘if,’ Comp. 1 John ii. 8, iii, 2, 
 
XII. 36.] NOTES. 259 
 
 ἑλκύσω. Not συρῶ (see on vi. 44), There is no violence; the at- 
 traction is moral and not irresistible. Man’s will is free, and he may 
 refuse to be drawn. Previous to the ‘lifting up’ it is the Father who 
 ‘draws’ men to the Son (vi. 44, 45). And in both cases all are drawn 
 and taught: not only the Jews represented by the Twelve, but the 
 Gentiles represented by the Greeks. Πρὸς ἐμαυτόν, unto Myself, up 
 from the earth. The two verses (31, 32) sum up the history of the 
 Church; the overthrow of Satan’s rule, the establishment of Christ’s. 
 
 33. ποίῳ 6. By what manner of death (x. 32, xviii. 32, xxi. 9). 
 For ἤμελλεν see on vi. 71. 
 
 34—36. Tue PrerPLexiIty oF THE MULTITUDE. 
 
 34. ἐκ τ. νόμου. In its widest sense, including the Psalms and the 
 Prophets, as in x. 34, xv. 25. Comp. Ps. lxxxix. 29, 36, cx. 4; Is. ix. 
 7; Ezek. xxxvii. 25, &c. The people rightly understand ‘lifted up 
 from the earth’ to mean removal from the earth by death; and they 
 argue—‘Scripture says that the Christ (see on i. 20) will abide for 
 ever. You claim to be the Christ, and yet you say that you will be 
 lifted up and therefore not abide.’ For Set see on 111, 14. 
 
 οὗτος ὁ ui. τ. ἀν. Οὗτος is contemptuous (ix. 16): ‘astrange Messiah 
 this, with no power to abide!’ (See i. 52.) Once more we see with how 
 firm a hand the Evangelist has grasped the complicated situation. 
 One moment the people are convinced by a miracle that Jesus is the 
 Messiah, the next that it is impossible to reconcile His position with 
 the received interpretations of Messianic prophecy. It did not occur 
 to them to doubt the interpretations. 
 
 35. εἶπεν οὖν av. 6°I. Jesus therefore said to them: instead of 
 answering their contemptuous question He gives them a solemn warn- 
 ing. Walk as ye have the light (ws not ἕως) means ‘walk in a manner 
 suitable to the fact of there being the Light among you: make use of 
 the Light and work, in order that darkness (see on i. 5), in which no 
 man can work, overtake you not.’ ἹΚαταλαμβάνειν is used 1 Thess. v. 4 
 of the last day, and in LXX. of sin overtaking the sinner (Num. xxxii. 
 23). Some authorities have it in vi. 17 of darkness overtaking the 
 Apostles on the lake. 
 
 86. ὡς τ. φῶς ἔχετε. As ye have the Light (as in v. 35), believe on 
 the Light, that ye may become sons of light. Note the impressive 
 repetition of φώς (comp. i. 10, iii. 17, 31, xv. 19, xvii. 14), and the 
 absence of the article before φωτός. In all the four preceding cases τὸ 
 φῶς means Christ, as in i. 5, 7, 8,9. The expression ‘child of’ or 
 ‘son of’ is frequent in Hebrew to indicate very close connexion as 
 between product and producer (see on xvii. 12): vids εἰρήνης, Luke x. 6; 
 oi viol τ. αἰῶνος τούτου, xvi. 8; viol βροντῆς, Mark iii. 17. Such expres- 
 sions are very frequent in the most Hebraistic of the Gospels; Matt. 
 v. 9, viii. 12, ix. 15, xiii. 38, xxiii, 15. 
 
 ταῦτα ἐλάλησεν. He gave them no other answer, departed, and did 
 not return. 8. John is silent as to the place of retirement, which was 
 
 R2 
 
260 S. JOHN. [ΧΗ 36— 
 
 probably Bethany (Matt. xxi. 17; Mark xi. 11; Luke xxi. 37), The 
 one point which he would make prominent is the Christ’s withdrawal 
 from His people. Their time of probation is over. They have closed 
 their eyes again and again to the Light; and now the Light itself is 
 gone, He was hidden from them. 
 
 37—43. THE JUDGMENT OF THE EVANGELIST. 
 
 5. John here sums up the results of the ministry which has just 
 come toaclose. Their comparative poverty is such that he can ex- 
 plain it in no other way than as an illustration of that judicial blind- 
 ness which had been foretold and denounced by Isaiah, The tragic 
 tone returns again: see oni. 5. 
 
 37. τοσαῦτα. So many, not ‘so great’ (vi. 9, xxi. 11). The Jews 
 admitted His miracles (vii. 31, xi. 47). 85. John assumes them as no- 
 torious, though he records only seven (ii. 23, iv. 45, vii. 31, xi. 47). 
 
 38. ἵνα.. πληρωθῇ. Indicating the Divine purpose. Comp. xiii. 
 18, xv. 25, xvii. 12, xvili. 9, 32, xix. 24, 36. It is the two specially 
 Hebraistic Gospels that most frequently remind us that Christ’s life 
 was a fulfilment of Hebrew prophecy. Comp, Matt. i, 22 (note), ii 
 16, 47, ive 14, vill, 17, Χ1 ΠΣ ΠῚ op, xxl. 4, xxvi. 54, 56, xxvii. 9. 
 The quotation closely follows the LXX. Τῇ ἀκοῇ ἡμῶν is what they 
 heard from us rather than what we heard from God (1 Thess, ii. 18): 
 ὁ βραχίων Κυρίου means His power (Luke i. 5; Acts xiii. 17). 
 
 39. διὰ τοῦτος For this cause: as usual (vv. 18, 27, v. 18, vii. 21, 
 22, viii. 47, x. 17) this refers to what precedes, and ὅτι following gives 
 the reason more explicitly. For οὐκ ἐδύναντο see on vii. 7. It had be- 
 come morally impossible for them to believe. Grace may be refused 
 so persistently as to destroy the power of accepting it. ‘I will not’ 
 leads to ‘I cannot’ (Rom, ix. 6—xi, 32), 
 
 40. τετύφλωκεν. The nominative is ὁ Θεός. Here the quotation 
 follows neither the Hebrew nor the LXX. of Is. vi. 10 very closely. 
 The nominative to ἰάσομαι is Christ. God has hardened their hearts 
 so that Christ cannot heal them. Comp. Matt. xiii. 14, 15, where 
 Jesus quotes this text to explain why He teaches in parables; and 
 Acts xxviii. 26, where 8S. Paul quotes it to explain the rejection of his 
 preaching by the Jews in Rome, For ἵνα see Winer, p. 575. 
 
 41. ὅτι εἶδεν. Because he saw. Here, as in v.17, authorities vary 
 between ὅτι and ὅτε, and here ὅτε is to be.preferred. Christ’s glory 
 was revealed to Isaiah in a vision, and therefore he spoke of it. The 
 glory of the Son before the Incarnation, when He was ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ 
 aay ii. 6), is to be understood. 
 
 ὅμως μέντοι. Here only in N.T. For μέντοι see on iv. 27. 
 rege spite of the judicial blindness with which God had visited them 
 many even of the Sanhedrin believed on Him. We know of Joseph of 
 Arimathea and Nicodemus. But because of the recognised champions 
 of orthodoxy both in and outside the Sanhedrin (vii. 13, ix. 22) they 
 continually abstained (imperf.) from making confession. ᾿Αποσυνά- 
 ywyos occurs in N. T. only here, ix. 22, xvi. 2. 
 
XI. 49.] NOTES. 261 
 
 43. τὴν δόξαν τ. dvOp. The glory (that cometh) from men rather 
 than the glory (that cometh) from God (see on v. 41, 44). Joseph and 
 Nicodemus confessed their belief after the crisis of the Crucifixion. 
 Gamaliel did not even get so far as to believe on Him. 
 
 44—50. THE JUDGMENT oF CHRIST. 
 
 The Evangelist has just summed up the results of Christ’s ministry 
 (37—43). He now corroborates that estimate by quoting Christ Him- 
 self. But as v. 36 seems to give us the close of the ministry, we are 
 probably to understand that what follows was uttered on some occa- 
 sion or occasions previous to v. 36. Perhaps it is given us as an 
 epitome of what Christ often taught. 
 
 44. ἔκραξεν. The word implies public teaching (vii. 28, 37). 
 
 οὐ mor. els ἐμέ. His belief does not end there; it must include 
 more. This saying does not occur in the previous discourses ; but in 
 v. 36 and vili. 19 we have a similar thought. Jesus came as His 
 Father’s ambassador, and an ambassador has no meaning apart from 
 the sovereign who sends him, Not only is it impossible to accept the 
 one without the other, but to accept the representative is to accept not 
 him in his own personality but the prince whom he personates. These 
 words are, therefore, to be taken quite literally. Only here and xiv. 1 
 does S. John use πιστεύειν εἰς, so frequent of believing on Jesus, of 
 believing on the Father, 
 
 45. ὁ θεωρῶν. He who hbeholdeth, contemplateth (vi. 40, 62, 
 vii. 3, xiv. 17, 19, xvi. 10, 16, 17, 19, &c.). 
 
 46. ἐγὼ φῶς. I, with great emphasis, am come as light (vv. 35, 36, 
 viii. 12, ix. 5). “Iva, of the Divine purpose. Till the Light comes all 
 are in darkness (i. 5); but it is not God's will that anyone should 
 abide in darkness, With πᾶς comp. i. 7, iii. 15, xi. 26: there is no 
 limitation of race. 
 
 47. ἀκούσῃ. In a neutral sense, implying neither belief nor un- 
 belief (Matt. vii. 24, 26; Mark iv. 15,16). For ῥήματα see on iii. 34. 
 
 μὴ φυλάξῃ. Keep them not, i.e. fulfil them not (Luke xi. 28, 
 xvill. 21). A few authorities omit μή, perhaps to avoid a supposed 
 inconsistency between vv. 47 and 48. 
 
 48. ἔχει. Hath his judge already, without My sentencing him 
 (ili. 18, v. 45). The hearer may refuse the word, but he cannot refuse 
 the responsibility of having heard it. For the retrospective use of 
 ἐκεῖνος see on i. 18, and for ἐν τ. ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ see on vi. 39. This 
 verse is conclusive as to the doctrine of the last judgment being con- 
 tained in this Gospel. 
 
 49. ὅτι, Because. It introduces the reason why one who rejects 
 Christ’s word will be judged by His word ;—because that word is mani- 
 festly Divine in origin. With ἐξ ἐμαυτοῦ, out of Myself as source, 
 without commission from the Father, comp, dw ἐμαυτοῦ, v.30, vii. 17, 
 28, viii. 28, 42, x. 18, xiv. 10, 
 
262 S. JOHN. [ΧΙ]. 49— 
 
 αὐτός. Himself (and none other) hath given Me commandment (see 
 on iii. 35, x. 18), what I should say and how I should say it; εἴπω 
 refers to the doctrine, λαλήσω to the form in which it is expressed (see 
 on viii. 43, and comp. xiv. 10, xvi. 18). 
 
 50. The Son’s testimony to the Father. ‘The commission 
 which He has given Me is (not shall be) eternal life’ (111, 15, 16). ‘The 
 things therefore which J speak, even as the Father hath said to Me, soI 
 speak.’ 
 
 With this the first main division of the Gospel ends. Curist’s 
 REVELATION OF HIMSELF TO THE WORLD IN His ΜΙΝΙΒΤΕῪ is concluded. 
 The Evangelist has set before us the Testimony to the Christ, the 
 Work of the Christ, and the Jupemernt respecting the work, which 
 has ended in a conflict, and the conflict has reached a climax. We 
 have reached the beginning of the end. 
 
 CHAPTER XIIL 
 
 1. ἦλθεν for ἐλήλυθεν (from xii. 23), 
 
 2. γινομένου for γενομένου, with BLX [δὲ has γεινομένου] against AD. 
 
 ἵνα παραδοῖ αὐτὸν ᾿Ιούδας Σίμωνος ᾿Ισκαριώτης for ᾿Ιούδα Σ. 
 Ἱσκαριώτου, ἵνα αὐτὸν παραδῷ (correction to avoid difficulty οὗ construc- 
 tion) with SBLMX against AD. 
 
 6. Omit καί before λέγει, and ἐκεῖνος before Kvpte, 
 12. Kal ἀνέπεσεν for ἀναπεσών. 
 
 24. καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, Εἰπὲ τίς ἐστιν (BCLX) for πυθέσθαι τίς ἂν εἴη 
 (AD). In δὲ we have the two readings combined. 
 
 25. ἀναπεσών for ἐπιπεσών (from Luke xy. 20?). 
 
 26. βάψω for βάψας, and καὶ δώσω αὐτῷ for ἐπιδώσω (correction 
 to avoid awkwardness). The readings vary much. Βάψας οὖν for καὶ 
 ἐμβάψας, and ᾿Ισκαριώτου for ᾿Ισκαριώτῃ (comp. vi. 71). 
 
 38. ἀποκρίνεται for ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ: φωνήσῃ for φωνήσει: ἀρνήσῃ 
 for ἀπαρνήσῃ. 
 
 We now enter upon the second main division of the Gospel. The 
 Evangelist has given us thus far a narrative of Curist’s Ministry pre- 
 sented to us in a series of typical scenes (i. 18—xii. 50). He goes on 
 to set forth the Issurs or Curist’s Ministry (xiii.—xx.). The last 
 chapter (xxi.) forms the Er1nocue, balancing the first eighteen verses 
 (i. 1—18), which form the Protocus. 
 
 The second main division of the Gospel, like the first, falls into 
 three parts: 1. THE INNER GLORIFICATION OF CHRIST IN His Last 
 
eS 1 ae NOTES. 263 
 
 Discourses (xiii. —xvii.); 2, THE OUTER GLORIFICATION OF CHRIST IN 
 His Passion (xvili., xix.); 3. THE VICTORY COMPLETED IN THE RESURREC- 
 TION (xx.). These parts will be subdivided as we reach them. xiii. 1 
 is a prologue to the first part. 
 
 xili.—_ xvii. THE INNER GLORIFICATION oF CHRIST IN His 
 LAST DISCOURSES. 
 
 1. His love in Humiliation (xiii. 1—30); 2. His Love in keeping 
 His own (xiii, 30—xv. 27); 3. the Promise of the Paraclete and of 
 Christ’s Return (xvi.): 4. Christ’s Prayer for Himself, the Apostles, and 
 all Believers (xvii.). 
 
 Cuap. XIII. 1—30. Love m Houmiriation, 
 
 This section has two parts in strong dramatic contrast : 1. the wash- 
 ing of the disciples’ feet (2—20); 2. the self-excommunication of the 
 traitor (21—30). As v. 1 roe an introduction to this part of the 
 Gospel (xili.— xvii.), so vv. 2, 3, to this section (2—20). 
 
 1. πρὸ δὲ τ. ἑορτῆς τ. m. Can this mean, Now on the Feast 
 before the Passover (comp. xii. 1)? Nowhere else does 8S. John use 
 the periphrasis ‘the Feast of the Passover,’ which occurs in N. T. only 
 Luke ii. 41. The words give a date, not to εἰδώς, nor ἀγαπήσας, nor 
 ἠγάπησεν, but to the narrative which follows. Some evening before 
 the Passover Jesus was at supper with His disciples; and probably 
 Thursday, the beginning of Nisan 14, But the difficult question of 
 the Day of the Crucifixion is discussed in Appendix A. 
 
 εἰδώς. Knowing, 1. 6. ‘because He knew’ rather than ‘although 
 He knew.’ It was precisely because He knew that He would soon 
 return to glory that He gave this last token of self-humiliating love. 
 For ἡ dpa see on ii. 4, vii. 6, xi. 9. Till His hour came His enemies 
 could do no more than plot (vii. 30, viii. 20). The wa points to the 
 Divine purpose (xii. 23, xvi. 2, 32; xi. 50). Winer, p. 426. With 
 μεταβῇ ἐ ἐκ τ. K. τ., PASS OVer Out of this world, comp. ᾿μεταβέβηκεν ἐκ τ. 
 θανάτου (v. 24; 1 "John iii. 14). For ἀγαπᾶν see on xi. 5, xxi. 15. 
 
 τοὺς ἰδίους. Those whom God had given Him (xvii. 11, vi. 37, 39; 
 Acts iv. 23, xxiv. 23), still amid the troubles of the world. 
 
 εἰς τέλος. Vulg. in finem. ‘To the end of His life’ is probably 
 not the meaning: this would rather be μέχρι τέλους (Heb. iii. 6, 14), 
 or ἄχρι τέλους (Heb. vi. 11; Rev. ii. 26), or ἕως τέλους (1 Cor. i. 8; 
 2 Cor. i. 13). A.V. renders ‘els τέλος ‘unto the end,’ here, Matt. x. 22, 
 and xxiv. 13; ‘continual,’ Luke xviii. 5; ‘to the uttermost,’ 1 Thess. 
 a 10. In all these passages εἰς réhos may mean either ‘ at last, 
 finally,’ or ‘to the uttermost, utterly. To the uttermost seems 
 preferable here. Comp. LXX. of Amos ix. 8; Ps. xvi. 11, xix, 10: 
 lxxiv. 3. The expression points to an even higher power of love 
 exhibited in the Passion than that which the Christ had all along 
 displayed. 
 
264 S. JOHN. [XIIL 2— 
 
 2. δείπνου γινομένου. Neither this nor 6. γενομένου (Mark vi. 2) 
 can mean ‘supper being ended;’ andthe supper is not ended (v. 26). 
 The former means ‘when supper was beginning’ or ‘was at hand;’ 
 the latter, ‘supper having begun.’ If the Lord’s act represents the 
 customary washing of the guests’ feet by servants before the meal, 
 ‘when supper was at hand’ would be the better rendering of δ, 
 γινομένου: but ἐκ τοῦ δείπνου in v. 4 seems to be against this. 
 
 τ. διαβόλου k.t.A. The devil having now put it into the heart, that 
 Judas, Simon’s son, Iscariot, should betray Him. Whose heart? 
 Only two answers are possible grammatically; (1) the heart of Judas, 
 (2) the devil’s own heart. The latter is incredible, if only for the 
 reason that 8. John himself has shewn that the devil had long been 
 at work with Judas. The meaning is that of the received reading, 
 but more awkwardly expressed. The traitor’s name is given in full 
 for greater solemnity, and comes last for emphasis. Note the position 
 of Iscariot, confirming the view (see on vi. 71) that the word is a local 
 epithet rather than a proper name. 
 
 3. εἰδώς. ‘Because He knew,’ asinv.1. For πάντα ἔδωκεν see on 
 iii. 35 and comp. Eph. i. 22; Phil. ii. 9—11. Note the order; and 
 that it was from God He came forth, and unto God He is going. ‘He 
 came forth from God without leaving Him; and He goeth to God 
 without deserting us” (S. Bernard). 
 
 4. τὰ ἱμάτια. His upper garments which would impede His 
 movements. The plural includes the girdle, fastenings, &c. (xix. 23). 
 The minuteness in vv. 4, 5 shews the eyewitness. Luke xxii. 27. 
 
 5. τ. νιπτῆρα. The bason, which stood there for such purposes, 
 the large copper bason commonly found in oriental houses. 
 
 ἤρξατο νίπτειν. Ἤρξατο is not a mere amplification as in the other 
 Gospels (Matt. xi. 7, xxvi. 22, 37, 74; Mark iv. 1, vi. 2, 7, 34, 55; 
 Luke vii. 15, 24, 38, 49; &c. &c.), and in the Acts (i. 1, ii. 4, xviii. 26, 
 &c.). The word occurs nowhere else in 8. John, and here is no mere 
 periphrasis. He began to wash, but was interrupted by the incident 
 with 5. Peter. With whom He began is not mentioned: from very 
 early times some have conjectured Judas. Contrast the mad inso- 
 lence of Caligula—quosdam summis honoribus functos ad pedes stare 
 succinctos linteo passus est. Suet. Calig. xxv1. One is unwilling to 
 surrender the view that this symbolical act was intended among other 
 purposes to be a tacit rebuke to the disciples for the ‘strife among 
 them, which of them should be accounted the greatest’ (Luke xxii. 
 24); and certainly ‘I am among you as he that serveth’ (v. 27) seems 
 to point directly to this act. This view seems all the more probable 
 when we remember that a similar dispute was rebuked in a similar 
 way, viz. by symbolical action (Luke ix. 46—48). The dispute may 
 have arisen about their places at the table, or as to who should wash 
 the others’ feet. That 5. Luke places the strife after the supper is 
 not fatal to this view; he gives no note of time, and the strife is singu- 
 larly out of place there, immediately after their Master’s self-humilia- 
 
XIII 10] NOTES. 265 
 
 tion and in the midst of the last farewells. We may therefore believe, 
 in spite of S. Luke’s arrangement, that the strife preceded the supper. 
 In any case the independence of 5. John’s narrative is conspicuous. 
 
 6. ἔρχεται οὖν. He cometh therefore, i.e. in consequence of 
 having begun to wash the feet of each in turn. The natural impres- 
 sion is that S. Peter’s turn at any rate did not come first. But if it 
 did, this is not much in favour of the primacy of S. Peter, which can 
 be proved from other passages, still less of his supremacy, which can- 
 not be proved at all. The order of his words marks the contrast between 
 him and his Master, Σύ μου ν. τ. π.; Tu mihi lavas pedes? Strong 
 emphasis on ot: comp. σὺ ἔρχη πρός με (Matt. 111. 14). 
 
 7. ὃ ἐγὼ π. σὺ οὐκ οἶδας. ᾿Εγώ and σύ are in emphatic opposi- 
 tion. §. Peter’s question implied that he knew, while Christ did not 
 know, what He was doing: Jesus tells him that the very reverse is 
 the case. For ἄρτι see on ii. 10. 
 
 γνώσῃ δ. p. τ. But thou shalt come to know, or shalt perceive, 
 presently. Μετὰ ταῦτα (111. 22, v. 1, 14, vi. 1, vil. 1, xix. 38) need not 
 refer to the remote future: had this been intended we should probably 
 have had νῦν and ὕστερον (v. 36) instead of ἄρτι and μετὰ ταῦτα. The 
 promised γινώσκειν seems to begin v. 12, when Jesus explains His 
 symbolical action, and begins with this very word, Γινώσκετε τί 
 πεποίηκα ὑμῖν; But not till Pentecost did the Apostles fully recognise 
 the meaning of Christ’s words and acts. See on vii. 26 and viii. 55 
 for the converse change from γινώσκω to οἶδα. 
 
 8. ov μὴ νίψῃς. Strong negative; Thow shalt certainly never wash 
 my feet. See on vili. 51, and comp. οὐ μὴ ἔσται σοι τοῦτο (Matt. xvi. 
 22). In both utterances 53. Peter resents the idea of his Master being 
 humiliated. 
 
 οὐκ ἔχεις μέρος. Comp. ὁ ἔχων μέρος (Rev. xx. 6). The phrase 
 occurs nowhere else in N.T. See on ὄψις, xi. 44. Comp. οὐκ ἔστι σοι 
 μερὶς οὐδὲ κλῆρος (Acts viii. 21; Deut. x. 9, xii. 12, xiv. 27, &c.), and τὸ 
 μέρος αὐτοῦ μετὰ τ. ὑποκριτών θήσει (Matt. xxiv. 51). The expression 
 is of Hebrew origin. To reject Christ’s self-humiliating love, because 
 it humiliates Him (a well-meaning but false principle), is to cut oneself 
 off from Him. It requires much more humility to accept a benefit 
 which is a serious loss to the giver than one which costs him nothing. 
 In this also the surrender of self is necessary. 
 
 9. μὴ τ. πόδας p. μόνον. The impetuosity which is so marked a 
 characteristic of 8. Peter in the first three Gospels (comp. especially 
 Luke v. 8 and Matt. xvi. 22) comes out very strongly in his three 
 utterances here. It is incredible that this should be invention; and 
 if not, the independent authority of 5. John’s narrative is manifest. 
 
 10. ὁ λελουμένος. He that is bathed (comp. Heb. x. 22 and 
 2 Pet. ii. 22). Νίπτειν (see on ix. 7) means to wash part of the body, 
 λούεσθαι to bathe the whole person. A man who has bathed does not 
 need to bathe again when he reaches home, but only to wash the dust 
 off his feet: then he is wholly clean. So also in the spiritual life, a 
 
266 S. JOHN. [XIII. 10— 
 
 man whose moral nature has once been thoroughly purified need not 
 think that this has been all undone if in the walk through life he 
 contracts some stains: these must be washed away, and then he is 
 once more wholly clean. Peter, conscious of his own imperfections, 
 in Luke v. 8, and possibly here, rushes to the conclusion that he is 
 utterly unclean, But his meaning here perhaps rather is; ‘If having 
 part in Thee depends on being washed by Thee, wash all Thou canst.’ 
 5. Peter excellently illustrates Christ’s saying. His love for his 
 Master proves that he bad bathed; his boastfulness (v. 37), his attack 
 on Malchus (xviii. 10), his d nials (25, 27), his dissimulation at An- 
 tioch (Gal. ii.), all shew how often he had need to wash his feet. 
 
 τὸν παραδιδόντα. Him that was betraying or delivering over: the 
 participle marks the work as already going on (xviii. 2,5). In Luke 
 vi. 16 Judas is called προδότης, ‘a traitor;’ but elsewhere παραδιδόναι, 
 not προδιδόναι, is the word used to express his crime. 
 
 οὐχὶ πάντες. The second indication of the presence of a traitor 
 (comp. vi. 70). Apparently it did not attract much attention: each, 
 conscious of his own faults, thought the remark only too true. The 
 disclosure is made gradually but rapidly now (vv. 18, 21, 26). 
 
 12. ἀνέπεσεν. The word is frequent in the Gospels (nowhere else 
 in N.T.) of reclining at meals. It always implies a change of position 
 (v. 25, vi. 10, xxi, 20; Matt. xv. 35; Mark vi. 40; Luke xi. 37). Τὶ- 
 νώσκετε, Perceive ye? (see on v. 7), directs their attention to the 
 explanation to be given. 
 
 13. ὁ διδάσκαλος κ. ὁ Kiptos. The ordinary titles of respect paid 
 to a Rabbi (i. 29, xx. 16, iv. 11, 15, 19): κύριος is the correlative of 
 δοῦλος (v. 16), διδάσκαλος of μαθητής. For the nominative in addresses 
 comp. xix. 3; Matt. xi. 26; Mark v. 41; Luke viii. 54, &. It is 
 specially common with the imperative. Winer, p. 227. 
 
 14. εἰ οὖν ἐγὼ ἔν. ὑμῶν τ. w. The pronouns are emphatic and 
 opposed. The aorist indicates the act now accomplished: comp. xv. 
 20, xviii. 23. But in English the perfect is more usual in such cases: 
 if I, therefore, the Lord and the Master, (have) washed (see on viii. 29). 
 Here ὁ κύριος stands first as the title of deeper meaning: the disciples 
 would use it with increased meaning as their knowledge increased. 
 
 Kal ὑμεῖς doh. The custom of the ‘feet-washing’ on Maundy 
 Thursday in literal fulfilment of this typical commandment is not 
 older than the fourth century. The Lord High Almoner washed the 
 feet of the recipients of the royal ‘maundy’ as late as 1731. James I. 
 was the last English sovereign who went through the ceremony. In 
 1 Tim. v. 10 ‘washing the saints’ feet’ is perhaps given rather as a 
 type of devoted charity than as a definite act to be required. 
 
 c -« 
 
 15. καθὼς ἐγὼ ἐπ. ὑμῖν. Not, ‘what I have done to you,’ but 
 ‘even as I have done:’ this is the spirit in which to act—self- 
 sacrificing humility—whether or no it be exhibited precisely in this 
 way. Mutual service, and especially mutual cleansing, is the obliga- 
 tion of Christ’s disciples. Comp. James v. 16. 
 
XIII. 19.] NOTES. 267 
 
 16. οὐκ ἔστιν δοῦλος x.t.A. This saying occurs four times in the 
 Gospels, each time in a different connexion: (1) to shew that the 
 disciples must expect no better treatment than their Master (Matt. 
 x. 24); (2) to impress the Apostles with their responsibilities as 
 teachers, for their disciples will be as they are (Luke vi. 40); (3) here, 
 to teach humility (comp. Luke xxii. 27); (4) with the same purpose 
 as in Matt. x. 24, but on another occasion (xv. 20). We infer that it 
 was one of Christ’s frequent sayings: it is introduced here with the 
 double ἀμήν, as of special importance (i. 52). ᾿Απόστολος, one that is 
 sent, an apostle. 
 
 17. μακάριοί ἐστε. Blessed are ye, as in the Beatitudes: comp. 
 xx. 29; Rev. i. 3, xiv. 13, &e. Knowledge must influence conduct. 
 Ei introduces the general supposition, if ye know; ἐάν the particular 
 condition, provided ye do them. Comp. Rev. ii. 5; 1 Cor. vii. 36; 
 Gal. i. 8, 9; Acts v. 38. Winer, p. 370. 
 
 18. ov περὶ πάντων. There is one who knows, and does not do, 
 and is the very reverse of blessed. I know the character of the 
 Twelve whom I chose (vi. 70, xv. 16); the treachery of one is no sur- 
 prise to Me. For the elliptical ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα, ‘but this was done in order 
 that,’ so frequent in S. John, see oni. 8. Here we may supply ἐλεξ- 
 dunv: but I chose them in order that. Winer, p. 398. 
 
 ἡ γραφὴ πλ. See on ii. 22 and xii. 38. The quotation is taken, but 
 with freedom, from the Hebrew of Ps. xli. 9: for ἐπῆρεν ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ τ. 
 πτέρναν αὐτοῦ both Hebrew and LXX. have ‘magnified his heel against 
 me,’ ἐμεγάλυνεν ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ πτερνισμόν. The metaphor here is of one 
 lifting up his foot before kicking, but the blow is not yet given. This 
 was the attitude of Judas at thismoment. Jesus omits ‘Mine own 
 familiar friend whom I trusted.’ He had not trusted Judas, and had 
 not been deceived as the Psalmist had been: ‘He knew what was in 
 man’ (ii. 25). The variations from the LXX. are still more remark- 
 able in the first clause. 8. John quotes ὁ τρώγων per’ ἐμοῦ τὸν ἄρτον, 
 the LXX. having ὁ ἐσθίων ἄρτους wov,, We notice (1) τρώγειν, the verb 
 used of eating Christ’s Flesh and the Bread from Heaven (vi. 54, 56, 
 57, 58), and nowhere else in N.T. excepting Matt. xxiv. 38, instead of 
 the much more common ἐσθίειν : (2) τὸν ἄρτον, the bread, instead of 
 ἄρτους, bread or loaves: (3) μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ for μου, if the reading per’ ἐμοῦ 
 be genuine, which is doubtful. To eat bread with a man is more 
 than to eat his bread, which a servant might do. The variations can 
 scarcely be accidental, and seem to point to the fact that the 
 treachery of Judas in violating the bond of hospitality, so universally 
 held sacred in the East, was aggravated by his having partaken of the 
 Eucharist. That Judas did partake of the Eucharist seems to follow 
 from Luke xxii. 19—21, but the point is one about which there is 
 ~ much controversy. 
 
 5. John omits the institution of the Eucharist for the same 
 reason that he omits so much,—because it was so well known to 
 every instructed Christian; and for such he writes. 
 
 19. ἀπ᾽ ἄρτι. From henceforth (xiv. 7; Rev. xiv. 13): see on ii. 10, 
 Hitherto, for Judas’ sake, Jesus had been reserved about the presence 
 
268 S. JOHN. (XIII. 19— 
 
 of a traitor; to point him out might have deprived him of a chance 
 of recovery. But every good influence has failed, even the Eucharist 
 and the washing of his feet: and from this time onward, for the 
 Eleven’s sake, He tells them. The success of such treachery might 
 have shaken their faith had it taken them unawares: by foretelling it 
 He turns it into an aid to faith, Comp. xiv. 29. For ἐγώ εἰμι see on 
 Vili. 24, 28, 58. 
 
 20. ὁ λαμβάνων k.t.A. The connexion of this saying, solemnly 
 introduced with the double ‘verily,’ with what precedes is not easy to 
 determine. The saying is one with which Christ had sent forth the 
 Apostles in the first instance (Matt. x. 40). It is recalled at the 
 moment when one of them is being denounced for treachery. It was 
 natural that such an end to such a mission should send Christ’s 
 thoughts back to the beginning of it. Moreover He would warn them 
 all from supposing that such a catastrophe either cancelled the 
 mission or proved it to be worthless from the first. Of every one of 
 them, even of Judas himself, the saying still held good, ‘he that 
 receiveth whomsoever I send, receiveth Me.’ The unworthiness of the 
 minister cannot annul the commission. 
 
 21—30. ‘THE SELF-EXCOMMUNICATION OF THE TRAITOR. 
 
 21. ἐταράχθη τῷ mv. It is the πνεῦμα, the seat of the religious 
 emotions, not the ψυχή, that is affected by the thought of Judas’ sin 
 (xi. 33). For the dative comp. Acts xviii. 25; Rom. xiv. 1; Eph. iv. 
 18, 23; Col. i. 21. Once more the reality of Christ’s human nature 
 is brought before us (xi. 33, 35, 38, xii. 27); but quite incidentally 
 and without special point. It is the artless story of one who tells 
 what he saw because he saw it and remembers it. The lifelike 
 details which follow are almost irresistible evidences of truthfulness, 
 
 22. ἔβλεπον εἰς dA. ‘Began to inquire among themselves’ (Luke 
 xxii. 23). The other two state that all began to say to Him ‘Is it I?’ 
 They neither doubt the statement, nor ask ‘Is it he?’ Each thinks it 
 is as credible of himself as of any of the others. Judas asks, either to 
 dissemble, or to see whether he really is known (Matt. xxvi, 25). 
 ᾿Απορούμενου expresses bewilderment rather than doubt. 
 
 23. ἣν ἀνακείμενος...ἐν τ. κόλπῳ. It is important to distinguish 
 between this reclining on Jesus’ lap and ἀναπέσων ἐπὶ τὸ στῆθος in 
 υ. 25. The Jews had adopted the Persian, Greek, and Roman 
 custom of reclining at meals, and had long since exchanged the 
 original practice of standing at the Passover first for sitting and then 
 for reclining. They reclined on the left arm and ate with the right. 
 This is the posture of the beloved disciple indicated here, which con- 
 tinued throughout the meal: in v. 25 we have a momentary change 
 of posture. 
 
 ὃν ἠγάπα ὁ I. This explains how 8. John came to be nearest 
 and to be told who was the traitor (Introduction, p. xxxiv.) Comp, 
 xix, 26, xxi. 7, 20; not xx. 2. §. John was on the Lord’s right, Who 
 
XIII. 29.] NOTES. , 269 
 
 was next to Him on the left? Possibly Judas, who must have been 
 very close for Christ to answer him without the others hearing. 
 
 24. εἰπὲ τίς ἐστιν. S. Peter thinks that the beloved disciple is 
 sure to know. The reading of T. R., πύθεσθαι ris ἂν εἴη, is wanting in 
 authority and contains an optative, which S. John never uses. 
 
 25. ἀναπεσὼν... ἐπὶ τὸ στῆθος. In v. 23 we have the permanent 
 posture, here a change, as in v. 12: he leaning back on to Jesus’ breast. 
 For ἐκεῖνος see on i. 8; for οὕτως, as he was, comp. iv. 6. ‘This is 
 among the most striking of those vivid descriptive traits which dis- 
 tinguish the narrative of the Fourth Gospel generally, and which are 
 especially remarkable in these last scenes of Jesus’ life, where the 
 beloved disciple was himself an eye-witness and an actor. It is there- 
 fore to be regretted that these fine touches of the picture should be 
 blurred in our English Bibles.” Lightfoot, On Revision, p. 73. 
 
 26. ᾧ ἐγὼ βάψω τὸ Ψ. kK. δώσω αὐτῷ. For whom I shall dip the 
 morsel and give it to him. The text is much confused, perhaps 
 owing to copyists having tried to correct the awkwardness of @ and 
 αὐτῷ (comp. vi. 51, xiv. 4). Ψώμιον (Ywev, collat. form of ψάειν, ‘to 
 rub’) is ‘a little piece broken off;’ it is still the common word in 
 Greece for bread. To give such a morsel at a meal was an ordinary 
 mark of goodwill, somewhat analagous to taking wine with a person 
 in modern times. Christ, therefore, as a forlorn hope, gives the 
 traitor one more mark of affection before dismissing him. It 15 the 
 last such mark: ‘Friend, wherefore art thou come?’ (Matt. xxvi. 50) 
 should be ‘Comrade, (do that) for which thou art come,’ and is a 
 sorrowful rebuke rather than an affectionate greeting. "Whether the 
 morsel was a piece of the unleavened bread dipped in the broth of 
 bitter herbs depends upon whether this supper is regarded as the 
 Paschal meal or not. The name of the traitor is once more given with 
 solemn fulness as in v, 2 and vi, 71, Judas the son of Simon Iscariot. 
 
 27, τότε εἰσηλθεν x.t.A. At that moment Satan entered into 
 him. At first Satan made suggestions to him (v. 2; Luke xxii. 3) 
 and, Judas listened to them; now Satan takes full possession of him. 
 Desire had conceived and brought forth sin, and the sin full grown had 
 engendered death (James i. 15). Jesus knew that Satan had claimed 
 his own, and therefore saith to him, That thou doest, do more quickly ; 
 carry it out at once, even sooner than was planned (1 Tim. iii, 14), 
 Winer, p. 304. Now that the case of Judas was hopeless, delay 
 merely kept Jesus from His hour of victory (Matt. xxiii. 32; Luke 
 xii, 50). He longs to be alone with the faithful Eleven, For τάχιον 
 see on xx. 4. 
 
 28. οὐδεὶς ἔγνω. Even S. John, who now knew that Judas was 
 the traitor, did not know that Christ’s words alluded to his treachery. 
 
 29. τινὲς yao. The yap introduces a proof that they could not 
 have understood, For γλωσσόκομον see on xil. 6. His τ. ἑορτὴν 
 agrees with v. 1 in shewing that this meal precedes the Passover. 
 For τ. πτωχοῖς comp. xii. 5; Neh. viii. 10, 12; Gal. ii. 10. Note the 
 change of construction from ἀγόρασον to ἵνα δῷ : comp. Vili. 53, xv. 5, 
 
270 S. JOHN. (XIII. 30— 
 
 30. ἐκεῖνος. Here and in v. 27 the pronoun marks Judas as an 
 alien (comp. vii. 11, ix. 12, 28). Vv. 28, 29 are parenthetical: the 
 Evangelist now returns to the narrative, repeating with solemnity the 
 incident which formed the last crisis in the career of Judas. ᾿Εξῆλθεν 
 εὐθύς is no evidence that the meal was not a Paschal one. The rule 
 that ‘none should go out at the door of his house until the morning’ 
 (Ex. xii, 22) had, like standing at the Passover, long since been 
 abrogated. Judas goes out from the presence of the Christ like Cain 
 from the presence of the Lord. Dum vult esse praedo, fit praeda. 
 
 ἦν δὲ νύξ. Comp. 1 Sam. xxviii. 8. The tragic brevity of this has 
 often been remarked, and will never cease to lay hold of the imagi- 
 nation. It can scarcely be meant merely to tell us that at the time 
 when Judas went out night had begun. In the Gospel in which the 
 Messiah so often appears as the Light of the World (i. 4—49, iii 
 19—21, viii. 12, ix. 5, xii. 35, 36, 46), and in which darkness almost 
 invariably means moral darkness (i. 5, vili. 12, xii. 35, 46), a use pe- 
 culiar to S. John (1 John i, 5, ii. 8, 9, 11),—we shall hardly be wrong 
 in understanding also that Judas went forth from the Light of the 
 World into the night in which a man cannot but stumble ‘because 
 there is no light in him’ (xi, 10): see on 111. 2, x. 22, xviii. 1. Thus 
 also Christ Himself said some two hours later, ‘This is your hour, 
 and the pewer of darkness’ (Luke xxii. 53). For other remarks of 
 telling brevity and abruptness comp. χειμὼν ἦν (x. 22); ἐδάκρυσεν ὁ 
 Ἰησοῦς (xi. 35); λέγει αὐτοῖς ᾿Εγώ εἰμι (xviii. 5); ἦν δὲ ὁ BapaBBas 
 λῃστής (xviii. 40). 
 
 These remarks shew the impropriety of joining this sentence to the 
 next verse; ‘and it was night, therefore, when he had gone out;’ a 
 combination which is clumsy in itself and quite spoils the effect. 
 
 XIII. 31—XV. 27. Curist’s Love IN KEEPING His own. 
 
 31—35. Jesus, freed from the oppressive presence of the traitcr, 
 bursts out into a declaration that the glorification of the Son of Man 
 has begun. Judas is already beginning that series of events which 
 will end in sending Him away from them to the Father; therefore they 
 must continue on earth the kingdom which He has begun—the reign 
 of Love. 
 
 This section forms the first portion of those parting words of 
 heavenly meaning which were spoken to the faithful Eleven in the last 
 moments before His Passion. At first the discourse takes the form of 
 dialogue, which lasts almost to the end of chap. xiv. Then they rise 
 from the table, and the words of Christ become more sustained, while 
 the disciples remain silent with the exception of xvi. 17, 18, 29, 30. 
 Then follows Christ’s prayer, after which they go forth to the Garden 
 of Gethsemane (xviii. 1). 
 
 31. ὅτε οὖν ἐξῆλθεν. Indicating that the presence of Judas had 
 acted as a constraint, but also that he had gone of his own will: there 
 was no casting out of the faithless disciple (ix. 34). Νῦν, with solemn 
 exultation: the beginning of the end has come. For ὁ vids τ. ἀνθ. 
 
XIII. 34.] NOTES. 271 
 
 see on i. 52: for the aorist ἐδοξάσθη see Winer, Ὁ. 345. He was 
 glorified in finishing the work which the Father gave Him to do 
 (xvii. 4); and thus God was glorified in Him. 
 
 32. εἰ ὁ 0. ἐδοξ. ἐν attra. These words are wanting in NBC!DLX; 
 the repetition might account for their being omitted, but they spoil 
 the marked balance and rhythm of the clauses in vv. 31, 32. 
 
 καὶ 6 0. δοξάσει. And God shall glorify Him, with the glory which 
 He had with the Father before the world was. Hence the future. 
 The glory of completing the work of redemption is already present ; 
 that of returning to the Father will straightway follow. ’Ev αὐτῷ 
 means ‘in God:’ as God is glorified in the Messianic work of the Son, 
 so the Son shall be glorified in the eternal blessedness of the Father. 
 Comp. xvii. 4,5; Phil. ii. 9. 
 
 33. τέκνια. Nowhere else in the Gospels does Christ use this 
 expression of tender affection, which springs from the thought of His 
 orphaned disciples. §. John appears never to have forgotten it. 
 It occurs frequently in his First Epistle (ii. 1, 12, 28, iii. 7, 18, iv. 4, 
 v. 21), and perhaps nowhere else in the N. T. In Gal. iv. 19 the 
 reading is doubtful. Comp. παίδια, xxi. 5. For ἔτι μικρὸν see on vii. 
 33, 34, viii. 21. 
 
 ζητήσετέ pe. Christ does not add, as He did to the Jews, ‘and 
 shall not find Me,’ still less, ‘ye shall die in your sin.’ Rather, ‘ye 
 shall seek Me: and though ye cannot come whither I go, yet ye shall 
 find Me by continuing to be My disciples and loving one another.’ 
 The expression ot ᾿Ιουδαῖοι is rare in Christ’s discourses (iv. 22, xviil. 
 20, 36): in these cases the idea of nationality prevails over that of 
 hostility to the Messiah. 
 
 34. ἐντολὴν καινήν. The commandment to love was not new, for 
 ‘thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself’ (Lev. xix. 18) was part 
 of the Mosaic Law. But the motive is new; to love our neighbour 
 because Christ has loved us. We have only to read the ‘most ex- 
 cellent way’ of love set forth in 1 Cor. xiii., and compare it with the 
 measured benevolence of the Pentateuch, to see how new the com- 
 mandment had become by having this motive added. Καινήν not 
 νέαν : xawos looks back, ‘fresh’ as opposed to ‘worn out’ (xix. 41; 
 1 John ii. 7, 8, which doubtless refers to this passage; Rev. ii. 17, 
 iii. 12, xxi. 1—5); νέος looks forward, ‘young’ as opposed to ‘aged’ 
 (Luke v. 39; 1 Cor. v. 7). Both are used Mark ii. 22, οἶνον νέον εἰς 
 ἀσκοὺς καινούς, new wine into fresh wine-skins. Both are used of 
 διαθήκη: νέα, Heb. xii. 24; καινή, Luke xxii. 20. ᾿Εντολὴν διδόναι is 
 peculiar to 8. John (xii. 49, xiv. 31; 1 John iii. 23; comp. xi. 57). 
 Καθὼς ἠγάπησα ὑμᾶς belongs to the second half of the verse, being the 
 reason for the fresh commandment;—even as I (have) loved you. 
 Comp. ‘If God so loved us, we ought also to love one another’ (1 John 
 iv. 11). The aorist shews that Christ’s work is regarded as already 
 completed; but the perfect is perhaps more in accordance with Eng- 
 lish idiom: see on viii. 29 and comp. xv. 9, 12. 
 
272 S. JOHN. [XIII. 35— 
 
 35. ἐν τούτῳ yv. π. This is the true ‘Note of the Church;’ not 
 miracles, not tormularies, not numbers, but love. ‘The working 
 of such love puts a brand upon us; for see, say the heathen, how they 
 love one another,” Tertullian, Apol. xxx1x. Comp. 1 John iti, 10, 14. 
 *Epol is emphatic ; disciples to Me. 
 
 36. ποῦ tmdyas; The affectionate Apostle is absorbed by the 
 words, ‘Whither I go, ye cannot come,’ and he lets all the rest pass. 
 His Lord is going away, out of his reach; he must know the meaning 
 of that. The Lord’s reply alludes probably not merely to the Apostle’s 
 death, but also to the manner of it: comp. xxi. 18, 19. But his hour 
 has not yet come; he has a great mission to fulfil first (Matt. xvi, 18). 
 The beautiful story of the Domine, quo vadis? should be remembered 
 in connexion with this verse. See Introduction to the Epistles of 
 S. Peter, p. 56. 
 
 37. ἄρτι. Even now, at once (ii. 10). He sees that Christ’s going 
 away means death, and with his usual impulsiveness (v. 9) he declares 
 that he is ready to follow even thither at once. He mistakes strong 
 feeling for moral strength. For τ. ψυχήν p. θήσω see on x. 11. 
 
 38. λέγω σοι. In the parallel passage, Luke xxii, 34, we have 
 λέγω σοι, Ilérpe. For the first and last time Jesus addresses the 
 Apostle by the name which He had given him; as if to remind him 
 that rock-like strength was not his own to boast of, but must be found 
 in humble reliance on the Giver. 
 
 S. Luke agrees with S. John in placing the prediction of the triple 
 denialin the supper-room: 5. Matt. (xxvi. 30—35) and 5. Mark (xiv. 
 26—30) place it on the way from the room to Gethsemane. It is 
 possible but not probable that the prediction was repeated; though 
 some would even make three predictions recorded by (1) 8. Luke, 
 (2) S. John, (3) 5. Matt. and 8. Mark. See Appendix B. 
 
 τρίς. All four accounts agree in this. 5. Mark adds two details: 
 (1) that the cock should crow twice, (2) that the prediction so far from 
 checking 5. Peter made him speak only the more vehemently, a par- 
 ticular which 8S. Peter’s Gospel more naturally contains than the 
 other three. 83. Matthew and 5. Mark both add that all the disciples 
 joined in 8. Peter’s protestations. In these discourses 8. Peter speaks 
 no more. 
 
 It has been objected that fowls were not allowed in the Holy City. 
 The statement wants authority, and of course the Romans would 
 pay no attention to any such rule, even if it existed among the Jews. 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 4. Omit καί before, and οἴδατε after, τὴν ὁδόν with NBLQX against 
 ADN : insertions for clearness. 
 
 10. λέγω for λαλῶ (correction for uniformity): and ποιεῖ τὰ ἔργα 
 αὐτοῦ for αὐτὸς π. τ. ἔργα with NBD against ANQ. 
 
XIV. 2.] NOTES. 272 
 
 16. ἢ for μένῃ (from νυ. 17). Authorities differ as to the position 
 of 7, whether before or after μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν, or after αἰῶνα. 
 
 19. ζήσετε for ξήσεσθε; comp. vi. 57; Winer, p. 105. 
 
 23. ποιησόμεθα (NBLX) for ποιήσομεν (A). The middle of ποιεῖν is 
 comparatively rare in N.T., but here it is appropriate; Winer, p. 320. 
 
 30. Omit τούτου after κόσμου (insertion from xii. 31, xvi. 11). 
 31. ἐντολὴν ἔδωκεν (BLX) for ἐνετείλατο (NAD). 
 
 In this last great discourse (xiv.—xvii.) we find a return of the 
 spiral movement noticed in the Prologue (see on i. 18). The various 
 subjects are repeatedly presented and withdrawn in turn. Thus the 
 Paraclete is spoken of in five different sections (xiv. 16, 17; 25, 26; 
 xv. 26; xvi. 8—15; 23—25); the relation between the Church and 
 the world in three (xiv. 22—24; xv. 18—25; xvi. 1—3). So also 
 with Christ’s departure and return, 
 
 Cuap. XIV. Curist’s LOVE IN KEEPING His own (continued). 
 
 1. μὴ ταρασσέσθω ὕ. ἥ. κα There had been much to cause anxiety 
 and alarm; the denouncing of the traitor, the declaration of Christ’s 
 approaching departure, the prediction of S. Peter’s denial. The last 
 as being nearest might seem to be specially indicated ; but what follows 
 shews that μὴ ταρασσέσθω refers primarily to ὅπου ἐγὼ ὑπάγω, ὑμεῖς οὐ 
 δύνασθε ἐλθεῖν (Χ111. 88). There is nothing to shew that one πιστεύετε 
 is indicative and the other imperative. Probably both are imperative 
 like ταρασσέσθω : comp. v. 39, xii. 19, xv. 18. In any case a full 
 genuine belief and trust (i. 12) in God leads to a belief and trust in 
 His Son. 
 
 2. τῇ οἰκίᾳ τ. πατρός. Heaven. Matt. v. 34, vi. 9. By μοναὶ 
 πολλαί nothing is said as to mansions differing in dignity and beauty. 
 There may be degrees of happiness hereafter, but such are neither ex- 
 pressed nor implied here. The abodes are many; there is room enough 
 for all. Movy occurs in N.T. only here and v. 23. It is derived from 
 S. John’s favourite verb μένειν (i. 33), which occurs vv. 10, 16, 17, 25, 
 and 12 times in chap. xv. Mov7, therefore, is ‘a place to abide in, an 
 abode.’ ‘Mansion,’ Scotch ‘manse,’ and French ‘maison’ are all from 
 mancre, the Latin form of the same root. ᾿ 
 
 εἰ δὲ μή, εἶπον ἂν ὑμῖν" ὅτι π. The construction is amphibolous and 
 may be taken in four ways. 1. 1} it were not so, I would-have told 
 you; because I go. This is best. Christ appeals to His fairness: 
 would He have invited them to a place where there was not room for 
 all? 2. ‘In My Father’s house are many mansions; (if it were not 
 so, I would have told you;) because I go.’ 3. ‘Would I have said to 
 you thatI go?’ 4. ‘I would have said to you that I go.’ The last 
 cannot be right. Jesus had already said (xiii. 36), and says again 
 (v. 8), that He is going to shew the way and prepare a place for them, 
 
 5 
 
 5. JOHN 
 
274 5. JOHN. βάν Ἢ 
 
 8. ἐὰν πορευθῶ. The ἐάν does not imply a doubt; but, as in xii. 32, 
 it is the result rather than the date of the action that is emphasized; 
 hence ‘if,’ not ‘when.’ See on xii. 26. 
 
 ἔρχομαι kK. παραλήμψομαι. The late form λήμψομαι occurs again 
 Acts i. 8; we have λάμψομαι Hat. rx. 108. The change from present 
 to future is important: Christ is ever coming in various ways to His 
 Church; but His receiving of each individual will take place once for 
 all at death and at the Jast day (see on xix. 16). Christ’s coming 
 again may have various meanings and apparently not always the same 
 one throughout these discourses; the Resurrection, or the gift of the 
 Paraclete, or the presence of Christ in His Church, or the death of 
 individuals, or the Second Advent at the last day. Comp. vi. 39, 40. 
 
 4, ὅπου ἐγὼ ὑπ. οἴδ. τ. ὁδόν. This seems to have been altered as 
 in T.R. to avoid awkwardness of expression (see on vi. 51, xiii. 26). 
 "Ey is emphatic; in having experience of Him they know the way to 
 the Father. The words are half a rebuke, implying that they ought 
 to know more than they did know (x. 7, 9, xi. 25). Thus we say ‘you 
 know,’ meaning ‘you might know, if you did but take the trouble,’ 
 
 δ. Θωμᾶς. Nothing is to be inferred from the omission of Δίδυμος 
 here (comp. xi. 16, xx. 24, xxi, 2). For his character see on xi. 16, 
 His question here has a melancholy tone combined with some dulness 
 of apprehension. But there is honesty of purpose in it. He owns 
 his ignorance and asks for explanation. This great home with many 
 abodes, is it the royal city of the conquering Messiah, who is to restore 
 the kingdom to Israel (see on Acts i. 6); and will not that be Jerusa- 
 lem? How then can He be going anywhere? How do we know the 
 way? The abrupt asyndeton gives emphasis. 
 
 6. ἐγώ εἰμι. See on vi. 35. The pronoun is emphatic; I and no 
 other: Ego sum Via, Veritas, Vita. S. Thomas had wished rather to 
 know about the goal; Christ shews that for him, and therefore for us, 
 it is more important to know the way. Hence the order; although 
 Christ is the Truth and the Life before He is the Way. The Word is 
 the Truth and the Life from all eternity with the Father: He becomes 
 the Way for us by taking our nature. He is the Way to the many 
 abodes in His Father’s home, the Way to the Father Himself; and 
 that by His doctrine and example, by His Death and Resurrection. 
 In harmony with this passage ‘the Way’ soon became a recognised 
 name for Christianity; Acts ix. 2, xix. 9, 23, xxii. 4, xxiv. 22 (comp. 
 xxiv. 14; 2 Pet. ii. 2). But this is obscured in our version by the 
 common inaccuracy ‘this way’ or ‘that way’ for ‘the Way.’ (See on 
 i. 21, 25, vi. 48.) 
 
 ἡ ἀλήθεια. Being from all eternity in the form of God, Who cannot 
 lie (Phil. ii. 6; Heb. vi, 18), and being the representative on earth of 
 a Sender Who is true (viii. 26). To know the Truth is also to know 
 the Way to God, Who must be approached and worshipped in truth 
 (iv. 23). Comp. Heb. xi, 6; 1 John νυ. 20. 
 
ΡΥ TY. NOTES. 275 
 
 ἡ ftw. Comp. xi. 25. He is the Life, being one with the living 
 Father and being sent by Him (x. 30, vi. 57). See oni. 4, vi. 50, 51, 
 and comp. 1 John v. 12; Gal. ii. 20. Here again to know the Life is 
 to know the Way to God. But the three thoughts must not be merged 
 into one; ‘I am the true way of life,’ or ‘the living way of truth.’ 
 The three, though interdependent, are distinct; and the Way is the 
 most important to know, as Christ insists by adding οὐδεὶς ἔρχεται 7. 
 τ. w., εἰ μὴ de ἐμοῦ. Comp. δι’ αὐτοῦ ἔχομεν τὴν προσαγωγὴν πρὸς τὸν 
 πατέρα (Eph. ii. 18). See also Heb. x, 19—22; 1 Pet. iii. 18. 
 
 7. εἰ ἐγνώκειτέ με, K. τ. TT. μ. ἐγνώκειτε dv. The better reading is 
 ἂν ἤδειτε: If ye had learned to know Me, ye would know My Father 
 also. The change of verb and of order are both significant. See on 
 vii. 26, vili, 55, xiii. 7. The emphasis is on ἐγνώκειτε and on πάτερα: 
 ‘If ye had recognised Me, ye would know My Father also.’ Beware of 
 putting an emphasis on ‘Me:’ an enclitic cannot be emphatic. 
 
 ἀπ’ ἄρτι. To be understood literally, not proleptically (comp. xiii. 
 19; Rev. xiv. 13). Hitherto the veil of Jewish prejudice had been on 
 their hearts, obscuring the true meaning of Messianic prophecy and 
 Messianic acts. But henceforth, after the plain declaration in v. 6, 
 they learn to know the Father in Him. Philip’s request leads to a 
 fuller statement of v. 6. 
 
 Φίλιππος. For the fourth and last time S. Philip appears in this 
 Gospel (see notes on i, 4449, vi. 5—7, xii. 22). Thrice he is men- 
 tioned in close connexion with 5. Andrew, who may have brought 
 about his being found by Christ; twice he follows in the footsteps of 
 S. Andrew in bringing others to Christ, and on both occasions it is 
 specially to see Him that they are brought; ‘Come and see’ (i. 45); 
 “We would see Jesus’ (xii. 21). Like S. Thomas he has a fondness 
 for the practical test of personal experience; he would see for himself, 
 and have others also see for themselves. His way of stating the diffi- 
 culty about the 5000 (vi. 7) is quite in harmony with this practical turn 
 of mind. Like 5, Thomas also he seems to have been somewhat slow 
 of apprehension, and at the same time perfectly honest in expressing 
 the cravings which he felt. No fear of exposing himself keeps either 
 Apostle back: and the freedom with which each speaks shews how 
 truly Christ had ‘called them friends’ (xy. 15). 
 
 δεῖξον ἡμῖν. He is struck by Christ’s last words, ‘Ye have seen the 
 Father,’ and cannot find that they are true of himself. It is what he 
 has been longing for in vain; it is the one thing wanting. He has 
 heard the voice of the Father from Heaven, and it has awakened a 
 hunger in his heart. Christ has been speaking of the Father’s home 
 with its many abodes to which He is going; and Philip longs to see 
 for himself. And when Christ tells him that he has seen he unre- 
 servedly opens his mind: ‘Only make that saying good, and it is 
 enough.’ He sees nothing impossible in this. There were the theo- 
 phanies, which had accompanied the giving of the Law through Moses, 
 And a greater than Moses was here. 
 
 52 
 
276 S. JOHN. [XIV. 9— 
 
 9. τοσούτῳ χρόνῳ. Philip had been called among the first (i. 44), 
 and yet has not learned to know the Christ. Comp. viii. 19. The 
 Gospels are full of evidence of how little the Apostles understood of 
 the life which they were allowed to share: and the candour with which 
 this is confessed confirms our trust in the narratives. Not until Pen- 
 tecost were their minds fully enlightened. Comp. x. 6, xii. 16; Matt. 
 xv. 16, xvi. 8; Mark ix. 32; Luke ix. 45, xviii. 34, xxiv. 25; Acts i. 6; 
 Heb. v. 12. Christ’s question is asked in sorrowful but affectionate 
 surprise; hence the tender repetition of the name. Had 5. Philip 
 recognised Christ, he would have seen the revelation of God in Him, 
 and would never have asked for a vision of God such as was granted 
 to Moses. See notes on xii. 44, 45. There is no reference to the 
 Transfiguration, of which 5. Philip had not yet been told; Matt. 
 xvii. 9. For the dative, a doubtful reading, see Winer, p. 273. 
 
 ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἕωρ. τ. πατέρα. Again there is the majesty of 
 Divinity in the utterance, What mere man would dare to say, ‘He 
 that hath seen me hath seen God’? Comp, v. 80, viii. 29, 42, xv. 10. 
 
 10. οὐ πιστεύεις. Κ΄. Philip’s question seemed to imply that he 
 did not believe this truth, although Christ had taught it publicly (x. 38). 
 What follows is stated in an argumentative form, ‘That the Father is 
 in Me is proved by the fact that My words do not originate with Myself; 
 and this is proved by the fact that My works do not originate with 
 Myself, but are really His.’ No proof is given of this last statement: 
 Christ’s works speak for themselves; they are manifestly Divine. It 
 matters little whether we regard the argument as @ fortiori, the works 
 being stronger evidence than the words; or as inclusive, the works 
 covering and containing the words. The latter seems to agree best 
 with vili. 28. For τὰ ῥήματα see on 111. 34: λέγω refers to the sub- 
 stance, λαλῶ to the form of the utterances (xii. 49, xvi. 18). On the 
 whole statement that Christ’s words and works are not His own but 
 the Father’s, comp. v. 19, 30, viii. 26—29, xii. 44: τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ are 
 the Father’s works, done and seen in the Son. 
 
 11. πιστεύετέ μοι. In English we lose the point that Jesus now 
 turns from §. Philip and addresses all the Eleven. ‘Ye have been 
 with Me long enough to believe what I say; but if not, at any rate 
 believe what Ido. My words need no credentials: but if credentials 
 are demanded, there are My works.’ He had said the same, somewhat 
 more severely, to the Jews (x. 37, 38, where see note); and He repeats 
 it much more severely in reference to the Jews (xv. 22, 24). Note the 
 progress from πιστεύετέ pou here to ὁ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμέ in v. 12; the one 
 grows out of the other. 
 
 12. κἀκεῖνος ποιήσει. Comp. vi. 57 and vv. 21, 26: see oni. 8, 18. 
 ‘Like Me, he shall do the works of the Father, He dwelling in him 
 through the Son. Comp. καθὼς ἐκεῖνός ἐστι, καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐσμεν ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ 
 τούτῳ (1 John iv. 17). 
 
 kal μείζονα τούτων. No reference to healing by means of 5, Peter’s 
 shadow (Acts v. 15) or of handkerchiefs that had touched 8S. Paul 
 (Acts xix. 12). Even from a human point of view no miracle wrought 
 
XIV. 16.] NOTES. 277 
 
 by an Apostle is greater than the raising of Lazarus. But from a 
 spiritual point of view no such comparisons are admissible; to Omni- 
 potence all works are alike. These ‘greater works’ refer rather to the 
 results of Pentecost; the victory over Judaism and Paganism, two 
 powers which for the moment were victorious over Christ (Luke xxii. 
 33). Christ’s work was confined to Palestine and had but small 
 success; the Apostles went everywhere, and converted thousands. 
 The reason introduced by ὅτι is twofold: (1) He will have left the 
 earth and be unable to continue these works; therefore believers must 
 continue them for Him; (2) He will be in heaven ready to help both 
 directly and by intercession; therefore believers will be able to con- 
 tinue these works and surpass them. But note that He does not say 
 that they shall surpass His words. He alone has words of eternal 
 life; never man spake as He did (vi. 68, vii. 46). 
 
 It is doubtful whether there should be a comma or a full stop at the 
 end of this verse. Our punctuation seems the better; but to make ὅτι 
 run on into the next verse makes little difference to the sense. 
 
 13. ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί pov. The phrase occurs here for the first time. 
 Comp. xv. 16, xvi. 23, 24, 26. Anything that can rightly be asked in 
 His name will be granted; there is no other limit. By ‘in My name’ 
 is not of course meant the mere using the formula ‘through Jesus 
 Christ.’ Rather, it means praying and working as Christ’s repre- 
 sentatives in the same spirit in which Christ prayed and worked,— 
 ‘Not My will, but Thine be done.’ Prayers for other ends than this 
 are excluded; not that it is said that they will not be granted, but 
 there is no promise that they will be. Comp. 2 Cor. xii. 8,9. For tva 
 δοξασθῇ see on xi. 4, xii. 28, xiii. 31. 
 
 14. ἐγὼ ποιήσω. Perhaps we ought to read τοῦτο ποιήσω, this will 
 I do (iii. 32); but the emphatic ἐγώ suits the context better. In v. 13 
 the prayer is regarded as addressed to the Father, but granted by the 
 Son: in υ. 14, if the very strongly supported με is genuine, the prayer 
 is addressed to Christ. In xvi. 23 the Father with equal truth grants 
 the prayer. 
 
 15. ἐὰν dyamdré pe. The connexion with what precedes is again 
 not quite clear. Some would see it in the condition ‘in My name,’ 
 which includes willing obedience to His commands. Perhaps it is 
 rather to be referred to the opening and general drift of the chapter. 
 ‘Let not your heart be troubled at My going away. You will still be 
 Mine, I shall still be yours, and we shall still be caring for one another. 
 I go to prepare a place for you, you remain to continue and surpass My 
 work on earth. And though you can no longer minister to Me in the 
 flesh, you can prove your love for Me even more perfectly by keeping 
 My commandments when I am gone.’ ‘My’ is emphatic (see on viii. 
 31); not those of the Law but of the Gospel. Only in these last dis- 
 courses does Christ speak of His commandments: v. 21, xv. 10, 12, 
 xiii. 34. 
 
 16. Kaydép. Ἐγώ is emphatic: ‘you do your part on earth, and 
 I will do Mine in heaven.’ So far as there is a distinction between 
 
278 S. JOHN. [XIV. 16— 
 
 αἰτεῖν and ἐρωτᾷν, the latter is the less suppliant. It is always used 
 by 5. John when Christ speaks of His own prayers to the Father (xvi. 
 26, xvii. 9, 15, 20). Martha, less careful than the Evangelist, uses 
 αἰτεῖν of Christ’s prayers (xi. 22). But the distinction must not be 
 pressed as if αἰτεῖν were always used of inferiors (against which Deut. 
 x. 12; Acts xvi. 29; 1 Pet. iii. 15 are conclusive), or ἐρωτᾷν always of 
 equals (against which Mark vii. 26; Luke iv. 38, vii. 3; John iv, 40, 
 47; Acts iii. 3 are equally conclusive), although the tendency is in that 
 direction. In 1 John v. 16 both words are used. In classical Greek 
 ἐρωτᾷν is never ‘to make a request,’ but always (as in i. 19, 21, 25, ix. 
 2, 15, 19, 21, 23, &c.) ‘to ask a question:’ see on xvi. 23. 
 
 παράκλητον. Advocate. Παράκλητος is used five times in N. T.— 
 four times in this Gospel by Christ of the Holy Spirit (xiv. 16, 26, 
 xy. 26, xvi. 7), and once in the First Epistle by 8. John of Christ 
 (ii. 1). Our translators render it ‘Comforter’ in the Gospel, and 
 ‘Advocate’ in the Epistle. As to the meaning of the word, usage 
 appears to be decisive. It commonly signifies ‘one who is summoned 
 to the side of another’ to aid him in a court of justice, especially the 
 ‘counsel for the defence.’ It is passive, not active; ‘one who is 
 summoned to plead a cause,’ not ‘one who exhorts, or encourages, 
 or comforts.’ A comparison of the simple word (xAynrés=‘ called;’ 
 Matt. xx. 16, xxii. 14; Rom.i.1, 6, 7; 1 Cor. i. 1, 2, &c.) and the 
 other compounds, of which only one occurs in the N. T. (ἀνέγκλητος ΞΞ 
 ‘unaccused ;’ 1 Cor. i. 8; Col. i. 22, &c.), or a reference to the 
 general rule about adjectives similarly formed from transitive verbs, 
 will shew that παράκλητος must have a passive sense. Moreover, 
 ‘Advocate’ is the sense which the context suggests, wherever the 
 word is used in the Gospel: the idea of pleading, arguing, con- 
 vincing, instructing, is prominent in every instance. Here the Para- 
 clete is the ‘Spirit of truth,’ whose reasonings fall dead on the ear 
 of the world, and are taken in only by the faithful. In v. 26 He is to 
 teach and remind them. In xy. 26 He is to bear witness to Christ. 
 In xvi. 7—11 He is to convince or convict the world. In short, 
 He is represented as the Advocate, the Counsel, who suggests true 
 reasonings to our minds and true courses for our lives, convicts our 
 adversary the world of wrong, and pleads our cause before God 
 our Father. He may be ‘summoned to our side’ to comfort as well 
 as to plead, and in the 7’e Deum the Holy Spirit is rightly called ‘the 
 Comforter,’ but that is not the function which is set forth here. To 
 substitute ‘Advocate’ will not only bring out the right meaning in 
 the Gospel, but will bring the language of the Gospel into its true 
 relation to the language of the Epistle. ‘He will give you another 
 Advocate’ acquires fresh meaning when we remember that S. John 
 calls Christ our ‘ Advocate ;’ the Advocacy of Christ and the Advocacy 
 of the Spirit mutually illustrating one another. At the same time an 
 important coincidence between the Gospel and Epistle is preserved, 
 one of the many which help to prove that both are by one and the 
 same author, and therefore that evidence of the genuineness of the 
 Epistle is also evidence of the genuineness of the Gospel. See Light- 
 
XIV. 20.] NOTES. 279 
 
 foot, On Revision, pp. 50—56, from which nearly the whole of this 
 note is taken. §S. Paul, though he does not use the word, has the 
 doctrine: in Rom. viii. 27, 34 the same language, ‘ to make interces- 
 sion for’ (ἐντυγχάνειν ὑπέρ), is used both of the Spirit and of Christ. 
 Philo frequently uses παράκλητος of the high-priest as the advocate 
 and intercessor for the people. He also uses it in the same sense of 
 the Divine Λόγος. 
 
 εἰς τ. αἰῶνα. Their present Advocate has come to them and will 
 leave them again; this ‘ other Advocate’ will come and never leave 
 them. And in Him, who is the Spirit of Christ (Rom. viii. 9), Christ 
 will be with them also (Matt. xxviii. 20). 
 
 17. τ΄ av. τ. ἀληθ. This expression confirms the rendering ‘ Ad- 
 vocate,’ Truth is more closely connected with the idea of advocating 
 a cause than with that of comforting. Comp. xv. 26, xvi. 13; 1 John 
 v.6. The Paraclete is the Spirit of Truth as the Bearer of the Divine 
 revelation, bringing truth home to the hearts of men. In 1 John 
 iv. 6 it is opposed to the ‘spirit of error.’ Comp. 1 Cor. ii. 12. On 
 κόσμος see on 1. 10. 
 
 οὐ θεωρεῖ. Beholdeth Him not, neither cometh to know Him, 
 because the Spirit and ‘the things of the Spirit’ must be ‘ spiritually 
 discerned’ (1 Cor. ii. 14), The world may have intelligence, scientific 
 investigation, criticism, learning; but not by these is the Spirit of 
 Truth contemplated and recognised; rather by humility, self-investi- 
 gation, faith, and love. Note the presents γινώσκετε, μένει, ἐστίν. 
 The Spirit is in the Apostles already, though not in the fulness of 
 Pentecost. Note also (in vv. 16, 17) the definite personality of the 
 Spirit, distinct from the Son who promises Him and the Father who 
 gives Him: and the three prepositions; the Advocate is with us for 
 fellowship (μετά) ; abides by our side to defend us (παρά) ; is in us as 
 a source of power to each individually (ἐν). 
 
 18. ὀρφανούς. Desolate, or (with Wiclif) fatherless, as in James 
 i. 27, the only other place in N. T. where it occurs. ‘ Comfortless’ gives 
 unfair support to ‘Comforter’: there is no connexion between ὀρ- 
 gavos and παράκλητος. The connexion is rather with rexvia in xiii. 
 33: He will not leave His ‘little children’ fatherless. 
 
 ἔρχ. πρός. Iam coming wnto you, in the Spirit, whom I will send. | 
 The context seems to shew clearly that Christ’s spiritual reunion 
 with them through the Paraclete, and not His bodily reunion with 
 them either through the Resurrection or through the final Return, is 
 intended. Note the frequent and impressive asyndeton in vv. 17—20. 
 
 19. ἔτι μικρόν. Comp. xiii. 33, xvi. 16. They behold Him in the 
 Paraclete, ever present with them; and they shall have that higher 
 and eternal life over which death has no power either in Him or His. 
 followers. Christ has this life in Himself (v. 26); His followers 
 derive it from Him (vy. 21). 
 
 20. ἐν ἐκ. τ. 7p. Comp. xvi. 23, 26. Pentecost, and thenceforth to 
 the end of the world. They will come tv know, for experience will 
 
280 S. JOHN. [XIV. 20— 
 
 teach them, that the presence of the Spirit is the presence of Christ, 
 and through Him of the Father. For ὑμεῖς ἐν ἐμοί comp. xv. 4, 5, 
 xvii. 21, 23; 1 John iii. 24, iv. 13, 15, 16. 
 
 21. ἔχων... τηρῶν. Bearing them steadfastly in his mind and 
 observing them in his life, *Eketvos, with great emphasis (see on i. 
 18); he and no else. 
 
 ἐμφανίσω. Once more, as in vii. 17, willing obedience is set forth 
 as the road to .spiritual enlightenment. “Eugavifew (here only in 
 5. John) is stronger than φανεροῦν. 
 
 22, ᾿Ιούδας. Excluding the genealogies of Christ we have six 
 persons of thisnamein N. T. 1. This Judas, who was the son of a 
 certain James (Luke vi. 16; Acts i. 13): he is commonly identified 
 with Lebbaeus or Thaddaeus (see on Matt. x. 3). 2. Judas Iscariot. 
 3. The brother of Jesus Christ, and of James, Joses, and Simon 
 (Matt. xiii. 55; Mark vi. 3). 4. Judas, surnamed Barsabas (Acts 
 xv. 22, 27, 32). δ. Judas of Galilee (Acts v. 37). 6. Judas of 
 Damascus (Acts ix. 11). Of these six the third is probably the author 
 of the Epistle; so that this remark is the only thing recorded in the 
 N. T. of Judas the Apostle as distinct from the other Apostles. Nor 
 is anything really known of him from other sources. 
 
 . τί γέγονεν. What is come to pass; what has happened to deter- 
 mine Thee to so strange a course? *Eudavicw rouses 8. Judas just as 
 ἑωράκατε (v. 7) roused §. Philip. Both go wrong from the same 
 cause, inability to see the spiritual meaning of Christ’s words; but 
 they go wrong in different ways. Philip wishes for a vision of the 
 Father, a Theophany, a suitable inauguration of the Messiah’s king- 
 dom. Judas supposes with the rest of his countrymen that the 
 manifestation of the Messiah means a bodily appearance in glory before 
 the whole world, to judge the Gentile and restore the kingdom to the 
 Jews. Once more we have the Jewish point of view given with 
 convincing precision. Comp. vil. 4. 
 
 _ 28. ἀπεκρίθη. The answer is given, as so often in our Lord’s 
 
 | replies, not directly, but by repeating and developing the statement 
 which elicited the question. Comp. lii, 5—8, iv. 14, vi. 44—51, 53— 
 58, &c. The condition of receiving the revelation is loving obedience; 
 those who have it not cannot receive it. This shews that the revela- 
 tion cannot be universal, cannot be shared by those who hate and 
 disobey (xv. 18). 
 
 ἐλευσόμεθα. For the plural comp. x. 30; it is a distinct claim to 
 Divinity : for μονήν see on v. 2. The thought of God dwelling among 
 His people was familiar to every Jew (Ex. xxv. 8, xxix. 45; Zech. ii. 
 10; &c.), There is a thought far beyond that,—God dwelling in the 
 heart of the individual ; and later Jewish philosophy had attained to 
 this also. But the united indwelling of the Father and the Son by 
 means of the Spirit is purely Christian. 
 
 ~ 
 
 24. οὐκ ἔστιν ἐμός. Quite literally; comp. xii. 44. This explains 
 why Christ cannot manifest Himself to the world: it rejects God’s 
 
XIV. 27.) NOTES. 281 
 
 word, On πέμψαντος see on i. 33. Perhaps there is a pause after 
 v. 24: with v, 25 the discourse takes a fresh departure, returning to 
 the subject of the Paraclete, 
 
 25. ταῦτα. First for emphasis in opposition to πάντα in v. 26: 
 ‘Thus much I tell you now; the Advocate shall tell you all.’ 
 
 26. ἅγιον. This epithet is given to the Spirit thrice in this 
 Gospel; 1. 33, xx. 22, and here: in vii. 39 ἅγιον is an insertion. It is 
 not frequent in any Gospel but the third; 5 times in S. Matt., 4 in 
 S. Mark, 12 in 5. Luke. S. Luke seems fond of the expression, which 
 he uses some 40 times in the Acts; rarely using Πνεῦμα without ἅγιον. 
 Here only does 8. John give the full phrase: in i. 33 and xx. 22 there 
 is no article. 
 
 ἐν τ. dv. p. As My representative, taking My place and continuing 
 My work: see on v.13 and comp. xvi. 13, 14. The mission of the 
 Paraclete in reference to the glorified Redeemer is analogous to that 
 of the Messiah in reference to the Father. And His two functions 
 are connected: He teaches new truths, ‘things to come,’ things which 
 they ‘cannot bear now,’ in recalling the old; and He brings the old 
 to their remembrance in teaching the new. He recalls not merely 
 the words of Christ, a particular in which this Gospel is a striking 
 fulfilment of the promise, but also the meaning of them, which the 
 Apostles often failed to see at the time: comp. ii, 22, xii. 16; Luke 
 ix. 45, xviii. 34, xxiv. 8. ‘‘It is on the fulfilment of this promise to 
 the Apostles, that their sufficiency as Witnesses of all that the Lord 
 did and taught, and consequently the authenticity of the Gospel 
 narrative, is grounded” (Alford). 
 
 27. εἰρήνην ἀφ. This is probably a solemn adaptation of the 
 conventicnal form of taking leave in the East: comp. ‘Go in peace,’ 
 Judg. xviii. 6; 1 Sam.i. 17, xx. 42, xxix. 7; 2 Kings v.19; Mark v. 
 34, &c. See notes on James ii. 16 and 1 Pet. v.14. The Apostle of 
 the Gentiles perhaps purposely substitutes in his Epistles ‘ Grace be 
 with you all’ for the traditional Jewish ‘Peace.’ Try ἐμήν is em- 
 phatic (viii. 31): this is no mere conventional wish. 
 
 ov καθώς. It seems best to understand ‘as’ literally of the world’s 
 manner of giving, not of its gifts, as if ‘ as’ were equivalent to ‘ what.’ 
 The world gives from interested motives, because it has received or 
 hopes to receive as much again (Luke vi. 33, 34); it gives to friends 
 and withholds from enemies (Matt. v. 43); it gives what costs it 
 nothing or what it cannot keep, as in the case of legacies ; it pretends 
 to give that which is not its own, especially when it says ‘ Peace, 
 peace,’ when there is no peace (Jer. vi. 14). The manner of Christ’s 
 giving is the very opposite of this. He gives what is His own, what 
 He might have kept, what has cost Him a life of suffering and a cruel 
 death to bestow, what is open to friend and foe alike, who have 
 nothing of their own to give in return. With μὴ ταρασσέσθω comp. 
 v.1. It shews that the peace is internal peace of mind, not external 
 freedom from hostility. Δειλιᾷν, to be fearful, frequent in LXX., 
 occurs here only in N. T. 
 
282 S. JOHN. [XIV. 28— 
 
 28. ἐχάρητε ἄν. Ye would have rejoiced that Iam going. Comp. 
 the construction in iv. 10, xi, 21, 82, Winer, p. 381. Their affection 
 is somewhat selfish: they ought to rejoice at His gain rather than 
 mourn over their own loss. And His gain is mankind’s gain. 
 
 ὅτι ὁ πατήρ. Because the Father is greater than I. Therefore Christ’s 
 going to Him was gain. This was a favourite text with the Arians, 
 as implying the inferiority of the Son. There is a real sense in 
 which even in the Godhead the Son is subordinate to the Father: 
 this is involved in the Eternal Generation and in the Son’s being the 
 Agent by whom the Father works in the creation and preservation of 
 all things. Again, there is the sense in which the ascended and 
 glorified Christ is ‘inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.’ 
 Lastly, there is the sense in which Jesus on earth was inferior to His 
 Father in Heaven. Of the three this last meaning seems to suit the 
 context best, as shewing most clearly how His going to the Father 
 would be a gain, and that not only to Himself but to the Apostles; 
 for at the right hand of the Father, who is greater than Himself, He 
 will have more power to advance His kingdom. See notes on 1 Cor, 
 xv. 27, 28; Mark xiii. 32, [xvi. 19]. 
 
 29. πιστεύσητε. Comp. xiii. 19 and see on i. 7. By foretelling 
 the trouble Jesus turns a stumblingblock into an aid to faith. 
 
 30. οὐκέτι. No longer will I speak much with you (comp. xv. 15), 
 for the ruler of the world is coming (see on xii. 31). The powers of 
 darkness are at work in Judas and his employers; and yet there is 
 nothing in Jesus over which Satan has control. His yielding to the 
 attack is voluntary, in loving obedience to the Father. For the 
 import of this confident appeal to His own sinlessnes, in Me he hath 
 nothing, see on v. 9, viil. 29, 46, xv. 10. 
 
 31. ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα. See on i. 8. But (Satan cometh) in order that. 
 Some would omit the full stop at ποιῶ and make ἵνα depend on 
 ἐγείρεσθε : ‘But that the world may know that I love the Father, and 
 that as the Father commanded Me so I do, arise, let us go hence.’ 
 There is a want of solemnity, if not a savour of ‘theatrical effect,’ in 
 this arrangement. Moreover it is less in harmony with 53. John’s 
 style, especially in these discourses. The more simple construction 
 is the more probable. But comp. Matt. ix. 6. 
 
 ἄγωμεν. ‘Let us go and meet the power before which I am willing 
 in accordance with God’s will to fall.’ 
 
 We are probably to understand that they rise from table and 
 prepare to depart, but that the contents of the next three chapters 
 are spoken before they leave the room (comp. xviii. 1). Others 
 suppose that the room is left now and that the next two chapters are 
 discourses on the way towards Gethsemane, chap. xvii. being spoken 
 at some halting-place, possibly the Temple. See introductory note to 
 chap. xvii. 
 
XV.2.) «COTES. 283 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 4and 6, μένῃ, μένητε, μένῃ for μείνῃ, μείνητε, μείνῃ. 
 
 6. τὸ should probably be inserted before πῦρ with NAB: omitted 
 as less usual; comp. Matt. 111, 10, vii. 19; Luke iii. 9. 
 
 7. αἰτήσασθε for αἰτήσεσθε (influenced by γενήσεται). 
 11. ἡ for μείνῃ (influenced by v. 10). 
 22 and 24, εἴχοσαν for εἶχον (more usual form), 
 
 The general subject still continues from xiii, 31—Curist’s Love ΙΝ 
 KEEPING His own. This is still further set forth in this chapter in 
 three main aspects: 1. Their union with Him, illustrated by the 
 allegory of the Vine (1—11); 2. Their union with one another in Him 
 (12—17); 3. The hatred of the world to both Him and them (18—25). 
 
 CHap. XV. 1—11. THe UNION oF THE DISCIPLES WITH CHRIST. 
 Tur ALLEGORY OF THE VINE. 
 
 The allegory of the Vine is similar in kind to that of the Door and 
 of the Good Shepherd in chap. x. (see introductory note there): this 
 sets forth union from within, the other union from without, 
 
 ἡ ἄμπ. ἡ ἀληθινή. For Hy εἰμι see on vi. 35. Christ is the true, 
 genuine, ideal, perfect Vine, as He is the perfect Witness (Rev. ili. 14), 
 the perfect Bread (vi. 32), and the perfect Light (see oni. 9). Whether 
 the allegory was suggested by anything external,—vineyards, or the 
 vine of the Temple visible in the moonlight, a vine creeping in at the 
 window, or the ‘fruit of the vine’ (Matt. xxvi. 29) on the table which 
 they had just left,—it is impossible to say. Of these the last is far the 
 most probable, as referring to the Eucharist just instituted as a special 
 means of union with Him and with one another. But the allegory 
 may easily have been chosen for its own merits and its O.T. associa- 
 tions (Ps. lxxx. 8—19; Is. v. 1—7; Jer. ii. 21; &c.) without any sug- 
 gestion from without. The vine was a national emblem under the 
 Maccabees and appears on their coins. 
 
 ὁ γεωργός. The Owner of the soil Who tends His Vine Himself and 
 establishes the relation between the Vine and the branches. There is 
 therefore a good deal of difference between the form of this allegory 
 and the parable of the Vineyard (Mark xii. 1) or that of the Fruitless 
 Fig-tree (Luke xiii. 6). Γεωργός occurs nowhere else in the Gospels 
 except of the wicked husbandmen in the parable of the Vineyard. 
 
 2. κλῆμα. Occurs here only (vv. 2—6) in N.T. In classical Greek 
 it is specially used of the vine. Κλάδος (Matt. xiii. 32, xxi. 8, xxiv. 32; 
 Mark iv. 32, xii. 28; Luke xiii. 9; Rom. xi, 16—21) is the smaller 
 branch of any tree. So that κλῆμα itself, independently of the context, 
 fixes the meaning of the allegory. Every vine-branch, every one who 
 
284 .0ΘΗΝ (Xv. 9— 
 
 is by origin a Christian, if he continues such by origin only, and bears 
 no fruit, is cut off. The allegory takes no account of the branches of 
 other trees: neither Jews nor heathen are included. These could not 
 be called κλήματα ἐν ἐμοῖ. Note the casus pendens in both clauses. 
 Comp. vi. 39, vii. 38; 1 John ii. 24, 27; Rev. ii. 26, ili. 12, 21. 
 
 καθαίρει. He cleanseth it. Mark the connexion with καθαροί in 
 v. 3. The play between αἴρει and καθαίρει is perhaps intentional; but 
 cannot be reproduced in English. Kaéaipeww means freeing from ex- 
 crescences and useless shoots which are a drain on the branch for 
 nothing. The Eleven are now to be cleansed by suffering. 
 
 3. ἤδη ὑμεῖς και Already are ye clean because of the word. Dis- 
 tinguish διά with the accusative from διά with the genitive. A.V. con- 
 founds the two here and Matt. xv. 3, 6. ‘O λόγος is the whole teaching 
 of Christ, not any particular discourse (xiv. 23). Ἤδη assures the 
 disciples that the chief part of their cleansing is accomplished: in the 
 language of xiii. 10, they are λελουμένοι. Ὑμεῖς is emphatic: many 
 more will become καθαροί hereafter. 
 
 4. κἀγὼ ἐν ὑμῖν. This may be taken either as a promise (‘and 
 then I will abide in you’), or as the other side of the command (‘take 
 care that I abide in you’). The latter is better. The freedom of man’s 
 will is such that on his action depends that of Christ. The branches 
 of the spiritual Vine have this mysterious power, that they can cut 
 themselves off, as Judas had done. Nature does something and grace 
 more; but grace may be rejected. The expression ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ, from 
 itself, as the source of its own productiveness, is peculiar to 8. John 
 (v. 19, vii. 18, xi. 51, xvi. 13). 
 
 5. The text of the allegory is repeated and enlarged. That the 
 disciples are the branches has been implied but not stated. Note the 
 irregular construction and comp. v. 44. 
 
 ὅτι χωρὶς ἐμοῦ. Because apart from Me (i. 3; Eph. ii. 12). Chris- 
 tians cannot live as such if severed from Christ. Nothing is here said 
 about those who are‘nct Christians; but there is a sense in which the 
 words are true of them also. 
 
 6. ἐβλήθη ἔξω. 15 cast out of the vineyard. The vineyard is a 
 further enlargement of the idea. The aorist shews the inevitable 
 nature of the consequence: he is already cast out and withered by the 
 very fact of not abiding in Christ. Winer, p. 345. These words were 
 spoken in spring, the time for pruning vines. Heaps of burning twigs 
 may have been in sight. This part of the picture looks forward to the 
 day of judgment. Meanwhile the cast-out branch may be grafted in 
 again (Rom. xi. 23) and the dead branch may be raised to life again 
 (v. 21, 25). With συνάγουσιν, they gather, comp. αἰτοῦσιν, Luke xii, 
 20: the nominative is quite indefinite. Avra refers to τὰ κλήματα 
 implied in ἐάν τις. 
 
 7. ὃ ἐὰν θέλ. alr. Ask whatsoever ye will. Both in its compre- 
 hensiveness and in its limitation the promise is similar to that in xiv. 
 13,14. One who abides in Christ and has His sayings (iii. 34) abiding 
 in him cannot ask amiss: His words inspire and guide prayer. 
 
XV, 12.] NOTES. 285 
 
 8. ἐν τούτῳ. Looks back to vv. 5 and 7 or perhaps forward to 
 ἵνα; comp. iv. 87, xvi. 30; 1 John iv.17. The aorist ἐδοξάσθη is 
 similar to those in v.6. The Father is already glorified in the union 
 between Christ and His disciples. He is glorified whenever the oc- 
 casion arises. For ἵνα see oni. 8: that ye may bear much fruit and 
 become My disciples, or disciples to Me. Hven Apostles may become 
 still more truly disciples to Christ. A well-supported reading (yev7- 
 σεσθε)ὴ gives ye shall become. 
 
 9. καθὼς yy. Authorities differ as to whether we should place a 
 comma or a colon at ἠγάπησα: either, Even as the Father hath loved Me 
 and I have loved you, abide in My love; or, Even as the Father hath 
 loved Me, I also have loved you (xvii. 18, xx. 21): abide in My love. 
 The latter is better as keeping in due prominence the main statement, 
 that the love of Christ for His disciples is analogous to that of the 
 Father for the Son. The aorists may be translated as such, the love 
 being regarded as a completed whole, always perfect in itself. But 
 perhaps this is just one of those cases where the Greek aorist is best 
 translated by the English perfect: see on viii. 29. ᾿Εν τ. dy. τ. ἐμῇ 
 may mean either My love-or the love of Me. The former is more na- 
 tural and better suited to the context, which speaks of His love to them 
 as similar to the Father’s towards Him; but the latter need not be ex- 
 cluded. See on viii. 31. 
 
 10. καθὼς ἐγώ. This being a subordinate sentence, the tremendous 
 import of it is liable to pass unnoticed. Looking back over a life of 
 thirty years Jesus says, I have kept the Father’s commandments. Would 
 the best man that ever lived, if only a man, dare to say this? See on 
 viii. 29, 46, xiv. 9,30. Between the disciple and Christ, as between 
 Christ and the Father, obedience proves love and secures love in re- 
 turn. 
 
 11. The verse forms a conclusion to the allegory of the Vine: comp. 
 v. 17, xiv. 25, xvi. 25, 33. For ἡ x. ἡ ἐμή see on vill. 31: that the joy 
 that is Mine may be in you means the joy which Christ experienced 
 through consciousness of His fellowship with the Father, and which 
 supported Him in His sufferings, may be in His disciples and support 
 them in theirs. Here first, on the eve of His Passion, does Jesus speak 
 of His joy. For ἡ x. tp. wd. see on iii. 29. Human happiness can 
 reach no higher than to share that joy which Christ ever felt in being 
 loved by His Father and doing His will. 
 
 12—17. THE UNION oF THE DISCIPLES WITH ONE ANOTHER IN CHRIST, 
 
 e 
 
 12, ἡ évr. ἡ ἐμή. See on iii. 29. In v. 10 He said that to keep 
 His commandments was the way to abide in His love. He now re- 
 minds them what His commandment is (see on xiii. 34). It includes 
 all others. A day or two before this Christ had been teaching that all 
 the Law and the Prophets hang on the two great commands, ‘love 
 God with all thy heart’ and ‘love thy neighbour as thyself’ (Matt. xxii, 
 37—40). 8S. John teaches us that the second really implies the first 
 (1 John iv. 20). For ἵνα see on i. 8 and comp, xi. 57, xiii, 34, xv. 17. 
 
286 S. JOHN. [xvi = 
 
 13. This verse and the next three are an expansion of καθὼς ἠγά- 
 πησα ὑμᾶς. The standard of Christian love is the love of Christ for 
 His disciples: that is the ideal to be aimed at. For τ. ψυχὴν αὐ. θῇ 
 see on x. 11. Needless difficulty has been made about ὑπὲρ τ. φίλων 
 av., as if it contradicted Rom. v. 6—8. Christ here says that the 
 greatest love that any one can shew towards his friends is to die for 
 them. §. Paul says that such cases of self-sacrifice for good men occur; 
 but they are very rare. Christ, however, surpassed them, for He died 
 not only for His friends but for His enemies, not only for the good 
 but for sinners. There is no contradiction. Nor is there any emphasis 
 on ‘friends;’ as if to suffer for friends were higher than to suffer for 
 strangers or enemies. The order of the Greek words throws the em- 
 phasis on ‘life ;’ it is the unique character of the thing sacrificed that 
 proves the love. Christ says ‘for His friends’ because He is addressing 
 His friends. 
 
 14, ὑμεῖς φίλοι. Ὑμεῖς is emphatic: ‘and when I say “ friends” 
 I mean you.’ This shews that ‘friends’ was used simply because 
 He was speaking to Apostles, 
 
 15. οὐκέτι. No longer do I call you servants (see on vili. 34 and 
 comp. xiv. 30. He had implied that they were His servants xii. 26 
 and stated it xiii, 13—16. The two relationships do not exclude 
 one another. He had called them φίλοι before this (Luke xii. 4); and 
 they did not cease to be His δοῦλοι after this (Rom. i. 10; 2 Pet. i. 1; 
 Rey. i. 1). 
 
 ὑμᾶς δὲ elp. But you have I called friends; because all things 
 that I heard from My Father I made known to you: as they were 
 able to bear it (xvi. 12). After Pentecost they would be able to bear 
 much more. Thus he who wills to do his will as a servant shall 
 know of the doctrine as a friend (vii. 17). 
 
 16. οὐχ ὑμεῖς. Not ye chose Me, but I chose you. ‘Yuets and 
 ἐγώ are emphatic. ᾿Εκλέγειν refers to their election to be Apostles 
 (vi. 70, xiii. 18; Acts i. 2); therefore the aorist as referring to a 
 definite act in the past should be preserved. So also ἔθηκα, I ap- 
 pointed you, i.e. assigned you to a definite post, as in 2 Tim.i. 11; 
 Heb. i. 2. This is better than ‘I ordained,’ as A. V. here and 
 1 Tim. ii. 7, ‘ordain’ having become a technical term in ecclesiastical 
 language. Comp. Acts xiii. 47, xx. 28; 1 Cor. xii. 28. The repetition 
 of ὑμεῖς throughout the verse emphasizes the personal responsibility 
 of the Apostles. 
 
 ὑπάγητε. See oni, 7: that ye should go and bear fruit. Ὑπάγητε 
 must not be insisted on too strongly as if it referred to the missionary 
 journeys of the Apostles. On the other hand it is more than a mere 
 auxiliary or expletive: it implies the active carrying out of the idea 
 expressed by the verb with which it is coupled (comp. Luke x. 37; 
 Matt. xiii. 44, xviii. 15, xix. 21), and perhaps also separation from 
 their Master (Matt. xx. 4, 7). The missionary work of gathering in 
 souls is not specially indicated here: the ‘ fruit’ is rather the holiness 
 of their own lives and good works of all kinds, The second iva is 
 
XV. 20.] NOTES. 287 
 
 partly coordinate with, partly dependent on, the first: comp. the 
 double ἵνα xiii. 34 and seeonv.7. Several ancient commentators take 
 δῶ as the first person in harmony with xiv, 13. The three passages, 
 xiy. 13, xv. 7 and 16 should be compared. 
 
 17. ταῦτα. The verse sums up what precedes and prepares for 
 a new departure (comp. v. 11, xiv. 25, xvi. 1, 25, 33), ταῦτα referring 
 to what has been said about being one with Him and with one another. 
 For ἵνα see on i. 8 and comp. v, 12, xi. 57, xiii. 84. The idea of 
 purpose is probably to be included. 
 
 Note the solemn effect produced by prolonged asyndeton. In vv. 
 1—17 there is not a single connective particle. A Greek uninfluenced 
 by Hebrew would be very unlikely to write thus, See oni. 6. 
 
 18—25. Tue Hatrep oF THE WoRLD TO BOTH HIM AND THEM, 
 
 In strong contrast to the love and union between Christ and His 
 disciples and among the disciples themselves is the hatred of the world 
 to Him and them. He gives them these thoughts to console them in 
 encountering this hatred of the world. (1) It hated Him first: in this 
 trial also He has shewn them the way. (2) The hatred of the world 
 proves that they are not of the world. (3) They are sharing their 
 Master’s lot, whether the world rejects or accepts their preaching, 
 (4) They will suffer this hatred not only with Him, but for His sake. 
 All this tends to shew that the very hatred of the world intensifies 
 their union with Him. 
 
 18. γινώσκετε] Hither ye know, or know ye, that it hath hated 
 Me. As in xiv. 1, the imperative seems preferable to the indicative : 
 in v. 27 and v. 39 the context throws the balance the other way. 
 
 μεμίσηκεν expresses what has been and still is the case. πρῶτον 
 ὑμῶν is similar to πρῶτός μου (see on i, 15); first of you, first in 
 regard to you. To avoid the unusual construction some good autho- 
 rities omit ὑμῶν. Comp. 1 John iii. 18. 
 
 19. τὸ ἴδιον. Its own. In vii. 7 He told His brethren, who did 
 not believe on Him, that the world could not hate them. This shews 
 why. In their unbelief it still found something of its own (1 John 
 iv. 5). The selfishness of the world’s love is thus indicated. It 
 loves not so much them, as that in them which is to its own ad- 
 
 _vantage: hence the lower word φιλεῖν rather than ὠγαπᾷν (contrast 
 v. 17); it is mere natural liking. With the solemn repetition of 
 κόσμος Comp, 111. 17, 31, xii. 36, xvii. 14, For the construction comp. 
 v. 46, viii. 19, 42, ix. 41, xviii. 36 and contrast iv. 10, xi. 21, xiv. 28. 
 For διὰ τοῦτο see on vii. 21, 22. 
 
 20. μνημονεύετε. See note on xiii. 16: of the passages noticed 
 there Matt. x. 24 is similar in meaning to this. Christ may here be 
 alluding to the occasion recorded in Matt. x. 24. On the blessedness 
 of sharing the lot of Christ comp. 1 Pet. iv. 12, 13, 
 
 εἰ ἐμὲ ἐδ. If they persecuted Me...if they kept (xiii. 14, xviii. 23) 
 My word, Type must not be rendered ‘watch, lay wait for’ in 
 
288 S. JOHN. [ΧΥ͂. 20— 
 
 a hostile sense: the two halves of the sentence are opposed, not 
 parallel. Τὸν . or τοὺς Δ. τηρεῖν is peculiar to 5, John (viii. 51, 62, 
 55, xiv. 23, 24, xvii. 6) always in the sense of the parallel phrase 
 τὰς ἐντολὰς τ. (xiv. 15, 21, xv. 10). Both phrases link the Gospel 
 with the First Epistle (ii. 3, 4, 5, iii. 22, 24, v. 2, 3), and these two 
 with the Apocalypse (iii. 8, 10, xii. 17, xiv. 12, xxii 7, 9). Comp. 
 John ix. 16; Rev. i. 3, 11. 26, iii. 8, and see on John vii. 30, 37, 
 xi. 44, xix. 37, xx. 16. These passages shew that τηρεῖν cannot be 
 taken in a hostile sense. The meaning of the verse as a whole is 
 that both in failure and in success they will share His lot. 
 
 21. ἀλλά. But be of good cheer, it is διὰ τὸ ὄνομα pov. This 
 thought is to turn their suffering into joy: Acts ν. 41, xxi. 13; 
 2 Cor. xii. 10; Gal. vi. 14; Phil. ii. 17, 18; 1 Pet. iv, 14. With 
 οὐκ οἴδασιν comp. vii. 28, xvi. 3, xvii. 25. They not merely did not 
 know that God had sent Jesus; they did not know God Himself, for 
 their idea of Him was radically wrong. And this ignorance is moral; 
 it has its root in hatred of good: it is not the intellectual darkness 
 of the heathen. 
 
 22. εἰ μὴ... ἐλάλησα. He had spoken as man had never spoken 
 before (vii. 16), in words sufficient to tell unprejudiced minds Who 
 He was. Their hatred was a sin against light: without the light 
 there would have been no sin. “Eyew ἁμαρτίαν is peculiar to 8. 
 John (v. 24, ix. 41, xix. 11; 1 John 1. 8): they would not have sin 
 (xix. 11; Rom. vii.7). πρόφασιν is excuse rather than ‘cloke.’ The 
 notion is not of hiding, but of excusing what cannot be hid: ‘colour’ 
 (Acts xxvii. 30) is better than ‘cloke’ (1 Thess. ii. 5). 
 
 νῦν δέ here and in v. 24 introduces a sharp contrast: the two 
 verses exhibit the parallelism so frequent in 5. John. For περὶ τῆς 
 ἁμ. Comp. vill. 46, xvi. 8. 
 
 24. τὰ ἔργα. If they did not perceive that His words were 
 Divine, they might at least have recognised His works as such (x. 38, 
 xiv. 11, v. 36). Here again their sin was against light : they admitted 
 the works (xi. 47) as such that none other did (ix. 32), and like Philip 
 they had seen, without recognising, the Father (xiv. 9, 10). 
 
 25. τ. νόμῳ. In the wide sense for the O. T. as a whole (x. 34, 
 xii. 34; Rom. iii. 19), The passage may be from Ps. lxix. 4 or xxxyv. 
 19: there are similar passages cix. 3 and cxix. 161. That their 
 hatred is gratuitous is again inexcusable. 
 
 26. ἐγὼ πέμψω. ᾿Εγώ is an emphatic claim to Divinity. Here 
 it is the Son who sends the Advocate from the Father (see on i, 6). 
 In xiv. 16 the Father sends in answer to the Son’s prayer. In xiv. 26 
 the Father sends in the Son’s name. These are three ways of ex- 
 pressing that the mission of the Paraclete is the act both of the 
 Father and of the Son, Who are one. See oni, 33. For τ᾿ tv. τ. 
 ἀληθ. see on xiv. 17. 
 
 ὃ π. τ. πατρὸς ἐκπορεύεται. It seems best to take this much dis- 
 cussed clause as simply yet another way of expressing the fact of the 
 
XV. 27.] NOTES. 289 
 
 mission of the Paraclete. If the Paraclete is sent by the Son from the 
 Father, and by the Father in the Son’s name and at the Son’s request, 
 then the Paraclete ‘proceedeth from the Father.’ If this be correct, 
 then this statement refers to the office and not to the Person of the Holy 
 Spirit, and has no bearing either way on the great question between 
 the Eastern and Western Churches, the Filioqgue added in the West to 
 the Nicene Creed. The word used here for ‘proceed’ is the same as 
 that used in the Creed of Nicea, and the Easterns quote these words 
 of Christ Himself as being against not merely the insertion of the clause 
 ‘and the Son’ into the Creed (which all admit to have been made ir- 
 regularly), but against the truth of the statement that the Spirit, not 
 only in His temporal mission, but in His Person, from all eternity pro- 
 ceeds from both the Father and the Son. On the whole question see 
 Pearson On the Creed, Art. vili.; Reunion Conference at Bonn, 1875, 
 pp. 9—85, Rivingtons; Pusey On the Clause “and the Son,” a Letter 
 to Dr Liddon, Parker, 1876. ᾿Εκπορεύεσθαι occurs in this Gospel only 
 here and y. 29, but is frequent in the other Gospels and in Revelation 
 (Matt. iii. 5, iv. 4, xv. 11, 18; Mark vii. 15, 18, 20, 21, 23; Luke iv. 
 22, 37; Rev. i. 16, iv. 5, &c.), and there seems to be nothing in the 
 word itself to limit it to the Eternal Procession. On the other hand the 
 παρά is strongly in favour of the reference being to the mission. Comp, 
 xvi. 27, xvii. 8. In the Creeds ἐκ is the preposition invariably used 
 of the Eternal Procession, τὸ ἐκ τ. πατρὸς ἐκπορευόμενον: and ‘the 
 Greek Fathers who apply this passage to the eternal Procession in- 
 stinctively substitute ἐκ for rapa” (Westcott). For ἐκεῖνος see on i. 18; 
 He in contrast to the world which hates and rejects Christ. Christ 
 has the witness of the Spirit of truth, and this has the authority of the 
 Father: it is impossible to have higher testimony than this, 
 
 27. καὶ ὑμ. δὲ μ. Nay, ye also bear witness, or Nay, bear ye also 
 witness (Winer, p. 53): but the conjunctions are against μαρτυρεῖτε 
 being imperative; comp. 3 John 12 and see on v.18 and viii. 16. The 
 testimony of the disciples is partly the same as that of the Spirit, 
 partly not. It is the same, so far as it depends on the illumination of 
 the Spirit, who was to bring all things to their remembrance and lead 
 them into all truth. This would not be true in its fulness until 
 Pentecost. It is not the same, so far as it depends upon the Apostles’ 
 own personal experience of Christ and His work; and this is marked 
 by the emphatic ὑμεῖς. This is the case at once; the experience is 
 already there; and hence the present tense. Comp. Acts νυ, 32, where 
 the Apostles clearly set forth the twofold nature of their testimony, 
 and Acts xv. 28, where there is a parallel distinction of the two factors. 
 
 am’ ἀρχῆς. Comp. 1 John ii. 7, 24, iii. 11 and especially iii. 8, 
 where as here we have the present: Winer, p. 334. The context must 
 decide the meaning (see on i. 1, vi. 64): here the beginning of Christ’s 
 ministry is clearly meant. They could bear witness as to what they 
 themselves had seen and heard (Luke i. 2; Acts i. 22). See on xvi, 4. 
 
 ST JOHN ἠὰ 
 
290 5. JOHN. ΓΕ 
 CHAPTER ΧΥ͂Ι. 
 
 3. After ποιήσουσιν omit ὑμῖν (inserted from vv. 1 and 4). 
 7. For οὐκ ἐλεύσεται some of the best authorities have οὐ μὴ ἔλθῃ. 
 
 13. For eis τ. ἀλήθειαν π. NDL have ἐν τῇ dX. 7., perhaps because 
 ἐν after ὁδηγεῖν is more common in LXX. ἀκούσει for ἂν ἀκούσῃ, with 
 BDEHY: WNL have ἀκούει. 
 
 14,15, 24. λήμψεται for λήψεται: Winer, p. 53. 
 
 16. After ὄψεσθέ pe omit ὅτι ἐγὼ ὑπάγω πρὸς τὸν πατέρα (inserted 
 from v. 17) with NBDL against A. 
 
 17. After ὅτι omit ἐγώ (inserted from xiv. 12). 
 
 20. Before λυπηθήσεσθε omit δέ (inserted to point a contrast with 
 ὁ κόσμος χαρήσεται). 
 
 22, ἀρεῖ for αἴρει: both are strongly supported. 
 
 23. ϑώσει ὑμῖν before ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί pov. 
 
 25. Before ἔρχεταυ omit ἀλλ᾽, and read ἀπαγγελῶ for ἀναγγελῶ (from 
 vv. 13, 14, 15). 
 
 27. παρὰ τ. Θεοῦ (NAC*) perhaps comes from xiii. 3: 7. 7. πατρός 
 (BC!DLX) seems preferable. 
 
 28. ἐκ τ. πατρός (BC!LX) for παρὰ τ. π. (NAC?) from v. 17. 
 
 29. Before παρρησίᾳ insert ἐν (overlooked after viv or omitted in 
 harmony with S. John’s usage; see on vii. 13). 
 
 32. Before ἐλήλυθεν omit νῦν (inserted from iv. 23, v. 25). 
 
 We are still in the first part of the second main division of the 
 Gospel, THE INNER GLORIFICATION OF CHRIST IN HIS LAST DISCOURSES 
 xiii,—xvii.). We now enter upon the third division of this first part 
 tae introductory note to chap. xiii.). 
 
 Tur PRoMISE OF THE PARACLETE AND OF CuRIsST’s RETURN. 
 
 As has been remarked already, the subjects are not kept distinct; 
 they cross and interlace, like the strands in a rope. But the following 
 divisions may conduce to clearness; 1. The World and the Paraclete 
 (1—11); 2. The Disciples and the Paraclete (12—15); 3. The Sorrow of 
 Christ’s Departure turned into Joy by His Return (16—24); 4, Summary 
 and Conclusion of the Discourses (25—33). 
 
 1—11. THe WORLD AND THE PARACLETE. 
 
 1. ταῦτα. These discourses generally, especially the last section, 
 about the world’s hatred of Him and them: see on xy. 11, 17. 
 
 σκανδαλισθῆτε. The verb combines the notions of ‘trip up’ and 
 ‘entrap.’ Σκάνδαλον is a later form of σκανδάληθρον (Aristoph. Ach, 
 
XVI. 5.] NOTES. 201 
 
 687), which is the bait-stick in a trap, to touch which makes the trap 
 close. Σκάνδαλον hence comes to mean any snare set to catch or trip 
 up. The metaphor occurs often in LXX. and in S. Matt. and S. Mark, 
 thrice in 5. Luke, and twice in §. John (vi. 61: comp. 1 John ii. 10). 
 The fanatical hatred of the Jews might make Jewish Apostles stumble 
 at the truth. 
 
 2. ἀποσυναγώγους. See on ix. 32. The ἀλλά introduces a grada- 
 tion, as in 2 Cor. vii. 11: Nay, there cometh an hour. ‘You may 
 think excommunication a strong measure, but they will go greater 
 lengths than this.’ In tva the Divine purpose again seems indicated 
 (xii. 23, xiii. 1); ‘an hour for every one that killeth you to think,’ ut 
 omnis...arbitretur. In πᾶς the universality of the delusion appears: 
 Jew and Gentile alike will put down Christians as blasphemers and 
 atheists and the perpetrators of every crime. The history of religious 
 persecution is the fulfilment of this prophecy: comp. Acts viii. 1, 
 ix. 1. Aarpetav expresses a religious service (Rom, ix. 4; Heb. ix. 1, 
 6); προσφέρειν the offering of sacrifice (Heb. v. 1, viii. 3, ix. 7): 
 offereth service to God. 
 
 3. οὐκ ἔγνωσαν. Did not recognise, implying that they had the 
 opportunity of knowing. They failed to see that God is Love, and 
 that Jesus came to bring in, not to shut out; to save, not to destroy. 
 The very names ‘ Father’ (here used with special point) and ‘Jesus’ 
 might have taught them better things. 
 
 4. ἀλλά. But, to return (to v.1), these things have I spoken to you 
 (vv. 1, 4, 6 must be rendered alike), that when their hour (the hour 
 appointed for these things; v. 2) is come, ye may remember them, how 
 that J told you. *Eyoé is emphatic, ‘I Myself, the object of your faith.’ 
 
 ἐξ ἀρχῆς. Here and vi. 64 only: it expresses consequence and con- 
 tinuity, whereas ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς (xv. 27) expresses simple departure, And 
 these things I told you not from the beginning. There is no incon- 
 sistency between this statement and passages like Matt. x. 16—39, 
 xxiv. 9; Luke vi. 22: ταῦτα covers not only the prediction of persecu- 
 tions, but the explanation of them, and the promise of the Paraclete, 
 &c. All this was new. While He was with them to explain and ex- 
 hort, they did not need these truths. 
 
 5. ὑπάγω πρός. I go away unto: the notion is that of withdrawal 
 (see on v. 7). Hitherto He has been with them to protect them and to 
 be the main object of attack: soon they will have to bear the brunt 
 without Him. This is all that they feel at present,—how His departure 
 affects themselves, not how it affects Him. And yet this latter point 
 is all important even as regards themselves, for He is going in order 
 to send the Paraclete. As to Ποῦ ὑπάγεις, as far as words go S. Peter 
 had asked this very question (xiii. 36) and S. Thomas had suggested 
 it (xiv. 5); but altogether in a different spirit from what is meant here. 
 They were looking only at their own loss instead of at His gain. Sorrow 
 has so filled their hearts that there is no room for thoughts of His 
 glory aad their future consolation. 
 
 T2 
 
292 S. JOHN. [XVI. 7— 
 
 7. ἐγὼ τ. ἀλλ. ‘I who know, and who have never misled you:’ 
 comp, xiv. 2. For tva comp. xi. 50. Note the different words for ‘go’ 
 in vv. 5, 7: in ὑπάγω the primary idea is withdrawal, I go away; in 
 ἀπέρχομαι, separation, Idepart; in πορεύομαι, progress to a goal, I go 
 my way. For παράκλητος see on xiv. 16. Jesus as Man must possess 
 the Spirit, before He can impart the Spirit to men: it is in virtue of 
 His glorified Manhood that He sends the Advocate. 
 
 8. The threefold office of the Advocate towards those who do not 
 believe, but may yet be won over. And He, when He is come, will 
 convict the world concerning sin, and concerning righteousness, and 
 concerning judgment. ‘Convict’ is better than ‘convince,’ much 
 better than ‘reprove :’ it means forcing a man to condemn himself 
 after a scrutiny in the court of conscience (see on iii. 20). This ren- 
 dering gives additional point to the rendering ‘Advocate’ for Paraclete. 
 To convince and convict is a large part of the duty of an advocate. 
 He must vindicate and prove the truth; and whoever, after such proof, 
 rejects the truth, does so with responsibility in proportion to the in- 
 terests involved. “Αμαρτίας, δικαιοσύνης and κρίσεως, not having the 
 article, are left quite indefinite. The conviction about each may bring 
 either salvatiou or condemnation, but it must bring one or the other. 
 Comp. Acts ii. 37, iv. 1—4, v. 33, ἄο. 
 
 9. ἁμαρτίας. This must come first: the work of the Spirit begins 
 with convicting man of having rebelled against God. And the source 
 of sin is unbelief ; formerly, unbelief in God, now unbelief in His Am- 
 bassador. Not that the sin is limited to unbelief, but this is the be- 
 ginning of it: ‘Because’ does not explain ‘sin,’ but ‘will convict.’ 
 The Spirit, by bringing the fact of unbelief home to the hearts of men, 
 shews what the nature of sin is. 
 
 10. δικαιοσύνης. The word occurs here only in this Gospel; but 
 comp. 1 John ii. 29, iii. 7, 10; Rev. xix. 11. Righteousness is the 
 keeping of the law, and is the natural result of faith; so much so that 
 faith is reckoned as if it were righteousness (Rom. iv. 3—9) so cer- 
 tain is this result regarded. Here δικαιοσύνη is used not in the lower 
 sense of keeping prescribed ordinances (Matt. iii. 15), but in the highest 
 and widest sense of keeping the law of God; internal as well as external 
 obedience. The lower sense was almost the only sense both to Jew 
 and Gentile (Matt. v. 20). The Spirit, having convinced man that sin 
 is much more than a breaking of certain ordinances, viz. a rejection of 
 God and His Christ, goes on to convince him that righteousness is 
 much more than a keeping of certain ordinances. As before, ὅτι ex- 
 plains ἐλέγξει, not δικαιοσύνης. The pattern life of Christ being com- 
 pleted, the Spirit makes known to man the nature of that life, and 
 thus shews what the nature of righteousness is. Sin being resistance 
 to God’s will, righteousness is perfect harmony with it. For θεωρεῖτε, 
 behold, comp. v. 16, vi. 40, 62, vii. 3, xiv. 19, ἄς, Jesus here shews 
 His sympathy with His disciples: in speaking of His return to glory, 
 He does not forget the sorrow which they feel and expect always to 
 feel. Contrast Acts ii. 46. 
 
XVI. 14.] NOTES. 293 
 
 11. ὁ ἄρχων. The ruler of this world hath been judged (see on 
 xii, 31 and xiv. 80). As the world has had its own false views about 
 sin and righteousness, so also it has had its own false standards of 
 judgment. The Advocate convicts the world of its error in this point 
 also, The world might think that ‘the power of darkness’ conquered 
 at Gethsemane and Calvary, but the Resurrection and Ascension proved 
 that what looked like victory was most signal defeat: instead of con- 
 quering Satan was judged. This result is so certain that from the 
 point of view of the Spirit’s coming it is spoken of as already accom- 
 plished. 
 
 12—15. Tue DiscripLEs AND THE PARACLETE, 
 
 The Paraclete not only convicts and convinces the world, He also 
 enlightens the Apostles respecting Christ and thereby glorifies Him, 
 for to make Christ known is to glorify Him. These verses are very 
 important as shewing the authority of the Apostles’ teaching: it is not 
 their own, but it is the truth of Christ revealed by the Spirit. 
 
 12. πολλὰ. «λέγειν. They are His friends (xv. 15), and there is 
 nothing which He wishes to keep back from them; He would give 
 them His entire confidence. But it would be useless to tell them what 
 they cannot understand; cruel to impart knowledge which would only 
 crush them. Ἄρτι is emphatic (see on v. 31): at Pentecost they will 
 receive both understanding and strength to know even that ‘which 
 passeth knowledge’ (Eph. iii. 19). 
 
 13. ὁδηγήσει. He will be your guide into this new country. Christ 
 is the Way and the Truth. The Spirit of Truth (see on xiv. 17) leads 
 men into the Way and thus into all the Truth. Comp. ὑμεῖς δ᾽ ἐμοῦ 
 ἀκούσεσθε πᾶσαν τὴν ad. Plato Apol. 17. But He does not compel, 
 does not carry: they may refuse to follow; and if they follow they 
 must exert themselves. Contrast Matt. xv. 14; Acts viii. 81. 
 
 ad’ ἑαυτοῦ. See on v.19, xv. 4. The Spirit, like the Son, cannot 
 speak what proceeds from Himself as distinct from what proceeds 
 from the Father, the Source of all Divine energy. This is the security 
 for infallibility: Satan, who speaks out of his own resources, is con- 
 sequently a liar (viii. 44). 
 
 Note the threefold ἀναγγελεῖ ὑμῖν. He shall declare to you the 
 things that are coming (comp. ὁ épxéuevos): among τὰ ἐρχόμενα we 
 may place the constitution of the Church and all those truths which 
 Christian experience would teach. 
 
 14. ἐκεῖνος ἐμέ. Both pronouns are emphatic; ‘Me shall that 
 Spirit glorify.’ Just as the Son glorifies the Father by revealing 
 Him (i. 18, xvii. 4) both in word and work, so does the Spirit glorify 
 the Son by revealing Him. In both cases to reveal is necessarily to 
 glorify: the more the Truth is known, the more it is loved and 
 adored. Anpaperar here and λαμβάνει in v. 15 must be rendered 
 alike, and by take rather than ‘receive ;’ it implies that the recipient 
 is not wholly passive: comp. x. 17, xii. 48, xx. 22, 
 
294 S. JOHN. [XVI 16— 
 
 16—24. Tuer Sorrow or Curist’s DEPARTURE TURNED INTO Jor 
 By His RETURN. 
 
 16. θεωρεῖτε. Ye behold, asin vv.10and17. Mark the difference 
 between this and the more general word ὄψεσθε. When His bodily 
 presence was withdrawn, their view of Him was enlarged: no longer 
 after the flesh, He is seen and known by faith. 
 
 17. καὶ ὅτι. They refer to what was said in v. 10: there ὅτι is 
 ‘because,’ here it probably is ‘that,’ to introduce what follows. They 
 are perplexed about not beholding and yet seeing, and about His de- 
 parture to the Father. For ἐκ τῶν see on xxi. 10. 
 
 19. ἔγνω. Perceived or recognised; see on ii. 25. We are perhaps 
 to understand from γινώσκειν being used rather than εἰδεναι that it was 
 by His natural powers of observation that He perceived this. "Where 
 these sufficed we may believe that His supernatural power of reading 
 men’s thoughts was not used: comp. v. 6, vi. 15. In translation 
 mark the difference between μετ᾽ ἀλλήλων, One with another, πρὸς ἀλλή- 
 λους (v. 17, iv. 33), one to another, and πρὸς ἑαυτούς (vil. 35, xii. 19), 
 among themselves; Concerning this do ye enquire one with another. 
 
 20. We have two contrasts; between the Apostles (ὑμεῖς last to em- 
 phasize the contrast) and ὁ κόσμος: and between their present sorrow 
 and their future joy. KaAavtoere (xi. 33, xx. 11) and θρηνήσετε (Luke 
 Vil. 32, xxiii, 27) express the outward manifestation of grief: λυπηθή- 
 σεσθε expresses the feeling. The world will rejoice at being rid of 
 One whose life was a reproach to it and whose teaching condemned it. 
 Their sorrow shall not merely be followed by joy, but shall become joy. 
 The loss of Christ’s bodily presence shall be first a sorrow and then 
 a joy. Τίνεσθαι εἰς is used of the rejected stone becoming the head of 
 the corner (Matt. xxi. 42; Acts iv. 11), of the mustard sprout becoming 
 a tree (Luke xiii. 19), of the first man Adam becoming a living soul 
 (1 Cor. xv. 45). See oni. 52. 
 
 21. ἡ γυνή. The article is generic; this is the general law: comp, 
 ὁ δοῦλος (xv. 15), The metaphor is frequent in O. T. Isai. xxi. 3, 
 xxvl. 17, Ixvi. 7; Hos. xiii, 13; Mic. iv. 9. See on Mark xiii. 8. Note 
 the articles in what follows; the child, the anguish, the joy,—always 
 to be found in such acase. But the joy effaces the anguish, because 
 a human being (ἄνθρωπος), the noblest of God’s creatures, is born. 
 Μόχθον γὰρ οὐδεὶς τοῦ παρελθόντος λόγος. 
 
 22. καὶ ὑμεῖς. And ye therefore now, or Ye also therefore now. As 
 in childbirth, the disciples’ suffering was the necessary condition of 
 their joy. This suffering took a new form in the work of converting 
 souls (Gal. iv. 19). In wv. 16, 17, 19 we had ὄψεσθέ με: here we have 
 the other side of the same truth, ὄψομαι vuas. In Gal. iv. 9 we have 
 both sides. 
 
 23. ἐκείνῃ. Not the forty days of His bodily presence after the 
 Resurrection, but the many days of His spiritual presence after Pente- 
 cost. Comp. v. 26 and xiv. 20, 
 
XVI. 211 NOTES. 295 
 
 οὐκ épwr. Ask no question (v. 19), or Make no petition (see on xiv. 
 16). The former is better. When they are illuminated by the Spirit 
 there will be no room for such questions as ‘ What is this little while? 
 How can we know the way? Whither goest Thou? How is it that 
 Thou wilt manifest Thyself unto us and not unto the world?’ His 
 going to the Father will gain for them (1) perfect knowledge. Αἰτήσητε 
 must mean ‘pray,’ not ‘question.’ Note that the answer (according 
 to the better reading), as well as the prayer (xiv. 13, xv. 16), is in 
 Christ’s name; and all such prayers will be answered, His return to 
 the Father will gain for them (2) perfect response to prayer. 
 
 24. αἰτεῖτε. Go on asking (present imperative; v. 14, [viii. 11,] 
 xx. 17: contrast Matt. vii. 7; Mark vi. 22) that your joy may be ful- 
 filled, may become complete and remain so (see on ili, 29), His 
 return to the Father will gain for them (3) perfect joy. 
 
 25—33. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION OF THESE DISCOURSES. 
 
 25. ταῦτα. As in στ. 1 there is some uncertainty as to how 
 much is included. Some refer ‘these things’ to vv. 19—24; others to 
 xv. 1—xyvi. 24. Perhaps even the latter is too narrow; the words 
 can apply to all Christ’s teaching, of which there was much which 
 the multitudes were not allowed (Matt. xiii. 11) and the Apostles were 
 not able (ii. 22) to understand at the time. For παροιμίαις see on 
 x. 6, and for παρρησίᾳ on vii. 13. ᾿Απαγγελῶ, the better reading, 
 looks to the maker of the announcement, ἀναγγελῶ to the recipients 
 of it. 
 
 26. With the perfect knowledge just promised they will discern 
 what may be asked in His name (see on xiv. 13): cognitio parit ora- 
 tionem. The ov λέγω does not mean ‘I need not say, for of course I 
 shall do 50: which does not harmonize with v. 27, The meaning 
 rather is, that so long as through the power of the Advocate they 
 have direct communion with the Father in Christ’s name, there is no 
 need to speak of Christ’s intercession. But this communion may be 
 interrupted by sin, and then Christ becomes their Advocate (1 John 
 ii. re Rom, viii. 34). Note the emphatic ἐγώ. On ἐρωτᾶν see on 
 xiv. 6. 
 
 27. αὐτός. Without My intercession; vi.6. We might have expected 
 ἀγαπᾷ for φιλεῖ here (see on xi. 5): but it is a Father’s love, flowing 
 spontaneously from a natural relationship as distinct from discrimina- 
 ting friendship. It is their love for the Son which wins the Father’s 
 love (xiv. 21, 23). The two pronouns, ὑμεῖς ἐμέ, are in emphatic con- 
 tact. The two perfects signify what has been and still continues, 
 No argument can be drawn from the order of the verbs as to love 
 preceding faith: πεφιλήκατε naturally comes first on account of φιλεῖ 
 just preceding. ‘Love begets love’ is true both between man and man 
 and between God and man. ‘Faith begets faith’ cannot have any 
 meaning between God and man. For π. τ. Θεοῦ we should probably 
 read 7. τ. πατρός (xv. 26). It was because they recognised Him as the 
 Son sent from the Father, and not merely as a man sent from God 
 (i. 6), that they won the Father’s love. 
 
296 5. JOHN. [XVI. 28— 
 
 28. Note the change from παρὰ τ. π. ἴο ἐκ τ. π. Inv, 27 ‘I came 
 forth from’ refers to the temporal mission of Christ from the Father 
 (xvii. 8); here ‘I came out from’ includes the Eternal Generation of 
 the Son (viii. 42). This verse would almost form a creed. The Son, 
 of one Substance with the Father, was born into the world, suffered, 
 and returned to the Father. 
 
 29. ἴδε νῦν ἐν παρ. See on i. 29 and vii. 4, 13. 
 
 30. οἴδαμεν ὅτι οἶδας. We know that Thou knowest (comp. 2 Cor, 
 zi, 2, 5, at the A.V. is similarly capricious). Christ had spoken 
 in the future tense (v. 25): they speak in the present. They feel that 
 His gracious promise is already coming true. He had shewn them 
 that He had read their hearts (v. 19); like Nathanael (i. 50) and the 
 
 Samaritan woman (iv. 29, 39), and 8S. Thomas (xx. 28), they conclude 
 that He knows all. 
 
 ἐν τούτῳ. Herein: see on iv. 37. His all-embracing knowledge is 
 that in which their faith has root. The ὅτι 15. probably ‘that,’ not 
 ‘because,’ as the context and 3. John’s usage shew: xiii. 35; 1 John 
 ii. 3, 5, ili. 19, 24, v. 2. The disciples’ ἀπὸ Θεοῦ implies a less inti- 
 mate union between the Father and Jesus than either παρὰ τ. 7. 
 
 (v. 27) or ἐκ τ. π. (v. 28). Their views of Christ are still very im- 
 perfect. 
 
 31. ἄρτι πιστεύετε; The words are only half a question: comp. 
 i. 51, xx. 29. The belief of which they are conscious is no illusion, 
 but it is far more defective than they in their momentary enthusiasm 
 
 suppose, “Apr: means ‘at this stage of your course:’ contrast νῦν (vv. 
 29, 30) and see on ii. 10, 
 
 32. ἵνα σκορπ. Seeonv.2, This part of the allegory of the sheep- 
 fold will be illustrated even in the shepherds themselves (x. 19). 
 Comp. Πατάξω τ. ποιμένα, καὶ διασκορπισθήσονται τ. πρόβατα (Matt. 
 xxvi. 31). With εἰς τ. ἴδια comp. i. 11, xix. 27: ‘to his own home, 
 property, or pursuits.’? ᾿Αφῆτε depends upon ta; may be scattered 
 and may leave: all this is part of the Divine plan. They must be 
 taught their weakness, and this foretelling of it is, as it were, pardon 
 granted by anticipation. 
 
 Kal οὐκ εἰμί. And yet ITamnot. The ‘yet’ is implied, as so often 
 in 5. John, in the collocation of the sentences: i. 10, 11, iii. 19, 32, 
 vi. 70, vii. 4, 26, viii. 20, ix. 20. As arule it is best to leave 5. John’s 
 simple conjunctions to tell their own meaning. 
 
 ὁ πατὴρ per ἐμοῦ. The Divine background (as it seems to us) of 
 Christ’s life was to Him a Presence of which He was always conscious 
 (viii. 29), with the awful exception of Matt. xxvii. 46. 
 
 33. εἰρήνην. The purpose of all these farewell discourses (ταῦτα) 
 is that they may have peace. His ministry ends, as His life began, 
 with this message: ἐπὶ γῆς εἰρήνη (Luke ii. 14). 
 
 θλῖψιν ἔχετε. Ye have anguish: not ‘shall have;’ the anguish 
 (v. 21) has already begun. 
 
XVIL] NOTES. 297 
 
 ἐγώ. With great emphasis. At the very moment when He is face to 
 face with treachery, and disgrace, and death, Christ triumphantly 
 claims the victory. Comp. 1 John ii. 13, 14, v. 4, In His victory His 
 followers conquer also, 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 1. ἐπάρας for ἐπῆρε. Omit καί before εἶπεν and before 6 vids, and 
 omit cov after 6 vids. : 
 
 3. γινώσκουσιν (ADGLYAA) for γινώσκωσι : but γινώσκωσιν (NBC) 
 is probably right. 
 
 4, τελειώσας (NABCL) for ἐτελείωσα (D). 
 
 11, 12. @ for οὖς: οὖς in v. 12 caused-the omission of καί before 
 ἐφύλαξα, a colon being placed at cov. 
 
 16. οὐκ εἰμί before ἐκ τ. Kk. (NABCD). The converse arrangement 
 (E) is an imitation of the preceding clause. 
 
 19. ὦσιν before kal αὐτοί ; comp. v. 16, 
 
 20. πιστευόντων (NABCD!) for πιστευσόντων (alteration to what 
 seemed more in harmony with facts). 
 
 21. After ἐν ἡμῖν omit ἕν (an insertion from the first clause: comp. 
 vv. 11, 22). Confusion between the clauses makes several patristic 
 quotations ambiguous; but the insertion is strongly supported. 
 
 22. Omit ἐσμεν at the end of the verse with N1BDL against AN. 
 24. ἸΠατήρ, ὅ for Πάτερ, οὕς (an obvious correction). 
 
 THe Prayer oF THE GREAT HicH Prisst. 
 
 The prayer which follows the last discourse is unique in the Gospels. 
 The other Evangelists, especially S. Luke, mention the fact of Christ 
 praying (Matt. xiv. 23; Mark i. 35; Luke iii. 21, v. 16, vi. 12, ix. 18, 
 &c.), and give some words of His prayer at Gethsemane; but here the 
 substance of a long act of devotion is preserved. S. John never men- 
 tions the fact of Christ praying, but in xii. 27 he perhaps gives us a 
 few words of prayer, and in xi. 41 a thanksgiving which implies pre- 
 vious prayer. There is an approach to the first portion of this prayer 
 in the thanksgiving in Matt. xi. 25, 26. 
 
 This Oratio Summi Sacerportis falls naturally into three portions; 
 1. for Himself (1—5); 2. for the disciples (6—19); 3. for the whole 
 Church (20—26), the last two verses forming a summary, in which the 
 relations of Christ to the Father and to His own, and of His own to 
 both Father and Son are gathered up. The leading thought through- 
 out is the glory of God in the work of Christ and in those who con- 
 tinue it. . 
 
298 S. JOHN. [XVII 1— 
 
 The prayer was spoken aloud (v. 1), and thus was not only a prayer, 
 but a source of comfort to those who heard it (v. 13), and by its pre- 
 servation a means of faith and life to all (xx. 31). He had taught by 
 action (xiii.) and by discourse (xiv.—xvi.); now He teaches by prayer. 
 No doubt it was spoken in Aramaic, and we have here also, as in the 
 discourses, no means of determining how far the Greek version pre- 
 serves the very words, how far only the substance, of what was spoken. 
 We must take it reverently as it has been given to us, and we shall find 
 abundant reason for believing that on the one hand it quite transcends 
 even the beloved disciple’s powers of invention; on the other that there 
 is nothing in it to make us doubt that this report of it is from his pen. 
 “ἐ It is urged that the triumphant elevation of this prayer is inconsistent 
 with the Synoptic account of the Agony. But the liability to fluctua- 
 tions of feeling and emotion is inherent in humanity, and was assumed 
 with His manhood by Him Who was perfect man” (Sanday). ‘“ All 
 human experience bears witness in common life to the naturalness of 
 abrupt transitions from joy to sadness in the contemplation of a su- 
 preme trial. The absolute insight and foresight of Christ makes such 
 an alteration even more intelligible. He could see, as man cannot do, 
 both the completeness of His triumph and the suffering through which 
 it was to be gained” (Westcott). The three characteristics of the 
 Gospel, simplicity, subtlety, and sublimity, reach a climax here. 
 Bengel calls this chapter the simplest in language, the profoundest 
 in meaning, in the whole Bible. All is natural, for it isa son speaking 
 to a father; all is supernatural, for the Son is the Lord from heaven. 
 
 The place where these words were spoken is not stated. If the view 
 taken above (xiv. 31) is correct, they were spoken in the upper room, 
 after the company had risen from supper, in the pause before starting 
 for the Mount of Olives (xviii. 1). Westcott thinks that “the upper 
 chamber was certainly left after xiv. 31,” and that as ‘‘it is inconceiv- 
 able that chap. xvii. should have been spoken anywhere except under 
 circumstances suited to its unapproachable solemnity,” these would 
 best be found in the Temple Courts. Here was the great Golden Vine, 
 to suggest the allegory of the Vine (xvi. 1—11), and ‘‘nowhere could 
 the outlines of the future spiritual Church be more fitly drawn than in 
 the sanctuary of the old Church.” It is perhaps slightly against this 
 attractive suggestion, that surroundings so rich in meaning would 
 probably have been pointed out by a writer so full of feeling for dra- 
 matic contrasts and harmonies as the writer of this Divine Epic (comp, 
 iii, 2, iv. 6, xx. 22, xiii, 30, xvili. 1, 3, 5, 28, 40, xix. 23—27, 31—42). 
 
 1—5. Tue Prayer ror HIMseEtLr, 
 
 The Son was sent to give to men eternal life, which consists in the 
 knowledge of God. This work the Son has completed to the glory of 
 the Father, and therefore prays to be glorified by the Father. 
 
 1. émdpas. As before the raising of Lazarus (xi. 41), Jesus looks 
 heavenwards in calm confidence as to the issue (xvi. 33). The attitude 
 is in marked contrast to His falling on His face in the garden (Matt. 
 
XVII. 3.] NOTES. 299 
 
 xxvi. 39). Els τ. odp. does not prove that He was in the open air: 
 comp. Acts vii. 55; Luke xviii. 18, 
 
 πάτερ. This is His claim to be heard: the prayer throughout is 
 the prayer of a son. Comp. ‘Abba, Father’ in Mark xiv. 36, and see 
 Lightfoot on Gal. iv. 6. For ἡ ὥρα see on ii. 4 and xii. 23. 8. John 
 loves to mark each great crisis in Christ’s life: this is the last. 
 
 δόξασον. By His return to glory (v. 5); so that His human nature 
 might share the Divine attributes, and thus glorify the Father by con- 
 tinuing with higher powers in heaven the work which He has com- 
 pleted on earth. Comp. Phil. ii. 9—11. The tone from the first is 
 one of triumph. ᾿ 
 
 2. καθὼς ἔδωκας. Even as thou gavest (ili. 35) Him authority (i. 12) 
 over all flesh. The authority was given once for all (v. 27), and is the 
 reason for the petition in v. 1. Πᾶσα σάρξ is a Hebraism not used 
 elsewhere in this Gospel. Comp. Matt. xxiv. 22; Luke iii, 6; Acts ii. 
 17; Rom. iii. 20, &c. Fallen man, man in his frailty, is specially 
 wneant; but the Second Adam has dominion also over ‘all sheep and 
 oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field, the fowl of the air, and the fish 
 of the sea.’ Ps. viii. 7, 8. In the following texts ‘all flesh’ includes the 
 brute creation; Gen. vi. 19, vii. 15, 16, 21, viii. 17, ix. 11, 15, 16, 17; 
 Ps. exxxvi. 25; Jer. xxxiil. 27, xlv. 5. Once more, therefore, Jewish 
 exclusiveness is condemned. The Messiah is King of ‘all flesh,’ not 
 of the Jews only. For the casus pendens comp. vi. 39, vii. 38, xv. 2. 
 Note the change from neut. sing. to masc. plur. in what follows: in 
 order that all that Thow hast given Him, He should give to them 
 eternal life. Believers are given to Christ as a united whole; they 
 earn eternal life as individuals: comp. v. 24, i. 11, vi. 37. 
 
 3. αὕτη δέ. But the life eternal (just mentioned) ts this: ‘is’ not 
 ‘will be’ (see on iii. 36, v. 24, vi. 47, 54); and ‘is this’ means ‘this is 
 what it consists in’ (iii. 19, xv. 12). The truth of man’s religion de- 
 pends on his conception of God. For ἵνα after οὗτος comp, vi. 29, 
 39, 49, 50, xv. 12; 1 John iii. 11, 23, v. 3; 2 John 6. 
 
 ἵνα γινώσκουσιν. The present indicative after ἵνα is surprising, but 
 not very rare in late Greek: comp. 1 Cor. iv. 6; Gal. iv. 17: Winer, 
 p. 362. The future is comparatively common; Gal. ii. 4. There is 
 no need to give ἵνα a local as distinct from a final meaning in such 
 constructions; ‘where’ or ‘in which case’ instead of ‘in order that.’ 
 The meaning is rather ‘that ye may continue to recognise, as you do 
 now.’ But γινώσκουσιν, though adopted by Tischendorf and Tregelles, 
 is rejected by Westcott and Hort, who retain γινώσκωσιν with Alford 
 and the Revisers. (Westcott and Hort adopt δώσει for δώσῃ in v. 2.) 
 It is the appropriation of the knowledge that is emphasized: hence 
 γινώσκειν, not εἰδέναι. Comp. Wisd. xv. 3. For ἀληθινόν see on i. 9, 
 iv. 23: ‘the only true God’ is directed against the many false, 
 spurious gods of the heathen. This portion of the truth the Gentiles 
 signally failed to recognise. 
 
300 S. JOHN. [XVII. 3— 
 
 ὃν ἀπ. Ἴ. Xp. Him whom thou didst send (see on i. 33),—Jesus 
 Christ ; or, Jesus as Christ. This portion of the truth the Jews failed 
 to recognise. But the words are not without difficulty, even when we 
 insert the ‘as;’ and the run of the Greek words is rather against the 
 insertion of ‘as.’ If ‘Christ’ were a predicate and not part of the 
 proper name we should expect ‘Jesus, whom Thou didst send, as 
 Christ.’ Probably in this verse we have the substance and not the 
 exact words of Christ’s utterance. That He should use the name 
 ‘Jesus’ here is perhaps improbable; that He should anticipate the use 
 of ‘Jesus Christ’ as a proper name is very improbable; and the ex- 
 pression ‘the true God’ is not used elsewhere by Christ and is used by 
 8. John (1 John v. 20). We conclude, therefore, that the wording here 
 is the Evangelist’s, perhaps abbreviated from the actual words. 
 
 4. ἐδόξασα. I glorified Thee on the earth, having perfected. In 
 confident anticipation Christ looks back from the point when all shall 
 be accomplished, and speaks of the whole work of redemption as one 
 act. The A.V. is very capricious throughout this chapter, rendering 
 aorists as perfects and perfects as aorists. Comp. vv. 6, 8, 18, 21, 22, 
 23, 25, 26. For δέδωκας see on iii. 35: Christ did not choose His work 
 for Himself. The ἵνα indicates God’s purpose in giving it. 
 
 5. This and v. 4 are parallels: ‘I Thee glorified on earth; glorify 
 Me Thou in heaven;’ the pronouns being placed side by side for em- 
 phasis. Kal viv means ‘now that all is completed ;’ and παρὰ σεαυτῷ 
 ‘side by side with Thee, in fellowship with Thee.’ The imperfect, 
 εἶχον, implies continual possession. The following great truths are 
 contained in these two verses; (1) that the Son is in Person distinct 
 from the Father; (2) that the Son, existing in glory with the Father 
 from all eternity, working in obedience to the Father on earth, existing 
 in glory with the Father now, is in Person one and the same, 
 
 6—19. Tue Prayer ror His Discipzrzs. 
 
 6—8. The basis of the intercession ;—they have received the revela- 
 tion given to them. The intercession itself begins v. 9. 
 
 6. épavépwoa. See on i. 31. The manifestation was not made 
 indiscriminately, but to persons fitted to receive it. Sometimes the 
 Father is said to ‘give’ or ‘draw’ men to Christ (v. 24, vi. 37, 44, 65, 
 x. 29, xviii. 9); sometimes Christ is said to ‘choose’ them (vi. 70, xv. 
 16): but it is always in their power to refuse; there is no compulsion 
 (i. 11, 12, iii. 18, 19, xii. 47, 48). For τετήρηκαν see on viii. 51: the 
 notion is that of intent watching. For τὸν λόγον and τὰ ῥήματα (v. 8) 
 see on iii. 84, 
 
 7. ἔγνωκαν. They have recognised and therefore know (v. 42, vi. 69, 
 Vill. 52, 55, xiv. 9) that the whole of Christ’s work of redemption in 
 word and act was in its origin and still is (εἰσίν) of God. 
 
 8. ἔγνωσαν... ἐπίστευσαν. They recognised that His mission was 
 Divine (see on xvi. 28): they believed that He was sent as the Messiah. 
 They had proof of the one; the other was a matter of faith. 
 
XVII. 14.] NOTES. 301 
 
 9—19. The intercession for the disciples based on their need. 
 
 9. ‘For them who have believed I, who have laboured to bring them 
 to this belief, am praying; for the world I am not praying.’ ᾿Εγώ, 
 αὐτῶν and κόσμου are emphatic. Ilep¢ indicates the subject of the pe- 
 tition: for ἐρωτῶ see on xiv. 16. Of course this does not mean that 
 Christ never prays for unbelievers; v. 23 and Luke xxiii. 34 prove the 
 contrary: but it is for the chosen few, in return for their allegiance, 
 that He is praying now. He could not pray for unbelievers that they 
 should be kept (v. 11) and sanctified (v. 17), but that they should be 
 converted and forgiven. 
 
 10. ta ἐμά. All things that are Mine are Thine and Thine are 
 Mine. This does not refer to persons only; it continues and also 
 amplifies ὅτι σοί εἰσιν. The double mode of statement insists on 
 the perfect union between the Father and the Son: what follows 
 shews the perfect union between Christ and believers. Christ is glo- 
 rified in them as the vine in its branches and fruit: they are the 
 vehicles and monuments of the glory (1 Thess. 11, 20). Δεδόξασμαι, 
 ‘I have been and still am glorified.’ 
 
 11—16. In vv, 6—8 the disciples’ acceptance of Christ is given as 
 the basis of intercession for them: here another reason is added,— 
 their need of help during Christ’s absence. This plea is first stated in 
 all simplicity, and then repeated at intervals in the petition. Note 
 the simple and solemn coupling of the clauses, 
 
 11. πάτερ ἅγιε. The expression occurs here only; but comp. Rev. 
 vi. 10; 1 John ii. 20 and v. 25. The epithet agrees with the prayer 
 ἁγίασον αὐτούς (v. 17), ἵνα ὦσιν καὶ αὐτοὶ ἡγιασμένοι (v. 19). God has 
 given His name (see on i. 12) to Christ to reveal to His disciples; and 
 Christ here prays that they may be kept true to that revelation of the 
 Divine character. And even as (καθώς) the Father and Son are one 
 in the possession of the Divine nature, so the disciples are to be kept 
 one by the knowledge of it. Comp. Rev. ii. 17, xxii. 4. 
 
 12. ἐτήρουν. The imperfect expresses Christ’s continual watching. 
 γώ is emphatic: ‘I kept them while I was with them; but now do 
 Thou keep them.’ Mark the change to ἐφύλαξα, I guarded: this is 
 the protection which is the result of the watching. 
 
 ὁ vids τ. ἀπωλείας. The phrase occurs twice in N.T.; here of Judas, 
 and 2 Thess. ii. 3 of the ‘man of sin.’ See on xii. 36 and comp. 
 τέκνα ἀπολείας (Is, lvii. 4), vids θανάτου (2 Sam, xii. 5). The connexion 
 between ἀπώλετο and ἀπολείας cannot easily be shewn in English. ‘H 
 γραφή refers to Ps. xli. 9: see on x. 35, xiii. 18, xii, 38. 
 
 13. νῦν δέ. But now. Hitherto He has been with them to guard 
 them, but now He is going away: and He is praying thus aloud in 
 order that His words may comfort them when they remember that 
 before He went He consigned them to His Father’s keeping. Comp. 
 xi. 42. For τ. χαρὰν τ. ἐμήν see on viii. 31. 
 
 14. ἐγὼ δέδ. J, in emphatic opposition to the world, have given 
 them the revelation of Thee; and the world hated them. The aorist 
 
302 S. JOHN. [XVII 14-- 
 
 expresses the single act of hate in contrast to the gift which they 
 continue to possess. These are the two results of discipleship; 
 Christ’s protection with the gift of God’s word and the world’s hate. 
 
 15. ἐκ τ. πονηροῦ, From the evil one: comp. 1 John ii, 13, 14, iii. 
 12, and especially v. 18,19. The world and the Gospel are regarded 
 as in ceaseless opposition in §. John’s writings, and the evil one is 
 ‘the ruler of this world’ (xii. 31, xvi. 11), Just as Christ is that in 
 which His disciples live and move, so the evil one is that owt of which 
 (ἐκ) He prays that they may be kept. Believers are ἐν τῷ ἀληθινῷ, ἐν 
 τῷ vig αὐτοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστῷ (1 John ν. 20): but the world ἐν τῷ πονηρῷ 
 κεῖται. In 1 John iv. 4 we have the opposite mode of statement; 
 Christ is in believers and the evil one is in the world. All these pas- 
 sages seem to shew that τοῦ πονηροῦ must be masculine. 
 
 16. What was stated in v. 14 as the reason for the world’s hate is 
 repeated as the introduction to a new petition for not merely protec- 
 tion but sanctification. 
 
 17. ἁγίασον. Sanctify or consecrate. It expresses God’s desti- 
 nation of them for their work and His endowment of them with the 
 powers necessary for their work. The word is used of God’s conse- 
 cration of Jeremiah, Moses, and the Chosen People (Jer. i. 5; Ecclus. 
 xlix. 7, xlv.4; 2 Macc. i. 25). This prayer has been called ‘“‘ the Prayer 
 of Consecration.”” The Truth in which they are consecrated is the 
 whole Christian revelation, the new environment in which believers 
 are placed for their sanctification; just as a sickly wild plant is 
 strengthened and changed by being transplanted into a garden. For 
 ὁ λόγος ὁ σός see on Vili. 31: God’s revelation as a whole is meant, 
 not any single utterance or collection of utterances: see on iii. 84, 
 
 19. Christ does for Himself that which He prays the Father to do 
 for His disciples. In x. 36 He speaks of Himself as consecrated by 
 the Father; set apart for a sacred purpose. But only thus far is 
 the consecration of Christ and of His disciples the same. In them it 
 also implied redemption and cleansing from sin; and in this sense 
 ἁγιάζω is frequently connected with καθαρίξω (2 Cor. vii. 1; Eph. v. 
 26; 2 Tim. ii. 21; Heb. ix. 13). The radical meaning of the word is 
 not separation, as is sometimes stated, but holiness, which involves 
 separation, viz. the being set apart for God. In O. T. consecration is 
 a ritual act; in N. T. a spiritual act, the consecration of the heart 
 and will to God. *Ev ἀληθείᾳ, in truth and reality, not in mere name, 
 is different from ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ in the Truth (see on v.17). As a 
 Priest consecrated by the Father (x. 36) He consecrates Himself as a 
 Sacrifice (Eph. vy. 2), and thereby obtains a real internal consecration 
 for them through the Paraclete (xvi. 7). 
 
 20—26. Tur PRAYER FOR THE WHOLE CHURCH. 
 
 Christ having prayed first for the Author of salvation, and then for 
 the instruments of the work, now prays for the objects of it. The 
 limitation stated in v. 9 is at an end: through the Church He prays 
 for the whole race of mankind (v, 21). 
 
XVII. 24.] NOTES. 303 
 
 20. πιστευόντων. Present: the future body of believers is regarded 
 by anticipation as already in existence: the Apostles are an earnest 
 of the Church that is to be. The order emphasizes the fact that 
 those who believe on Christ believe through the Apostles’ word. 
 
 21. ἕν dow. This is the purpose rather than the purport of the 
 prayer: Christ prays for blessings for His Church with this end in 
 view—that all may be one. 
 
 καθώς depends on the second ἵνα, not on the first (comp, xiii. 34): 
 the unity of believers is even as the unity of the Father with the Son 
 (x. 30); not a mere moral unity of disposition, but a vital unity, in 
 which the members share the life of one and the same organism 
 (Rom. xii. 4, 5), Mere agreement in opinion and aim would not con- 
 vert the world; whereas the eternal unity of believers will produce 
 such external results (‘see how these Christians love one another’), 
 that the world will believe that God sent their Master. Christian 
 unity and love (Matt. vii. 12; Luke vi. 31; 1 Cor. xiii.) is a moral 
 miracle, a conquest of the resisting will of man, and therefore more 
 convincing than a physical miracle, which is a conquest of unresisting 
 matter. Hence the quarrels of Christians are a perpetual stumbling- 
 block to the world, 
 
 The parallel between this verse and 1 John i. 3 is remarkable. If 
 ἀπαγγέλλομεν refers to the Gospel and not to the Epistle, as is pro- 
 bable, then S. John wrote his Gospel in order that this prayer of 
 Christ might be fulfilled. 
 
 22—24. Having prayed for them with a view to their unity, Jesus 
 passes to His final petition, a share in His glory for His disciples. In 
 leading up to this He states what He Himself has done for them: 
 Kay is emphatic. 
 
 22. δέδωκας. See oniii. 35. The meaning of this gift of δόξα is 
 clear from v. 24; the glory of the ascended and glorified Christ in 
 which believers are His συνκληρονόμοι (see on Rom. viii. 17). In full 
 assurance of victory (xvi. 33), Jesus speaks of this glory as already 
 given back to Him (v. 5) and shared with His followers. 
 
 23. The basis of the unity of believers is their union with Christ 
 and through Him with the Father: in this way they are perfected 
 into one, completed and made one. It is in the unity that the 
 completeness consists. For τελειοῦσθαι comp. 1 John ii. 5, iv. 12, 
 17, 18; for εἰς ἕν comp. xi. 52 (1 John v. 8). 
 
 γινώσκῃ. Come to know, recognise (v. 3) gradually and in time. 
 This is the second effect of the unity of Christians, more perfect than 
 the first. The first (v. 21) was that the world is induced to believe 
 that God sent Christ; the second is that the world comes to know that 
 God sent Christ, and moreover that He loved the world even as He 
 loved Christ. The ov and ἐμέ in what follows are emphatic. 
 
 24. πατήρ. Comp. vv. 1, 5, 11, 25, xi. 41, xii. 27. The rela- 
 tionship is the ground of appeal; He knows that His ‘will’ is one 
 
304 5. JOHN. [XVII 24— 
 
 with His Father’s. The position of ὃ δέδωκάς μοι (see on v. 2) is re- 
 markable: the fact of the gift is another ground of appeal. 
 
 θέλω. The expression, as used here by Christ, is unique: but 
 comp. xxi. 22; Matt. viii. 3, xxiii. 37, xxvi. 39; Luke xii. 49. It is 
 His last will and testament, which the Christ on the eve of His death 
 here deposits in the Father’s hands. For τ. ϑόξαν τ. ἐμήν see on viii. 
 31: it is not the glory of the Word, the Eternal Son, which was His 
 in His equality with the Father, but the glory of Christ, the Incar- 
 nate Son, with which the risen and ascended Jesus was endowed. In 
 sure confidence Christ speaks of this as already given, and wills that 
 all believers may behold and share it. Thus two gifts of the Father 
 to the Son meet and complete one another: those whom He has 
 given behold the glory that He has given. See on xii. 24. 
 
 καταβολῆς κόσμου. Christ thrice uses this expression; here, Luke 
 xi. 50; Matt. xxv. 34. Two of those who heard it reproduce it (1 Pet. 
 i. 20; Rev. xiii. 8, xvii. 8), Comp, Eph. i. 4; Heb. iv. 3, ix. 26, 
 ΧΙ. 
 
 25, 26. Summary. 
 
 25. πατὴρ δίκαιε. The epithet (comp. v. 11) harmonizes with 
 the appeal to the justice of God which follows, which is based on a 
 simple statement of the facts. The world knew not God; Christ 
 knew Him; the disciples knew that Christ was sent by Him. ‘Shall 
 not the Judge of all the earth do right?’ Kat before ὁ κόσμος may 
 be rendered ‘indeed:’ ‘it is true the world knew Thee not, but yet, 
 &e.’ 
 
 26. ἐγνώρισα. Shew in translation that the verb is cognate with 
 ἔγνων in τ. 25; made known. In both cases the aorist should be 
 kept in English. Christ knows the Father and makes known His 
 name, i.e. His attributes and will (see on i. 12), to the disciples. 
 This imparting of knowledge is already accomplished in part,—‘I 
 made known’ (comp. xv. 15); but the knowledge and the love which 
 imparts it being alike inexhaustible, there is room for perpetual 
 instruction throughout all time, especially after the Paraclete has 
 been given,—‘I will make known’ (comp. xiv. 26, xvi. 13). With the 
 double accusative, ἣν ἠγάπησάς pe comp. vii. 24; Rev. xvi. 9; Eph. 
 ii. 4: this love is to rule in their hearts as a guiding principle, with- 
 out which they cannot receive the knowledge here promised; ‘he 
 that loveth not, knoweth not God (1 John iv. 8). 
 
 κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτοῖς. These last words of Christ’s mediatorial Prayer 
 are the thread which runs through all these farewell discourses. He 
 is going away and yet abides with them. His bodily presence passes 
 away, His spiritual presence remains for ever; not seen with the eye 
 without, but felt as life and strength within. Having known Christ 
 after the flesh, now they know Him so no more: they are in Christ, 
 a new creation (2 Cor. v. 16, 17). 
 
XVIII.] NOTES. 305 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII 
 
 1. τῶν Κέδρων (N°>BCLX Origen) is to be preferred to τοῦ Ké- 
 dpov (ND) or τοῦ Kedpwv (ASA). Both τῶν Κέδρων and τοῦ Κεδρών 
 occur in LXX. as various readings (2 S. xv. 23; 1 K. ii. 37, xv. 13; 
 2 K. xxiii. 6, 12): Josephus uses Κεδρῶνος as the genitive of Κεδρών 
 (A. J. vit. i.5). We infer that both names were current, the Hebrew 
 sient given birth to a Greek name of different meaning but similar 
 sound. ᾿ 
 
 4. ἐξῆλθεν καὶ λέγει (ΒΟ1) Origen) for ἐξελθὼν εἶπεν (δ 408). 
 10, ὠτάριον (NBC1LX) for ὠτίον ( 0310) from Matt. xxvi. δ1 3). 
 14. ἀποθανεῖν (NBCIDLX) for ἀπολέσθαι {AC*). 
 
 16. ὁ γνωστὸς τοῦ ἀρχιερέως (BCL) for ὃς ἦν γνωστὸς τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ 
 (NAC? from υ. 14). 
 
 21. ἐρωτᾷς; ἐρώτησον (NBC!LX) for ἐπερωτᾷς ; ἐπερερώτησον (v. 7). 
 
 29. Insert ἔξω (NBC!LX) after ΠΠιλάτος: φησίν (NBC'LX) for 
 εἶπεν (AC® correction to harmonize with ἐξηλθεν). 
 
 30. κακὸν ποιῶν (N°BL) for κακοποιός (AC? for simplification ; the 
 word perhaps comes from 1 Pet. ii. 12, 14, iii. 16, iv. 15). 
 
 We enter now upon the second part of the second main division of 
 the Gospel. The Evangelist having given us the INNER GLORIFICATION 
 or Curist ΙΝ His tast Discoursszs (xiii.—xvii.), now sets forth His 
 OUTER GLORIFICATION IN His Passion AND DEATH (xvViii., xix.). This 
 part, like the former (see Introduction to chap. xiii.), may be divided 
 into four sections. 1. The Betrayal (xviii. 1—11); 2. The Jewish 
 Trials (12—27); 3. The Roman Trial (xviii. 283—xix. 16); 4. The 
 Death and Burial (17—42). 
 
 Dr Westcott (Speaker’s Commentary, N.T., Vol. 11. p. 249) ob- 
 serves; “1, It is a superficial and inadequate treatment of his narra- 
 tive to regard it as a historical supplement of the other narratives, or 
 of the current oral narrative on which they are based...... The record 
 is independent and complete in itself. It is a whole, and like the rest 
 of the Gospel an interpretation of the inner meaning of the history 
 which it contains. 
 
 ‘‘Thus in the history of the Passion three thoughts among others 
 rise into clear prominence: 
 
 (1) The voluntariness of Christ’s sufferings; xviii. 4, 8, 11, 36; 
 xix, 28, 30. 
 
 (2) The fulfilment of a divine plan in Christ’s sufferings ; xviii. 
 4,9, 11, xix. 11, 24, 28, 36, 37. 
 
 (3) The Majesty which shines through Christ’s sufferings; xviii. 
 6, 20—23 (comp. Luke xxii. 53), 37, xix. 11, 26, 27, 30. 
 
 ST JOHN U 
 
306 S. JOHN. [XVIIL, ΕΞ 
 
 «The narrative in this sense becomes a commentary on earlier 
 words which point to the end; (1) x. 17, 18; (2) xiii. 1; (3) xiii. 31. 
 
 “2. In several places the full meaning of S. John’s narrative is first 
 obtained by the help of words or incidents preserved by the synop- 
 tists. His narrative assumes facts found in them: e.g. xviii. 11, 33, 40, 
 xix. 41. 
 
 “3, The main incidents recorded by more than one of the other 
 Evangelists which are omitted by S. John are: (by all three) the agony, 
 traitor’s kiss, mockery as prophet, council at daybreak, impressment 
 of Simon, reproaches of the spectators, darkness, confession of the 
 centurion; (by S. Matthew and S. Mark) the desertion by all, exam- 
 ination before the Sanhedrin at night, false witness, adjuration, 
 great Confession, mockery after condemnation, cry from Ps. xxii., 
 rending of the veil. 
 
 ‘‘Other incidents omitted by Κ΄. John are recorded by single Evan- 
 gelists: (S. Matthew) power over the hosts of heaven, Pilate’s wife’s 
 message, Pilate’s hand-washing, self-condemnation of the Jews, earth- 
 quake; (S. Mark) flight of the young man, Pilate’s question as to the 
 death of Christ; (S. Luke) examination before Herod, lamentation of 
 the women, three ‘ words’ from the Cross (xxiii. 34, 43, 46), repent- 
 ance of one of the robbers. 
 
 “4, The main incidents peculiar to S. John are: the words of power 
 at the arrest, examination before Annas, first conference of the Jews 
 with Pilate and Pilate’s private examination, first mockery and Ecce 
 Homo, Pilate’s maintenance of his words, the last charge (xix. 25—27), 
 the thirst, piercing of the side, ministry of Nicodemus. 
 
 “5. In the narrative of incidents recorded elsewhere S. John con- 
 stantly adds details, often minute and yet most significant: e.g. xviii. 
 1, 2,10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 26, 28, xix. 14,17, 41. See the notes. 
 
 “6. In the midst of great differences of detail the Synoptists and 
 S. John offer many impressive resemblances as to the spirit and cha- 
 racter of the proceedings: e.g. (1) the activity of the ‘ High Priests’ 
 (i.e. the Sadducaean hierarchy) as distinguished from the Pharisees; 
 (2) the course of the accusation—civil charge, religious charge, per- 
 sonal influence; (3) the silence of the Lord in His public accusations, 
 with the significant exception, Matt. xxvi.64; (4) the tone of mockery; 
 (5) the character of Pilate.” 
 
 1—11. Tue Betrayat. 
 
 1. ἐξῆλθεν. From the upper room. The word is used of leaving 
 the room, Matt. xxii. 39; Mark xiv. 26; Luke xxii. 39. Those who 
 suppose that the room is left at xiv. 31 (perhaps for the Temple), 
 interpret this of the departure from the city. 
 
 τῶν Κέδρων. Of the Cedars, rather than τοῦ Kedpwy, of the Kedron. 
 Kedron or Kidron=‘ black,’ and is commonly referred to the dark 
 colour of the water or to the gloom of the ravine. But it might 
 refer to the black green of the cedars, and thus both names would 
 be united. χειμαρροῦς or φάραγξ (Josephus uses both words) indi- 
 cates the ravine rather than the water: even in winter the stream 
 
XVIIL 3] NOTES. 307 
 
 issmall. This detail of Jesus crossing the ‘Wady’ of the Kidron is 
 given by 5. John only; but he gives no hint of a reference to the 
 flight of David from Absalom and Ahithophel (2 5. xv. 23). If we 
 are to seek a reason for his noting the fact, we may find it in his cha- 
 racteristic symbolism: ἐκ χειμάρρου ἐν ὁδῷ πίεται (Ps. cx. 7); χείμαρ- 
 ρον διῆλθεν ἡ ψυχή (Ps. exxiv. 4). This gloomy raviue with its dusky 
 waters is a figure of the affliction through which the Messiah is pass- 
 ing. See on ili. 2, x. 22, xiii. 80. 
 
 κῆπος. Garden or orchard. Gethsemane means ‘oil-press,’ and 
 olives probably abounded there. The very ancient olive-trees still 
 existing on the traditional site were probably put there by pilgrims 
 who replanted the spot after its devastation at the siege of Jerusalem. 
 S. John gives no hint of a comparison between the two gardens, Eden 
 and Gethsemane, which commentators from Cyril to Isaac Williams 
 have traced. See on Mark i. 13 for another comparison. 
 
 2. ὁ παραδιδούς. Who was betraying; he was at that moment at 
 work : his knowing the place disproves the sneer of Celsus, that Jesus 
 went thither to hide and escape. Origen (Cels. 11. x.) appeals to vv. 
 4, 5 as shewing that He deliberately surrendered Himself. Συνήχθη 
 (literally, assembled) suggests that they met for a definite purpose, 
 such as teaching or devotion. The owner must have known of these 
 frequent gatherings and may have been a disciple. 
 
 3. oovv’l. Judas therefore. It was because he knew that Jesus 
 often went thither that he came hither to take Him. The details 
 which follow are minute and accurate as of an eyewitness. 
 
 τὴν σπεῖραν. The band of soldiers: this is one part of the company ; 
 Roman soldiers sent to prevent ‘an uproar’ among the thousands of 
 pilgrims assembled for the Passover (see on Matt. xxvi. 5). Σ πεῖρα 
 seems elsewhere in N.T. to mean ‘cohort,’ the tenth of a legion (Matt. 
 xxvii. 27; Mark xv. 16; Acts x. 1, xxi. 31, xxvii. 1), and with this 
 Polybius (x1. xxi. 1; [xxiii. 17) agrees. But Polybius sometimes (v1. 
 Xxiv. 5, xv. 1x. 7, Ill. cxiii. 3) appears to use σπεῖρα for ‘maniple,’ the 
 third part of a cohort and about 200 men. In any case only a portion 
 of the cohort which formed the garrison of the fortress of Antonia can 
 here be meant: but that the arrest of Jesus was expected to produce a 
 crisis is shewn by the presence of the chief officer of the cohort (v. 12). 
 The Jewish hierarchy had no doubt communicated with Pilate, and 
 his being ready to try the case at so early an hour as 5 a.m. may be 
 accounted for in this way. 
 
 ἐκ τ. apx. kK. τ. Φ. From the Sanhedrin (see on vii, 32, 45, xi. 47). 
 These ὑπηρέται may have been either officers of justice appointed by 
 the Sanhedrin, or a portion of the Levitical temple-police: that some 
 of the latter were present is clear from Luke xxii. 4, 52. This is a 
 second part of the company. S. Luke (xxii. 52) tells us that some of 
 the chief priests themselves were there also. Thus there were (1) Roman 
 soldiers, (2) Jewish officials, (3) chief priests. The φανοί and Aap- 
 mades were the common equipment for night duty, not rendered useless 
 by the Paschal full moon. Dark woods or buildings might need 
 
 U2 
 
308 S. JOWN. ΙΧ τς 
 
 searching. Φανός occurs here only in N.T. Both A.V. and R.V. vary 
 between ‘torch,’ ‘light,’ and ‘lamp’ for λαμπάς (Matt. xxv. 1—8; Acts 
 xx. 8; Rev. iv. 5, viii. 10). Torches were fed with oil carried in a 
 vessel for the purpose, and perhaps ‘torch’ would be best everywhere 
 for λαμπάς, leaving ‘lamp’ for the translation of λύχνος (v. 35; Matt. 
 v. 15, vi. 22; Luke viii. 16, &c.). There is a suppressed irony in the 
 details of this verse: ‘all this force against one; against one who in- 
 tended no resistance; against One who with one word (v. 6; Matt. 
 xxvi. 53) could have swept them all away.’ 
 
 4. ἐξῆλθεν. From what? (1) from the shade into the light; (2) 
 from the circle of disciples; (3) from the depth of the garden; (4) from 
 the garden itself. It is impossible to say which of these is right; the 
 last is not contradicted by v. 26. The kiss of Judas is by some placed 
 here, by others after v. 8. While ‘His hour was not yet come’ (vii. 
 30, viii. 20), He had withdrawn from danger (viii. 59, xi. 54, xii. 36); 
 now He goes forth to meet it. He who had avoided notoriety (v. 13) 
 and royalty (vi. 15), goes forth to welcome death. His question may 
 have had two objects ; to withdraw attention from His disciples (v. 8), 
 and to make His captors realise what they were doing. 
 
 5. “I. τ. Nafwpatov. Jesus the Nazarene (Matt. ii. 23), a rather 
 more contemptuous expression than ‘Jesus of Nazareth’ (i. 46; Acts 
 x. 38; comp. Matt. xxi. 11). ‘The Nazarene’ in a contemptuous 
 sense occurs xix. 19; Matt. xxvi. 71; Mark xiv. 67. It is sometimes 
 used in a neutral sense (Mark x. 47; Luke xviii. 37, xxiv. 19). Later 
 on the contempt of Jews and heathen became the glory of Christians 
 (Acts ii. 22, iii. 6, iv. 10, vi. 14). 
 
 ἐγώ εἰμι. These words to Jewish ears were the name of Jehovah. 
 We have had the same expression several times in this Gospel (iv. 26), 
 vi. 20, viii. 24, 28, 58, xiii. 1 (see notes), Judas, if not the chief 
 priests, must have noticed the significant words. There is nothing 
 in the narrative to shew that either the whole company were mira- 
 culously blinded (Luke xxiv. 16), or that Judas in particular was 
 blinded or paralysed. Even those who knew Him well might fail to 
 recognise Him at once by night and with the traces of the Agony fresh 
 upon Him. 
 
 _ εἱστήκει... ὁ παραδιδούς. Judas, who was betraying Him (v. 2) was 
 standing with them. This tragic detail is stamped on the Evangelist’s 
 memory: that one dark figure standing as the chief representative of 
 the ἐξουσία τοῦ σκότους. ὃ. John has been accused of personal hatred 
 towards Judas; but he alone of the four Evangelists omits the traitor’s 
 kiss. For εἱστήκει v. 16, comp. i. 35, vii. 35, xix. 25, xx. 11. 
 
 6. ὡς οὖν εἶπεν. When therefore He said; intimating that what 
 followed was the immediate consequence of His words. They fell 
 backwards, recoiling from the majesty of goodness, not forwards in 
 adoration of it. Whether their falling was the natural effect of guilt 
 meeting with absolute innocence, or a supernatural effect wrought by 
 Christ’s will, is a question which we have not the means of determining. 
 
XVIII. 10.] NOTES. 309 
 
 Moreover, the distinction may be an unreal one, Is it not His will 
 that guilt should quail before innocence? The result in this case 
 proved both to the disciples and to His foes that His surrender was 
 entirely voluntary (x. 18). Once before, the majesty of His words had 
 overwhelmed those who had come to arrest Him (vii. 46); and it 
 would have been so now, had not He willed to be taken. Comp. Matt. 
 xxvi. 53, where the expression ‘legions of angels’ may have reference 
 to the fragment of a legion that had come to superintend His capture. 
 
 7 πάλιν οὖν. Again therefore. Their first onset had been 
 baffled: He Himself gives them another opening. They repeat the 
 terms of their warrant; they have been sent to arrest ‘Jesus the 
 Nazarene.’ 
 
 8. ἄφετε τούτους ὑπάγειν. He is no hireling (x. 12); His first 
 thought is for the sheep. At first Jesus had gone forward (v. 4) from 
 His company, as Judas, to give the kiss, from his. Judas has fallen 
 back on his followers, while the disciples gather round Christ. Thus 
 the two bands and two leaders confront one another. 
 
 9. ous δεδ. p., οὐκ ἀπ. Of those whom Thou hast given Me, I lost 
 not one. The reference is to xvii. 12, and is a strong confirmation of 
 the historical truth of chap. xvii. Ifthe prayer were the composition 
 of the Evangelist to set forth in an ideal form Christ’s mental condition 
 at the time, this reference to a definite portion of it would be most un- 
 natural. The change from ‘not one of them perished’ to ‘I lost of 
 them not one’ brings out the protective intervention of Christ. 
 
 It does not follow, because 8. John gives this interpretation of 
 Christ’s words, that therefore they have no other. This was a first 
 fulfilment, within an hour or two of their utterance, an earnest of a 
 larger fulfilment in the future. The meaning here must not be limited 
 to bodily preservation. Had they been captured, apostasy might have 
 been the result, as was actually the case with S. Peter. 
 
 10. &. οὖν II. Simon Peter therefore; because he ‘saw what 
 would follow’ (Luke xxii. 49). The position of οὖν is remarkable, as if 
 Ilérpos had been added as an after-thought, possibly in allusion to the 
 significance of the name. All four Evangelists mention this act of 
 violence; S. John alone gives the names. While 5. Peter was alive it 
 was only prudent not to mention his name; and probably 8. John was 
 the only one who knew (v. 15) the servant’s name. This impetuous 
 boldness of ὁ θερμὸς Πέτρος illustrates his impetuous words xiii. 37 and 
 Mark viii. 32. The sword was probably one of the two produced in 
 misunderstanding of Christ’s words at the end of the supper (Luke 
 xxiii, 38). To carry arms on a feast-day was forbidden; so that we 
 have here some indication that the Last Supper was not the Passover. 
 No doubt Malchus had been prominent in the attack on Jesus; hence 
 τὸν τ. ἀρχ. δοῦλον, which does not mean that only one servant was 
 there (v. 26). Or τὸν δ. may mean ‘ the servant of whom you have so 
 often heard.’ §. Peter had aimed at his head. 83. Luke also mentions 
 that it was the right ear that was cut, and he alone mentions the 
 healing, under cover of which 5. Peter probably escaped. 
 
310 5. JOHN. [X VIII. 11— 
 
 11. βάλε. Seeonv. 7. 5. John alone gives the words about the cup: 
 the Synoptists alone (Matt. xxvi. 39, &c.) give the prayer to which they 
 obvicusly refer. Thus the two accounts confirm one another. Comp. 
 ii. 19, xii. 8; and for the metaphor Ps. Ixxv. 8, lx. 3; Job xxi. 20; 
 Rev. xiv. 10, xvi. 19. 5. Matthew gives another reason for sheathing ; 
 ‘all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword’ (xxvi. 52). 
 ** Any zeal is proper for religion but the zeal of the sword and the zeal 
 of anger” (Jeremy Taylor). For ov μή interrogative comp. Ruth iii. 
 1; οὐ μὴ εὕρω σοι ἀνάπαυσιν; See on iy. 48. 
 
 12—27. Tue JEwIsH oR EccLESIASTICAL TRIALS. 
 
 12—27. Much space is given in all four Gospels to the Jewish 
 and Roman trials, space apparently disproportionate to the brief 
 account of the Crucifixion. But the two trials illustrate the two great 
 elements of Christ’s Messiahship. By the Sanhedrin He was con- 
 demned as claiming to be the Son of God, by Pilate as claiming to be 
 the King of the Jews. The Crucifixion would be unintelligible if we 
 did not clearly understand Who was crucified, and why. 
 
 12. ἡ οὖν ow. Therefore the band; because of S. Peter’s violent 
 attempt at rescue. The χιλίαρχος is the tribune of the Roman cohort. 
 His presence with the detachment shews that the hierarchy had pre- 
 pared the Romans for serious resistance. Peter’s violence confirms: 
 these representations. Jesus the Nazarene is a dangerous character 
 who incites His followers to rebellion ; He must be secured and bound. 
 And the incident in v. 6 would suggest great caution, as in dealing 
 with a powerful magician. 
 
 13. πρὸς ΓἼΑνναν πρῶτον. The πρῶτον shews that 8. John is 
 aware of the subsequent examination before Caiaphas given by the 
 Synoptists. Whether Annas was ‘chief’ of the priests (2 Kings xxy. 
 18), or president, or vice-president, of the Sanhedrin, we have no in- 
 formation, Certainly he was one of the most influential members of 
 the hierarchy, as is shewn by his securing the high-priesthood for no 
 less than five of his sons as well as for his son-in-law Caiaphas, after 
 he had been deposed himself. He held office a.p. 7—14, his son 
 Eleazar a.p. 16, Joseph Caiaphas a.p. 18—36; after Caiaphas four 
 sons of Annas held the office, the last of whom, another Annas (a.D. 62), 
 put to death 3. James, the first bishop of Jerusalem. The high-priests 
 at this time were often mere nominees of the civil power, and were 
 changed with a rapidity which must have scandalized serious Jews. 
 There were probably five or six deposed high-priests in the Sanhedrin 
 which tried our Lord (see on xi. 49 and Luke iii. 2). Other forms of 
 the name Annas are Ananias, Ananus, and Hanan. 
 
 ἣν γὰρ mev0. And therefore Caiaphas would be sure to respect the 
 results of a preliminary examination conducted by him. Possibly the 
 chief priests thought that Annas was a safer man than Caiaphas. 
 This examination before Annas is given us by S. John only, who tacitly 
 corrects the impression that the examination before Caiaphas was the 
 only one. 
 
XVIII. 18.] NOTES. 311 
 
 14. συμφέρει. See on xi. 50—52. S. John intimates that a trial 
 conducted under such auspices could have but one issue, 
 
 15. ἠκολούθει. Was following ; the descriptive imperfect. Some 
 good authorities (N°C) insert ὁ before ἄλλος, but the balance is de- 
 cidedly against it. There is no very strong reason for rejecting the 
 almost universal opinion that this ἄλλος μαθητής is S. John himself, 
 It agrees with his habitual reserve about himself (i. 40, xiii. 23—25, 
 xix. 26, xx. 2—8, xxi. 20—24); with his being often found with 
 S. Peter (Luke xxii. 8; Acts iii, 1, iv. 13, viii. 14) ; and with his know- 
 ledge of the high-priest’s servant’s name (v. 10). Yet the opinion is 
 not a certainty; the facts just mentioned would fit his brother 
 S. James almost equally well; and the fact of S. John’s elsewhere 
 designating himself as the μαθητὴς ὃν ἠγάπα ὁ Τησοῦς is slightly against 
 the opinion. But on the other hand that designation would have no 
 point here ; the unnamed disciple is not receiving any mark of favour 
 from Jesus. See Introduction, p. xxxiv. 
 
 γνωστὸς τ. dpx. Comp. Luke ii. 44, xxiii. 49. The nature of the 
 acquaintance is not explained: in connexion with it we may remember 
 the tradition that 8. John himself wore the high-priestly badge in later 
 life; Ὁ. xvii. To dpx. is probably Caiaphas (vv. 13, 24): deposed 
 high-priests were thus designated sometimes (Luke ii. 2; Acts iv. 6), 
 but never by 8. John. Possibly Annas lived in his son-in-law’s 
 official residence; but if not, there is nothing improbable in his con- 
 ducting a preliminary examination there. The αὐλή (x. 1, 16) is the 
 court or open space in the centre or in front of the house (Luke xxii, 
 55): ἔξω (v. 16) agrees better with an interior court. 
 
 16. εἱστήκει. Was standing; descriptive imperfect, as in vv. 5, 
 15, 18. The details again indicate an eyewitness. Female door- 
 keepers were common among the Jews: LXX. in 2 Sam. iv. 6; 
 Rhoda, Acts xii. 13; Josephus, Ant. vit. 11. 1. 
 
 17. μὴ kal σύ. Art thou also (shewing that she knew his compa- 
 nion to be a disciple), or, swrely thou also art not. See on iv. 29 and 
 comp, iv. 33, vi. 67, vii. 47, ix. 40; where, as here, the μή anticipates 
 a negative answer. §. Peter’s denial is thus put into his mouth. 
 Tovrov and the turn of the sentence are contemptuous; ix. 16, 24, xi. 
 47. 8. John had hurried on to the room where Christ was being 
 examined; as at the Cross (xix. 26) he kept close to his Master; and 
 in neither case was molested. 8. Peter, who ‘followed afar off’ (Luke 
 xxii. 54) and that rather out of curiosity ‘ to see the end’ (Matt. xxvi. 
 58) than out of love, encountered temptation and fell. 
 
 18. εἱστήκ. δὲ of δι Now the servants and the officers were standing 
 
 ...and were warming themselves. The tribune (v. 12) has withdrawn 
 his men, having completed the arrest. Only the officials of the Sanhed- 
 rin remain, joined now by the household servants of the high-priest. 
 *Av@paxia means charcoal in a brazier, πρὸς τὸ φῶς of which S. Peter 
 stood and sat, pretending to be indifferent, but restlessly changing his 
 posture (Luke xxii. 56): comp. xxi. 9; Heclus. xi. 32. Cold nights in 
 
312 S. JOHN. [X VIII. 18— 
 
 April are exceptional but not uncommon in Palestine, and Jerusalem 
 stands high, 
 
 per αὐτῶν. Peter also is with the Lord’s enemies, making himself 
 comfortable in this night of cold. Otia pulvinar Satanae. 
 
 19. ὁ οὖν dpx. The οὖν connects what follows with vv. 13, 14. 
 Again we are in doubt as to who is meant by the high-priect (see on 
 v. 15), but it will be safest to consider that Caiaphas is meant through- 
 out. Neither hypothesis is free from difficulty. If the high-priest 
 here is Caiaphas, the difficulty is to explain v, 24 (see note there), 
 But we may suppose that while Annas is conducting the examination 
 Caiaphas enters and takes part in it. It was hoped that some evidence 
 might be obtained which would be of service in the formal trial that 
 was to follow. 
 
 20. éy#. With strong emphasis. He answers no questions 
 about His disciples, but bears the brunt alone. Moreover He seems 
 to contrast His openness with the secrecy of His enemies: for 
 παρρησίᾳ see on vil. 13, and for ἐν συναγωγῇ on vi. 59. ‘I always 
 taught in public places, where all the Jews come together. I am 
 not the head of a secret society; nor am I ashamed of My doc-: 
 trine.’ Comp, Matt. x. 27 Veritas nihil erubescit praeter abscondt 
 (Tertullian) 
 
 21. ἴδε οὗτοι. Asif implying that they were present and ought to 
 be examined. Witnesses for the defence were heard first. Οὗτοι can- 
 not mean S. Peter and 5. John: §. Peter is still outside by the fire. 
 For ἴδε see on i. 29. 
 
 22. ῥάπισμα. Elsewhere only xix. 3 and Mark xiv. 65. Literally, 
 ‘a blow with a rod,’ and δέρεις (v. 23) agrees with this. But ῥάπισμα 
 is also used for ‘a blow with the open hand:’ comp. ῥαπίζειν, Matt. v. 
 39. In later Greek this meaning prevailed, perhaps exclusively. 
 Christ’s conduct here shews how Matt. v. 39 is to be understood: 
 personal retaliation is forbidden, but not calm protest and rebuke, 
 
 23. εἰ κι ἐλάλησα. If I spake evil is perhaps better than If I 
 have-spoken evil. Like ἐλάλησα in v. 20 and εἶπον in τ. 21, this seems 
 to refer to Christ’s teaching, about which He is being examined, 
 rather than to His reply to the high-priest. For the construction 
 comp. xiii. 14, xv. 20. 
 
 24. ἀπέστ. οὖν. The οὖν (see critical note) shews that the remark 
 is not an afterthought. Because the preliminary examination before 
 Annas produced a prima facie case, but nothing conclusive, Annas 
 therefore sent Him for formal trial to Caiaphas, who had apparently 
 been present during the previous examination and had taken part in 
 it (v.19). Hence there is no need to discuss whether ἀπέστειλεν May 
 be equivalent to a pluperfect : comp. Matt. xxvi. 48, xiv. 3, 4. 
 
 Christ had been bound at His arrest (v. 12) to prevent escape. 
 During the examination He would be unbound as possibly innocent. 
 He is now bound again. Apparently He was unbound a second time 
 before the Sanhedrin, and then bound afresh to be taken to Pilate 
 (Matt. xxvii, 2). 
 
XVIII. 27.] NOTES. 313 
 
 25. The narrative is resumed from v. 18: But Simon Peter was 
 standing and warming himself. Dramatic contrast: the Lord stands 
 bound; His disciple stands and warms himself. A look of distress on 
 his face, when his Master appears bound as a criminal, and perhaps 
 with the mark of the blow (v. 22) on His face, provokes (οὖν) the 
 exclamation, Surely thou also art not one of His disciples: see on v. 17. 
 
 26. συγγενής. How natural that an acquaintance of the high- 
 priest (v. 15) known to his portress (v. 16) should know this fact also 
 as well as Malchus’ name (v. 10). This confirms the ordinary view 
 that the ‘ other disciple’ (v. 15) is the Evangelist himself. This third 
 accusation and denial was, as 5. Luke tell us, about an hour after the 
 second; so that our Lord must have ‘turned and looked upon Peter’ 
 either from a room looking into the court, or as He was being led to 
 receive the formal sentence of the Sanhedrin after the trial before 
 Caiaphas, not as He was being taken from Annas to Caiaphas. The 
 ἐγώ is emphatic; ‘with my own eyes:’ the man speaks with bitterness 
 and assurance. Comp. διισχυρίζετο λέγων (Luke xxii. 59). 
 
 27. πάλιν οὖν. Again therefore, because he had denied before 
 and yet another denial had become necessary. ὃ. John, like 5. Luke, 
 omits the oaths and curses (Mark xiv. 71; Matt. xxvi. 73). We may 
 believe that S. Peter himself through S. Mark was the first to include 
 this aggravation of his guilt in the current tradition. 
 
 ἀλέκτωρ ἐφ. A cock crew. In none of the Gospels is there the 
 definite article which our translation inserts. This was the second 
 crowing (Mark xiv. 72). <A difficulty has been made here because the 
 Talmud says that fowls, which scratch in dunghills, are unclean. 
 But (1) the Talmud is inconsistent on this point with itself; (2) not 
 all Jews would be so scrupulous as to keep no fowls in Jerusalem; (3) 
 certainly the Romans would care nothing about such scruples. 
 
 Just as the Evangelist implies (v. 11), without mentioning, the Agony 
 in the garden, so he implies (xxi. 15), without mentioning, the repent- 
 ance of §. Peter. The question has been raised, why he narrates 
 S. Peter’s fall, which had been thrice told already. There is no need 
 to seek far-fetched explanations, as that ‘‘ there might be contained in it 
 some great principle or prophetic history, and perhaps both: some great 
 
 rinciple to be developed in the future history of the Church, or of 
 
 . Peter’s Church.” Rather, it is part of 5. John’s own experience 
 which falls naturally into the scope and plan of his Gospel, setting forth 
 on the one side the Divinity of Christ, on the other the glorification of 
 His manhood through suffering. Christ’s foreknowledge of the fall of 
 His chief Apostle (xiii. 38) illustrated both: it was evidence of His 
 Divinity (comp. ii, 24, 25), and it intensified His suffering. S. John, 
 therefore, gives both the prophecy and the fulfilment. It has been 
 noticed that it is ‘“‘S. Peter’s friend 8. John, who seems to mention 
 most what may lessen the fault of his brother apostle;”’ that servants 
 and officers were about him; that in the second case he was pressed by 
 more than one; and that on the last occasion a kinsman of Malchus 
 was among his accusers, which may greatly have increased Peter’s terror. 
 Moreover, this instance of human frailty in one so exalted (an instance 
 
314 S. JOHN. [X VIII. 27— 
 
 which the life of the great Exemplar Himself could not afford), is given 
 us with fourfold emphasis, that none may presume and none despair. 
 
 On the difficulties connected with the four accounts of 5. Peter’s 
 denials see Appendix B. 
 
 28—XIX. 16. Tue Roman orn Civin TRIAL. 
 
 As already stated, 5. John omits both the examination before Caiaphas 
 and the Sanhedrin at an irregular time and place, at midnight and at 
 ‘the Booths’ (Matt. xxvi. 57—68; Mark xiv. 53—65), and also the 
 formal meeting of the Sanhedrin after daybreak in the proper place 
 (Matt. xxvii. 1; Mark xv. 1; Luke xxii. 66—71), at which Jesus was 
 sentenced to death. He proceeds to narrate what the Synoptists omit, 
 the conference between Pilate and the Jews (vv. 28—32) and two 
 private examinations of Jesus by Pilate (vv. 33—38 and xix. 8—11). 
 Here also we seem to have the evidence of an eyewitness. We know 
 that 5. John followed his Lord into the high-priest’s palace (v. 15), and 
 stood by the Cross (xix. 26); it is therefore probable enough that he 
 followed into the Procurator’s court. 
 
 28. ἄγουσιν οὖν. They lead therefore (v. 3). 8S. John assumes 
 that his readers know the result of Jesus being taken to Caiaphas (v. 
 24): He had been condemned to death; and now His enemies (there 
 is no need to name them) take Him to the Roman governor to get the 
 sentence executed. 
 
 aro t. K. From the house of Caiaphas. Comp. Mark vy. 35; Acts 
 xvi. 40. 
 
 τὸ πραιτώριον. The palace, Pilate’s house, the praetorium. Our 
 translators have varied their rendering of it capriciously: Matt. xxvii. 
 17, ‘common hall,’ with ‘ governor’s house’ in the margin; Mark xv. 
 16, ‘Praetorium ;’ John xviii. 33 and xix. 9, ‘judgment-hall.’ Yet the 
 meaning must be the same in all these passages. Comp. Acts xxiii. 
 35, ‘judgment-hall;’ Phil. i. 13, ‘the palace.’ The meaning of prae- 
 torium varies according to the context. The word is of military origin; 
 (1) ‘the general’s tent’ or ‘head-quarters.’ Hence, in the provinces, 
 (2) ‘the governor’s residence,’ the meaning in Acts xxiii. 35: in a sort 
 of metaphorical sense, (3) a ‘mansion’ or ‘palace’ (Juvenal 1. 75): at 
 Rome, (4) ‘the praetorian guard,’ the probable meaning in Phil. 1. 13. 
 Of these leading significations the second is probably right here and 
 throughout the Gospels; the official residence of the Procurator. 
 Where Pilate resided in Jerusalem is not quite certain. We know 
 that ‘ Herod’s Praetorium,’ a magnificent building on the western hill 
 of Jerusalem, was used by Roman governors somewhat later (Philo, 
 Leg. ad Gaium, p. 1034). But it is perhaps more likely that Pilate 
 occupied part of the fortress Antonia, on the supposed site of which 
 a chamber with a column in it has recently been discovered, which it 
 is thought may possibly be the scene of the scourging. 
 
 5. John’s narrative alternates between the outside and inside of the 
 Praetorium, Outside; 28—32, 38—40, xix. 4—7, 12—16. Inside; 
 33—37, xix. 1—3, 8---11, 
 
XVIII. 29.] NOTES. 315 
 
 28—32. Outside the Praetorium; the Jews claim the execution 
 of the Sanhedrin’s sentence of death, and Pilate refuses it. 
 
 πρωΐ, This is rendered ‘morning’ Matt. xvi. 3; Mark i. 35, xi. 
 20, xiii. 35, xv. 1; the last passage being partly parallel to this. In 
 Mark xiii. 35 the word stands for the fourth watch (see on Mark 
 vi. 48), which lasted from 3.0 to 6.0 a.m. A Roman court might 
 be held directly after sunrise; and as Pilate had probably been 
 informed that an important case was to be brought before him, 
 delay in which might cause serious disturbance, there is nothing 
 improbable in his being ready to open his court between 4.0 and 
 5.0 4.M. The hierarchy were in a difficulty. Jesus could not safely 
 be arrested by daylight, and the Sanhedrin could not legally pro- 
 nounce sentence of death by night: hence they had had to wait till 
 dawn to condemn Him. Now another regulation hampers them: 
 a day must intervene between sentence and execution. This they 
 shuffled out of by going at once to Pilate. Of course if he undertook 
 the execution, he must fix the time; and their representations would 
 secure his ordering immediate execution. Thus they shifted the 
 breach of the law from themselves to him. 
 
 As in the life of our Lord as awhole, so also in this last week and 
 last day of it, the exact sequence and time of the events cannot be 
 ascertained with certainty. Chronology is not what the Evangelists 
 aim at giving us. Fora tentative arrangement of the chief events of 
 the Passion see Appendix C. 
 
 αὐτοί. The “most characteristic trait of a religious and godless 
 nation ever put on record”’ (Maurice). They themselves (in contrast 
 to their Victim, whom they sent in under a Roman guard) entered 
 not into the palace, that they might not be defiled by entering a 
 house possibly polluted by heathen abominations and certainly not 
 cleansed from leaven (Ex. xii. 15). But Jewish zeal had taught the 
 Romans that idols could not be tolerated in the Holy City. 
 
 ἵνα φάγωσιν τὸ π. It is evident that S. John does not regard the 
 Last Supper as a Paschal meal. Comp. xiii, 1, 29. It is equally 
 evident that the synoptic narratives convey the impression that the 
 Last Supper was the ordinary Jewish Passover (Matt. xxvi, 17, 18, 
 19; Mark xiv. 14, 16; Luke xxii. 7, 8, 11, 13, 15). Whatever be 
 the right solution, the independence of the author of the Fourth 
 Gospel is manifest. Would anyone counterfeiting an Apostle venture 
 thus to contradict what seemed to have such strong Apostolic 
 authority? Would he not expect that a glaring discrepancy on so 
 important a point would prove fatal to his pretensions? Assume 
 that 8. John is simply recording his own vivid recollections, whether 
 or no we suppose him to be correcting the impression produced by 
 the Synoptists, and this difficulty at any rate is avoided. 83. John’s 
 narrative is too precise and consistent to be explained away. On the 
 difficulty as regards the Synoptists see Appendix A; see also Excursus 
 V at the end of Dr Farrar’s 5. Luke. 
 
 29. ἐξῆλθεν οὖν ὁ Π΄. ἔξω. Because they would not enter, therefore 
 Pilate went out to them. The emphatic position of ἐξῆλθεν and the 
 
316 S. JOHN. [XVIIL 29— 
 
 addition of ἔξω seem to call attention to this Roman concession 
 to Jewish religiousness. The Evangelist assumes that his readers 
 know who Pilate is, just as he assumes that they know the Twelve, 
 Martha and Mary, and Mary Magdalene (vi. 67, xi. 1, xix. 25). 
 
 τίνα κατηγορίαν. No doubt Pilate knew, but in accordance with 
 strict procedure he demands a formal indictment. 
 
 κακὸν ποιῶν. An evil-doer: distinguish from κακοῦργος (Luke 
 xxiii. 32). The Jews are taken aback at Pilate’s evident intention 
 of trying the case himself. They had expected him merely to carry 
 out their sentence, and had not come provided with any definite 
 accusation. Blasphemy, for which they had condemned Him (Matt. 
 xxvi. 65, 66), might be no crime with Pilate (comp. Acts xviii. 16). 
 Hence the vagueness of their first charge. Later on (xix. 7) they 
 throw in the charge of blasphemy; but they rely mainly on three 
 distinct charges, which being political, Pilate must hear; (1) seditious 
 agitation, (2) forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, (3) assuming the 
 title, ‘King of the Jews’ (Luke xxiii. 3). 
 
 31. εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς ὁ II. Because of their vague accusation. 
 If they will not make a specific charge, he will not deal with the 
 case. Pilate, impressed probably by his wife’s dream (Matt. xxvii. 
 19) tries in various ways to avoid sentencing Jesus to death. (1) 
 He would have the Jews deal with the case themselves; (2) he sends 
 Jesus to Herod; (8) he proposes to release Him in honour of the 
 Feast; (4) he will scourge Him and let Him go. Roman governors 
 were not commonly so scrupulous, and Pilate was not above the 
 average: a vague superstitious dread was perhaps his strongest 
 motive. Thrice in the course of these attempts does he pronounce 
 Jesus innocent (v. 39, xix. 4, 6). Note the emphatic and somewhat 
 contemptuous ὑμεῖς and ὑμῶν; Take Him yourselves and accortling 
 to your law judge Him. Pilate disdains to interfere in Jewish 
 religious disputes. 
 
 οὐκ ἔξεστιν. These words are to be taken quite literally, and with- 
 out any addition, such as ‘at the Passover’ or ‘by crucifixion,’ or ‘for 
 high treason.’ The question whether the Sanhedrin had or had not 
 the right to inflict capital punishment at this time is a vexed one. 
 On the one hand we have (1) this verse; (2) the statement of the 
 Talmud that 40 years before the destruction of Jerusalem the Jews 
 lost this power; (3) the evidence of Josephus (Ant. xx. ix. 1; comp. 
 xvi. i, 1; xvi. ii. 4, and vi.) that the high-priest could not summon 
 a judicial court of the Sanhedrin without the Procurator’s leave; (4) 
 the analogy of Roman law. To this it is replied (Dollinger, First Age 
 of the Church, Appendix 1.) ; (1) that the Jews quibbled in order to 
 cause Jesus to be crucified at the Feast instead of stoned after all the 
 people had dispersed; and Pilate would not have insulted the Jews 
 from the tribunal by telling them to put Jesus to death, if they had no 
 power to do so; (2) that the Talmud is in error, for the Roman do- 
 minion began 60 years before the destruction of Jerusalem; (3) that 
 Josephus (xx. ix. 1) shews that the Jews had this power: Ananus is 
 
XVIII. 33.] NOTES. 317 
 
 accused to Albinus not for putting people to death, but for holding a 
 court without leave: had the former been criminal it would have been 
 mentioned ; (4) that the analogy of Roman law proves nothing, for 
 cities and countries subject to Rome often retained their autonomy: 
 and there are the cases of 5. Stephen, those for whose death 8. Paul 
 voted (Acts xxvi. 10), and the Apostles, whom the Sanhedrin wished 
 to put to death (Acts v. 33); and Gamaliel in dissuading the council 
 never hints that to inflict death will bring trouble upon themselves. 
 To this it may be replied again; (1) that Pilate would have exposed a 
 quibble had there been one, and his dignity as judge was evidently not 
 above shewing ironical contempt for the plaintiffs; (2) that the Talmud 
 may be wrong about the date and right about the fact; possibly it is 
 right about both; (3) to mention the holding of a court by Ananus 
 was enough to secure the interference of Albinus, and more may have 
 been said than Josephus reports; (4) autonomy in the case of subject 
 states was the exception; therefore the burden of proof rests with those 
 who assert it of the Jews. 8. Stephen’s death and the other cases 
 (comp. John v. 18, vii. 1, 25, viii. 3, 59; Acts xxi. 31) only prove that 
 the Jews sometimes ventured on acts of judicial rigour and violence 
 of which the Romans took little notice. Besides we do not know that 
 in all these cases the Sanhedrin proposed to do more than to sentence 
 to death, trusting to the Romans to execute the sentence, as here. 
 Pilate’s whole action, and his express statement xix. 10, seem to 
 imply that he alone has the power to inflict death. 
 
 ποίῳ θανάτῳ. By what manner of death (xii. 33, xxi. 19; comp. x. 
 32; Matt. xxi. 23, xxii. 36; Luke vi. 32, xxiv. 19). Had the Sanhe- 
 drin executed Him as a blasphemer or a false prophet, He would have 
 been stoned. The Jews had other forms of capital punishment (see 
 on [viii. 5]), but not crucifixion ; and by them He could not have been 
 lifted up (viii. 28) like the Brazen Serpent (iii. 14). 
 
 33—37. Inside the Praetorium; Jesus is privately examined by 
 Pilate, and makes τὴν καλὴν ὁμολογίαν (1 Tim. vi. 13). 
 
 33. Because of the importunity of the Jews (οὖν) Pilate is obliged 
 to investigate further; and being only Procurator, although cum potes- 
 tate, has no Quaestor, but conducts the examination himself. Probably 
 the Roman guards had already brought Jesus inside the Praetorium: 
 Pilate now calls Him before the judgment-seat. What follows implies 
 that He had not heard the previous conversation with the Jews. 
 
 σὺ εἶ ὁ β. τ. 1. In all four Gospels these are Pilate’s first words to 
 Jesus, and §. Luke (xxiii. 2) gives the Jewish accusation which sug- 
 gested them; ‘saying that He Himself is Christ a king.’ In all four 
 Σύ is emphatic. The appearance of Jesus is in such contrast to 
 royalty that Pilate speaks with surprise (comp. iv. 12, viii. 53): his 
 meaning is either ‘Dost Thou claim to be King?’ or, ‘Art Thou the so- 
 called King?’ The civil title, ‘the King of the Jews,’ first appears in 
 the mouth of the wise men (Matt. ii. 1), next in the mouth of Pilate: 
 contrast the theocratic title, ‘the K. of Israel’ (i. 50). 
 
318 S. JOIN. [ΣΧ VIII. 34— 
 
 34. Note the solemn brevity of the introductions to vv. 34, 35, 56. 
 Jesus demands that the responsibility of making this charge against 
 Him be laid on the right persons. Moreover the meaning of the 
 charge, and therefore the truth of it, would depend on the person 
 making it. In Pilate’s sense He was not King; in another sense He 
 was. Note that He asks for information; see on xi. 17, 34. 
 
 35. ‘Is it likely that I, a Roman governor, have any interest in 
 Jewish questions? Am I likely to call Thee King? It was Thine own 
 nation (double article; see next note) that delivered Thee tome. What 
 made them do it?’ 
 
 36. ἡ B. ἡ ἐμή. This emphatic form, ‘the kingdom that is Mine’ 
 (see on vili. 31) prevails throughout the verse. ‘Yanpérat must be 
 rendered ‘servants,’ not ‘officers,’ although there is doubtless an al- 
 lusion to the officials of the hierarchy (vv. 3, 12, 18, 22, vii. 32, 45, 46; 
 Matt. v. 25). In Lukei. 2 and 1 Cor. iv. 1, the only places in Gospels 
 and Epistles in which the word is used of Christians, it is rendered 
 ‘ministers,’ both in A.V.and R.V. ‘Officers’ would here suggest mili- 
 tary officers. ‘The kingdom that is really Mine does not derive its 
 origin (ἐκ) from this world (iv. 22, viii. 23, xv. 19, xvii. 14, 16, x. 16): 
 if from this world sprang My kingdom, then would the servants that 
 are really Mine be striving’ (Luke xiii. 24; 1 Cor. ix. 25). For the 
 construction see on v. 46, and for τοῖς ᾿Γουδαίοις see on xiii. 33. 
 
 νῦν δέ. The meaning of νῦν is clear from the context; ‘as it is, as 
 the case really stands:’ comp. vili. 40, ix. 41, xv. 22, 24. It does not 
 mean ‘My kingdom is not of this world now, but shall be so hereafter ;’ 
 as if Christ were promising a millennium. 
 
 37. οὐκοῦν. Here only in N.T. Combined with the position of 
 ov it gives a tone of scorn to the question, which is half an exclama- 
 tion: ‘So then, Thou art a King!’ We might write οὔκουν and render, 
 ‘Art Thou not then a King?’ or, ‘Thou art not then a King.’ But 
 οὐκοῦν is simpler and is preferred by most editors. See Winer, Ὁ. 643. 
 
 σὺ λέγεις ὅτι. The rendering, Thou sayest (well), because, is much 
 less natural than Thou sayest that. Christ leaves the royal title which 
 Pilate misunderstands and explains the nature of His kingdom—the 
 realm of truth. 
 
 els τοῦτος To this end have I been born and to this end am I 
 come into the world. To be a King, He became incarnate; to be a 
 King, He entered the world: and this in order to witness to the truth. 
 The second els τοῦτο does not, any more than the first, refer exclu- 
 sively to what follows; both refer partly to what precedes, partly 
 (1 John ili, 8) to what follows. The perfects express a past act 
 continuing in the present; Christ has come and remains in the 
 world. ᾿Εγώ is very emphatic; in this respect Christ stands alone 
 among men. ἔξιρχεσθαι εἰς τ. κόσμον is frequent in §. John (i. 9, 
 ix. 39, xi. 27, xvi. 28). Applied to Christ it includes the notions 
 a His mission and of His pre-existence: but Pilate would not see 
 this. 
 
XVIII. 38. | NOTES. 319 
 
 ἵνα papt. τῇ GA. This is the Divine purpose of His royal power: 
 not merely ‘witness the truth,’ i.e. give a testimony that is true, 
 but bear witness to the objective reality of the Truth: again, not 
 merely ‘bear witness of,’ i.e. respecting the Truth (i. 7, 15, ii. 25, 
 v. 31—39, viii. 13—18, &c.), but ‘bear witness to,’ 1.6. in support 
 and defence of the Truth (v. 33). Both these expressions, ‘ witness’ 
 and ‘truth,’ have been seen to be very frequent in S. John (see 
 especially chaps, i. iii. v. vili. passim). We have them combined 
 here, as in v. 33. This is the object of Christ’s sovereignty,—to bear 
 witness to the Truth. It is characteristic of the Gospel that it claims 
 to be ‘the Truth.’ ,‘ This title of the Gospel is not found in the 
 Synoptists, Acts, or Apocalypse; but it occurs in the Catholic Epis- 
 {165 (James i. 19; 1 Pet. 1. 22; 2 Pet. ii. 2) and in 3. Paul (2 Thess, 
 li. 12; 2 Cor. xiii. 8; Eph. i. 13, &c.). It is specially characteristic 
 of the Gospel and Epistles of 5. John.” - Westcott, Introduction to 
 S. John, p. xliv. 
 
 e 
 
 ὁ av ἐκ τ. aX. That has his root in the Truth, so as to draw the 
 power of his life from it: comp. v. 36, iii. 31, viii. 47, and especi- 
 ally 1 John ii. 21, 111. 19. ‘‘It is of great interest to compare this 
 confession before Pilate with the corresponding confession before the 
 high priest (Matt. xxvi. 64). The one addressed to the Jews is in the 
 language of prophecy, the other addressed to a Roman appeals to the 
 universal testimony of conscience. The one speaks of a future mani- 
 festation of glory, the other of a present manifestation of truth......... 
 It is obvious how completely they answer severally to the circum- 
 stances of the two occasions.” Westcott, in loco. 
 
 38. τί ἐστιν ἀλήθεια: Pilate does not ask about ‘ the Truth,’ but 
 truth in any particular case. His question does not indicate any 
 serious wish to know what truth really is, nor yet the despairing 
 scepticism of a baffled thinker; nor, on the other hand, is it uttered 
 in a light spirit of ‘jesting’ (as Bacon thought). Rather it is the 
 half-pitying, half-impatient, question oi a practical man of the world, 
 whose experience of life has convinced him that truth is a dream of 
 enthusiasts, and that a kingdom in which truth is to be supreme is as 
 visionary as that of the Stoics. He has heard enough to convince 
 him that the accused is no dangerous incendiary, and he abruptly 
 closes the investigation with a question, which to his mind cuts at 
 the root of the Prisoner’s aspirations. ‘It was a good question; but 
 Pilate’s haste lost him the answer”: he asked it and went out. Quid 
 est Veritas? Vir est qui adest (Anagram attributed to Charles I.). 
 Here probably we must insert the sending to Herod Antipas} who had 
 come from Tiberias, as Pilate from Caesarea, on account of the Feast, 
 the one to win popularity, the other to keep order (Luke xxiii. 6—12). 
 
 38—40. Outside the Praetorium ; Pilate pronounces Him innocent 
 and offers to release Him for the Feast: the Jews prefer Barabbas. 
 
 38. τ. ᾿Ιουδαίους. Apparently this means the mob and not the 
 hierarchy. Pilate hoped that only a minority were moving against 
 Jesus; by an appeal to the majority he might be able to acquit Him 
 
320 8. JOHN. (XVIII. 38— 
 
 without incurring odium. By pronouncing Him legally innocent 
 he would gain this majority; by proposing to release Him on account 
 of the Feast rather than of His innocence he would avoid insulting 
 the Sanhedrin, who had already pronounced Him guilty. From 
 S. Mark (xv. 8, 11) it would appear that some of the multitude hoped 
 to deliver Jesus on the plea of the Feast and took the initiative in 
 reminding Pilate of the custom, but were controlled by the priests and 
 made to clamour for Barabbas. 
 
 ἐγώ... αἰτίαν. ‘Whatever you fanatics may do, I find no ground of 
 accusation in Him:’ comp. xix. 6. Αἰτία means ‘legal ground for 
 prosecution, crime’ (Matt. xxvii. 37; Mark xv. 26; Acts xiii. 28, 
 xxviii. 18). 
 
 39. συνήθεια, Nothing is known of this custom beyond what the 
 Gospels tell us. It may have been a memorial of the deliverance 
 from Egypt. But prisoners were sometimes released at Rome at 
 certain festivals, and it would be quite in harmony with the concili- 
 atory policy of Rome to honour native festivals in this way in the 
 case of subject nations. In Luke xxiii. 17 the custom is said to be an 
 obligation, ἀνάγκην εἶχεν : but the verse is of very doubtful genuine- 
 ness. For iva comp. xi. 57, xv. 12. Ἔν τ. πάσχα is no evidence that 
 the Passover had been already celebrated: the prisoner would natu- 
 rally be released in time to share in the Paschal meal. The Synop- 
 tists use the less definite expression, κατὰ ἑορτήν (Matt. xxvii. 15; 
 Mark xv. 6). For the construction βούλεσθε ἀπολύσω comp. θέλεις 
 συλλέξωμεν, ποῦ θέλεις ἑτοιμάσωμεν (Matt. xili. 28, xxvi. 17; Luke xxii. 
 9), where in each case the fut. ind. is found as a various reading, per- 
 haps from the LXX. (Heb. viii 5). Matt, xx. 32, xxvii. 17, 21; Mark 
 x. 51, xv. 9, 12; Luke xviii. 41, like this, are ambiguous; but the aor. 
 subj. is much more intelligible (though not as a kind of deliberative 
 subjunctive; comp. 1 Cor. iii. 21) than the fut. ind. Luke ix. 54 must 
 be aor. subj. Comp. βούλει φράσω, Arist. Eq. 36. The subj. intensi- 
 fies the demand: would ye have me release. 
 
 40. ékpavyacav. They cried out therefore again: πάντες is of 
 very doubtful authority. 85. John has mentioned no previous shout, 
 but, as usual, assumes that his readers know the main facts. Pilate 
 declared Jesus innocent both before and after sending Him to Herod, 
 and in both cases this provoked an outcry (Luke xxiii. 4—7, 14—21): 
 5. John in narrating the later clamour implies the earlier. Kpavydtw 
 expresses a loud cry, and (excepting Matt. xii. 19; Acts xxii. 23) 
 occurs only in §. John (xi, 43, xii. 13, xix. 6, 12, 15). 
 
 τ. Βαραββᾶν. Bar-Abbas, son of Abba (father): the derivation Bar- 
 rabban, son of a Rabbi, seems fanciful. The innocent Son of the 
 Father is rejected for the blood-stained son of a father. The name 
 has the article, although S. John has not mentioned him before. 
 The Jews who speak had mentioned him before. In Matt. xxvii. 16 
 and 17 some inferior authorities give ‘Jesus Barabbas’ as his name, 
 and Pilate asks ‘Which do ye wish that I release to you, Jesus 
 
XIX.] NOTES. 321 
 
 Barabbas, or Jesus Who is called Christ?’ The reading is remarkable, 
 but it is supported by no good MS. 
 
 ἦν δὲ ὁ B. λῃστής. For the tragic brevity of this remark comp. 
 ἐδάκρυσεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς (xi. 35) and ἣν δὲ νῦξ (xiii. 30). The λῃστής as 
 distinct from the κλέπτης (x. 1) is the man of violence, the bandit or 
 brigand, more dangerous to persons than to property. In the case of 
 Barabbas we know from ὃ. Mark and §S. Luke that he had been 
 guilty of insurrection and consequent bloodshed rather than of 
 stealing; and this was very likely the case also with the two robbers 
 crucified with Jesus. Thus by a strange irony of fate the hierarchy 
 obtain the release of a man guilty of the very political crime with 
 which they charged Christ,—sedition. The people no doubt had 
 some sympathy with the insurrectionary movement of Barabbas, and 
 on this the priests worked. Barabbas had done, just what Jesus had 
 refused to do, take the lead against the Romans. ‘They laid 
 information against Jesus before the Roman government as a dan- 
 gerous character; their real complaint against him was precisely this, 
 that He was not dangerous. Pilate executed Him on the ground that 
 His kingdom was of this world; the Jews procured His execution 
 precisely because it was not.” Ecce Homo, p. 27. 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 3. Insert καὶ ἤρχοντο πρὸς αὐτόν before καὶ ἔλεγον with NBLUXA 
 against A (homoeoteleuton; omission from αὐτόν to αὐτόν). 
 
 4 καὶ ἐξῆλθεν (NABKLX) for ἐξῆλθεν οὖν (A). 
 
 7. After τὸν νόμον omit ἡμῶν (obvious amplification) with NBLA 
 against A. 
 
 12. Authorities vary much between éxpavyafov, ἐκραύγασαν, and 
 ἔκραζον. 
 
 18. τῶν λόγων τούτων (NAB) for τοῦτον τὸν λόγον (from v. 8). 
 
 17. After ᾿Ιησοῦν omit καὶ ἀπήγαγον (perhaps from Matt. xxvii. 
 31). Αὐτῷ τὸν σταυρόν (BLX) for τ. στ. αὐτοῦ (E): there are other 
 variations. 
 
 20. “Pwpatorl before ᾿ Ἑλληνιστί with SBLX against AT. 
 
 26, 27. ἴδε (S. John’s usual form) for ἰδού, with NB and others 
 against A, 
 
 29. σπόγγον οὖν μεστὸν τοῦ ὄξους (NBLX) for of δὲ πλήσαντες 
 σπόγγον ὄξους καὶ (Ἀ), a combination with Matt. xxvii. 48 and Mark xv. 
 36, which caused οὖν to be transferred to the previous clause,— 
 σκεῦος οὖν ἔκειτο. 
 
 38. Before and after ᾿Ιωσήφ omit 6 (usual in mentioning a 
 well-known person). 
 
 39. αὐτόν for τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν (correction for clearness), 
 
 ST JOHN x 
 
322 S. JOHN. [ΧΙΧ, 1— 
 
 1—3. Inside the Praetorium; the scourging and mockery by the 
 soldiers. 
 
 1. τότε otv. Because the attempt to release Him in honour 
 of the Feast had failed, Pilate tries whether the severe and degrading 
 punishment of scourging will not satisfy the Jews. In Pilate’s 
 hands the boasted justice of Roman Law ends in the policy “ What 
 evil did He do? I found no cause of death in Him: I will therefore 
 chastise Him and let Him go” (Luke xxiii. 22). Scourging was 
 part of Roman capital punishment, and had we only the first two 
 Gospels we might suppose that the scourging was inflicted immediately 
 before the crucifixion: but this is not stated, and S. John, combined 
 with S. Luke, makes it clear that scourging was inflicted as a separate 
 punishment in the hope that it would suffice. The supposition of 
 a second scourging as part of the execution is unnecessary and 
 improbable. Pilate, sick of the bloody work and angry at being 
 forced to commit a judicial murder, would not have allowed it; and 
 it may be doubted whether any human frame could survive a Roman 
 scourging twice in one day. One infliction was sumetimes fatal; 
 ille flagellis ad mortem caesus, Hor. 5. 1. 11. 41. Comp. ‘ horribile 
 flagellum,’ 5. τ. iii. 119. 
 
 2. ot στρατιῶται. Herod and his troops (Luke xxiii. 11) had set 
 an example which the Roman soldiers were ready enough to follow. 
 Pilate countenances the brutality as aiding his own plan of satistying 
 Jewish hatred with something less than death. The soldiers had 
 inflicted the scourging; for Pilate, being only Procurator, would have 
 no lictors. They crown Him in mockery of royalty rather than of 
 victory, as what follows shews. The plant used was probably the 
 thorny nabk, lycium spinosum, with flexible branches and leaves like 
 ivy, abundant round about Jerusalem. 
 
 ἱμ. πορφυροῦν. S. Mark has πορφύραν, 8. Matthew χλαμύδα κοκ- 
 κίνην. Purple with the ancients was a vague term for rich bright 
 colour, crimson as well as violet. The robe was a military chlamys 
 or paludamentum, representing a royal robe. That in which Herod 
 mocked Jesus was probably white: 1 Macc. viii. 14, x. 20,62. The 
 soldiers act in derision of the detested Jews generally, who could pro- 
 bably see all this from the outside, rather than of Jesus in particular. 
 The whole is a caricature of Jewish expectations of a national king. 
 
 ἤρχοντο mp. av. This graphic touch is omitted by the Synop- 
 tists and by some authorities here. We see each soldier coming up 
 (imperfect) to offer his mock homage. As in xviii, 22, ῥάπισμα is 
 probably a blow with the hand rather than with a rod. Comp. Is. 
 1. 6, I gave my back, eis μάστιγας, and my cheek, els ῥαπίσματα. The 
 Old Latin adds in faciem. The blow is the mock gift brought by the 
 person doing homage. 
 
 4—7. Outside the Praetorium; Pilate’s appeal, ‘Behold the Man;’ 
 the Jews’ rejoinder, ‘He made Himself Son of God.’ 
 
 4. dyw. On the previous occasion (xviii. 38) Pilate left Jesus within, 
 
XTX. 9.] NOTES. 323 
 
 while he pronounced Him innocent. Note the absence of ἐγώ and the 
 change of order. 
 
 δ. φορῶν. Not φέρων; wearing, not merely ‘bearing.’ The crown 
 and the robe are now His permanent dress. The Evangelist repeats 
 the details (v. 2) as of a picture deeply imprinted in his memory: 
 whether or no he entered the Praetorium, he no doubt witnessed the 
 Ecce Homo. 
 
 ἰδοὺ ὁ ἄνθρωπος. In pity rather than contempt. Pilate appeals to 
 their humanity: surely the most bitter among them will now be satis- 
 fied, or at least the more compassionate will control the rest. No one 
 can think that this Man is dangerous, or needs further punishment. 
 When this appeal fails, Pilate’s pity turns to bitterness (v. 14). 
 
 6. ot ἀρχ. κ. οἱ ὑπ. Repeat the article.as in xi. 47. The leaders 
 take the initiative, to prevent any expression of compassion on the 
 part of the crowd. The sight of ‘the Man’ maddens rather than 
 softens them. For κραυγάζω see on xviii. 40. 
 
 σταύρ. σταύρ. Crucify, crucify. The imperative without an accu- 
 sative better expresses the cry which was to give the cue to the multi- 
 tude. According to all four Gospels the demand for crucifixion 
 was not made until after the offer to release Jesus for the Feast. 
 
 AaB. av. ὑμεῖς. Take Him yourselves, as in xviii. 31. We may 
 admit that it ought to have been beneath the dignity of a Roman judge 
 to taunt the people with a suggestion which they dared not follow; but 
 there is nothing so improbable in it as to compel us te believe that the 
 Jews had the power of inflicting capital punishment (see on xviii. 31). 
 Pilate is goaded into an exhibition of feeling unworthy of his office. 
 The éy# again (xviii. 38) contrasts his verdict with that of the Jews. 
 
 7. νόμον. They refer to Lev. xxiv. 16. The Jews answer Pilate’s 
 taunt by a plea hitherto kept in the background. He may think 
 lightly of the seditious conduct of Jesus, but as a Procurator he is 
 bound by Roman precedent to pay respect to the law of subject nation- 
 alities. He has challenged them to take the law into their own hands; 
 let him hear what their law is. Pilate had said ‘Behold the Man!’ 
 The Jews retort, ‘He made Himself Son of God.’ They answer his 
 appeal to their compassion by an appeal to his fears. See on viii. 53, 
 
 8—11. Inside the Praetorium ; Christ’s origin is asked and not told; 
 the origin of authority is told unasked. 
 
 8. +. τ. λόγον. This word: it is no mere ‘saying’ (ῥῆμα); like the 
 word of Caiaphas, it has more meaning than the speakers know. It 
 intensifies Pilate’s disquietude. The message from his wife and the 
 awe which Christ’s presence was probably inspiring had already in 
 some degree affected him. This mysterious claim still further excites 
 his fears. Was it the offspring of a divinity that he had so infamously 
 handled? Comp. Matt. xxvii. 54. 
 
 9. πραιτώριον. See on xviii. 28. Πόθεν εἶ ov; is a vague question 
 which might apply to Christ’s dwelling-place, already known to Pilate 
 
 X2 
 
324 S. JOHN. [ΧΙΣ. 9— 
 
 (Luke xxiii. 6); he hoped for an answer as to His origin. Would the 
 Prisoner repeat this mysterious claim, or explain it? But Pilate could 
 not have understood the answer; and what had it to do with the 
 merits of the case? No answer is given. Comp. Matt. xxvii. 12—14 
 and Christ’s own precept, Matt. vii. 6. 
 
 10. Baffled and still in doubt as to the relations between himself 
 and his Prisoner he takes refuge in a domineering tone of assumed 
 confidence. To me speakest Thou not? Whatever He might do before 
 His countrymen, it was folly to refuse to answer the Roman governor. 
 For ἐξουσίαν, authority, see on i. 12 and comp. v. 27, x. 18, xvii. 2: 
 note the emphatic repetition. 
 
 11. οὐκ εἶχες. Comp. xv. 20. This is Christ’s last word to Pilate; 
 a declaration of the supremacy of God, and a protest against the claim 
 of any human potentate to be irresponsible. The Accused has become 
 the judge’s Judge. Even Pilate could understand ἄνωθεν : had Jesus 
 said παρὰ τοῦ πατρός μου, he would have remained uninstructed. The 
 point is not, that Pilate is an instrument ordained for the carrying out 
 of God’s purposes (Acts ii. 23); he was such, but that is not the mean- 
 ing here. Rather, that the possession and exercise of all authority is 
 the gift of God; ili. 27; Rom. xiii. 1—7 (see notes there). To in- 
 terpret ‘from above’ of the higher tribunal of the Sanhedrin is quite 
 inadequate. Comp. 111. 3, 7, 31; James i. 17, iii. 15, 17, where the 
 same adverb is used: see notes in each place. It is for this cause 
 (see on i, 31), because Pilate’s authority over Jesus is the result of a 
 Divine commission, whereas that of His enemies was usurped, that 
 their sin is greater than His. Moreover. they might have known Who 
 He was. 
 
 ὁ παραδούς. The addition of σοι (contrast xiii. 11, xviii. 2, 5) shews 
 that Caiaphas, the representative of the Sanhedrin and of the nation, 
 and not Judas, is meant: comp. xviii. 35. Judas had delivered Jesus 
 to the Sanhedrin, not to Pilate. For ἔχειν ἁμαρτίαν see on xv. 22. 
 
 12—16. Outside the Praetoriwm. The power from above controlled 
 from below pronounces public sentence of death on the Innocent. 
 
 12. ἐκ τούτου. Upon this; see on vi. 66. The imperfect expresses 
 continued efforts. Indirect means, as the release in honour of the 
 Feast, the appeal to compassion, and taunts, have failed; Pilate now 
 makes more direct efforts. We are not told what they were; but the 
 Evangelist shews by the unwillingness of Pilate how great was the 
 guilt of ‘the Jews.’ 
 
 ἐὰν τ. ἀπολύσῃς. If thou release this man: ἀπολῦσαι and ἀπολύσῃς 
 must be translated alike. The Jews once more shift their tactics and 
 from the ecclesiastical charge (v. 7) go back to the political, which 
 they now back up by an appeal to Pilate’s own political interests. 
 They know their man: it is not a love of justice, but personal feeling 
 which moves him to seek to release Jesus; and they will overcome one 
 personal feeling by another still stronger. Pilate’s unexplained interest 
 in Jesus and supercilious contempt for His accusers must give way 
 before a fear for his own position and possibly even his life. Whether 
 
XIX. 14] NOTES. 325 
 
 or no there was any such honorary title as Amicus Caesaris, like our 
 ‘Queen’s Counsel,’ it is unlikely that the Jews allude to it here: they 
 simply mean ‘loyal to Caesar.’ For ἑαυτὸν ποιῶν see on viii, 53. 
 
 ἀντιλέγει τ. K. Setteth himself against Caesar; ipso facto declares 
 himself a rebel: thus the rebellion of Korah is called ἀντιλογία (Jude 
 11). For a Roman governor to protect such a person would be high 
 treason (majestas). The Jews scarcely knew how powerful their 
 weapon was, Pilate’s patron Sejanus (executed a.p. 31) was losing 
 his hold over Tiberius, even if he had not already fallen. Pilate had 
 already thrice nearly driven the Jews to revolt, and his character there- 
 fore would not stand high with an Emperor who justly prided himself 
 on the good government of the provinces. Above all, the terrible Lex 
 Majestatis was by this time worked in such a way that prosecution 
 under it was almost certain death. Atrocissime exercebat leges majes- 
 tatis (Suetonius). 
 
 13. Pilate’s mind seems to have been made up at once: without 
 replying he prepares to pass sentence. The fatal moment has come, 
 and as in the case of the arrest (xviii. 1—4) the Evangelist gives 
 minute particulars. 
 
 ἤγαγεν ἔξω. Sentence must be pronounced in public. Thus we find 
 that Pilate, in giving judgment about the standards, which had been 
 brought into Jerusalem, has his tribunal in the great circus at 
 Caesarea, and Florus erects his in front of the palace (Josephus, B. J. 
 ἘΠῚ χα 3, Xiv. 8). 
 
 ἐκάθισεν may be either transitive, as in 1 Cor. vi. 4; Eph. i. 20, or 
 intransitive, as in Matt. xix, 28, xxv. 81. If it is transitive here, the 
 meaning will be, ‘placed him on a seat,’ as an illustration of his mock- 
 ing exclamation, ‘Behold your King! ’—i.e. ‘There He sits enthroned!’ 
 But [viii. 2;] xii. 14; Rev. 111. 21, xx. 4, the only places where 5. John 
 uses the word, and Acts xii. 21, xxv. 6, 17, where we have the same 
 phrase as here, are against the transitive meaning in this place. The 
 absence of the article before βήματος perhaps indicates that the 
 Bema was a temporary and not the usual one; everywhere else in N. T. 
 βῆμα has the article. With the pregnant use of εἰς comp. xx. 19, 
 (xxi. 4). 
 
 «Λιθόστρωτον. Josephus (Ant. v. v. 2) says that the Temple-Mount, 
 on part of which the fortress of Antonia stood, was covered with a 
 tesselated pavement. This fact and the Aramaic name tend to shew 
 that the portable mosaic which Imperators sometimes carried about 
 for their tribunals is not meant here. But Gab Baitha is no equiva- 
 lent of Λιθόστρωτον, though it indicates the same place: it means 
 ‘the ridge of the House,’ i.e. the Temple-Mound. For ‘EBpaiort see 
 on v. 2. 
 
 14. ἦν δὲ π. τ. π., dpa ἦν ὡς ἕκτη. In two abrupt sentences 5. John 
 calls special attention to the day and hour; now it was the eve of the 
 Passover: it was about the sixth hour. It is difficult to believe that 
 he can be utterly mistaken about both. The question of the day is 
 discussed in Appendix A; the question as to the hour remains, 
 
326 S. JOHN. (xing ες 
 
 We have seen already (i. 39, iv. 6, 52, xi. 9), that whatever view we 
 may take of the balance of probability in each case, there is nothing 
 thus far which is conclusively in favour of the antecedently improbable 
 view, that 5. John reckons the hours of the day as we do, from mid- 
 night to noon and noon to midnight. 
 
 The modern method is sometimes spoken of as the Roman method. 
 This is misleading, as it seems to imply that the Romans counted 
 their hours as we do. If this were so, it would not surprise us so much 
 to find that S. John, living away from Palestine and in the capital of 
 a Roman province, had adopted the Roman reckoning. But the Ro- 
 mans and Greeks, as well as the Jews, counted their hours from sunrise. 
 Martial, who goes through the day hour by hour (tv. viii.), places the 
 Roman method beyond a doubt. The difference between the Romans 
 and the Jews was not as to the mode of counting the hours, but as to 
 the limits of each individual day. The Jews placed the boundary at 
 sunset, the Romans (as we do) at midnight. (Pliny, Nat. Hist. τι. 
 Ixxvii.) The ‘this day’ of Pilate’s wife (Matt. xxvii. 19) proves no- 
 thing ; it would fit either the Roman or the Jewish method ; and some 
 suppose her to have been a proselyte. In this particular S. John does 
 seem to have adopted the Roman method; for (xx. 19) he speaks of 
 the evening of Easter Day as ‘the same day at evening’ (comp. Luke 
 xxiv. 29, 33), This must be admitted as against the explanation that 
 ‘yesterday’ in iv. 54 was spoken before midnight and refers to the 
 time before sunset: but the servants may have met their master after 
 midnight. 
 
 Yet there is some evidence of a custom of reckoning from midnight 
 in Asia Minor. Polycarp was martyred ‘at the eighth hour’ (Mart. 
 Pol. xx1.), Pionius at ‘the tenth hour’ (Acta Mart. p. 137); both at 
 Smyrna. Such exhibitions commonly took place in the morning 
 (Philo ii. 529); so that 8.0 and 10.0 a.m. are more probable than 2.0 
 and 4.0 P.M. 
 
 McClellan adds another argument. ‘The phraseology of our present 
 passage is unique in the Gospels. The hour is mentioned in conjunc- 
 tion with the day. To cite the words of St Augustine, but with the 
 correct rendering of Paraskeué, ‘S. John does not say, It was about 
 the sixth hour of the day, nor merely, It was about the sixth hour, but 
 It was the Fripay of the Passover; it was about the S1xtH hour.’ 
 Hence in the straightforward sense of the words, the sixth hour 
 that he means is the sixth hour of the Friday; and so it is rendered 
 in the Thebaic Version. But Friday in 8. John is the name of the 
 whole Roman civil day, and the Roman civil days are reckoned from 
 midnight.” New Test. 1. p. 742. 
 
 This solution may therefore be adopted, not as certain, but as less 
 unsatisfactory than the conjecture of a false reading either here or in 
 Mark xv. 25, or the various forced interpretations which have been 
 given of S. John’s words. The reading τρίτη in some MSS. here is 
 evidently a harmonizing correction. If, however, the mode of reckon- 
 ing in both Gospels be the same, the preference in point of accuracy 
 must be given to the Evangelist who stood by the cross, 
 
XIX. 17.] NOTES. 327 
 
 ἴδε ὁ Bas. ὑμῶν. Like the title on the cross, these words are spoken 
 in bitter irony. This Man in His mock insignia is a fit sovereign for 
 the miserable Jews. Perhaps Pilate would also taunt them with their 
 own glorification of Him on Palm Sunday. To the Christian the words 
 are another unconscious prophecy, 
 
 15. ἐκεῖνοι. The pronoun indicates their opposition. The four 
 aorists are all appropriate: ἐκραύγασαν, they shouted out once for all; 
 while the three aorists imperative shew their impatience to have their 
 will. Σιταυρώσω is either Shall I or Must I. Note the emphatic posi- 
 tion of τ. Bac. ὑμῶν: ‘Must I crucify your King?’ Pilate begins (xviii. 
 33) and ends with the same idea, the one dangerous item in the in- 
 dictment, the claim of Jesus to be King of the Jews. This explains 
 the length at which S. John describes the scenes with Pilate: see intro- 
 ductory note on xviii. 12—27. 
 
 οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς. This depth of degradation is reserved for them. ‘‘The 
 official organs of the theocracy themselves proclaim that they have 
 abandoned the faith by which the nation had lived.” Sooner than 
 acknowledge that Jesus is the Messiah they proclaim that a heathen 
 Emperor is their King. And their baseness is at once followed by 
 Pilate’s: sooner than meet a dangerous charge he condemns the Inno- 
 cent to death. To rid themselves of Jesus they commit political 
 suicide; to free himself from danger he commits a judicial murder. 
 
 16. τότε οὖν π. In none of the Gospels does it appear that Pilate 
 pronounced sentence on Jesus; he perhaps purposely avoided doing so. 
 But in delivering Him over to the priests he does not allow them to 
 act for themselves: ‘ he delivered Him to them that He might be cruci- 
 fied’ by Roman soldiers; not that they might crucify Him themselves. 
 
 17—42. Tue DratH AND ΒΌΒΙΑΙ,. 
 
 For what is peculiar to S. John’s narrative in this section see the 
 introductory note to chap. xviii. Besides this, the title on the cross, 
 the Jews’ criticism of it, and the conduct of the four soldiers, are given 
 with more exactness by S. John than by the Synoptists. 
 
 The section falls into four double parts, all four of which contain 
 a marked dramatic contrast, such as S. John loves to point out (see 
 on vv. 18 and 30) :— 
 (1) The Crucifixion and the title on the cross (17—22). 
 (2) The four enemies and the four friends (23—27). 
 (3) The two words, ‘I thirst,’ ‘It is finished’ (28—30). 
 (4) The hostile and the friendly petitions (31—42). 
 
 17—22. Tue CRUCIFIXION AND THE TITLE ON THE Cross. 
 
 17. παρέλαβον οὖν. They took Jesus therefore, or they received, 
 as ini. 11, xiv. 3. The verb means ‘to accept what is offered, receive 
 from the hands of another.’ A comparison of the three texts is in- 
 structive. The eternal Son is given by the Father, comes to His own 
 inheritance, and His own people received Him not (i. 11). The Incar- 
 
328 S. JOHN. (xi ae 
 
 nate Son is given up by Pilate to His own people, and they received 
 Him to crucify Him (xix. 16). The glorified Son comes again to His 
 own people, to receive them unto Himself (xiv. 3). 
 
 βαστ. αὐτῷ τ. στ. ἐξῆλθεν. Bearing the cross for Himself went forth. 
 5. John omits the help which Simon the Cyrenian was soon compelled 
 to render, as also (what seems to be implied by Mark xv. 22) that at 
 last they were obliged to carry Jesus Himself. Comp. the Lesson for 
 Good Friday morning, Gen. xxii., especially v. 6. ‘The place of 
 public execution appears to have been situated north of the city. It 
 was outside the gate (Heb. xiii. 12) and yet ‘nigh unto the city’ (v. 
 20). In the Mishna it is placed outside the city by a reference to Lev, 
 xxiv. 14, It is said to have been ‘two men high’ (Sanh. vi. 1). The 
 Jews still point out the site at the cliff, north of the Damascus gate, 
 where is a cave now called ‘Jeremiah’s Grotto.’ This site has there- 
 fore some claim to be considered as that of the Crucifixion, It was 
 within 200 yards of the wall of Agrippa, but was certainly outside the 
 ancient city. It was also close to the gardens and the tombs of the 
 old city, which stretch northwards from the cliff; and it was 
 close to the main north road, in a conspicuous position, such as might 
 naturally be selected for a place of public execution.” Conder, Hand- 
 book to the Bible, pp. 356, 7. Kpavlov τόπον refers to the shape of 
 the ground. To leave skulls unburied would violate Jewish law; and 
 this would require κρανίων τόπον. For‘ EBpaicrti see on v. 2. 
 
 18. μέσον δὲ τ. *I. Dramatic contrast; the Christ between two 
 criminals, It is the place of honour mockingly given to Him as King, 
 The two were robbers or bandits, as 5. Matthew and 3. Mark call 
 them, probably guilty of the same crimes as Barabbas. In the Acta 
 Pilati they are named Dysmas and Gestas. Jesus suffers with them 
 under a similar charge of sedition. Whether this was mere con- 
 venience, or a device of the Romans to insult the Jews, is uncertain. 
 The latter is probable. Omnium par poena, sed dispar causa (S. 
 Augustine). The whole of humanity was represented there: the 
 sinless Saviour, the saved penitent, the condemned impenitent. 
 
 19. καὶ τίτλον. A title also: the meaning of the καί is not clear; 
 perhaps it looks back to v. 16, or to μέσον τ. ᾿Ιησοῦν, as being Pilate’s 
 doing: he placed Jesus between two criminals, and also insulted the 
 Jews by a mocking inscription. ‘Tiros is titulus Graecized. It was 
 common to put on the cross the name and crime of the person 
 executed, after making him carry the inscription round his neck to 
 the place of execution. 83. Matthew (xxvil. 37) has τ. αἰτίαν αὐτοῦ, 8. 
 Mark (xv. 26) ἡ ἐπιγραφὴ τ. αἰτίας αὐτοῦ, 8. Luke (xxiii. 38) ἐπιγραφή. 
 For ἦν yeypap., there was written, see on ii.17. The title is given 
 differently in all four Gospels, and possibly varied in the three lan- 
 guages. Its object was to insult the Jews, not Jesus: all variations 
 contain the offensive words ‘“‘ The King of the Jews.” 
 
 20. ἐγγύς. 5. John’s exact topographical knowledge appears 
 again here. Pictures of the Crucifixion mislead in placing the city a 
 
XIX. 23.] NOTES. 329 
 
 mile or two off in the background. Τῆς πόλεως with ἐγγύς (xi. 18), not 
 after 6 τόπος : ‘the place of the city was near’ is scarcely sense. 
 
 *Efp., ‘Pop., ‘EAA. This is the order in the better authorities, The 
 national and official languages would naturally be placed before 
 Greek,—and for different reasons either Hebrew or Latin might be 
 placed first. In Luke xxiii. 38 the order is Greek, Latin, Hebrew; 
 but the clause is of very doubtful authority. In any case the three 
 representative languages of the world at that time, the languages of 
 religion, of empire, and of intellect, were employed. Thus did they 
 ‘tell it out among the heathen that the Lord is king,’ or (according to 
 a remarkable reading of the LXX. in Ps. xcvi. 10) ‘that the Lord 
 reigned from the tree.’ 
 
 21. ot dpx. τ. Ἴουδ. Now that they have wrung what they wanted 
 out of Pilate they see that in granting it he has insulted them publicly 
 before the thousands present at the Passover, and in a way not easy 
 to resent. The addition ‘of the Jews’ is remarkable, and it occurs 
 nowhere else in N. T. It probably refers to the title: these ‘chief 
 priests of the Jews’ objected to His being called ‘the King of the Jews.’ 
 
 22. Pilate’s answer illustrates the mixture of obstinacy and relent- 
 lessness, which Philo says was characteristic of him. His own in- 
 terests are not at stake, so he will have his way: where he had any- 
 thing to fear or to gain he could be supple enough. A shrewd, prac- 
 tical man of the world, with all a Roman official’s contemptuous impar- 
 tiality and severity, and all the disbelief in truth and disinterestedness 
 which the age had taught him, he seems to have been one of the many 
 with whom self-interest is stronger than their convictions, and who 
 can walk uprightly when to do so is easy, but fail in the presence 
 of serious difficulty and danger. 
 
 293—27. THE FrouR ENEMIES AND THE FOUR FRIENDS. 
 
 23. τὰ ἱμάτια. The upper garment, girdle, sandals, &c. The 
 ἱμάτιον was large enough to be worth dividing. By the law De bonis 
 damnatorum the clothes of executed criminals were the perquisite of 
 the soldiers on duty. The τέσσερα shews accurate knowledge: a 
 quaternion has charge of the prisoner, as in Acts xii. 4; but there 
 the prisoner has to be kept a long time, so four quaternions mount 
 guard in turn, one for each watch. Here there was probably a qua- 
 ternion to each cross. The danger of a popular outbreak (xviii. 3) is 
 at an end, and a small force suffices. 
 
 dpados. Josephus (Ant. 111. vii. 4) tells us that the high-priest’s 
 tunic was seamless, whereas in other cases this garment was com- 
 monly made of two pieces. Possibly 5. John regards it as a symbol 
 of Christ’s Priesthood. The χιτών was a shirt, reaching from the 
 neck to the knees or ancles. ‘‘It is noted by one of the Fathers, that 
 Christ’s coat indeed had no seam, but the Church’s vesture was ‘of 
 divers colours ;’ whereupon he saith, In veste varietas sit, scissura non 
 sit: they be two things, unity and uniformity” (Bacon, Essay 111.). 
 
330 5. JOHN. [ΧΙΧ. 24— 
 
 24, λάχωμεν. This use of λαγχάνω is rare, if not unique, Its 
 proper meaning is ‘to obtain by lot’ (Luke i. 9; Acts i. 17; 1 Pet. i. 1). 
 
 ἵνα ἡ γραφή. See on ii. 22 and xii. 38. It was in order that the 
 Divine purpose, already declared by the Psalmist, might be accom- 
 plished, that this twofold assignment of Christ’s garments took place. 
 5. John quotes the LXX. verbatim, although there the difference, 
 which both he and the original Hebrew mark between the upper and 
 under garment, is obliterated. It is from this passage that the refer- 
 ence to Ps. xxii. 18 has been inserted in Matt. xxvii. 35; none of the 
 Synoptists refer to the Psalm. By ot μὲν οὖν στρ. τ. ἔπ. S. John 
 emphasizes the fact that this prophecy was most literally fulfilled by 
 men who were utterly ignorant of it. 
 
 25. εἵστηκ. δέ. But there were standing. The δέ answers to the 
 previous μέν, and these two particles mark the contrast between the 
 two groups. On the one hand, the four plundering soldiers with the 
 centurion; on the other, the four ministering women with the be- 
 loved disciple. It is not improbable that the women had provided 
 (Matt. xvii. 55; Luke viii. 2, 3) the very clothing which the soldiers 
 had taken away. 
 
 ἡ ἀδ. τ. μ. αὐ., Μ. ἡ. τ. K. We are left in doubt whether we here 
 have two women or one, whether altogether there are four women or 
 three. The former is much the more probable alternative. (1) It 
 avoids the very improbable supposition of two sisters having the same 
 name, (2) S. John is fond of parallel expressions; ‘His mother and 
 His mother’s sister, Mary of Clopas and Mary Magdalene’ are two 
 pairs set one against the other. (3) 5. Mark (xv. 40) mentions Mary 
 Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the Less, and Salome. Mary 
 Magdalene is common to both narratives, ‘Mary the mother of James 
 the Less’ is the same as ‘Mary of Clopas:’ the natural inference is 
 that Salome is the same as ‘His mother’s sister.’ If this is correct, 
 (4) 5. John’s silence about the name of ‘His mother’s sister’ is ex- 
 plained: she was his own mother, and he is habitually reserved about 
 all closely connected with himself. We have seen already that he 
 never mentions either his own name, or his brother’s, or the Virgin’s. 
 (5) The very ancient Peshito or Syriac Version adopts this view by 
 inserting ‘and’ before ‘Mary the (wife) of Clopas.’ Ἢ rot Κλωπᾶ 
 may mean the daughter, mother, or even sister of Clopas; but the wife 
 is more probable: comp. ἐκ τῆς τοῦ Οὐρίου (Matt. i. 6); τὴν Σμικυθίωνος 
 (Arist, Eccles. 46); Verania Pisonis (Plin. Ep. 1.20). There is no 
 reason for identifying Clopas here with Cleopas in Luke xxiv. 18: 
 Clopas is Aramaic, Cleopas is Greek. The spelling Cleophas is a 
 mistake derived from Latin MSS, All Greek authorities have Cleopas, 
 If ‘wife’ is rightly inserted, and she is the mother of James the Less, 
 Clopas is the same as Alphaeus (Matt. x. 3; comp. xxvii. 56). It is 
 said that Clopas and Alphaeus may be different forms of the same 
 Aramaic name. For Μαρία ἡ May6. see on vi. 67; Matt. xxvii. 56; 
 Luke viii. 2. 
 
 26. ὃν ἠγάπα. See on xiii. 23: it is no mere periphrasis to avoid 
 
XIX. 29.] NOTES. 331 
 
 naming him, still less a boastful insertion. It explains why Jesus 
 committed him to His Mother and His Mother to him, 
 
 γύναι, ἴδε 6 vids cov. See onii.4. The act is one of filial care for 
 the soul-pierced Mother (Luke ii. 35), who perhaps was thus spared 
 the agony of seeing her Son die. If S. John took her home at once, 
 this accounts for his omitting the third and fourth Words (Appendix 
 C), which would be uttered during his absence. He who had just asked 
 God’s forgiveness for His murderers and promised Paradise to His 
 fellow-sufferer, now gives another son to His Mother, another mother 
 to His friend. If §. John was the Virgin’s nephew, and if Christ’s 
 ‘brethren’ were the sons of Joseph by a former marriage, the fact that 
 Christ committed His Mother to her nephew and His own beloved 
 disciple rather than to her step-sons requires no explanation. Even 
 if His ‘brethren’ were the sons of Joseph and Mary, their not believing 
 on Him (vii. 5) would account for their being set aside ; and we have 
 no evidence that they believed till after the Resurrection (Acts i. 14). 
 
 eis τὰ ἴδια. See oni. 11 and xvi. 32. Although the commendation 
 was double, each being given to the other, yet (as was natural) 5. John 
 assumes the care of Mary rather than she of him. This shews the un- 
 tenability of the view that not only S. John, but in him all the Apostles, 
 were committed by Christ to the guardianship of Mary, That S.John 
 was known to the high-priest (xviii. 15) and that his family had hired 
 servants (Mark i. 20) would seem to imply that he was a man of some 
 position and substance, 
 
 28—30. THE TWO WORDS FROM THE cross, ‘I Turrst,’ ‘It 15 
 FINISHED.’ 
 
 28. μετὰ τοῦτο εἰδώς. See on v. 38, iii. 22, xiii. 1. The identity 
 between τετέλεσται here and in v. 30 must be preserved in translation; 
 are now finished. The construction that follows is amphibolous. In 
 order to avoid the apparent contradiction between all things being 
 already finished and something still remaining to be accomplished, 
 many critics make ἵνα τελειωθῇ depend upon τετέλεσται. But this is 
 awkward. It is better to connect iva red. with λέγει, especially as Ps. 
 lxix. speaks so plainly of the thirst, The seeming contradiction dis- 
 appears when we consider that the thirst had been felt before it was 
 expressed. All things were finished, including the thirst; but Jesus 
 alone knew this. Jn order that the Scripture might be accomplished 
 and made perfect, it was necessary that He should make known His 
 thirst. ‘*He could have borne His drought: He could not bear the 
 Scripture not fulfilled” (Bishop Hall). Tededw in this sense is re- 
 markable and very unusual. 
 
 29. S. John’s exact knowledge appears again. The Synoptists do 
 not mention the σκεῦος, but he had stood beside it. The ὄξος was 
 either the posca or sour wine for the soldiers during their long watch, 
 or something prepared for the sufferers. The sponge and the stalk of 
 hyssop being ready at hand is in favour of toe latter. Criminals 
 sometimes lived a day or two on the cross. Vinegar is degenerate 
 
332 S. JOHN. [ΧΙΧ, 29— 
 
 wine, and may symbolize the fallen nature of those who offered it. 
 Hyssop cannot be identified with certainty. The caper-plant, which is 
 as likely as any, has stalks which run to two or three feet, and this 
 would suffice. It is not probable that Christ’s feet were on a level 
 with the spectators’ heads, as pictures represent: this would have in- 
 volved needless trouble and expense. Moreover the mockery of the 
 soldiers recorded by S. Luke (see on xxiii. 36) is more intelligible if 
 we suppose that they could almost put a vessel to His lips. §, John 
 alone mentions the hyssop; another mark of exact knowledge. Did 
 he see in it a coincidence with Exod. xii. 22? 
 
 περιθέντες προσήνεγκαν. Very graphic; περιθ. expresses the placing 
 of the sponge round the stalk (Matt. xxi. 33, xxvii. 28, 48), προσήν. the 
 offering (xvi. 2) and applying (Mark x. 13) to His lips. The actors 
 and their motive are left doubtful. Probably they were soldiers and 
 acted in compassion rather than in mockery; or in compassion under 
 cover of mockery (Mark xv. 36; Ps. lxix. 22). 
 
 30. ἔλαβεν. He had refused the stupefying draught (Matt. xxvii. 
 34; Mark xv. 23), which would have clouded His faculties : He accepts 
 what will revive them for the effort of a willing surrender of His life. 
 
 τετέλεσται. Just as the thirst was there before he expressed it, so 
 the consciousness that His work was finished was there (v. 28) before 
 He declared it. The Messiah’s work of redemption was accomplished ; 
 His Father’s commandment had been obeyed; types and prophecies 
 had been fulfilled; His life had been lived, and His teaching com- 
 pleted; His last earthly tie had been severed (vv. 26, 27); and the 
 end had come. The final ‘ wages of sin’ alone remained to be paid. 
 
 κλίνας τ. κεφαλήν. Another detail peculiar to the Evangelist who 
 witnessed it 
 
 παρέδωκεν τ. rv. The two Apostles mark with special clearness that 
 the Messiah’s death was entirely voluntary. 8S. Matthew says, ‘He let 
 go His spirit’ (ἀφῆκεν); S. John, ‘He gave up His spirit.’ None of the 
 four says ‘He died.’ The other two have ἐξέπνευσεν ; and 8. Luke 
 shews clearly that the surrender of life was a willing one by giving the 
 words of surrender, ‘Father, into Thy hands I commend My spirit. ’— 
 ‘No one taketh it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself.’ It was the 
 one thing which Christ claimed to do ‘of Himself’ (x. 18). Contrast 
 v. 30, vil. 28, viii. 28, 42. Thus the spirit which He surrendered, 
 and the water and the blood (v. 34), bear witness to his Messiahship. 
 
 For ‘ the seven words from the cross’ see Appendix C and notes on 
 Luke xxiii, 34; Mark xv. 34; Matt. xxvii. 48. Between the two words 
 recorded in these verses (28—30) there is again a marked contrast. 
 ‘I thirst’ is an expression of suffering; the only one during the 
 Passion. ‘It is finished’ is a ery of triumph; and the ‘ therefore’ in 
 v. 30 shews how the expression of suffering led on to the ery of tri- 
 umph. S. John omits the ‘loud voice’ which all the Synoptists give 
 as immediately preceding Christ’s death. It proved that His end 
 was voluntary and not the necessary result of exhaustion. Quis ita 
 dormit quando voluerit, sicut Jesus mortuus est quando voluit? Quis 
 
XIX. 34.] NOTES. 333 
 
 ita vestem ponit quando voluerit, sicut se carne exuit quando voluit? 
 Quis ita cum voluerit abit, quomodo cum voluit obiit ? (ὃ. Augustine). 
 
 31—42. Tuer PETITION OF THE JEWS AND THE PETITION oF JOSEPH. 
 
 31. Asin xviii. 28, the Jews shew themselves to be among those 
 ‘who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel.’ In the midst of deliberate 
 judicial murder they are scrupulous about ceremonial observances. 
 The οὖν, as in v. 23, probably does not refer to what immediately 
 precedes: it looks back to vv. 20, 21. The Jews still continue their 
 relentless hostility. They do not know whether any one of the three 
 sufferers is dead or not; their request shews that; so that ‘ therefore’ 
 cannot mean in consequence of Jesus’ death. In order to save the 
 Sabbath, and perhaps also to inflict still further suffering, they ask 
 Pilate for this terrible addition to the punishment of crucifixion. 
 Certainly the lesson ‘I will have mercy and not sacrifice,’ of which 
 Christ had twice reminded them, and once in connexion with the 
 Sabbath (Matt. xii. 7, ix. 13), had taken no hold on them. 
 
 παρασκευή. The eve of the Sabbath ; and the Sabbath on this oc- 
 casion coincided with the 15th Nisan, the first day of the Passover. 
 This first day ranked as a Sabbath (Exod. xii. 16; Lev. xxiii. 7); so 
 that the day was doubly holy. Comp. vii. 37. 
 
 κατεαγῶσιν. The σκελοκοπία or crurifragium, like crucifixion, was 
 a punishment commonly reserved for slaves. The two were sometimes 
 combined, as here. Lactantius (Iv. xxvi.) says, ‘ His executioners did 
 not think it necessary to break His bones, as was their prevailing 
 custom ;’ which seems to imply that to Jewish crucifixions this horror 
 was commonly added, perhaps to hasten death. For even without a 
 Sabbath to make matters more urgent, corpses ought to be removed 
 before nightfall (Deut. xxi. 23); whereas the Roman custom was to 
 leave them to putrefy on the cross, like our obsolete custom of hanging 
 in chains. The plural verb (contrast μείνῃ just before) emphasizes 
 the separate acts: comp. ἃ ἐπερίσσευσαν (vi. 13). Winer, p. 645. 
 
 34. ἔνυξεν. Pricked or stabbed, a milder word than ἐξεκέντησαν 
 (v. 37). All ancient Versions mark the difference between the two 
 verbs. The Vulgate (aperuit) and Philox. Syriac indicate a reading 
 ἤνοιξεν. The object of the νύττειν was to make sure that He was 
 dead. The word occurs here only in N. T. 
 
 αἷμα x. ὕδωρ. There has been very much discussion as to the 
 physical cause of Christ’s death ; and those who investigate this try 
 to frame an hypothesis which will at the same time account for the 
 effusion of blood and water. Two or three such hypotheses have been 
 put forward. But it may be doubted whether they are not altogether 
 out of place. It has been seen (v. 30) how the Evangelists insist on 
 the fact that the Lord’s death was a voluntary surrender of life, not 
 a result forced upon Him. Of course it may be thatthe voluntariness 
 consisted in welcoming causes which must prove fatal. But it is 
 more simple to believe that He delivered up His life before natural 
 causes became fatal. ‘No one,’ neither Jew nor Roman, ‘took it 
 
334 S. JOHN. ΓΣΙΣ gic 
 
 from Him’ by any means whatever: He lays it down ‘ of Himself’ 
 τ 18). And if we decline to investigate the physical cause of the 
 
 ord’s death, we need not ask for a physical explanation of what is 
 recorded here. §. John assures us that he saw it with his own eyes, 
 and he records it that we may believe: i.e. he regards it as a ‘sign’ 
 that the corpse was no ordinary one, but a Body that even in death 
 was Divine. 
 
 We can scarcely be wrong in supposing that the blood and water 
 are symbolical. The order confirms this. Blood symbolizes the 
 work of redemption which had just been completed by His death; 
 and water symbolizes the ‘ birth from above,’ with its cleansing from 
 sin, which was the result of His death, and is the means by which 
 we appropriate it. Thus the great Sacraments are represented, 
 Some Fathers see in the double effusion the two baptisms, of blood 
 (in martyrdom) and of water. Others see the Church, the Spouse 
 of Christ, issuing in the Sacraments from the side of the sleeping 
 Second Adam, as Eve from the side of the first Adam, 
 
 35. ὁ ἑωρακὼς κιτιλ. He that hath seen hath borne witness 
 and his witness is true (comp. i. 19, 32, 34, viii. 13, 14, xii. 17). 
 The use of the perfect participle rather than the aorist is evidence 
 that the writer himself is the person who saw. If he were appealing 
 to the witness of another person he would almost certainly have 
 written, as the A. V., ‘he that saw.’ The inference that the author 
 is the person who saw becomes still more clear if we omit the centre 
 of the verse, which is somewhat parenthetical: ‘He that hath seen 
 hath borne witness, in order that ye also may believe.’ The natural 
 sense of this statement is that the narrator is appealing to his own 
 experience, Thus the Apostolic authorship of the Gospel is again 
 confirmed. (See Westcott, Introduction, Ὁ. xxvii.) ᾿Αληθινή means 
 not simply truthful, but genuine, perfect: it fulfils the conditions 
 of sufficient evidence. (See on i. 9 and comp. viii. 16, vii. 28.) 
 On the other hand ἀληθῆ means things that are true. There is 
 no tautology, as in the A. V. S. Jobn first says that his evidence 
 is adequate; he then adds that the contents of it are true. Testimony 
 may be sufficient (e.g. of a competent eyewitness) but false: or it 
 may be insufficient (e.g. of half-witted child) but true. 85, John 
 declares that his testimony is both sufficient and true. 
 
 Wa Kal ὑμεῖς π, That ye also may believe; as well as the witness 
 who saw for himself. 
 
 Why does 5. John attest thus earnestly the trustworthiness of his 
 narrative at this particular point? Four reasons may be assigned. 
 This incident tended to shew (1) the reality of Christ’s humanity against 
 Docetic views; and these verses therefore are evidence against the 
 theory that the Fourth Gospel is the work of a Docetic Gnostie (see 
 on i. 14, vi. 21, vii. 10): (2) the reality of Christ’s Divinity, against 
 Ebionite views; while His human form was no mere phantom, but 
 flesh and blood, yet He was not therefore a mere man, but the Son 
 of God: (3) the reality of Christ’s death, and therefore of His Resur- 
 rection, against Jewish insinuations of trickery (comp. Matt. xxviii. 
 
XIX. 38.] NOTES. 335 
 
 13—15); (4) the clear and unexpected fulfilment of two Messianic 
 prophecies. 
 
 36. ἐγένετο. Came to pass. Note that S. John uses the aorist, 
 where 5. Matthew, writing nearer to the events, uses γέγονεν. ‘Hath 
 come to pass’ implies that the event is not very remote; Matt. i, 22, 
 xxi, 4, xxvi. 56. The γάρ depends on misrevonre. Belief is sup- 
 ported by Scripture; for the two surprising events, Christ’s escaping 
 the crurifragium and yet having His side pierced, were evidently 
 preordained in the Divine counsels. The first γραφή (ii. 22, xii. 38) 
 is Exod. xii. 46. For συντρίβειν comp. Matt. xii. 20; Mark νυ. 4, 
 xiv. 3; Rev. ii. 27. Thus He who at the opening of this Gospel 
 was proclaimed as the Lamb of God (i. 29, 36), at the close of it 
 is declared to be the true Paschal Lamb. The Paschal Lamb, as 
 dedicated to God, was protected by the Law from rough treatment 
 and common uses. Its bones must not be broken; its remains must 
 be burned. Once more we have evidence that 83. John’s consistent 
 and precise view is, that the death of Christ coincided with the killing 
 of the Paschal Lamb. And this seems also to have been 85, Paul’s 
 view (see on 1 Cor. v. 7). 
 
 37. ὄψονται. All present, especially the Jews. The whole world 
 was represented there. *Exxevrav, ‘ to pierce deeply,’ occurs nowhere 
 else in N.T. excepting Rev. i. 7, and forms a connexion worth noting 
 between the Gospel and the Apocalypse (see on i. 14, iv. 6, vii. 30, 
 viii. 2, xi. 44, xiii. 8, xv. 20, xx. 16); all the more so because 3. John 
 here agrees with the present Masoretic Hebrew text and in every 
 word differs from the LXX. The LXX. softens down ἐξεκέντησαν 
 (which seemed a strange expression to use of men’s treatment of 
 Jehovah) into κατωρχήσαντο (‘insulted’). See on vi. 45, xii. 13, 15, 
 where there is further evidence of the Evangelist having independent 
 knowledge of Hebrew. With the construction εἰς ὅν comp. vi. 29, xvii. 9. 
 
 38. μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα. But after these things. The δέ marks a 
 contrast between the hostile petition of the Jews and the friendly 
 petition of Joseph. Taira as distinct from τοῦτο shews that no one 
 event is singled out with which what follows is connected: the 
 sequence is indefinite (iii. 22). Contrast v. 28: there the sequence is 
 direct and definite (ii. 12, xi 7,11). For Joseph of Arimathaea see on 
 Matt. xxvii. 57; Mark xv. 43; Luke xxiii. 50. The Synoptists tell us 
 that he was rich, a member of the Sanhedrin, a good and just man 
 who had not consented to the Sanhedrin’s counsel and crime, one who 
 (like Simeon and Anna) waited for the kingdom of God, and had 
 become a disciple of Christ. Διὰ τ. φόβον forms a coincidence with 
 S. Mark, who says of him (xy. 43) that ‘having summoned courage (rod- 
 unoas) he went in unto Pilate,’ implying that like Nicodemus he was 
 naturally timid. Joseph probably went to Pilate as soon as he knew 
 that Jesus was dead: the vague ‘after these things’ need not mean 
 that he did not act till after the piercing of the side. With ἦρεν τ. 
 copa comp. Matt. xiv. 12; Acts viii. 2. 
 
τ 
 
 336 S. JOHN. (XIX. 39— 
 
 39. Another coincidence. Nicodemus also was a member of the 
 Sanhedrin (iii. 1), and his acquaintance with Joseph is thus explained. 
 But it is 5. Mark who tells us that Joseph was one of the Sanhedrin, 
 5. John who brings him in contact with Nicodemus. It would seem 
 as if Joseph’s unusual courage had inspired Nicodemus also. Thus 
 Jesus by being lifted up is already drawing men unto Him. These 
 Jewish aristocrats first confess Him in the hour of His deepest degra- 
 dation. To πρῶτον is either at the beginning of Christ’s ministry, or 
 the first time He came to Jesus. The meaning of the Brazen Serpent, 
 of which he heard then (iii. 14), is becoming plain to him now, 
 
 μίγμα. This may be a correction of ἕλιγμα (NB), a roll. Myrrh- 
 gum (Matt. ii. 11) and pounded aloe-wood (here only) are both aro- 
 matic: ‘All thy garments are myrrh and aloes’ (Ps, xly. 8). The 
 quantity is royal (2 Chron. xvi, 14), but not improbable, and reminds 
 us of Mary’s profusion (xii. 8). It is a rich man’s proof of devotion, 
 and possibly of remorse for a timidity which now seemed irremedi- 
 able: his courage had come too late, 
 
 40. ἔδησαν αὐτὸ 68. Bound it in linen cloths. The ὀθόνια (see on 
 Luke xxiv. 12) seem to be the bandages, whereas the σινδών (Matt. 
 xxvii. 59; Mark xv. 46; Luke xxiii. 53) is a large sheet (Mark xiv. 51) 
 to envelope the whole. Καθὼς ἔθος ἐ. τ. Ἴ. distinguishes Jewish 
 from other modes of embalming. The Egyptians had three methods, 
 but in all cases removed part of the intestines and steeped the body in 
 nitre (Herod. τι. 86 ff.) "Evragidfev occurs elsewhere only Matt. 
 xxvi. 12: ἐνταφιασμός occurs xii. 7; Mark xiv. 8: in LXX. (Gen. 1. 2) 
 it is used for the embalming of Jacob. 
 
 41. κῆπος. S. John alone mentions it, as he alone mentions the 
 other garden (xviii. 1). It probably belonged to Joseph, for the tomb 
 was his (Matt. xxvii. 60). This shews that Joseph, though of Arima- 
 thaea, had settled in Jerusalem, For καινόν see on xiii.34. §. Mat- 
 thew also says that it was new, S. Luke that never man had yet lain 
 in it. 85. John states the fact both ways with great emphasis. It is 
 another royal honour. Not even in its contact with the grave did 
 ‘His flesh see corruption.’ Comp. the colt, whereon no man ever yet 
 sat (Luke xix. 30). 
 
 42. The burial was hastily performed: after the great Sabbath 
 they intended to make a more solemn and complete burial. The fact 
 of his having a tomb of his own close to Golgotha had perhaps sug- 
 gested to Joseph the thought of going to Pilate. For the addition 
 τῶν ᾿Ιουϑδαίων see on ii. 13, xi. 55: it suggests a time when there was 
 already a Christian ‘Preparation.’ The order of the words, with the 
 pathetic ending, should be preserved. There therefore, because of the 
 Jews’ Preparation (for the tomb was nigh at hand), laid they Jesus. 
 
XX. ] NOTES. 337 
 
 CHAPTER XX, 
 
 11. τῷ μνημείῳ for τὸ μνημεῖον with AB against KUX. 
 
 16. Before ‘PaBBovvl insert “EBpatorl with NBDLXA against A 
 (omitted as unnecessary). 
 
 19. Before σαββάτων omit τῶν (from v.1), and before διά omit 
 συνηγμένοι (explanatory gloss). 
 
 20. After ἔδειξεν omit αὐτοῖς : αὐτοῖς for αὐτοῦ. 
 
 29. After pe omit Θωμᾶ with NABCD, 
 
 We enter now upon the third and last part of the second main 
 division of the Gospel. The Evangelist having set before us the 
 INNER GLORIFICATION OF CuRIsT IN His tast Discourse (xiii.—xvii.), 
 and His ouTER GLORIFICATION IN His Passion AND DEATH (XvVili., xix.), 
 now gives us his record of THE RESURRECTION AND THREEFOLD MantI- 
 FESTATION OF CHRIST (XX.). 
 
 The chapter falls naturally into five sections. 1. The first Evi- 
 dence of the Resurrection (1—10). 2. The Manifestation to Mary 
 Magdalene (11—18). 3. The Manifestation to the Ten and others 
 (19—23). 4. The Manifestation to S. Thomas and others (24—29). 
 5. The Conclusion and Purpose of the Gospel (30, 31). 
 
 5. John’s Gospel preserves its character to the end. Like the rest 
 of his narrative, the account of the Resurrection is not intended as a 
 complete record ;—it is avowedly the very reverse of complete (v. 30) ; 
 —but a series of typical scenes selected as embodiments of spiritual 
 truth. Here also, as in the rest of the narrative, we have individual 
 characters marked with singular distinctness, The traits which 
 distinguish S. Peter, 5. John, 5. Thomas, and the Magdalene in this 
 chapter are clear and completely in harmony with what is told of 
 the four elsewhere, 
 
 Of the incidents omitted by S. John many are given in the other 
 Gospels or by 8. Paul. S. Matthew and 5. Mark; the angel’s message 
 to the two Marys and Salome, S. Matthew and [S. Mark]; the 
 farewell charge and promise. S. Luke and [S. Mark]; the mani- 
 festation to two disciples not Apostles. S. Matthew; the earthquake, 
 angel’s descent to remove the stone, soldiers’ terror and report to the 
 priests, device of the Sanhedrin, manifestation on the mountain in 
 Galilee (comp. 1 Cor. xv. 6). [S. Mark]; the reproach for unbelief. 
 S. Luke ; the manifestation to S. Peter (comp. 1 Cor. xv. 5), conver- 
 sation on the road to Emmaus, proof that He is not a spirit, mani- 
 festation before the Ascension (comp. Acts i. 6—9). 5. Paul; mani- 
 sowie: to the Twelve, to S. James, and to S. Paul himself (1 Cor. 
 xv. 6—8). 
 
 ST JOHN Υ 
 
338 S. JOHN. [xXx. 1— 
 
 To these incidents S. John adds, besides the contents of chap. xxi., 
 the gift of the power of absolution, and the manifestation on the 
 second Lord’s Day, when 8. Thomas was present. 
 
 It may be freely admitted that the difficulty of harmonizing the 
 different accounts of the Resurrection is very great. As so often in 
 the Gospel narrative, we have not the knowledge required for piecing 
 together the fragmentary accounts that have been granted to us. To 
 this extent it may be allowed that the evidence for the Resurrection 
 is not what we should antecedently have desired. 
 
 But it is no paradox to say that for this very reason, as well as 
 for other reasons, the evidence is sufficient. Impostors would have 
 made the evidence more harmonious. The difficulty arises from 
 independent witnesses telling their own tale, not caring in their con- 
 sciousness of its truth to make it clearly agree with what had been 
 told elsewhere. The writer of the Fourth Gospel must have known 
 of some, if not all, of the Synoptic accounts; but he writes freely and 
 firmly from his own independent experience and information. All 
 the Gospels agree in the following very important particulars; 
 
 1. The Resurrection itself is left undescribed. Like all beginnings, 
 whether in history or nature, it is hidden from view. 
 
 2. The manifestations were granted to disciples only, but to dis- 
 ciples wholly unexpectant of a Resurrection. The theory that they 
 were visions resulting from enthusiastic expectations, is against all 
 the evidence. 
 
 3. They were received with doubt and hesitation at first. 
 
 4. Mere reports were rejected. 
 
 5. The manifestations were granted to all kinds of witnesses, both 
 male and female, both individuals and companies. 
 
 6. The result was a conviction, which nothing ever shook, that 
 ‘the Lord had risen indeed’ and been present with them, 
 
 All four accounts also agree in some of the details; 
 
 1. The evidence begins with the visit of women to the sepulchre 
 in the early morning. 
 
 2. The first sign was the removal of the stone. 
 
 3. Angels were seen before the Lord was seen. 
 
 (See Westcott, Speaker’s Commentary, 11. pp. 287, 8. 
 
 1—10. Tue First EvIDENCE OF THE RESURRECTION. 
 
 1. +. caBB. Τὰ σάββατα may mean either the Sabbath, on the 
 analogy of names of festivals, τὰ ἐγκαίνια, τὰ παναθήναια, &e., or the 
 week, as the interval between two Sabbaths: here literally, on day one 
 of the week (Luke xxiv. 1). 83. John has not mentioned the stone; 
 but he speaks of it as known, τὸν λίθον. S. Mark notes the placing of 
 it, S. Matthew the sealing: all four note the displacement: ἡρμένον 
 ἐκ, lifted out of. 
 
 2. Concluding that the body must be gone, she runneth therefore 
 to S. Peter. He is still chief of the Apostles, and as such is consulted 
 first, in spite of his fall. The repetition of πρός implies that he was 
 not living with S. John, though (υ. 3) near him. We are in doubt 
 
XX. 5] NOTES. | 339 
 
 whether ὃν ἐφίλει applies to him as well as to ‘the other disciple.’ 
 The special phrase for 8. John is ὃν ἠγάπα (xiii. 22). 
 
 ἦραν. She makes no attempt to determine whether friends or 
 foes have done it (comp. Luke xii. 20): οἴδαμεν agrees with the Syn- 
 optists’ account, that other women came also. She left them to go 
 to the Apostles. 
 
 3. The change from the single act, ἐξῆλθεν, to that which lasted 
 some time, ἤρχοντο, is marked by change of tense; see on xi. 29. 
 
 4. &rpexov...mpoéd. τάχ. τ. II. Literally, began to run...ran on 
 before, more quickly than Peter: τάχ. τ. Il. being epexegetic. The 
 more usual form θᾶσσον does not occur in N. T. (xiii. 27; 1 Tim. iii. 
 14; Heb. xiii. 19, 23). §. John ran more quickly as being much 
 younger. Would a second century writer have thought of this in in- 
 venting a story? And how simply does 5. John give us the process of 
 conviction through which his mind passed: the dull unbelief before- 
 hand, the eager wonder in running, the timidity and awe on arriving, 
 the birth of faith in the tomb. This is true psychology free from 
 all self-consciousness. 
 
 5. παρακύψας. The word occurs again v. 11 and Luke xxiv. in a 
 literal sense, of ‘bending down to look carefully at;’ in a figurative 
 sense 1 Pet, 1. 12; James i. 25 (see notes). In Ecclus. xiv. 23 it is 
 used of the earnest searcher after wisdom; in xxi. 23 of the rude 
 prying of a fool. Ἐλέπει is seeth at a glance, as distinct from θεωρεῖ 
 (v. 6). 
 
 6. Both Apostles act characteristically. 85. John remains without 
 in awe and meditation: S. Peter with his natural impulsiveness goes 
 in at once. He takes a complete survey (θεωρεῖ), and hence sees the 
 σουδάριον (xi. 44), which 5. John in his short look had not observed. 
 How natural is the αὐτοῦ (v. 7): the writer is absorbed in his subject 
 and feels no need to mention the name. The details (so meagre in 
 Luke xxiv. 12) here tell of the eyewitness: he even remembers that 
 the napkin was folded. 
 
 8. καὶ ἐπίστευσεν. See oni. 7. More difficulty has perhaps been 
 made about this than is necessary. ‘Believed what?’ is asked. That 
 Jesus was risen. The whole context implies it; and comp. v. 25. 
 The careful arrangement of the grave-clothes proved that the body 
 had not been taken away in haste as by a foe: and friends would 
 scarcely have removed them at all. It is thoroughly natural that 
 S. John speaks only of himself, saying nothing of 5. Peter. He is 
 full of the impression which the empty and orderly tomb made upon 
 his own mind; and it is to this that vv. 1—7 lead up, just as the 
 whole Gospel leads up tov. 29. 5. Luke (xxiv. 12—of doubtful genuine- 
 ness) speaks only of 5. Peter’s wonder, neither affirming nor denying 
 his belief. 
 
 9. οὐδέπω. Not even yet. S. John’s belief in the Resurrection 
 was as yet based only on what he had seen in the sepulchre. He had 
 nothing derived from prophecy to help him. The candour of the 
 
 Y2 
 
340 S. JOHN. [ΧΚ. 9— 
 
 Evangelists is again shewn very strongly in the simple avowal that 
 the love of Apostles failed to grasp and remember what the enmity of 
 the priests understood and treasured up. Even with Christ to ex- 
 pound Scripture to them, the prophecies about His Passion and Re- 
 surrection had remained a sealed book to them (Luke xxiv. 25—27). 
 For δεῖ comp. iii. 14, xii. 84: Matt. xvi. 21, xxvi. 54; Mark viii. 31; 
 Luke ix. 22, xvii. 25, xxii. 37, xxiv. 7, 26,44. The Divine determina- 
 tion meets us’ throughout Christ’s life on earth, and is pointed out 
 with frequency towards the close of it, Comp. Eph. iii. 11. 
 
 10. dridov...rpos αὐτούς. The reading is doubtful: αὑτοὺς 
 ΞΞ ἑαυτούς is best. Comp. ἀπῆλθον καθ᾽ ἑαυτούς (1 Sam. xxvi. 12). 
 
 11—18. THe ManirestatTion to Mary ΜΙΆΑΘΡΑΙΕΧΝΕ.- 
 
 11—18. It has been noticed that the three manifestations in this 
 Chapter correspond to the three divisions of the Prayer in Chap. xvii. 
 Here we see Jesus Himself; in the second, Jesus in relation to His 
 disciples; in the third, Jesus in relation to all who have not seen and 
 yet have believed. 
 
 11. Mapta δέ. She had returned to the sepulchre after the hurry- 
 ing Apostles. Mark xvi. 9 states definitely, what we gather from this 
 section, that the risen Lord’s first appearance was to Mary Magda- 
 lene: the details of the meeting are given by 8. John alone. She 
 continued standing (xviii. 5, 16, 18, xix. 25) after the other two had 
 gone. 
 
 12. ἀγγέλους. Here only do angels appear in S. John’s narrative, 
 Comp. i. 52, xii. 29, [v. 4]. An appearance of angels‘to women occurs 
 in all the accounts of the Resurrection. We are ignorant of the laws 
 which determine such appearances; the two Apostles had seen nothing. 
 For ἐν λευκοῖς comp. Rev. 111. 4: in Rev. iii. 5, iv. 4, ἱματίοις is added. 
 
 13. τ. κύριόν μου...οἶδα. Inv. 2 it was τ. κύριον and οἴδαμεν. In 
 speaking to Apostles she includes other believers; in speaking to 
 strangers she represents the relationship and the loss as personal. 
 These words express the burden of her thoughts since she first saw 
 that the stone had been removed. She is so full of it that she has no 
 thought of the strangeness of this appearance in the tomb. We may 
 reasonably suppose that the Evangelist obtained his information from 
 Mary herself. ‘‘The extreme simplicity of the narrative reflects some- 
 thing of the solemn majesty of the scene. The sentences follow with- 
 out any connecting particles till v. 19. Comp. c. xv.” (Westcott). 
 
 14. ἐστράφη. Perhaps she becomes in some way conscious of 
 another Presence. But Christ’s Risen Body is so changed as not to 
 be recognised at once even by those who had known Him well. It has 
 new powers and a new majesty. Comp, xxi. 4; Luke xxiv. 16, 37; 
 Matt. xxvili, 17; [Mark xvi. 12]. 
 
 15. κηπουρός. Because He was there at that early hour. The 
 omission of His name is again (v. 7) very natural: she is so full of her 
 loss that she assumes that others know all about it, Σύ is emphatic; 
 
XX. 17.] NOTES. 341 
 
 ‘Thou, and not some enemy.’ For ἐβάστασας see on xii.6. In her 
 loving devotion she does not measure her strength: κἀγὼ αὐτὸν ἀρῶ. 
 Note that it is τ. κύριον (v. 2), τ. K. wou (v. 13), αὐτόν thrice (v. 15) ; 
 never τ. σῶμα or rT. νεκρόν. His lifeless form to her is still Himself. 
 
 16. Μαριάμ. The term of general address, Γύναι, awoke no echo in 
 her heart; the sign of personal knowledge and sympathy comes home 
 to her at once. Thus ‘He calleth His own sheep by name’ (x.3). The 
 addition of Ἕιβραϊστί is of importance as indicating the language 
 spoken between Christ and His disciples. 8. John thinks it well to 
 remind Greek readers that Greek was not the language used. Comp. 
 Acts xxii. 2, xxvi. 14, and see on v. 2. The form ‘PaBBovvi or ‘Paf- 
 Bovvel occurs also in Mark x. 51, but has been obliterated in A.V. 
 It is said to be Galilean, and if so natural in a woman of Magdala. 
 Would any but a Jew of Palestine have preserved this? Its literal 
 meaning is ‘my Master,’ but the pronominal portion of the word had 
 lost almost all meaning: comp. ‘Monsieur.’ S. John’s translation 
 shews that as yet her belief is very imperfect: she uses a mere human 
 title. 
 
 17. μή p. ἅπτου. This is a passage of well-known difficulty. At 
 first sight the reason given for refraining from touching would seem to 
 be more suitable to a permission to touch. Comp. iv. 44. Itis perhaps 
 needless to enquire whether the γάρ refers to the whole of what follows 
 or only to the first sentence, ‘Iam not yet ascended to the Father.’ In 
 either case the meaning would be, that the Ascension has not yet taken 
 place, although it soon will do so, whereas Mary’s action assumes that 
 it has taken place. If γάρ refers to the first clause only, then the em- 
 phasis is thrown on Mary’s mistake; if γάρ refers to the whole of what 
 is said, then the emphasis is thrown on the promise that what Mary 
 ‘craves shall be granted in a higher way to both her and others very 
 soon. The translation ‘touch Me not’ is inadequate and gives a false 
 impression. ἽἍπτεσθαι does not mean to ‘touch’ and ‘handle’ with 
 a view to seeing whether His body was real; this Christ not only 
 allowed but enjoined (v. 27; Luke xxiv. 39; comp. 1 John i. 1): rather 
 it means to ‘hold on to’ and ‘cling to.’ Moreover it is the present (not 
 aorist) imperative; and the full meaning will therefore be, ‘Do not 
 continue holding Me,’ or simply, hold Me not. The old and often in- 
 terrupted earthly intercourse is over; the new and continuous inter- 
 course with the Ascended Lord has not yet begun: but that Presence 
 will be granted soon, and there will be no need of straining eyes and 
 clinging hands to realise it. (For a large collection of various inter- 
 pretations see Meyer.) The reading πρὸς τ. πατέρα (without μου) agrees 
 better with mp. τ. dd. pov. The general relationship applying both to 
 Him and them is stated first, and then it is pointedly distinguished in 
 its application to Him and to them. 
 
 ἀναβαίνω. I am ascending. The change has already begun: earth 
 is His home no longer. In Luke xxiv. 44 Jesus says, ‘These are My 
 words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you.’ Mary’s 
 error consisted in supposing that Jesus was again with her under the 
 
342 S. JOHN. ΙΧ Σ 
 
 old conditions. He is with them no longer after the flesh: He only 
 appears tothem. Soon He will be in them as the glorified Christ. The 
 present interval is one of transition. But He remains perfect Man: 
 He still speaks of ‘My God.’ Comp. Rev. iii. 12. Thus also 5. Paul 
 and 5, Peter speak of ‘the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.’ 
 Comp. Eph. i. 3; 2 Cor. xi. 31; 1 Peter i. 3; and see on Rom. xy. 6; 
 2 Cor. i. 3, where the expression is blurred in the A.V. 
 
 18. ἔρχεται... ἀγγέλλουσα. The more usual form is ἐλθοῦσα ἀγγέλ- 
 λει; xi. 17, xvi. 8. Comp. xx. 6. She becomes an Apostle to the 
 Apostles. 
 
 Thus as Mary’s love seems to have been the first to manifest itself 
 (v. 1), so the first Manifestation of the Risen Lord is granted to her. 
 It confirms our trust in the Gospel narratives to find this stated. A 
 writer of a fictitious account would almost certainly have represented 
 the first appearance as being to the Virgin, or to S. Peter, the chief of 
 the Apostles, or to 5. John, the beloved disciple, or to the chosen three. 
 But these are all passed over, and this honour is given to her, who had 
 once been possessed by seven devils, to Mary of Magdala, ‘for she loved 
 much.’ A late and worthless tradition does assign the first appearance 
 to the Virgin; but so completely has Christ’s earthly relationship to 
 her been severed (xix. 26, 27), that henceforth she appears only among 
 the other believers (Acts i. 14). 
 
 19—23. THE MANIFESTATION TO THE TEN AND OTHERS. 
 
 19. οὔσης οὖν of. Note the great precision of the expression. 
 When therefore it was evening on that day, the first of the week: 
 that memorable day, the ‘day of days.’ Comp. i. 39, v. 9, xi. 49, 
 xviii. 13, where ‘that’ has a similar meaning. Evidently the hour is 
 late; the disciples have returned from Emmaus (Luke xxiv. 23), and 
 it was evening when they left Emmaus, At least it must be long after ἢ 
 sunset, when the second day of the week, according to the Jewish 
 reckoning, would begin. And S. John speaks of it as still part of the 
 first day. This is a point in favour of 5. John’s using the modern 
 method in counting the hours: it has a special bearing on the explana- 
 tion of ‘the seventh hour’ in iv. 52. See notes there and on xix. 14, 
 
 τ. θυρῶν κεκλ. This is mentioned both here and v. 26 to shew that 
 the appearance was miraculous. After the Resurrection Christ’s 
 human form, though still real and corporeal (Luke xxiv. 39), is not 
 subject to the ordinary conditions of material bodies. It is ἐν ἀφθαρ- 
 gig, ἐν δόξῃ, ἐν δυνάμει, πνευματικόν (1 Cor. xv. 42—44). Before the 
 Resurrection He was visible, unless He willed it otherwise; after the 
 Resurrection it would seem that He was invisible, unless He willed it 
 otherwise. Comp. Luke xxiv.31. Ot μαθηταί includes more than the 
 Apostles, as is clear from Luke xxiv. 33. It was natural that the small 
 community of believers should come together, to discuss the reported 
 appearances of the Lord, as well as for mutual comfort and support 
 under the (prevailing) fear of the Jews (comp. vii. 13), The Sanhedrin 
 might go on to attack Jesus’ disciples; all the more so now that 
 rumours of His being alive were spreading. 
 
XX. 23 NOTES. 343 
 
 ἦλθεν ὁ °*I. It is futile to discuss how; that the doors were miracu- 
 lously opened, as in §. Peter’s release from prison, is neither stated 
 nor implied. For εἰς after ἔστη comp. xix. 13, (xxi. 4). His greeting 
 is the ordinary greeting intensified. For this very simple form of it 
 comp. Judg, vi. 23; 1 Chron. xii. 18. His last word to them in their 
 sorrow before His Passion (xvi. 33), His first word to them in their 
 terror (Luke xxiv. 37) at His return, is ‘Peace.’ Possibly the place 
 was the same; the large upper room where they had last been all 
 together, 
 
 20. καὶ τ. πλευράν. S. Luke, who does not mention the piercing 
 of the side, has καὶ τ. πόδας (xxiv. 39 :—v.40, the exact parallel of this, 
 is of very doubtful genuineness). Τὸν κύριον (not αὐτόν) is important: 
 till then they had seen a form, but like Mary of Magdala and the 
 two at Emmaus, they knew not whose it was. Thus their sorrow 
 is turned into joy (xvi. 20). Ἶ 
 
 21. εἶπεν οὖν. He said therefore: because now they were able 
 to receive it. Their alarm was dispelled and they knew that He 
 was the Lord. He repeats His message of ‘ Peace.’ For ἀπέσταλκεν 
 and πέμπω see on i. 33. Christ’s mission is henceforth to be carried 
 on by His disciples. He is ὁ ἀπόστολος (Heb. 111. 1), even as they 
 are ἀπόστολοι. The close correspondence between the two missions 
 is shewn by καθώς, even as (xvii. 18). Note the present tense, I 
 am sending; their mission has already begun (xvii. 9); and the first 
 j art of it was to be the proclamation of the truth just brought home to 
 themselves—the Resurrection (Acts i. 22, ii. 32, iv. 2, 33, &c.). 
 
 22. ἐνεφύσησεν. The very same verb (here only in N. T.) is used 
 by the LXX. in Gen. ii. 7 (Wisdom xv. 11) of breathing life into 
 Adam. This Gospel of the new Creation looks back at its close, as 
 at its beginning (i. 1), to the first Creation. ¢ 
 
 We are probably to regard the breath here not merely as the emblem 
 of the Spirit (iii. 8), but as the means by which the Spirit was im- 
 parted to them. ‘ Receive ye,’ combined with the action of breathing, 
 implies this. This is all the more clear in the Greek, because πνεῦμα 
 means both ‘ breath’ and ‘spirit,’ a point which cannot be preserved 
 in English; but at least ‘Spirit’ is better than ‘Ghost.’ We have 
 here, therefore, an anticipation and earnest of Pentecost; just as 
 Christ’s bodily return from the grave and temporary manifestation 
 to them was an anticipation of His spiritual return and abiding 
 Presence with them ‘even unto the end of the world.’ Verus homo, 
 qui spirare, verus Deus, qui Spiritum potuit donare (S. Anselm). 
 
 λάβετε. Take ye, implying that the recipient may welcome or 
 reject the gift: he is not a mere passive receptacle. It is the very 
 word used for ‘ Take’ (Matt. xxvi. 26; Mark xiv. 22; Luke xxii. 17) 
 in the account of the institution of the Eucharist; which somewhat 
 confirms the view that here, as there, there is an outward sign and 
 vehicle of an inward spiritual grace. The expression still more 
 plainly implies that some gift was offered and bestowed then and 
 there: it is wresting plain language to make ‘Take ye’ a mere 
 
344 S. JOHN. [xXx. 29— 
 
 promise, There was therefore a Paschal as distinct from a Pente- 
 costal gift of the Holy Spirit, the one preparatory to the other. It 
 should be noticed that πνεῦμα ἅγιον is without the article, and this 
 seems to imply that the gift is not made in all its fulness. See 
 on xiv. 26, where both substantive and adjective have the article. 
 
 23. ἄν τινων ἀφῆτε. Comp. ἄφες in the Lord’s Prayer. This 
 power accompanies the gift of the Spirit just conferred, It must 
 be noticed (1) that it is given to the whole company present; not to 
 the Apostles alone. Of the Apostles one was absent, and there were 
 others present who were not Apostles: no hint is given that this 
 power is confined to the Ten. The commission in the first instance is 
 to the community as a whole, not to the Ministry alone. Of course 
 this does not imply that all present were raised to the rank of 
 Apostles; which would contradict the plain narrative of the Acts; 
 nor that the commission could not be delegated to the Ministry; 
 which would contradict the history of the Church. 
 
 It follows from this (2) that the power being conferred on the 
 community and never revoked, the power continues so long as the 
 community continues. While the Christian Church lasts it has the 
 power of remitting and retaining along with the power of spiritual 
 discernment which is part of the gift of the Spirit. That is, it has 
 the power to declare the conditions on which forgiveness is granted 
 and the fact that it has or has not been granted. 
 
 It should be noted (3) that the expression throughout is plural on 
 both sides. As it is the community rather than individuals that is 
 invested with the power, so it is classes of men rather than individuals 
 on whom it is exercised. God deals with mankind not in the mass 
 but with personal love and knowledge soul by soul. His Church 
 in fulfilling its mission from Him, while keeping this ideal in view, 
 is compelled for the most part to minister to men in groups and 
 classes. The plural here seems to indicate not what must always 
 be or ought to be the case, but what generally is. 
 
 ἀφέωνται.. κεκράτηνται. The force of the perfect is—‘are ipso 
 facto remitted ’—‘are ipso facto retained.’ But ἀφέωνται is not a 
 secure reading: ἀφίενται is strongly supported; and there are other 
 variations. When the community under the guidance of the Spirit 
 has spoken, the result is complete. The meaning of κρατῆτε is 
 ‘hold fast,’ so that they do not depart from the sinner. The word 
 occurs here only in this Gospel. In Revelation it is used of ‘ holding 
 fast doctrine,’ &e. (11. 14, 15, 25, 111. 11; comp. 2 Thess, ii, 15). 
 
 24—29. Tue ManirestaTIon To 5. THOMAS AND OTHERS. 
 Peculiar to 5. John. 
 
 24. Owpds...odK ἦν per αὐτῶν. His melancholy temperament 
 (see on xi. 16) might dispose him to solitude and to put no tryst in 
 the rumours of Christ’s Resurrection if they reached him on Easter 
 Day. And afterwards his despondency is too great to be removed by 
 the repeated (ἔλεγον) testimony even of eyewitnesses. He has but one 
 reply (εἶπεν); and the test which he selects has various points of 
 
XX, 28.] NOTES. 345 
 
 contact with the surroundings. The wounds had been the cause of 
 his despair; it is they that must reassure him. The print of them 
 would prove beyond all doubt that it was indeed his Lord that had 
 returned to him. Moreover, the Ten had no doubt told him of their 
 own terror and hesitation, and how Jesus had invited them to ‘handle 
 Him and see’ in order to convince themselves. This would suggest a 
 similar mode of proof to 5. Thomas. 
 
 25. βάλω... βάλω. In both places, put: see on v. 7. The negation 
 is in the strongest form, οὐ μὴ mor., I will in no wise believe; 
 and the condition is stated without hope: not, ‘Jf I see, I will 
 believe,’ but, ‘ Except I see, I will not.’ This obstinacy appears also in 
 the repetitions in the asseveration. 'Tdémov for the second τύπον is 
 an early corruption. It is asked, as in v. 8, ‘Believe what?’ The 
 answer is the same with even more certainty; that Jesus was risen. 
 
 26. 1p. ὀκτώ. Including both extremes, according to the Jewish 
 method. This is therefore the Sunday following Easter Day. We 
 are not to understand that the disciples had not met together during 
 the interval, but that there is no appearance of Jesus to record. They 
 are left to ponder over what they have seen. The first step is here 
 taken towards establishing ‘the Lord’s Day’ as the Christian weekly 
 festival. The Passover is over, so that the meeting of the disciples 
 has nothing to do with that. It is not clear why they had not 
 already started for Galilee as commanded (Mark xvi. 7; Matt. xxviii. 
 7). Perhaps the obstinacy of 5. Thomas had detained them. IIddw 
 and ἔσω shew that the place is the same: the time of day is not 
 given. 
 
 27. Jesus at once shews S. Thomas that He knows the test which 
 he had demanded. The reproduction of his very words helps to 
 bring home the grossness of the demand. Note γίνου: become. He 
 is at the point where faith and unbelief part company: his suspense 
 of judgment has been neither the one nor the other. It is not worth 
 while to strain after a literal reproduction in English of the verbal 
 contradiction between ἄπιστος and πιστός, as ‘unbelieving’ and 
 ‘believing’ or ‘faithless’ and ‘faithful.’ 
 
 28. Not merely the sight of Jesus but the conviction of His 
 omniscience overwhelms S. Thomas, as it did Nathanael (i. 50), 
 and the Samaritan woman (iv. 29). His faith rises with a bound to 
 its full height in the cry of adoration, with which the Gospel closes. 
 
 © κύριός p. K. ὁ θεός p. For the nominatives comp. xix. 3; Matt. 
 xi. 26; Luke viii. 54, xii, 32. Most unnatural is the Unitarian view, 
 that these words are an expression of astonishment addressed to 
 God. Against this are (1) the plain and conclusive εἶπεν αὐτῷ ; 
 (2) ὁ κύριός μου, Which is manifestly addressed to Christ (comp. v. 13) ; 
 (3) the fact that this confession of faith forms a climax and con- 
 clusion to the whole Gospel. The words are rightly considered as 
 an impassioned declaration on the part of a devoted but (in the 
 better sense of the term) sceptical Apostle of his conviction, not- 
 meiely that his Risen Lord stood before him, but that this Lord 
 
346 S. JOHN. [XX. ἘΠ 
 
 was also his God. And it must be noted that Christ does not correct 
 His Apostle for this avowal, any more than He corrected the Jews 
 for supposing that He claimed to be ἔσον τᾷ Θεῷ (v. 18); rather 
 He accepts and approves this confession of belief in His Divinity. 
 
 29. ἑώρακας. See oni. 18. This seems to shew that sight with- 
 out touch sufficed. ILemlorevxas (xi. 27) is half question, half excla- 
 mation: comp. i. 51, xvi. 31. The change from perfects to aorists 
 should be noted: Blessed are they who saw not and (yet) believed. 
 There were already disciples who believed without having seen the 
 Risen Lord; and from a point of view in the future Jesus sees many 
 more such. 
 
 This last great declaration of blessedness is a Beatitude which is 
 the special property of the countless number of believers who have 
 never seen Christ in the flesh. Just as it is possible for every 
 Christian to become equal in blessedness to Christ’s Mother and 
 brethren by obedience (Matt. xii. 49, 50), so it is possible for them to 
 transcend the blessedness of Apostles by faith. All the Aposiles, like 
 5. Thomas, had seen before they believed: even S. John’s faith did 
 not shew itself until he had had evidence (v. 8). 83. Thomas had the 
 opportunity of believing without seeing, but rejected it. The same 
 opportunity is granted to all believers now. 
 
 Thus this wonderful Gospel begins and ends with the same article 
 of faith. ‘The Word was God,’—‘the Word became flesh,’ is the 
 Evangelist’s solemn confession of a belief which had been proved and 
 deepened by the experience of more than half a century. From this 
 he starts, and patiently traces out for us the: main points in the 
 evidence out of which that belief had grown. This done, he shews us 
 the power of the evidence first over himself (v. 8), and then over one 
 who was needlessly wary of being influenced by insufficient testimony. 
 The result in the one case is silent conviction, in the other the in- 
 stantaneous confession, at once the result of questioning and the 
 
 victory over it, ‘My Lord and my God.’ Thomas has ‘died with 
 Him’ and risen again. 
 
 30, 31. THe ConcLUSION AND PuRPOSE OF THE GOSPEL. 
 
 πολλὰ μ. οὖν κι ἄλλα o. Many and other signs, therefore (as 
 might be expected from those which have been recorded in this book). 
 The context shews that onpeta must not be limited to proofs of the 
 Resurrection. §S. John is glancing back over his whole work, τὸ 
 βιβλίον τοῦτον, and the σημεῖα are miracles generally: comp. xii. 37. 
 Πολλὰ x. ἄλλα points the same way; the signs of the Resurrection 
 were few and similar. Meéy anticipates δέ in v. 31, and οὖν marks 
 the transition: comp. Mark xvi. 19, 20; Phil. ii. 23, 24. Winer, p. 
 556. With ἐνώπιον τ. μαθητῶν comp. xvi. 26, Acts i. 21, 22. 
 
 31. ταῦτα δέ. But these (signs). On the one hand there were 
 many unrecorded; but on the other hand some have been recorded. 
 And these are all signs: every act has been significant. It was not 
 S. John’s purpose to write a complete ‘ Life of Christ ;’ it was not his 
 purpose to write a ‘Life’ at 811, Rather he would narrate just those 
 
Pe a NOTES. 347 
 
 facts respecting Jesus which would produce a saving faith in Him as 
 
 the Messiah and the Son of God. ὃ. John’s work is ‘a Gospel and 
 
 ae a biography’: most imperfect as a biography, it is ‘complete as a 
 ospel.” 
 
 ἵνα πιστεύητε. That those who read this record may be convinced 
 of two things,—identical in the Divine counsels, identical in fact, but 
 separate in the thoughts of men,—(1) that Jesus, the well-known 
 Teacher and true man, is the Christ, the long looked for Messiah and 
 Deliverer of Israel, the fulfiller of type and prophecy; (2) that He is 
 also the Son of God, the Divine Word and true God. Were He not 
 the latter He could not be the former, although men have failed to see 
 this. Some had been looking for a mere Prophet and Wonder- 
 worker,—a second Moses or a second Elijah; others had been looking 
 for an earthly King and Conqueror,—a second David or a second 
 Solomon. These views were all far short of the truth, and too often 
 obscured and hindered the truth. Jesus, the Lord’s Anointed, must 
 be and is—not only very man but very God: 1 John iv. 14,15. This 
 truth is worth having for its own sake; but, as S. John’s experience 
 had taught him, to possess it is to possess eternal life: 1 John v. 13, 
 a passage which seems to shew that the object of the Epistle is 
 similar to that of the Gospel as here set forth. See on iii. 36. 
 For ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ see on i, 12. The conclusion of the 
 Gospel is an echo of the beginning (i. 4, 12); and it once more 
 gives a flat contradiction to Gnostic teaching. (1) Jesus is no mere 
 man to whom a divine being was for a time united, but the Messiah 
 and very God. (2) Eternal life is to be obtained, not by intellectual 
 enlightenment, but by faith in the name of Jesus. Comp. Acts iv. 10; 
 1 Cor. vi. 11. 
 
 It is quite manifest that this was in the first instance intended as 
 the end of the Gospel. The conflict between belief and unbelief 
 recorded in it reaches a climax in the confession of S. Thomas and the 
 Beatitude which follows: the work appears to be complete; and the 
 Evangelist abruptly but deliberately brings it to a close. What follows 
 is an afterthought, added by S. John’s own hand, as the style and 
 language sufficiently indicate, but not part of the original plan. 
 There is nothing to shew how long an interval elapsed before the 
 addition was made, nor whether the Gospel was ever published 
 without it. The absence of evidence as to this latter point favours 
 the view that the Gospel was not given to the world until after the 
 appendix was written. 
 
 CHAPTER XXI, 
 
 8. ἐνέβησαν for ἀνέβησαν. Omit εὐθύς after πλοῖον. 
 6. ἴσχυον (NBCDLA) for ἔσχυσαν (AP to suit ἔβαλον). 
 
 11. εἰς τὴν γῆν (NABCLPXA) for ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς (E). After ἀνέβη we 
 should probably insert οὖν with NBCLX against ADP. 
 
348 S. JOHN. [ΧΧΕΕΞ 
 
 15, 16, 17. ᾿Ιωάνου (NBC!DL) for Ἰωνᾷ (AC? from Matt. xvi. 17). 
 
 16,17. προβάτια for πρόβατα: in v. 16 the balance of evidence 
 against πρόβατα is less strong than in v. 17. 
 
 17. πάντα before σύ, with NBC!D against AC%. 
 21. After τοῦτον insert οὖν, with NBCD against A. 
 23. οὗτος before ὁ λόγος, with NBCD against A. 
 
 25. ἅ (NBC!X) for ὅσα (AC?D). At the end omit ᾿Αμήν, with 
 NABD against E. Theverse is added apparently by a. later hand in δὲ, 
 
 Tur EprmnocuE orn APPENDIX. 
 
 This Epilogue to a certain extent balances the Prologue, the main 
 body of the Gospel in two great divisions lying in between them; but 
 with this difference, that the Prologue is part of the original plan of 
 _ the Gospel, whereas the Epilogue is not. It is evident that when the 
 Evangelist wrote xx. 30, he had no intention of narrating any more 
 ‘signs.’ The reason for adding this appendix can be conjectured 
 with something like certainty: the Evangelist wished to give a full 
 and exact account of Christ’s words respecting himself, about which 
 there had been serious misunderstanding. In order to make the 
 meaning of Christ’s saying as clear as possible, 5. John narrates in 
 detail the circumstances which led to its being spoken. 
 
 Twenty-five distinct marks tending to shew that chap. xxi. is by 
 S. John are pointed out in the notes and counted up by figures in 
 square brackets, thus [1]. Besides these points it should be noticed 
 that 8. John’s characteristic οὖν occurs seven times (vv. 5, 6, 7, 9, 15, 
 21, 23) in 23 verses, 
 
 The whole of the chapter is peculiar to 8. John’s Gospel. It falls 
 into four parts. 1. The Manifestation to the Seven and the Miracu- 
 lous Draught of Fishes (1—14). 2. The Commission to S. Peter and 
 the Prediction as to his Death (15—19). 3. The Misunderstood Saying 
 respecting the Evangelist (20—23). 4. Concluding Notes (24, 25). 
 
 1—14. THe MANIFESTATION TO THE SEVEN AND THE MIRACULOUS 
 DravuGut or FISHES, 
 
 1. pera ταῦτα. This vague expression (see on iii. 22) suits an 
 afterthought which has no direct connexion with what precedes. 
 *Edavépwoev, manifested (see on ii. 11) is one of S. John’s expressions 
 [1]: so also is the construction ἐῴ. ἑαυτόν ; vil. 4, xi. 33, 55, xiii. 4; 
 1 John iii. 3; Rev. vi. 15, viii. 6, xix. 7: see also note on viii. 53 [2]. 
 Πάλιν, as v. 14 shews, points back to the manifestation to 8. Thomas 
 and the rest (xx. 26). 
 
 ἐπὶ τ. 0. τ. Τιβεριάδος. By the sea of Tiberias. Contrast vi. 19; 
 Rey. v. 185. 5. John alone (see on vi, 1) uses this name for the lake 
 [3]. The departure to Galilee is commanded Matt. xxviii. 7; Mark 
 
XXI. 5.] τ  “WOTES, 349 
 
 xvi. 7. 5. John does not relate the command, but gives its result 
 (see on ii. 19, xviii. 11). 5. Matthew gives only the appearances in 
 Galilee, 5. Luke and [S. Mark] only those in Jerusalem. 8. John 
 gives some of both. 
 
 The repetition of ἐφανέρωσεν is quite in 5. John’s style [4]. Οὕτως 
 gives a tone of solemnity to what is coming. 
 
 2. Probably all seven disciples belonged to the neighbourhood; we 
 know this of four of them. For Θωμᾶς see on xi. 16, xiv. 5, xx. 24; 
 all particulars about him are given by 5. John [5]. 8S. John alone 
 mentions Nathanael [6]; see on i.46. The descriptive addition, 6 
 ἀπὸ Kava τ. I., occurs here only: see on ii. 1. If one of ot τ. 
 Ζεβεδαίου were not the writer, they would have been placed first after 
 S. Peter, instead of last of those named [7]. The omission of their 
 personal names is in harmony with 8. John’s reserve about all that is 
 closely connected with himself [8]. The ἄλλοι δύο are probably not 
 Apostles ; otherwise, why are the names not given? 
 
 3. 5. Peter, as so often, takes the lead: and again we have precise 
 and vivid details, as from an eyewitness. In the interval of waiting 
 for definite instructions the disciples support themselves by their old 
 employment, probably at Capernaum or Bethsaida. Night was the 
 best time for fishing (Luke v, 5); and the ἐκείνῃ may indicate that 
 this failure was exceptional: or it may mean ‘in that memorable 
 night’ (xi. 49, 51, xix. 27, 31, xx. 19), 
 
 ἐπίασαν οὐδέν. Failure at first is the common lot of Christ’s 
 fishers. His Presence again causing success after failure might 
 enforce the lesson that apart from Him they could do nothing (xy. 5). 
 IIcagecv occurs six times in this Gospel besides here, and also Rev. xix. 
 20: elsewhere only Acts iii. 7, xii. 4 ; 2 Cor. xi. 32 [9]. The asyndeta, 
 λέγει, λέγουσιν, ἐξῆλθον, are in §. John’s style [10]: xviii. 34—36, 
 
 4. ἐπὶ τὸν αἰγ. Pregnant construction; ‘He came to and stood on 
 the beach.’ Comp. i. 82, 33, iii. 36 (xix. 18, xx. 19); Matt. iii, 2. 
 Mévrou, howbeit or nevertheless, implies that their not knowing was 
 surprising: μέντοι, besides here, occurs four times in 5. John (iy. 27, 
 vil. 13, xii. 42, xx. 5); elsewhere three times [11]. ‘For οὐκ ἤδεισαν 
 see on xx. 14, 
 
 5. παιδία. Perhaps a mere term of friendly address, like our 
 ‘young people’ (1 John ii, 14, 18); less affectionate than texvia (xiii. 
 33; 1 John ii. 1, 12, 28, iii. 7, 18, iv. 4, v. 21), which implies the 
 filial relationship. Thus Jesus addressed the Magdalene as Γύναι 
 before He called her by name (xx. 15, 16). ἸΤροσφάγιον occurs here 
 only: it seems to mean anything eaten with bread, especially fish: 
 comp. ὄψον, ὀψάριον (vi. 9). Possibly it means no more than ‘some- 
 thing to eat:’ but it may also mean ‘fish;’ and ἔχειν ἴῃ fishing and 
 fowling is used in the sense of ‘to catch.’ Perhaps we should 
 translate Have ye taken any fish? This agrees with the context 
 better than enquiries about food. A negative answer is anticipated: 
 comp. iv. 29, vii, 31, viii. 22, xviii. 35, 
 
350 S. JOHN. ° [XXL 6— 
 
 6. There is no need to seek symbolical meanings for the right and 
 left side. The difference is not between right and left, but between 
 working with and without Divine guidance. 
 
 7. The characteristics of the two Apostles are again delicately yet 
 clearly given (xx. 2—9): 5. John is the first to apprehend; S. Peter 
 the first to act, and with impulsive energy [12]. Perhaps 8. Peter’s 
 haste to reach his Lord and 3. John’s abiding in the boat to finish 
 the fishing is meant to symbolize the early martyrdom foretold to the 
 one (v, 18) and the indefinite abiding suggested of the other (v. 22). 
 
 ὁ kup. ἐστιν. For the third and last time 8. John speaks in his 
 own narrative: comp. i. 38, xiii. 25. The interval in time and 
 thought between ‘ Rabbi, where abidest thou?’ and ‘It is the Lord!’ 
 sums up the contents of the Gospel. 
 
 ἐπενδύτης (here only in N.T.) is neither the ἱμάτιον nor the χιτών, 
 but the workman’s ‘ frock’ or ‘ blouse,’ which he gathered round him 
 ‘* with instinctive reverence for the presence of his Master” (Westcott). 
 Τυμνός need not mean more than ‘stripped’ of the upper garment. 
 “ΝΟ one but an eyewitness would have thought of the touch in v. 7, 
 which exactly inverts the natural action of one about to swim, and 
 yet is quite accounted for by the circumstances” (Sanday). 
 
 8. τ. πλοιαρίῳ. In the boat, or by means of the boat. As in vi. 
 17—24, πλοῖον and πλοιάριον are both used; we are not sure whether 
 with or without a difference of meaning. This mixture of the two 
 words is not found in the Synoptists: excepting Mark iii. 9, πλοιάριον 
 is peculiar to 8. John [13]. ᾿Από, in measuring distance, occurs 
 only in 8. John’s writings (xi, 18; Rev. xiv. 20) [14]: 200 cubits 
 would be about 100 yards. 
 
 9. ἀνθρακιάν. See on xviii. 18: the word occurs only there and 
 here in Ν. T. [15]; moreover keto8at is more frequent in 8. John’s 
 writings than elsewhere. We are uncertain whether ὀψάριον and 
 ἄρτον are generic or not, fish and bread, or a fish and a loaf: ὀψάριον 
 occurs only in S. John (vi. 9, 14) in B,.7, [10]; 
 
 10. There is again (see on v. 3) a solemn simplicity in the narra- 
 tive; vv. 10—14 open in each case without connecting particles: 
 comp. xv. passim and xx. 13—19 [17]. 
 
 ἀπὸ τ. 6. We have ἐκ τῶν as a nominative i, 24, vii. 40, xvi. 
 17; Rev. xi. 9; and as an accusative, 2 John 4; Rev. ii. 10: here we 
 have ἀπὸ τῶν as an accusative. Comp. ἐξ αὐτοῦ, vi. 39. This ellipti- 
 cal form is frequent 1 in §. John, elsewhere rare [18]. Comp. Luke xi. 
 49, xxi. 16. Ὧν (attraction) ἔπιάσατε viv, which ye caught just now: 
 the aorist is worth keeping. For νῦν comp. xi. 8; ‘Just now the 
 Jews were seeking to stone Thee.’ As their success in fishing de- 
 pended partly on the Lord’s guidance, partly on their own efforts, so 
 their refreshment comes partly from Him and partly from themselves. 
 
 11. ἀνέβη. The meaning probably is ‘went on board’ the vessel, 
 now in shallow water. The details in this verse are strong evidence 
 
XXI. 14] NOTES. 351 
 
 of the writer having been an eyewitness: he had helped to count 
 these ‘great fishes’ and gives the number, not because there is any- 
 thing mystical in it, but because he remembers it; just as he remem- 
 bers and states the six large water-pots (ii. 6), the five loaves and two 
 fishes, the 5000 men and the 12 baskets (vi. 9—13). 
 
 The points of contrast between this Draught of Fishes and the 
 similar miracle at the beginning of Christ’s ministry are so numerous 
 and so striking, that it is difficult to resist the conclusion that the 
 spiritual meaning, which from very early times has been deduced 
 from them, is divinely intended. Symbolical interpretations of Scrip- 
 ture are of three kinds: (1) Fanciful and illegitimate. These are 
 simply misleading: they force into plain statements meanings wholly 
 unreal if not false; as when the 153 fishes are made to symbolize 
 Gentiles, Jews, and the Trinity. (2) Fanciful but legitimate. These 
 are harmless, and may be edifying: they use a plain statement to 
 inculcate a spiritual lesson, although there is no evidence that such 
 lesson is intended ; as when the miracle at Cana is made to symbolize 
 the substitution of the Gospel for the Law, or the intermittent spring 
 at Bethesda, to mean the meagreness of Judaism in contrast to the 
 fulness of Christ. (3) Legitimate and divinely intended. In these 
 cases the spiritual meaning is either pointed out for us in Scripture 
 (Luke v. 10), or is so strikingly in harmony with the narrative, that it 
 seems reasonable to accept it as purposely included in it. Of course 
 it requires both spiritual and intellectual power to determine to which 
 class a particular interpretation belongs ; but in the present instance 
 we may safely assign the symbolism to the third class. 
 
 The main points are these. The two Miraculous Draughts repre- 
 sent the Church Militant and the Church Triumphant. The one 
 gathers together an untold multitude of both good and bad in the 
 troubled waters of this world. Its net is rent with schisms and its 
 Ark seems like to sink. The other gathers a definite number of elect, 
 and though they be many contains them all, taking them not on the 
 stormy ocean but on the eternal shore of peace. 
 
 12. ἀριστήσατες Not the afternoon or evening δεῖπνον (xii. 2, 
 xiii, 2), but the morning ἄριστον, which could be rejected before going 
 to one’s day’s work (Matt. xxii. 4), is intended: see on Luke xi. 37. 
 Here the Apostles listen to the invitation with mingled perplexity, 
 awe, and conviction. They know that He is the Lord, but feel that 
 He is changed, and reverence restrains them from curious questions 
 (comp. iv. 27). Thus the writer shews knowledge of the inmost 
 feelings of Apostles: ii. 11, 17, 22, iv. 27, 33, vi. 21, ix. 2, xx. 20 [19]. 
 
 13. They are afraid to approach, so He comes to them; and gives 
 them the bread and the fish which were by the fire when they landed. 
 It is futile to ask how it was provided; but from His invariable prac- 
 tice before His Resurrection we may suppose that He did not create 
 it. Itis a gift from the Lord to His disciples. 
 
 14, τοῦτο ἤδη τρίτον. Comp. ii. 11, iv. 54. The remark in all 
 three cases guards against a possible misunderstanding of the 
 Synoptic narrative [20]. We have a similar construction 2 Pet. iii. 1, 
 
352 S. JOHN. χε ies 
 
 The two previous manifestations are probably those related xx. 19—23, 
 26—29, that to the Magdalene not being counted, as not granted to 
 the disciples: but we have not sufficient knowledge to arrange the 
 different appearances in chronological order, See on Luke xxiv. 49, 
 
 15—19. Tuer Commission to 8. Peter AND PREDICTION AS TO 
 HIS DEATH. 
 
 15—19. There had been an appearance to S. Peter alone (Luke 
 xxiv. 34; 1 Cor. xv. 5), and it was then, we may believe, that he was 
 absolved. His conduct here (v. 7) is not that of one in doubt as to 
 his relation to his Master. But he has not yet been reinstated as 
 chief of the Apostles. This takes place now. He received his Apos- 
 tleship after the first Miraculous Draught; he receives it back again 
 after the second. 
 
 15. Note that the writer speaks of ‘Simon Peter,’ but represents 
 the Lord as calling him ‘Simon son of John.’ This is in harmony 
 not only with the rest of this Gospel, but with the Gospels as a whole. 
 Although Jesus gave Simon the name of Peter, yet, with one remark- 
 able exception (see on Luke xxii. 34), He never addresses him as Peter, 
 but always as Simon. Matt. xvi.17, xvii. 25; Mark xiv. 37; Luke 
 xxii.31. The Synoptists generally call him Simon, sometimes adding 
 his surname. §. John always gives both names, excepting in i, 41, 
 where the surname just about to be given would be obviously out of 
 place. Contrast in this chapter vv. 2, 3, 7,11 with 16,17, Should 
 we find this minute difference observed, if the writer were any other 
 than §. John? [20]. This being the general usage of our Lord, there 
 is no reason to suppose that His calling him Simon rather than Peter 
 on this occasion is a reproach, as implying that by denying his Master 
 he had forfeited the name of Peter. That 5, John should add the 
 surname with much greater frequency than the Synoptists is natural. 
 At the time when 5. John wrote the surname had become the more 
 familiar of the two. S. Paul never calls him Simon, but uses the 
 Aramaic form of the surname, Cephas. 
 
 Note also that Jesus uses ἀγαπᾷς twice, and the third time φιλεῖς 
 (v. 17), whereas 8, Peter in all three answers says φιλῶ. The change 
 is not accidental; and once more we have evidence of the accuracy of 
 the writer: he preserves distinctions which were actually made, §, 
 Peter’s preference for ¢g:A@ is doubly intelligible: (1) it is the less 
 exalted word; he is sure of the natural affection which it expresses; 
 he will say nothing about the higher love implied in ἀγαπῶ; (2) it is 
 the warmer word; there is a calm discrimination implied in ἀγαπῷ 
 which to him seems cold. In the third question Christ takes him at 
 his own standard; he adopts 8, Peter’s own word, and thus presses 
 the question more home. 
 
 πλέον τούτων. More than these, thy companions, love Me. The 
 Greek is as ambiguous as A.V. and R.V., but there cannot be much 
 doubt as to the meaning: ‘more than thou lovest these things’ gives 
 a very inadequate signification to the question. At this stage in 
 S. Peter’s career Christ would not be likely to ask him whether he 
 
—— 
 
 γ-- 
 
 εἰς ΟΥ̓ ΤΑ͂Ι NOTES. 353 
 
 preferred his boat and nets to Himself. 85. Peter had professed to be 
 ready to die for his Master (xiii. 37) and had declared that though all 
 the rest might deny Him, he would never do so (Matt. xxvi. 88). 
 Jesus recalls this boast by asking him whether he now professes to 
 have more loyalty and devotion than the rest. 
 
 σὺ οἶδας ὅτι dh. oe. Not only does he change ἀγαπῶ to φιλῶ, but 
 he says nothing about ‘more than these:’ he will not venture any 
 more to compare himself with others. Moreover he makes no pro- 
 fessions as to the future; experience has taught him that the present 
 is all that he can be sure of. Xv is emphatic. This time he will 
 trust the Lord’s knowledge of him rather than his own estimate of 
 himself. Can all these delicate touches be artistic fictions? 
 
 βόσκε τ. a. p. Not only is he not degraded on account of his fall, 
 he receives a fresh charge and commission. The work of the fisher 
 gives place to that of the shepherd: the souls that have been brought 
 together and won need to be fed and tended. This 5. Peter must do. 
 
 16. Jesus drops πλέον τούτων, which the humbled Apostle had 
 shrunk from answering, but retains His own word ἀγαπᾷς. With 
 πάλιν δεύτερον comp. iv. 54 and πάλιν ἐκ δευτέρου (Acts x. 15), πάλιν 
 ἄνωθεν (Gal. iy. 9), rursus denuo. Winer, p. 755. 
 
 ποίμ. τ. προβάτιά p. Tend, or shepherd, My sheep. Bacxew is ‘to 
 supply with food,’ as of the herd of swine (Matt. viii. 30, 33; Mark v. 
 11, 14; Luke viii. 32, 34; xv. 15; the only other passages where it 
 occurs in N.T.): ποιμαίνειν is ‘to be shepherd to:’ literally Luke 
 xvii. 7; 1 Cor. ix. 7; figuratively Matt. ii. 6; Acts xx. 28; 1 Pet. v. 2. 
 Comp. Jude 12; Rev. ii. 27, vii. 17, xii. 5, xix. 15. It implies more 
 of guidance than βόσκειν does. The lambs, which can go no distance, 
 scarcely require guidance; their chief need is food. The sheep 
 require both. 
 
 17. τρίτον. He had denied thrice, and must thrice affirm his love. 
 This time Jesus makes a further concession: He not only ceases to 
 urge the ‘more than these,’ but He adopts S. Peter’s own word φιλεῖν. 
 The Apostle had rejected Christ’s standard and taken one of his own, 
 about which he could be more sure; and Christ now questions the 
 Apostle’s own standard. This is why ‘Peter was grieved’ so much; 
 not merely at the threefold question recalling his threefold denial, not 
 merely at his devotion being questioned more than once, but that the 
 humble form of love which he had professed, and that without boast- 
 ful comparison with others, and without rash promises about the 
 future, should seem to be doubted by his Lord. 
 
 σὺ oldas* σὺ γινώσκεις. Once more (vii. 27, viii. 55, xiii. 7, xiv. 7) 
 we have a sudden change between οἷδα and γινώσκω : oldas refers to 
 Christ’s supernatural intuition ; γινώσκεις to His experience and dis- 
 cernment; Thou recognisest, seest, that I love Thee. See onii. 25. 
 
 β. τ. προβάτιά p. One is tempted to think that ἀρνία, προβάτια, 
 πρόβατα, supported by S. Augustine’s agnos, oviculas, oves, and appa- 
 
 _ rently by the old Syriac, is right: but the balance of evidence is against 
 
 ST JOHN Z 
 
354 S. JOHN. (Kx Κα 
 
 it. If πρόβατα is admissible, it must (on the external evidence) come 
 second, not third. But in any case there is a climax: leading the 
 sheep is more difficult work than feeding the lambs; and feeding the 
 sheep is the most difficult of all. To find healthful στερεὰ τροφή for 
 τέλειοι Christians tasks the shepherd’s powers more than finding γάλα 
 for νήπιοι (Heb. v. 13). 
 
 S. Peter seems to recall this charge in his First Epistle (v. 2, 3), a 
 passage which in the plainest terms condemns the policy of those who 
 on the strength of this charge have claimed to rule as his successors 
 over the whole of Christ’s flock, 
 
 18,19. This high charge will involve suffering and even death. In 
 spite of his boastfulness and consequent fall the honour which he once 
 too rashly claimed (xiii. 37) will after all be granted to him. 
 
 18. ἀμὴν ἀμήν. This peculiarity of 5. John’s Gospel (see on i. 52) 
 is preserved in the appendix to it [21]. Νεώτερος, younger than thou 
 art now. The middle instead of ἐζώννυες σεαυτόν would have been 
 correct, as in Acts xii. 8; but then the contrast between σεαυτόν and 
 ἄλλος would have been lost: ἐξώννυσο is ‘thou didst gird (thyself) ;’ 
 éfwyvves σεαυτόν is ‘thou didst gird thyself.’ 
 
 ἐκτενεῖς τ. x. Hither for help, or in submission to the enforced 
 girding to which the condemned are subjected. “Ὅπου ov 0. means to 
 death: not that 8. Peter will be unwilling to die for his Lord, but that 
 death, and especially a criminal’s death, is what men naturally shrink 
 from. The expression would be a strange one if ἄλλος means God, and 
 the reference is to His equipping the Apostle for an unwelcome (!) 
 career. And what in that case can ὅταν ynpdons mean? 
 
 The common interpretation that ‘stretch forth thy hands’ refers to 
 the attitude in crucifixion, and ‘gird thee’ to binding to the cross, is 
 precarious, on account of the order of the clauses, the taking to execu- 
 tion being mentioned after the execution. But it is not impossible; 
 for the order of this group of clauses may be determined by the previous 
 group, and the order there is the natural one. The girding naturally 
 precedes the walking in the first half; therefore ‘gird’ precedes ‘carry’ 
 in the second half, and ‘stretch forth thy hands’ is connected with 
 _ ‘gird’ rather than ‘carry’ and therefore is coupled with ‘gird.’ Or 
 again ‘carry thee &c.’ may possibly refer to the setting up of the cross 
 after the sufferer was bound to it: in this way all runs smoothly. 
 
 19. ποίῳ θανάτῳ. By what manner of death. This comment is 
 quite in 5. John’s style: comp. xii. 33, xviii. 32 [22]. It will depend 
 on the interpretation of v. 18 whether we understand this to mean 
 crucifixion or simply martyrdom. That 5. Peter was crucified at 
 Rome rests on sufficient evidence, beginning with Tertullian (Scorp. 
 xy.); and that he requested to be crucified head downwards is stated 
 by Eusebius (H. Εἰ. 11. i. 2) on the authority of Origen. 
 
 ἀκολούθει por. Certainly the literal meaning cannot be excluded. 
 It is plain from ἐπιστραφείς that 8. Peter understood the command 
 literally, and began to follow, then turned and saw 8S. John following, 
 The correspondence between ἀκολούθει and ἀκολουθοῦντα cannot be for- 
 
XRT 35. NOTES. 355 
 
 tuitous. But the act is another instance of the symbolism which runs 
 through the whole of this Gospel [23]: comp. iii. 1, x. 22, xiii. 30, 
 xvill. 1. Thus the command is also to be understood, as elsewhere in 
 the Gospels, figuratively, the precise shade of meaning being deter- 
 mined by the context : comp. i. 43; Matt. viii. 22, ix. 9, xix. 21. Here 
 there is probably a reference to ἀκολουθήσεις δὲ ὕστερον (xiii. 36); and 
 ἀκολουθεῖν includes following to a martyr’s death, and perhaps death 
 by crucifixion. 
 
 20—23. Tur MisunpErstoop SayING RESPECTING THE EVANGELIST. 
 
 20. The details are those of an eyewitness. With ἐπιστραφείς 
 comp, xx. 14, 16. For ὃν ἠγάπα 61. and ἀνέπεσεν see on xiii, 23, 25. 
 
 21. οὗτος δὲ τί; Literally, but this man, what? Not so much, 
 ‘what shall he do?’ as ‘what about him?’ What is the lot in store for 
 Thy and my friend? The question arises from sympathy and the 
 natural wish that he and his habitual companion should be treated 
 alike. An awful but glorious future has been promised to S. Peter; 
 what is in store for 8. John? Hence the οὖν. As usual, S. Peter acts 
 on the first impulse; and we once more see the intimacy between these 
 two Apostles [24]: comp. xili. 6—9, 24, xviii. 15, xx. 1, 6. 
 
 22. ἐὰν av. 0. μέν. Christ died and rose again that He might 
 become the Lord and Master both of the dead and the living (Rom. 
 xiii. 9). He speaks here in full consciousness of this sovereignty. For 
 the use of θέλω by Christi comp. xvii. 24; Matt. viii. 3 (and parallels), 
 xxvi. 39. While θέλω asserts the Divine authority, ἐάν keeps the de- 
 cision secret. Mévew should be rendered that he abide; it is S. John’s 
 favourite word which we have had so often, and this important link 
 with the rest of the Gospel must not be lost [25]: see oni, 33. 8. Peter’s 
 lot was to suffer, 8. John’s to wait. For ‘abide’ in the sense of remain 
 in life comp. xii. 34; Phil. i. 25; 1 Cor. xv. 6. “Ews ἔρχομαι is lite- 
 rally while I am coming. The words express rather the interval of 
 waiting than the end of it. Comp. ix. 4; Mark vi. 45; 1 Tim. iv. 13. 
 This at once seems to shew that it is unnecessary to enquire whether 
 Pentecost, or the destruction of Jerusalem, or the apocalyptic visions 
 recorded in the Revelation, or a natural death, or the Second Advent, 
 is meant by Christ’s ‘coming’ in this verse. He is not giving an an- 
 swer but refusing one. The reply is purposely hypothetical and perhaps 
 purposely indefinite. But inasmuch as the longer the interval covered 
 by the words, the greater the indefiniteness, the Second Advent is to 
 be preferred as an interpretation, if a distinct meaning is given to the 
 ‘coming.’ This agrees with τί πρός oe; which is evidently a rebuke. 
 There is a sense in which ‘Am I my brother’s keeper?’ is a safeguard 
 against curiosity and presumption rather than a shirking of responsi- 
 bility. Xv and αὐτόν are emphatic and opposed : ‘ whatever I may will 
 respecting him, thow must follow Me. This is what concerns thee.’ 
 
 23. ἐξῆλθεν. There went forth therefore this word unto the 
 brethren, That disciple dieth not. Comp. Luke vii. 17. Οἱ ἀδελφοί 
 for believers generally, common in the Acts (ix. 30, xi. 1, 29, xv, 1, 3, 
 
 Z2 
 
356 5. JOHN. [XXI. 23— 
 
 22, 23, &c.), is not found elsewhere in the Gospels: but we see the 
 way prepared for it in the Lord’s words to Mary Magdalene (xx. 17), 
 to the disciples (Matt. xxiii. 8), and to 5. Peter (Luke xxii. 32), The 
 mistake points to a time when Christians generally expected that the 
 Second Advent would take place in their own time; and the correction 
 of the mistake points to a time when the Apostle was still living. If 
 this chapter was added by another hand after the Apostle’s death it 
 would have been natural to mention his death, as the simplest and 
 most complete answer to the misunderstanding. The cautious cha- 
 racter of the answer given, merely pointing out the hypothetical form 
 of Christ’s language, without pretending to explain it, shews that the 
 question had not yet been solved in fact. Thus we are once more 
 forced back within the first century for the date of this Gospel. 
 Godet is inclined to believe that in some mysterious way the hypo- 
 thesis is a fact; and that, as the primeval Church has its Enoch, 
 and the Jewish Church its Elijah, so the Christian Church may have 
 its 5. John, preserved in special connexion with its progress to the 
 very end. 
 
 24, 25. Conciupina Notes. 
 
 Again the question of authorship confronts us. Are these last two 
 verses by the writer of the rest of the chapter? Are they both by the 
 same hand? The external evidence, as in the case of the preceding 
 verses, is in favour of their being both by the same hand, and by the 
 writer of the first twenty-three verses, and therefore 5. John. No MS. 
 or version is extant without v. 24, and all except the Sinaitic have 
 v.25 also; nor is there any evidence that a copy was ever in existence 
 lacking either this last chapter or v. 24. 
 
 The internal evidence is the other way. The natural impression 
 produced by v. 24 is that it is not the writer of the Gospel who here 
 bears witness to his own work, but a plurality of persons who testify 
 to the trustworthiness of the Evangelist’s narrative. So that we pos- 
 sibly have in this verse a note added by the Ephesian elders before the 
 publication of the Gospel. The change to the singular in v. 25 would 
 seem to imply that this verse is an addition by a third hand of a re- 
 mark which the writer may have heard from 3. John. 
 
 But the internal evidence is not conclusive, and the impression natu- 
 rally produced by the wording of the verses need not be the right one. 
 The aged Apostle in bringing his work a second time (xx. 30, 31) to a 
 conclusion may have included that inmost circle of disciples (to whom 
 he had frequently told his narrative by word of mouth) among those 
 who were able to guarantee his accuracy. With a glance of affectionate 
 confidence round the group of devoted hearers, he adds their testimony 
 to his own, and gives them a share in bearing witness to the truth of 
 the Gospel. But this is less simple than the other hypothesis. 
 
 24. τούτων... ταῦτα. Itismore natural to understand ‘these things’ 
 as referring to the whole Gospel and not to the appendix only. The 
 Johannean phraseology is here of little weight as regards authorship : 
 the Ephesian elders would naturally follow xix. 35. The change from 
 
XXI. 25.] NOTES. 357 
 
 present (μαρτυρῶν) to aorist (γράψας) indicates that the witness con- 
 tinues, the writing took place once for all. §. Chrysostom’s proposal 
 to read οἶδα μέν for οἴδαμεν is quite inadmissible: but it does not follow 
 from οἷδεν in xix. 35 that S. John would not write οἴδαμεν here. It 
 would have been out of place in the middle of his narrative to add the 
 testimony of the Ephesian elders to his own as to details which he saw 
 with his own eyes at the foot of the cross, But it is not unnatural 
 that at the close of his Gospel he should claim them as joint witnesses 
 to the fidelity with which he has committed to writing this last in- 
 stalment of evangelical and apostolic traditions. Comp. 1 John y. 18, 
 19, 20, 15, iii. 14,1. 1; 3 John 12. 
 
 25. If this verse is an addition by an unknown hand it appears to 
 be almost contemporary. The wording seems to imply that it would 
 still be possible to write a great deal: additional materials still abound. 
 Ἔν with the subjunctive states an objective possibility with the pros- 
 pect of a decision: Winer, p. 366. Late in the second century this 
 possibility had ceased. 
 
 οἶμαι. The word occurs in N.T. Phil. 1. 17; Jamesi. 7 only. We 
 should expect μηδέ after it: and Origen (Philoc, xv.) has ws dpa μηδὲ 
 κόσμον οἶμαι χωρεῖν. The first person singular is very unlike S. John. 
 The bold hyperbole which follows, and which may be a saying of S. 
 John’s added by one who heard it, expresses the yearnings of Christen- 
 dom throughout all ages. The attempts which century after century 
 continue to be made to write the ‘Life of Christ’ seem to prove that 
 even the fragments that have come down to us of that ‘Life’ have 
 been found in their many-sidedness and profundity to be practically 
 inexhaustible. After all that the piety and learning of eighteen 
 hundred years have accomplished, Christians remain still unsatisfied, 
 still unconvinced that the most has been made of the very frag- 
 mentary account of about a tenth portion of the Lord’s life on earth. 
 What would be needed to make even this tenth complete? What, 
 therefore, to complete the whole? 
 
b pth if net 
 
 {αν ΜῊ 
 ikea ΤῊ ἡ ἐδ “ἢ ad vies iy ay + τ Υ ὦ 
 ty ad ‘ial 
 ee aids 
 eu: « 
 
 ͵ Ὶ ν᾽ bad | 
 : νά Ὁ: 
 ἂν Mad δι rt " has ες 
 
APPENDICES. 
 
 APPENDIX A, THE DAY OF THE CRUCIFIXION. 
 
 It can scarcely be doubted that if we had only the Fourth Gospel no 
 question would have arisen as to the date of the Last Supper and of 
 the Crucifixion. 8. John’s statements are as usual so clear and precise, 
 and at the same time so entirely consistent, that obscurity arises only 
 when attempts are made to force his plain language into harmony with 
 the statements of the Synoptists which appear to contradict his as 
 regards the day of the month. All four Gospels agree as to the day of 
 the week. 
 
 5. John gives five distinct intimations of the date. 
 
 1. IIpo δὲ τῆς ἑορτῆς τοῦ πᾶσχα (xiii. 1); which shews that the feet- 
 washing and discourses at the Last Supper preceded the Passover. 
 
 2. ᾿Αγόρασον ὧν χρείαν ἔχομεν εἰς τὴν ἑορτήν (xili. 29); which shews 
 that the Last Supper was not the Passover. 
 
 3. “Hy δὲ mpwi καὶ οὐκ εἰσῆλθον εἰς τὸ πραιτώριον, ἵνα μὴ μιανθῶσιν 
 ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα φάγωσιν τὸ πάσχα (xviii. 28); which proves that early on the 
 day of the Crucifixion the Jews who delivered the Lord to Pilate had 
 not yet eaten the Passover. 
 
 4. “Hy δὲ παρασκευὴ τοῦ πάσχα, wpa ἦν ws ἕκτη (xix. 14); which 
 shews that these Jews had not postponed eating the Passover because 
 of urgent business: the Passover had not yet begun. 
 
 δ. Οἱ οὖν ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, ἐπεὶ παρασκευὴ ἦν ἵνα μὴ μείνῃ ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ τὰ 
 σώματα ἐν τῷ σαββάτῳ, ἦν γὰρ μεγάλη ἡ ἡμέρα ἐκείνου τοῦ σαββάτου, 
 κιτ.λ. (xix. 31), Here παρασκενή may mean either Friday, the prepa- 
 ration for the Sabbath, or Nisan 14, the preparation for the Passover. 
 The statement that that Sabbath was a μεγάλη ἡμέρα most naturally 
 means that the Sabbath in that week coincided with the first day of 
 the Feast: so that the day of the Crucifixion was ‘the Preparation’ for 
 both the Sabbath and the Feast. 
 
 Τὸ is evident, therefore, that S. John places the Crucifixion on the 
 Preparation or Eve of the Passover, i.e.on Nisan 14, on the afternoon 
 of which the Paschal Lamb was slain; and that he makes the Pass- 
 over begin at sunset that same day. Consequently the Last Supper 
 cannot have been the Paschal meal. ἔ 
 
 It is from the Synoptists that we inevitably derive the impression 
 that the Last Supper was the Paschal meal (Matt. xxvi. 2, 17, 18, 19; 
 
360 APPENDICES. 
 
 Mark xiv. 14—16; Luke xxii. 7, 11, 13, 15). Whatever method of 
 explanation be adopted, it is the impression derived from the Synop- 
 tists that must be modified, not that derived from 8. John, Their 
 statements refer rather to the nature of the Last Supper, his cover the 
 whole field from the Supper to the taking down from the cross, giving 
 clear marks of time all along. No doubt they are correct in stating 
 that the Last Supper had in some sense the character of a Paschal 
 meal; but it is quite evident from S. John that the Last Supper was 
 not the Passover in the ordinary Jewish sense. And this conclusion 
 is confirmed :— 
 
 1. By the Synoptists themselves. They state that the priests and 
 their officials went to arrest Jesus immediately after the Last Supper 
 (Luke xxii, 52). Would this have been possible while the whole nation 
 was at the Paschal meal? Could Simon have been coming out of the 
 country (Mark xv. 21) on such a Sabbatical day as Nisan 15? Could 
 Joseph have bought a winding-sheet (xv. 46) on such a day? Would 
 the women have postponed the full embalming of the body on account 
 of the Sabbath (Luke xxiii. 56), if the day of the entombment was 
 already a Sabbatical day? Moreover it was on the evening between 
 Nisan 13 and 14 that people went to draw water with which to make the 
 unleavened bread for the Feast. Might not the’ ‘man bearing a 
 pitcher of water” (Mark xiv. 13), who provided the large upper-room 
 for the Last Supper, be bringing water for this purpose? Comp. ‘O 
 καιρός μου ἔγγύς ἐστιν" πρὸς σὲ ποιῶ τὸ πάσχα (Matt. xxvi. 18). What 
 logical connexion have these two sentences, if they do not mean that 
 Jesus was obliged to keep the Passover before the time? 
 
 2. By S. Paul. In speaking of the Resurrection he says ἀπαρχὴ 
 Χριστός (1 Cor. xv. 23). The sheaf which was the ἀπαρχή or first- 
 fruits of the harvest was gathered on Nisan 16. If Jesus died on 
 Nisan 14, His Resurrection exactly corresponded with this ἀπαρχή. 
 
 3. By Christian tradition. Clement of Alexandria says expressly 
 that the Last Supper took place Nisan 13, and that ‘‘ our Saviour 
 suffered on the following day; for He was Himself the true Passover.” 
 And the fact that the whole Church for eight centuries always used 
 leavened bread at the Eucharist, and that the Eastern Church con- 
 tinues to do so to this day, points to a tradition that the meal at 
 which the Eucharist was instituted was not the Paschal meal. 
 
 4. By Jewish tradition. The execution of Jesus is noticed in two 
 passages in the Talmud. In the one He is said to have been hung, 
 in the other to have been stoned: but both agree in placing the execu- 
 tioa on the eve of the Passover. 
 
 Jews, to whom the Gospel was to be preached first, might have 
 found a serious stumbling-block in the fact that He who was pro- 
 claimed as the Paschal Lamb partook of the Paschal Feast and was 
 slain afterwards. Whereas S. John makes it clear to them, that on 
 the very day and at the very hour when the Paschal lambs had to be 
 slain, the True Lamb was sacrificed on the Cross. (See note on Matt. 
 xxvj. 17 and Excursus V, in Dr Farrar’s S, Luke.) 
 
APPENDICES. 361 
 
 APPENDIX Β, 5. PETER’S DENIALS. 
 
 The difficulties which attend all attempts at forming a Harmony of the 
 Gospels are commonly supposed to reach something like a climax here. 
 Very few events are narrated at such length by all four Evangelists ; 
 and in no case is the narrative so carefully divided by them into distinct 
 portions as in the case of S. Peter’s threefold denial of his Master. 
 Here therefore we have an exceptionally good opportunity of comparing 
 the Evangelists with one another piece by piece; and the result is sup- 
 posed to be damaging to them. A careful comparison of the four ac- 
 counts will establish one fact beyond the reach of reasonable dispute ;— 
 that, whatever may be the relation between the narratives of 8. Matthew 
 and §. Mark, those of 5. Luke and 5. John are independent both of 
 the first two Gospels and of one another. So that we have at least 
 three independent accounts. 
 
 It would be an instructive exercise for the student to do for himself 
 what Canon Westcott has done for him (Additional Note on John xviii: 
 comp. Alford on Matt. xxvi. 69), and tabulate the four accounts, com- 
 paring not merely verse with verse but clause with clause. 
 
 His first impression of great discrepancy between the accounts will 
 convince him of the independence of at least three of them. And a 
 further consideration will probably lead him to see that this independ- 
 ence and consequent difference are the result of fearless truthfulness. 
 Each Evangelist, conscious of his own fidelity, tells the story in his own 
 way without caring to correct his account by that of others. In the 
 midst of the differences of details there is quite enough substantial 
 agreement to lead us to the conclusion that each narrative would be 
 found to be accurate if we were acquainted with all the cireumstances. 
 All four Evangelists tell us that three denials were predicted (Matt. xxvi. 
 34; Mark xiv. 30; Luke xxii. 34; John xiii. 38) and all four give three 
 denials (Matt. xxvi. 70, 72, 74; Mark xiv. 68, 70, 71; Luke xxii. 57, 
 58, 60; John xviii. 17, 25, 27). 
 
 The apparent discrepancy with regard to the prediction is that 8, 
 Luke and 8. John place it during the Supper, 8. Mark and 5, Matthew 
 during the walk to Gethsemane. But the words of the first two Evan- 
 gelists do not quite necessarily mean that the prediction was made 
 precisely where they mention it. Yet, if the more natural conclusion 
 be adopted, that they do mean to place the prediction on the road to 
 Gethsemane ; then, either the prediction was repeated, or they have 
 placed it out of the actual chronological sequence. As already remarked 
 elsewhere, chronology is not what the Evangelists care to give us. 
 
 The numerous differences of detail with regard to the three denials, 
 especially the second and third, will sink into very small proportions if 
 we consider that the attack of the maid which provoked the first denial, 
 about which the four accounts are very harmonious, led to a series of 
 attacks gathered into two groups, with intervals during which S. Peter 
 was left unmolested. Each Evangelist gives us salient points in these 
 groups of attacks and denials. As to the particular words put into the 
 mouth of 5. Peter and his assailants, itis quite unnecessary to suppose 
 
362 APPENDICES. 
 
 that they are intended to give us more than the substance of what was 
 said (see Introductory Note to chap. iii.). Let us remember S. Augus- 
 tine’s wise and moderate words respecting the differences of detail in 
 the narratives of the storm on the lake. “ There is no need to enquire 
 which of these exclamations was really uttered. For whether they 
 uttered some one of these three, or other words which none of the 
 Evangelists have recorded, yet conveying the same sense, what does it 
 matter?” De Cons. Ev. τι. xxiv. 55. 
 
 APPENDIX C. 
 ORDER OF THE CHIEF EVENTS OF THE PASSION. 
 
 This part of the Gospel narrative is like the main portion of it in 
 this, that the exact sequence of events cannot in all cases be deter- 
 mined with certainty, and that the precise date of events can in no 
 case be determined with certainty. But for the sake of clearness of 
 view it is well to have a tentative scheme; bearing in mind that, likea 
 plan drawn from description instead of from sight, while it helps us to 
 understand and realise the description, it must be defective and may 
 here and there be misleading. 
 
 Thursday after 6.0 p.m. 
 
 (Nisan 14) The Last Supper and Last Discourses. 
 
 11 p.m. The Agony. 
 Midnight The Betrayal. 
 Friday 1 a.m. Conveyance to the high-priest’s house. 
 2 A.M. Examination before Annas. 
 3 AM. Examination before Caiaphas at an in- 
 formal meeting of the Sanhedrin. 
 4.30 a.m. Condemnation to death at a formal meet- 
 ing of the Sanhedrin. 
 5 A.M, First Examination before Pilate. 
 5.30 a.m. Examination before Herod. 
 6 a.M. Second Examination before Pilate. 
 The Scourging and first Mockery by Pi- 
 late’s soldiers. 
 6.30 a.m. Pilate gives sentence of Crucifixion. 
 Second Mockery by Pilate’s soldiers. 
 9 A.M. The Crucifixion. 
 
 Noon to 3 p.m. 
 
 First Word. ‘ Father, forgive them, &c.’ 
 Second Word. ‘ Woman, behold thy son.’ 
 ‘ Behold thy mother.’ 
 Third Word. ‘ To-day shalt thou be, ἄτα." 
 The Darkness. 
 Fourth Word. 
 Fifth Word. 
 Sixth Word. 
 
 ‘ My God, My God, δα." 
 41 thirst.’ 
 ‘ It is finished,’ 
 
APPENDICES. 363 
 
 (Nisan 14) 3 P.M. Seventh Word. ‘ Father, into Thy hands 
 I commend My spirit.’ 
 The Centurion’s Confession. 
 The Piercing of the Side. 
 3 to 5 P.M. Slaughter of the Paschal lambs. 
 5 P.M. The Burial, 
 6 P.M, The Sabbath begins. 
 (Nisan 15) The Passover. 
 Saturday The Great Day of the Feast. 
 Jesus in the Grave, 
 
 APPENDIX Ὁ. 
 
 SUMMARY OF THE EXTERNAL EVIDENCE RESPECTING 
 THE PARAGRAPH VU. 53—VIII. 11. 
 
 (1) The paragraph is absent from every known Greek MS. earlier 
 than the eighth century, except the Western and eccentric D. A and 
 C are defective here, but in the missing leaves there cannot have been 
 room for the paragraph. In L and A (eighth and ninth cent.) there 
 are spaces, shewing that the transcribers knew of its existence, but 
 did not find it in their copies. (2) In the whole range of Greek 
 patristic literature of the first nine centuries there is no trace 
 
 of any knowledge of it, excepting a reference to it in the Apostolic 
 Constitutions (ii. 24) as an authority for the reception of penitents ; 
 but without any indication of the book from which it is quoted. (8) 
 In Oriental Versions it is found only in inferior MSS., excepting the 
 Ethiopic and the Jerusalem Syriac. (4) The silence of Tertullian in 
 his De Pudicitia and of Cyprian in Ep. uy. (which treats of the 
 admission of adulterous persons to penitence) and the evidence of 
 MSS. shew that it was absent from the earliest Latin texts. 
 
 Thus it is absent from the oldest representatives of every kind of 
 evidence; Greek MSS., Versions, and Fathers both Greek and Latin. 
 
 With regard to the authorities which contain or support the section 
 several points must be noted. (1) D is notorious for insertions and 
 additions, such as Matt. xx. 29 and Luke vi.5. But nowhere else 
 has it an insertion so considerable. Jerome’s statement that this 
 paragraph is found ‘in evangelio secundum Johannem in multis et 
 Graecis et Latinis codicibus’ implies that in the majority of MSS. it is 
 not found. In many of the extant MSS. which contain the passage it 
 is marked as dubious. (2) The date of the text of the Apostolic Con- 
 stitutions is uncertain, and we cannot tell whether the reference is to 
 the Gospel narrative or to tradition. The earliest Greek commentator 
 who notices the section, Kuthymius Zygadenus in the twelfth century, 
 marks it as probably an interpolation. (3) The MS. of the Jerusalem 
 
364 APPENDICES. 
 
 Syriac lectionary is not older than the eleventh century. (4) The 
 early Latin copies, like D, admitted interpolations very freely. Jerome, 
 on the authority of some Greek MSS., retained it in the Vulgate. 
 Ambrose and Augustine treated it as authentic. Later Latin writers 
 naturally followed the authority of these great names. 
 
 We conclude ‘“‘that the Section first came into S. John’s Gospel as 
 an insertion in a comparatively late Western text, having originally 
 belonged to an extraneous independent source...... that the Section 
 was little adopted in texts other than Western till some unknown 
 time between the fourth or fifth and the eighth centuries, when it 
 was received into some influential Constantinopolitan text” (West- 
 cott and Hort). Having found its way into most of the late Greek 
 MSS. and into almost all the Latin texts, it was allowed by Erasmus 
 to remain in its usual place, and hence became established in the 
 Textus Receptus. 
 
 APPENDIX E. 
 His τὸν αἰῶνα and Ζωὴ αἰώνιος. 
 
 Both these expressions are of frequent occurrence in §. John’s 
 Gospel: the former of them is best rendered ‘for ever,’ and the 
 second, ‘ eternal life.’ 
 
 The literal meaning of els τὸν αἰῶνα (vi. 51, 58, viii. 35, xii. 34, xiv. 
 16; 1 John 11. 17; 2 John 2) is ‘unto the age.’ The expression is of 
 Jewish origin. The Jews were accustomed to divide time into two 
 periods, the time preceding the coming of the Messiah, and the age 
 of the Messiah. The latter was spoken of as ‘the Age,’ the age κατ᾽ 
 ἐξοχήν, the age to which the hopes of all Israel looked forward: it 
 was ‘the Age,’ ὁ alév, just as the Messiah Himself was ‘the Coming 
 One,’ ὁ ἐρχόμενος (vi. 14, xi. 27; Matt. xi, 3; Luke vii. 19, 20). The 
 Apostles and the Early Christian Church adopted the same language 
 with an important change of meaning. They knew that the Messiah 
 had come, and that ‘the Age’ in the Jewish sense of the term had 
 already begun: but they once more transferred ‘the Age’ to the un- 
 known and possibly remote future, ‘The Age’ for them meant the 
 period which would be inaugurated by the Return of the Messiah 
 rather than by His First Coming: it represented, therefore, the 
 period of Christ’s Second Coming, when all His enemies shall be put 
 under His feet, and ‘He shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even 
 the Father’ (1 Cor. xv. 24). Hence, els τὸν αἰῶνα means ‘unto the 
 age’ of the Kingdom of God. Literally, therefore, the expression 
 states no more than that there is to be duration to the end of the 
 world; for this world ends when ‘the Age’ begins. But the expres- 
 sion seems to imply a good deal more than this. It appears to have 
 behind it the understood belief, that whatever is allowed to see the 
 Kingdom of God will continue to endure in that kingdom; and as 
 
APPENDICES. 365 
 
 that kingdom is to have no end, so enduring εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα includes, 
 though it does not express, enduring, not merely until the end of this 
 world, ἡ συντελεία τοῦ αἰῶνος [τούτου] (Matt. xiii. 40, 49, xxiv. 3, xxviii. 
 20), but ‘ for ever.’ 
 
 Similarly, ζωὴ αἰώνιος means life that is suitable to ‘the Age,’ the 
 life of those who share in the Kingdom of God. Like εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, 
 it does not express, but it probably implies, the notion of endlessness: 
 and we have a word in English which does much the same, and which 
 is therefore the best rendering to give of αἰώνιος, viz. ‘ eternal.’ 
 ‘Everlasting,’ which in A.V. is frequently used to translate αἰώνιος 
 (ili. 16, 36, iv. 14, v. 24, vi. 27, 40, 47, xii. 50; Matt. xviii. 8, ὅσο.) 
 expresses the notion of endlessness and nothing more: it expresses, 
 therefore, just that idea which αἰώνιος probably implies, but does ποῦ 
 directly state. Whereas ‘eternal’ is almost exactly the word we 
 require, Eternity is the negation of time, that which to higher 
 intelligences than ours takes the place of time, and will do so to our 
 glorified intelligences when time has ceased to be. But when we have 
 said that eternity is not time, we have said all that intelligibly and 
 with certainty can be said about it. All our experience and thought 
 involve the condition of time; and to endeavour to imagine a state 
 of things from which time is absent is to attempt an impossibility. 
 When we banish time from thought, we cease to think. Time, then, 
 is the condition of life in this world; eternity is the condition of life 
 in the world to come: and therefore {w7 αἰώνιος, the life of ‘the Age,’ 
 the life of the world to come, is best expressed in English by the 
 words ‘eternal life.’ This eternal life, 8. John assures us again and 
 again (iil. 36, v. 24, vi. 47, 54, xvii. 3), can be possessed in this world, 
 but it can only be understood in the world to come (1 John iii. 2). 
 
 It is worth remarking that 53. John applies the term αἰώνιος to 
 nothing but ‘life,’ and that for this aeonian life the word is always 
 ζωή and never βίος. Bios does not occur in §. John’s Gospel at all, 
 and only twice in the First Epistle;—in the phrases ἡ ἀλαζονεία τοῦ 
 βίου (ii. 16), ‘the vainglory of life,’ 1,6. arrogancy and ostentation 
 exhibited in the manner of living, and ὁ Bios τοῦ κόσμου (iii. 17), ‘the 
 world’s means of life,’ ie. the goods of this world. In Aristotle and 
 Greek philosophy generally βίος is higher than {w7: Bios is the life 
 peculiar to man as a moral being; {w7 is the vital principle which he 
 shares with brutes and vegetables. In N.T. ¢w7 is higher than Bios: 
 Bios is, as before, the life or livelihood of man; but ἕωή is the vital 
 principle which he shares with God. Contrast βίος in Luke viii. 14, 
 43, xv. 12, 30; 1 Tim. ii. 2; 2 Tim. ii. 4, &. with {wy in Johni. 4, 
 lil. 36, v. 24, 26, 29, 40, &c., &c. Bios occurs less than a dozen times 
 in the whole of the N.T., whereas {wy occurs upwards of a hundred 
 times: ζωή is the very sum and substance of the Gospel. ‘The life 
 eternal is this, that they should know Thee the only true God, and 
 Him whom Thou didst send, even Jesus Christ’ (xvii. 3). 
 
366 APPENDICES. 
 
 APPENDIX F. 
 
 ON SOME POINTS OF GEOGRAPHY. 
 
 Ir seems to be quite certain that the attractive reconciliation 
 of the two readings, Βηθανίᾳ and Βηϑαβαρᾷ, derived from Lieutenant 
 Conder’s conjectures, and suggested in the note on i. 28, must be 
 abandoned. And, what is of much more serious moment, it is 
 becoming clear that Lieutenant Conder’s identifications, when they 
 depend upon philological theories, must be received with the utmost 
 caution. It is true that the Arabs call Batanaea, the Baravala of 
 Josephus, Bathania; changing the Aramaic ‘t’, corresponding to the 
 Hebrew ‘sh’ in Bashan, to ‘th’, by a well-known phonetic relation 
 between these three dialects. But a Jewish writer would not adopt a 
 pure Arabic form, which is therefore impossible in a Gospel written 
 by a Jew. And even if this point could be conceded there would 
 remain the further improbability that the Arabic ‘a’ in Bathantya 
 should be represented by 7 in Βηθανία. Bethania is a compound of 
 Béth, and some place on the Jordan. It might possibly mean ‘ boat- 
 house’; and this would coincide pretty closely with Bethabara, which 
 means ‘ ford-house’ or ‘ ferry-house.’ . 
 
 In any map of Jerusalem there must of necessity be either serious 
 omissions, or insertions which are more or less conjectural. In the 
 present map the traditional name of Zion has been retained for 
 the Western Hill, and also the name of Hippicus for the great 
 Herodian tower which still stands close to the Jaffa Gate. Recent 
 measurements, however, have shewn that of the three Herodian towers, 
 Hippicus, Phasael, and Mariamne, the existing tower, often called the 
 Tower of David, may be Phasael rather than Hippicus. The name, 
 Tower of David, is mediaeval, and is a perpetuation of the error 
 of Josephus, who supposed that the fortress of David belonged to 
 the Upper City, and that the Western Hill had always been part 
 of Jerusalem. 
 
 Again, the position of the Acra is much disputed. In the map 
 it is not intended to affirm the special conjecture of Warren and 
 Conder, but merely to retain, until something better is fully es- 
 tablished, their present view. There is, however, good reason for 
 doubting its correctness. On this and other topographical questions 
 see the very interesting article on Jerusalem in the Encycl. Britan. 
 (xiii. p. 641) by Professor Robertson Smith, to whom the writer of 
 this Appendix is much indebted. 
 
INDICES. 
 
 I. GENERAL, © 
 
 Abraham seeing Christ’s day, 
 meaning of, 201 
 
 Abraham’s seed, supposed privi- 
 leges of, 70, 120, 193, 196 
 
 abstract for concrete, 176 
 
 adultery, the woman taken in, 
 181—186; internal evidence as 
 to authenticity of the passage, 
 181; external evidence, 362 
 
 Aenon, 108 
 
 Agony, the, implied but not nar- 
 rated by 8S. John, 257, 313 
 
 Ahithophel and Absalom, 307 
 
 Alexander the Great and the Sa- 
 maritans, 118 
 
 Alford on Christ’s dismissal of 
 the adulteress, 186; on the 
 basis of the authenticity of the 
 Gospel narrative, 281 
 
 allegories in §. John, 215, 283 
 
 Alogi, rejection of the Fourth 
 Gospel by, xxiii 
 
 Alphaeus, or Clopas, 169, 330 
 
 Ambrose’s mistaken charge a- 
 gainst the Arians, 102 
 
 analysis of the Gospel, brief, xl; 
 in detail, lxi—lxiv 
 
 anathema, Jewish forms of, 208 
 
 ὟΣ character of, 84, 148, 
 25 
 
 angels, 88; appear once only in 
 S. John’s narrative, 340 
 
 Annas, his office and influence, 
 310; examination of Jesus be- 
 
 fore him peculiar to 3. John, 
 310 
 
 Anselm on the gift of the Spirit, 
 343 
 
 antithetic parallelism, 65, 71, 77 
 
 aorist and imperfect, 89, 122, 
 127, 241 
 
 aorist and perfect, 192, 210, 237, 
 285, 346 
 
 aorist imperative, 257, 327 
 
 Apocalypse, relation of the Fourth 
 Gospel to the, xxxiii; similar- 
 ities between the two, 71, 80, 
 82, 115, 175, 183, 255, 265, 
 288, 319, 335 
 
 Apocryphal Gospels, miracles of 
 the Child Jesus in, 92 
 
 aposiopesis, 163 
 
 Apostles’ defects stated without 
 reserve, 92, 97, 122, 124, 236, 
 254, 274, 276, 280, 303, 313, 
 345 
 
 Apostolic Fathers, witness of, to 
 the Fourth Gospel, xxi, xxii 
 
 appearances of Jesus after the 
 Resurrection sufficiently at- 
 tested, 338 
 
 Arianism condemned, 136, 226 
 
 Aristophanes quoted, 290, 330 
 
 Aristotle on the invisibility of 
 God, 75 
 
 Arrian quoted, 127 
 
 article, force of the, 106, 140, 179, 
 197, 256, 259, 294 
 
368 
 
 article, absence of the, 87, 162, 
 205, 251, 259, 292, 313, 325, 
 344, 350 
 
 article repeated, very frequent in 
 5. John, 116, 117, 193 
 
 article with ‘IepooéAuua peculiar 
 to 8. John, 89 
 
 assimilation a frequent cause of 
 corruption of the text, lvii, 
 lviii, 89, 118, 130, 145, 167, 
 183, 203 
 
 attempts to proclaim Jesus king, 
 150, 254 
 
 attempts to arrest Jesus, 
 179, 249 
 
 attempts to stone Jesus, 202, 
 226 
 
 attraction, 191, 350 
 
 Ascension, the, implied but not 
 narrated by 8. John, 104, 105, 
 163, 258, 341 
 
 asyndeton, 67, 74, 111, 224, 274, 
 340 
 
 augment, triple, 203 
 
 Augustine, on 8S. John’s living in 
 the grave, xviii; on sacred soli- 
 tude, 134; on selfishness in 
 religion, 154; on the para- 
 graph respecting the adulteress, 
 181, 186; on ἕν ἐσμεν, 226; on 
 the voluntariness of Christ’s 
 death, 332; on differences in 
 the Gospels, 361; quoted, 121, 
 124, 136, 148, 157, 166, 168, 
 191, 243, 328 
 
 175, 
 
 Bacon, Lord, on Pilate’s ques- 
 tion, 319; on the rending of 
 His garment, 329 
 
 Baptism, the, implied but not 
 narrated by 8S. John, xlix 
 
 Baptism, of John, 108; of Jesus, 
 108, 113, 114 
 
 Baptism, Christian, referred to 
 in the Fourth Gospel, 102, 334 
 
 Baptist, the, his connexion with 
 the Evangelist, xiv. 83; his 
 threefold testimony, 76—83; 
 crisis in his ministry, 76; ar- 
 
 INDEX 1. 
 
 gument from his being called 
 simply ‘John’ by the Evan- 
 gelist, xxxii, 67 
 
 Barabbas, 320, 321, 328 
 
 Barnabas, Epistle of, its witness 
 to the Fourth Gospel, xxi 
 
 Bartholomew, reasons for identi- 
 fying him with Nathanael, 86 ; 
 see Nathanael 
 
 barley loaves, 149 
 
 Basilides, xxii 
 
 baskets, significant distinction of, 
 149 
 
 Bernard on Christ’s coming and 
 departure, 264 
 
 Bethabara, a false reading, 79 
 
 Bethany, two places of this name, 
 Xxxii 
 
 Bethesda, an uncertain reading, 
 131 
 
 Bethsaida, two places of this 
 name, xxxil, 86, 147 
 
 blasphemy, the Lord accused of, 
 136, 202, 226 
 
 blind, man born, 204; his pro- 
 gressive faith, 207; his conies- 
 sion of faith, 211 
 
 brethren of the Lord, various 
 theories respecting, 93, 168, 
 331; cannot be the sons of Al- 
 phaeus, 94, 169 
 
 bride, figure of the Church, 109 
 
 Caesar’s friend, 325 
 
 mi ea setting oneself against, 
 32 
 
 Caesarea, Pilate’s head-quarters, 
 319, 325 
 
 Caiaphas, his office, character, 
 and prophecy, 247, 248 
 
 Calvary, its position, 328 
 
 Cana, two places of this name, 
 xxxii; nature of the miracle at, 
 91, 93 
 
 Capernaum, the modern Tell- 
 Him, 93, 163; argument from 
 the mention of a brief visit to, 
 93 
 
 capital punishment, whether al- 
 
INDEX 1. 
 
 lowed to the Jews by the Ro- 
 mans, 184, 316 
 
 Cardinal Newman, on the dis- 
 courses in 5. John’s Gospel, 
 100 
 
 casus pendens, 157, 178, 284, 299 
 
 centurion’s servant different from 
 the nobleman’s son, 128, 129 
 
 Cerinthus, the Fourth Gospel at- 
 tributed to, xxiii 
 
 change of gender, 69, 157, 299 
 
 changes of tense, 122, 127, 133, 
 155, 225, 241 
 
 characteristics of the Fourth Gos- 
 pel, xli—xlix, 66, 68—70, 81, 
 82, 88, 99 
 
 chief priests, mostly Sadducees, 
 175, 176, 246; their baseness, 
 527 
 
 Christology of 5. John and of the 
 Synoptists, 139 
 
 chronology of the Fourth Gospel 
 consistent but often undefined, 
 xxx, 1, 108, 124, 131, 145, 146, 
 167, 223 
 
 Chrysostom, 90, 201, 357 
 
 Church, first beginning of the, 
 83; Christ’s prayer for, 302— 
 304; powers granted to the, 
 344 
 
 Circumcision prior to the Sab- 
 bath, 173 
 
 cleansing of the Temple in 5. 
 John distinct from that in the 
 Synoptists, 96 
 
 Clement of Alexandria quoted, 
 xli, 359, xxii, xxxvi 
 
 Clementine Homilies, 204, 219 
 
 Clementine Recognitions, 68 
 
 climax, 69, 354 
 
 cloths, 245, 336, 339 
 
 Clopas or Alphaeus, 330 
 
 cocks not excluded from Jerusa- 
 lem, 313 
 
 codices, principal, which contain 
 the Fourth Gospel, lv; rela- 
 tions between, lvi, lvii 
 
 coincidences between S. Paul and 
 S. John, 69, 70, 279, 359; be- 
 tween the Synoptists and §. 
 
 ST JOHN 
 
 369 
 
 John, xlix, liii, 149, 306, 338, 
 359; between the Fourth Gos- 
 pel and Revelation, xxxiii, 71, 
 80, 82, 115, 175, 183, 255, 265, 
 
 288, 319, 335 
 Christ’s new, 
 
 Commandment, 
 271; its comprehensiveness, 
 285 
 
 Communion of Saints, the, scrip- 
 tural, 201 
 
 Conder, on Bethany, 79; on Cal- 
 vary, 328 
 
 connexion of thought in 5. John 
 sometimes obscure, 141, 191 
 
 Court of the Women, 187, 189 
 
 corruption of the text, see false 
 readings, glosses, &c. 
 
 cross, size of the, 332; title on 
 the, 328 
 
 crown of thorns, 322 
 
 crurifragium, 333 
 
 cup of suffering, coincidence with 
 the Synoptists respecting, 310 
 
 date of the Gospel, xxxvi, 131, 
 238, 239 
 
 darkness, in a figurative sense, 
 for moral darkness, peculiar to 
 S. John, 66, 270 
 
 David’s flight probably not al- 
 luded to in xviii, 1, 307 
 
 death, punishment of, whether 
 allowed to the Jews by the Ro- 
 mans, 184, 316 
 
 Dedication, Feast of, 223, 224; 
 its mention evidence that the 
 Evangelist is a Jew, xxviii 
 
 delegated authority of Christ, 81 
 
 demon, see devil 
 
 denials, 5. Peter’s, 311; why nar- 
 rated by 5. John, 313; diffi- 
 culties respecting, 360 
 
 descent of the Spirit, its effects, 
 81 
 
 destruction of Jerusalem, the 
 Fourth Gospel written after 
 the, xxxvi, 131, 238, 239 
 
 devil, personal existence of the, 
 197; his influence over Judas, 
 264, 269, 166 
 
 AA 
 
37° 
 
 devil or demon, Christ accused of 
 being possessed by a, 207, 199, 
 223 
 
 difficult passages, 126, 190, 195, 
 197, 218, 257, 341 
 
 disciples’ imperfections candidly 
 admitted, 92, 97, 122, 124, 236, 
 254, 274, 276, 280, 308, 313, 
 345 
 
 discourses in the Fourth Gospel 
 contrasted with those in the 
 Synoptic Gospels, li, 99, 100 
 
 Divine Generation of Christ, 196, 
 296 
 
 Divinity plainly claimed by Je- 
 sus, 192, 198, 276, 280, 285, 
 288 
 
 Docetism utterly foreign to the 
 Fourth Gospel, 71, 116, 152, 
 170, 334 
 
 Dollinger quoted, xxiv, 316 
 
 door of the fold, allegory of the, 
 215, 218 
 
 dove visible at the Baptism, 81 
 
 Ecce Homo quoted, 321 
 
 East, turning to the, a very an- 
 cient custom, 187 
 
 Elijah, argument from the Bap- 
 tist’s denial that he is, 78 
 
 epexegetic clauses common in 
 5. John, 70, 74, 339 
 
 Ephesus, the abode of 8. John, 
 xvi, xvii; the place where he 
 wrote his Gospel, xxxv, 68; 
 the elders of, the probable au- 
 thors of xxi. 24, 356 
 
 Ephraim, a town called, 248 
 
 Epilogue, an afterthought, 348 
 
 Epiphanius, on Ebion, xvii; on 
 the Alogi, xxiii 
 
 Epistle, First of 8. John, its re- 
 lation to the Gospel, liv, 303; 
 coincidences between it and the 
 Gospel, 68, 72, 80, 81, 82, 105, 
 278 
 
 eternal life the present possession 
 of believers, 112, 138, 159, 161, 
 299, 364; the phrase a favourite 
 one with S. John, 105 
 
 INDEX I. 
 
 Eucharist, implied in the dis- 
 course on the Bread of Life, 
 158, 154, 160, 267; the insti- 
 tution omitted by S. John, 
 xlix, 267, 283; symbolized at 
 the Crucifixion, 334 
 
 Evangelists, concurrence of all 
 four, 1111, 88, 145, 306, 338, 
 360 
 
 evening, S. John’s method of 
 reckoning the, 128, 342 
 
 evenings, the two Jewish, 151 
 
 examination of Jesus before An- 
 nas peculiar to 5. John, 310 
 
 excommunication, Jewish, 180, 
 208, 211; the lot of Christians, 
 291; external evidence of the 
 authenticity of the Gospel, xx 
 —xXxiv 
 
 faith, gradual progress in, 119, 
 129, 207, 240, 339 
 
 faith in Jesus Christ, the test of 
 a child of God, 70; the begin- 
 ning and end of the Fourth 
 Gospel, 346, 347, xxxviii; with- . 
 out sight, 346 
 
 false readings, their evidence to 
 the date of the Gospel, 70, 71, 
 75, 102, 104, 211 
 
 feast, the unnamed in v.1, pro- 
 bably not a Passover, 131 
 
 feasts, Jewish, 8. John has exact 
 knowledge of, xxvii; groups 
 his narrative round, 94 
 
 fickleness of the multitude, see 
 multitude 
 
 five thousand, the feeding of the, 
 superiority of 5. John’s account 
 of, 148 
 
 forger of a gospel confronted by 
 insuperable difliculties, xxv, 
 Xxvl 
 
 four thousand, coincidences in 
 the feeding of the, 149 
 
 fourth commandment, the strong- 
 hold of Jewish religiousness, 
 133 ; 
 
 fragments, argument from the 
 command to gather up the, 149 
 
INDEX I, 
 
 funeral customs among the Jews, 
 238, 239, 245, 336 
 
 futile questions, 91, 149, 161, 
 350, 351 
 
 Gabbatha, or Gab Baitha, not 
 a mosaic pavement, but the 
 Temple-Mound, 328 
 
 Galileans, characteristics of, xii; 
 ill repute of, 86, 179, 181 
 
 Galilee, mixed population in, 
 xiii; prophets from, 181; 
 Christ’s ministry in, 167 
 
 gaps in S. John’s narrative, 1, 
 145, 146, 167, 223, 337 
 
 garments, 264, 322, 329 
 
 Gemara, the Babylonian, quoted, 
 249 
 
 Generation, Divine, of the Son, 
 196, 296 
 
 genitive after superlative, 73, 287 
 
 Gentiles, the, seek Christ, 255; 
 are to be sought through the 
 dispersed Jews, 177; are 
 Christ’s sheep, 221; are sons 
 of God, 70; are sharers in the 
 Atonement, 80; the Dispersion 
 among the, 176 
 
 Gerizim, temple on Mount, 119 
 
 Gethsemane, anticipation of, 257 
 
 glosses intruded into the text, 
 lviii, 98, 111, 130, 144, 182, 
 184, 185, 203, 230, 337 
 
 Gnostic demonology, 197, 198 
 
 Gnostics, the witness of, to the 
 Fourth Gospel, xxv 
 
 Gnosticism excluded from the 
 Fourth Gospel, xxiv, 71, 104, 
 120, 152, 227, 229, 334, 347 
 
 Godet quoted, 86, 91, 108, 178, 
 211 
 
 Golgotha, or place of a skull, 328 
 
 Gospel, Fourth, not a biography, 
 xxxvii, 145, 346 
 
 grace before meat, 149 
 
 grave, 238; of Lazarus, 244; of 
 Christ, 336, 339 
 
 Greek names among the Apostles, 
 255, 256 
 
 371 
 
 Greeks, see Gentiles 
 guards at the cross, 329 
 
 Hall, Bishop, quoted, 331 
 
 Hebrew elements in this Gospel ; 
 see Jewish 
 
 Hebrew, evidence that the author 
 of the Fourth Gospel knew, 
 xxix, 158, 254, 267, 335 
 
 Hegesippus quoted, 219 
 
 Hermas quoted, 219 
 
 Herod Antipas, 126, 319 
 
 Herod’s Praetorium, 314 
 
 Herod’s sycophancy, 147 
 
 Herod’s Temple, 97 
 
 high-priest, supposed to have 
 prophetic gifts, 247; doubt as 
 to who is meant by the, 311, 
 312; the disciple known to the, 
 311, 313 
 
 high-priests, rapid changes among 
 the, 247, 310 
 
 Holy Spirit, 82, 281, 344 
 
 homoeoteleuton, 321 
 
 Horace quoted, 251, 322 
 
 hyssop, 332 
 
 Ignatian Epistles, their evidence 
 to the Fourth Gospel, xxi, 117, 
 156; quoted, 103, 163, 192, 
 219 
 
 imperative or indicative, doubt 
 as to which is intended, 142, 
 255, 273, 287, 289 
 
 imperative, aorist, 257, 357; pre- 
 sent, 134, 186, 341 
 
 imperfect, of continued action, 
 135, 151, 152, 322; descriptive, 
 177, 184, 229, 268, 311, 313 
 
 imperfect and aorist, 89, 122, 
 127, 241 
 
 indirectness of Christ’s answers, 
 235 
 
 interpolations, 132, 181, 362; see 
 glosses 
 
 Tonic form, 89 
 
 Irenaeus, his evidence to the 
 Fourth Gospel, xxii, xxxvlii; 
 quoted, xvii, 202; his evidence 
 
 AA 2 
 
372 INDEX I. 
 
 to the duration of Christ’s min- 
 istry, li 
 
 Jacob, references to the history 
 of, 87, 88; well of, 115, 118 
 James, brother of 8. John, xi; 
 
 not mentioned by name in this 
 Gospel, 90; possibly the un- 
 named disciple who was known 
 to the high-priest, 311 
 Jeremiah, expected to return to 
 life, 78; specially consecrated, 
 223 
 Jeremy Taylor on religious zeal, 
 310 
 Jerome, on 3. John’s last days! 
 xviii; on the origin of the 
 Fourth Gospel, xxxvi; on the 
 brethren of the Lord, 94; on 
 Sychar, 115; on the paragraph 
 respecting the adulteress, 182, 
 362; on Christ’s writing on the 
 ground, 185; on Ephraim, 248 
 Jerusalem, two forms of the name, 
 77; with the article peculiar to 
 5. John, 89; destroyed before 
 S. John wrote, xxxvi, 131, 238; 
 his minute knowledge of its 
 topography, xvi, xxix 
 JESUS: 
 (i) The Ministry. 
 Baptist’s testimony to Him, 
 73, 79; disciples’ testimony 
 to Him, 83, 84; turns water 
 into wine at Cana, 89; pays 
 a brief visit to Capernaum, 
 93; cleanses the Temple the 
 first time, 94; discourses 
 with Nicodemus, 99; and 
 with the woman at the well, 
 116; converts many Samari- 
 tans, 125; heals the royal 
 official’s son, 127; and a 
 paralytic at Bethesda, 131; 
 reasons with the Jews about 
 the Son as the Source of 
 Life, 135; feeds five thou- 
 sand, 146; walks on the wa- 
 ter, 151; reasons with the 
 Jews about the Son as the 
 
 support of Life, 154; with 
 the Twelve about desertion 
 of Him, 165; with His bre- 
 thren about manifesting 
 Himself, 167; with the Jews 
 at the Feast of Tabernacles, 
 170; is marked for arrest, 
 175; [rescues the woman 
 taken in adultery, 183;] 
 claims to be God, 192, 198, 
 202; heals a man born blind, 
 205; and reveals Himself to 
 him, 212; delivers the Alle- 
 gories of the Fold and of the 
 Good Shepherd, 215, 220; 
 reasons with the Jews at the 
 Feast of the Dedication, 223; 
 retires into Peraea, 229; re- 
 turns to Bethany and raises 
 Lazarus from the dead, 238, 
 244; is marked for death by 
 Caiaphas, 247; retires to the 
 borders of the desert, 248; 
 returns and is anointed by 
 Mary of Bethany, 250; en- 
 ters Jerusalem in triumph, 
 254; is sought by Gentile 
 proselytes, 256; receives the 
 testimony of a voice from 
 heaven, 257; retires from 
 public teaching, 260 
 
 (ii) The Issues of the Min- 
 
 istry. 
 
 washes His disciples’ feet, 
 263; rebukes Peter, 265; 
 points out the traitor, 269; 
 delivers His new command- 
 ment, 271; foretells Peter’s 
 denials, 272; answers Tho- 
 mas, 274; Philip, 275; Ju- 
 das not Iscariot, 280; deli- 
 vers the allegory of the Vine, 
 283; promises to send the 
 Paraclete and to return, 290; 
 prays for Himself, 298; for 
 His disciples, 300; for all 
 believers, 302; is arrested in 
 the garden, 307; examined 
 before Annas, 310; denied 
 by Peter, 313; examined by 
 
INDEX I. 
 
 Pilate, 317; mocked, sen- 
 tenced and crucified, 322; 
 dies and is buried, 332; ma- 
 nifests Himself after His re- 
 surrection to Mary of Mag- 
 dala, 340; to the ten Apostles, 
 342; to Thomas, 344; to se- 
 ven disciples at the sea of 
 Tiberias, 348; gives the se- 
 cond miraculous draught of 
 fishes, 350; gives Peter his 
 last commission and foretells 
 his death, 352; rebukes his 
 curiosity about the Evan- 
 gelist, 355 
 Jewish elements in the Fourth 
 Gospel, xxvii, xxix, xliv, xlviii, 
 89, 203, 229 
 Jews, S. John’s view of them, 77 
 John, the Baptist; the Evangel- 
 ist’s manner of naming him, 
 xxxil, 67; his connexion with 
 the Evangelist, xiv, 83; his 
 testimony, 76—83; not the 
 Light but the Lamp, 68, 140; 
 the friend of the Bridegroom, 
 109; his baptism, 108; his last 
 utterance minatory, 112; not a 
 worker of miracles; importance 
 of this statement, 230 
 John, the Evangelist; his parent- 
 age, xi; his nationality, xii, 
 xiii; his connexion with the 
 Baptist, xiv, 83; his fiery zeal, 
 XV, Xvii; gives a home to the 
 Blessed Virgin, xv, 331; life at 
 Ephesus, xvi, xvii, xlix; tradi- 
 tions about him, xviii; his 
 chief characteristics, xviii, xix; 
 probably the unnamed disciple 
 in i. 35, 83; and in xviii. 15, 
 311; certainly ‘the disciple 
 - whom Jesus loved,’ xxxi, xxxiv, 
 268; in his Gospel speaks only 
 thrice, xxxiv 
 John, the father of Peter, 85, 352 
 Jordan, ford of, at Bethany, 79; 
 its associations, 79 
 Joseph, husband of the Blessed 
 Virgin, 89 
 
 ste 
 
 Joseph of Arimathea, 335; his 
 connexion with Nicodemus, 
 336 
 
 Josephus, on the date of Herod’s 
 Temple, 97; on the removal of 
 Israel at the captivity, 118; on 
 the Jews’ love of liberty, 193; 
 on a stoning in the Temple, 
 202; on the rudeness of the 
 Sadducees, 247; on Ephraim, 
 248; on the tesselated pave- 
 ment, 325; on the high-priest’s . 
 tunic, 329; his language about 
 the Kedron, 305, 306; about 
 the sea of Galilee, 146 
 
 Judas; six persons so named in 
 N.T., 280 
 
 Judas Iscariot; his name and 
 character, 166; murmurs at 
 Mary of Bethany, 251; receives 
 the sop and goes out into the 
 night, 269, 270; helps to arrest 
 Jesus, 308 
 
 Judas not Iscariot; the nature of 
 his question, 280 
 
 Judas of Galilee, rising of, xiii 
 
 Justin Martyr; knew the Fourth 
 Gospel, xxii; seems to quote it 
 twice, 78, 101; twice states 
 that Jesus healed those who 
 were diseased from birth, 204 
 
 Kedron, ravine of the; doubt as 
 to the reading, 305; meaning 
 of the name, 306; significance 
 of Christ’s crossing the ravine, 
 307 
 
 kingdom, nature of Christ’s, 101, 
 150, 318 
 
 Lactantius on the crurifragium, 
 333 
 
 Last Day; the phrase peculiar 
 to 5. John, 157 
 
 Lazarus, objections to the raising 
 of, 231, 232; identifications of, 
 232; conspired against, 253 
 
 Levites, argument from the men- 
 tion of, 77 
 
374 
 
 Liddon, on the discourse with 
 Nicodemus, 103 
 
 wie’ 256, 275; eternal, 105, 
 10 
 
 Light, of Christ, 66, 187, 205, 
 259; of the Baptist, 140, 308 
 
 Lightfoot, Bishop, on the wit- 
 ness of the Ignatian Epistles 
 to the Fourth Gospel, xxi; on 
 πλήρωμα, 73; on the Shechi- 
 nah, 71; on the vivid descrip- 
 tive traits in this Gospel, 269; 
 on the meaning of Paraclete, 
 279; on ὁ Χριστός, 74 
 
 Litotes, or understatement, 106, 
 157, 195 
 
 living water, meaning of, 117 
 
 Lord or Sir, 117, 156, 212 
 
 Love, the Fourth Gospel the 
 Gospel of, xix, liv, 214, 271, 285 
 
 Lucretius quoted, 86 
 
 Luther on futile questions, 161 
 
 Magdalene; see Mary Magdalene 
 
 Majestas, Pilate’s fear of being 
 accused to Tiberius of, 325 
 
 Malchus, mentioned by name by 
 5. John alone, 309, 313 
 
 Manasseh, founder of the rival 
 worship on Gerizim, 119 
 
 Marcion’s rejection of the Fourth 
 Gospel, xxiii 
 
 marriage, Christ gives His sanc- 
 tion to, 93; symbolical of His 
 relation to His Church, 109 
 
 Martha of Bethany, probably the 
 eldest of the family, 234, 239; 
 coincidence between 83. John 
 and 5. Luke respecting her, 
 liii, 239; her progressive faith, 
 240 
 
 Mary Magdalene, introduced as 
 a person well known, 165; at 
 the Cross, 330; at the sepul- 
 chre, 338; manifestation to 
 her, 340; nature of the rebuke 
 to her, 341 
 
 Mary of Clopas, probably the 
 wife of Clopas and mother of 
 James the less, 330 
 
 INDEX I, 
 
 Mary of Bethany, different from 
 the ‘sinner’ of Luke vii. 37 
 and from Mary Magdalene, 
 233; coincidence between §. 
 John and 5. Luke respecting 
 her, liii, 239; her devotion, 
 251; coincidence respecting her 
 name and promised fame, 252 
 
 Mary, the Blessed Virgin, never 
 named by 8. John, 90; rebuked 
 for interference at Cana, 90; 
 her relationship to the brethren 
 of the Lord, 93, 168; to 5. John, 
 xi, 330; no special manifesta- 
 tion to her after the Resurrec- 
 tion, 342; her death, whether 
 at Jerusalem or Ephesus, xvi 
 
 Maurice, F, D., quoted, 65, 315 
 
 McClellan, on Christ’s writing on 
 the ground, 184; on the hour 
 of the Crucifixion, 326 
 
 measures, of quantity, 91; of 
 distance, 239, 350 
 
 Messiah, Jewish ideas respecting, 
 well known to the Evangelist, 
 xxvii, 78, 87, 89, 150, 174, 179, 
 259; Samaritan ideas respect- 
 ing, 114, 122 
 
 Meyer, on the last words of the 
 Baptist, 110; on the discourse 
 on the Bread of Life, 166; on 
 the Jewish hierarchy, 170; on 
 the gift of the Spirit, 179; on 
 the raising of Lazarus, 232 
 
 ministry, duration of Christ’s, 1, 
 li, 202 
 
 miracles in N.T., their character, 
 92, 93; in the Fourth Gospel, 
 symbolical, xliii, xliv, 92, 129, 
 and spontaneous, 132; culmi- 
 nate in the raising of Lazarus, 
 231; confined to the ministry, 
 98 ; not attributed to John the 
 Baptist, 230 
 
 mission, of Jesus, 81, 106, 124, 
 141, 172, 175, 228, 300; of the 
 Paraclete, 281, 288, 289, 292: 
 of the Baptist, 67, 81, 199; of 
 the disciples, 81, 268, 302, 
 343 
 
INDEX 1. 
 
 money, changers of, 95; sums of, 
 148, 251 
 
 Moses, the actual giver, neither 
 of the Law, 74; nor of the 
 manna, 155; testifies to the 
 Christ, 86, 144; and against 
 the Jews, 144, 173; contrasted 
 with Christ, 155, 210 
 
 Mount Gerizim, temple on, 119 
 
 Mount of Olives, not mentioned 
 by S. John, 183 
 
 Mount of the Temple, 325 
 
 multitude, fickleness of the, 150, 
 155, 163, 167, 179, 188, 190, 
 193, 225, 243, 245, 259 
 
 Muratorian Fragment, xxii, xxxv 
 
 Nathanael, possibly the same as 
 Bartholomew, 86; his charac- 
 ter, 87 
 
 Nazarene, 308 
 
 Nazareth, evil repute of, 86 
 
 Neapolis, or Sychem, 115 
 
 new commandment, 271 
 
 Newman, Cardinal, on the dis- 
 courses in §. John’s Gospel, 
 100 
 
 Nicodemus, mentioned by 5. John 
 only, 100; his character, 100, 
 180, 335; coincidence between 
 8. John and 5. Mark respecting 
 him, 336 
 
 nobleman’s son distinct from the 
 centurion’s servant, 128, 129 
 
 nominative indefinite, 284 
 
 nominativus pendens, 157, 178, 
 299 
 
 objections, 5. John’s manner of 
 treating, 86, 179 
 
 Olives, Mount of, see Mount 
 
 optative mood rare in N.T., 67 
 
 orally, the Fourth Gospel deli- 
 vered at first, xxxvi, liv, 356 
 
 Origen, mainly responsible for 
 the reading Bethabara in i. 28, 
 79; on the Jewish lie respect- 
 ing Christ’s birth, 196; on 
 Christ's voluntary surrender, 
 
 375 
 
 307; on the crucifixion of S. 
 Peter, 354 
 
 Papias, knew the First Epistle of 
 5. John, xxii; a possible source 
 of the paragraph about the 
 adulteress, 182 
 
 parables, not found in the Fourth 
 Gospel, 215; principles of in- 
 terpretation of, 104, 216 
 
 Paraclete, threefold office of, 292; 
 mission of, 281, 288, 289 
 
 parallelism in the Fourth Gospel, 
 xlviii, 156, 190, 288; see anti- 
 thetic 
 
 paralytic at Bethesda, 132 
 
 Passion, prominent thoughts in 
 S. John’s narrative of the, 305; 
 reason for the space allotted to 
 the trials in the, 310; probable 
 order of events in the, 361 
 
 Passover, customs at the, 268, 
 269, 270, 320, 359; the first in 
 Christ’s ministry, 94; the se- 
 cond, 147; the last, 263; the 
 unnamed Feast in v. 1 not the 
 Passover, 130, 131; the Last 
 Supper not the Passover, 358, 
 359 
 
 Paul, coincidences between 8. 
 John and 8., 69, 70, 279, 359 
 
 pendens, casus, see casus 
 
 Pentecost anticipated, 343 
 
 perfect and aorist, see aorist 
 
 perfect with present meaning, 73, 
 143 
 
 Peter, brought to Jesus by his 
 brother Andrew and named by 
 Jesus, 84, 85; his impetuos- 
 ity, 265, 272, 309, 339, 350, 
 355; his intimacy with 8. John, 
 xiii, 269, 311, 339, 355; his 
 primacy fully recognised by S. 
 John, xxxiv; his confessions, 
 165; his denials, 360; his re- 
 pentance implied but not nar- 
 rated by 8. John, 352; argu- 
 ment from the method of 
 naming him in xxi, 352; 
 Christ’s last commission to 
 
376 
 him and prediction of his 
 death, 353, 354 
 
 Pharisees, the only Jewish sect 
 
 named by 8. John, 78; their 
 position, 76, 78, 100, 180, 207, 
 246; are led by the Sadducean 
 hierarchy in the persecution 
 of Jesus, 249 
 
 Philip, found by Jesus, 85; con- 
 sulted by Him, 147, 148; re- 
 buked by Him, 276; his cha- 
 racter, 256, 275 
 
 Philo, his doctrine of the Logos 
 compared with 5. John’s, 63, 
 64, 71; on Herod’s Praetorium, 
 314; on the character of Pilate, 
 329 
 
 Pilate, introduced as well known 
 to the reader, 316; his resi- 
 dence, 319, 325; his first words 
 to Jesus, 317; his attempts to 
 avoid putting Jesus to death, 
 316; his famous question, 319; 
 his policy, 322; his conflicting 
 fears, 324, 325; his character, 
 329; his recall to Rome, li 
 
 Plautus quoted, 191 
 
 Pliny quoted, 335 
 
 Plutarch quoted, 184 
 
 Polybius’ use of σπεῖρα for mani- 
 ple, 307 
 
 Polycarp’s evidence to the First 
 Epistle of 8. John, xxii; falla- 
 cious argument from his con- 
 troversy with Anicetus, xxxiv, 
 XXXV 
 
 Polycrates on 8. John’s sacerdo- 
 tal dress, xvii 
 
 Porphyry’s charge against Jesus, 
 170 
 
 Praetorium, 314 
 
 Prayer of the Great High Priest, 
 where spoken, 298 
 
 predestinarianism not counte- 
 nanced in the Fourth Gospel, 
 166, 204, 225 
 
 pregnant construction, 81, 87, 
 112, 325, 343, 349 
 
 preposition apparently 
 posed, 239, 250, 350 
 
 trans- 
 
 INDEX I. 
 
 priests, 77; mostly Sadducees, 
 yet combine with the Pharisees 
 against Jesus, 180, 246, 249 
 
 primacy of 8. Peter, see Peter 
 
 Procession of the Holy Spirit, 
 289 
 
 Prophet, the, 78, 150, 179, 241 
 
 Prophets, the, as a division of 
 Scripture, 159 
 
 Procurator, Pilate as, has no 
 Quaestor to conduct the exam- 
 ination, 317; nor lictors to in- 
 flict the scourging, 322 
 
 prophecies fulfilled in Christ, 86, 
 95, 144, 179, 254, 259, 317, 
 330, 331, 335 
 
 psychological consistency in 5. 
 John’s narrative, 100, 115, 119, 
 127, 128, 207, 237, 240, 244, 
 265, 275, 309, 339, 344, 345 
 
 punctuation, differences of, 65, 
 173, 208, 235, 248, 257, 270, 
 277, 296 
 
 purification, ceremonial, 91, 109, 
 248 
 
 Purim, Feast of, 131 
 
 purple robe, 322 
 
 purpose, constructions implying, 
 frequent in 5. John, xlvii, 68, 
 124, 125, 127, 201, 204, 247, 
 256 
 
 purpose of the Gospel, xxxvii, 
 liv, 303, 346, 347 
 
 Rabbi, meaning of, 83; not to be 
 rendered ‘Master,’ 123 
 
 Rabbinical sayings and traditions, 
 78, 122, 134, 174, 180, 184, 
 244 
 
 Rabboni, a Galilean form, 341 
 
 readings, important differences of, 
 lvii, 66, 70, 71, 75, 79, 130, 
 160, 170, 211, 269, 305, 312, 
 348 
 
 remission of sins by the Church, 
 344 
 
 repetition, characteristic of S. 
 John, xlvi, 106, 162, 219, 259, 
 286 
 
 reserve about all connected with 
 
INDEX I. 
 
 himself characteristic of S. 
 John, 84, 90, 311, 330, 349 
 
 resurrection, spiritual, 137, 138 ; 
 actual, 139; of the wicked, 
 140; of Lazarus, 231; of Christ, 
 338; Jewish belief respecting, 
 240 
 
 Revelation, see Apocalypse 
 
 robber or bandit, 95, 216, 321; 
 S. John and the robber, xvii 
 
 Sabbath, the attitude of Jesus to- 
 wards the, 133; yields to Cir- 
 cumcision and therefore to 
 charity, 173; miracles wrought 
 on the, 207 
 
 Sadducees, not mentioned by 5. 
 John, 78; combine with the 
 Pharisees against Jesus, 249 
 
 Salome, mother of S. John, pro- 
 bably the sister of the Blessed 
 Virgin, 330 
 
 Samaria, 116 
 
 Samaritan, Jesus called a, 199 
 
 Samaritans, 114; their origin, 
 117; their relations to the Jews, 
 116, 120; their religion, 120; 
 their idea of the Messiah, 122; 
 their readiness to believe in 
 Jesus, 125 
 
 Sanhedrin, its attitude towards 
 the Baptist, 76; towards Jesus, 
 175, 180, 246; had lost the 
 power to inflict capital punish- 
 ment, 184, 316; takes part in 
 the arrest of Jesus, 307; in a 
 difficulty respecting His execu- 
 tion, 315; ex-high-priests among 
 its members, 310; S. John’s 
 formula for the, 207; its place 
 of meeting, 189 
 
 Satan, see devil 
 
 scourging, inflicted only once on 
 Jesus, 322; with what object, 
 316, 322, 323 
 
 Sebaste, or Samaria, 116, 147 
 
 Seneca quoted, 106 
 
 sepulchre, 238 
 
 serpent, argument from the men- 
 tion of the, 104 
 
 377 
 
 signs, miracles to S. John are, 
 92, 212 
 
 Siloam, identified with Birket 
 Silwén, 206; the pouring of 
 the water from, 177 
 
 Simon, S. John’s usage in apply- 
 ing this name to 8. Peter, 352 
 
 Solomon’s Porch, 224 
 
 Son of Man, use of the phrase in 
 the O, T. and in the Gospels, 
 88 
 
 spiral movement, in the Prologue, 
 75; in the last discourses, 273 
 
 style of-S. John, xlvi—xlviii, 219 
 
 subjunctive, after a past tense, 
 67; after verbs of wishing, 320 
 
 Suetonius quoted, 264, 325 
 
 superscription or title, of the 
 Gospel, 61; on the cross, 328 
 
 Supper, at Bethany, 251; the 
 Last, 264; its character, 359 
 
 Sychar, probably not Sychem, 
 115 
 
 symbolical interpretations of 
 Scripture, authorised by Christ, 
 212; to be made with caution, 
 351 
 
 symbolism a characteristic of the 
 Fourth Gospel, xliii, 100, 206, 
 224, 270, 307 
 
 synagogue at Capernaum, exist- 
 ing ruins of, 163 
 
 Synoptic Gospels, their relation 
 to the Fourth, xlix—liii, 145, 
 306, 337 
 
 Tabernacles, Feast of, 168; spe- 
 cial ceremonies at the, 177, 
 187 
 
 table, mode of reclining at, 268 
 
 Talmud, on thanksgiving, 149; 
 on Elijah’s return, 78; on the 
 execution of Jesus, 249, 359; 
 on the uncleanness of fowls, 
 313; on capital punishment, 
 316 
 
 Targums, their use of the peri- 
 phrasis ‘ Word of God,’ 63 
 
 Tatian; his testimony to the 
 Fourth Gospel, 65, 66 
 
378 
 
 Temple; traffic in the Court of 
 the Gentiles, 94; date of build- 
 ing, 97; treasury in the Court 
 of the Women, 189; Christ’s 
 public teaching there, 171, 186, 
 225; Solomon’s Porch, 224 
 
 Tertullian, gives three renderings 
 of Λόγος, 62; witnesses to very 
 early differences of reading, 70, 
 211; to the crucifixion of S. 
 Peter at Rome, 354; to the 
 story of 5. John at Latin Gate, 
 xvii; to the true ‘Note of the 
 Church,’ 272; quoted, 312 
 
 Thaddaeus, or Judas, 280 
 
 Theophilus of Antioch, xxii 
 
 Thomas, name and character of, 
 237, 238, 274, 363; compared 
 with Philip, 275; nature of his 
 scepticism, 345, 346; his con- 
 fession the conclusion of the 
 Gospel, 339, 346 
 
 thorns, crown of, 322 
 
 Tiberias, not mentioned by the 
 Synoptists, 146, 348; because 
 a new town, 147; a centre of 
 education, xiii; various names 
 for the sea of, 146 
 
 Tiberius ; chronology of his reign 
 in connexion with Christ’s min- 
 istry, li; Pilate’s fear of him, 
 325 
 
 title, see superscription 
 
 tomb, 238, 339 
 
 tragic brevity in 8. John, 270, 
 321 
 
 tragic tone in 8. John, 66, 69, 
 104, 106, 111, 142, 156 
 
 Transfiguration, not recorded by 
 5. John, xxiii; nor alluded to 
 in v. 37, 141 
 
 transmigration of souls, 204 
 
 treasury in the Court of the Wo- 
 men, 189 
 
 Trench, Archbishop, on the cha- 
 racter of 5. Thomas, 237; on a 
 tradition respecting Lazarus, 
 245 
 
 trial of Jesus, why given at such 
 length in the Gospels, 310; the 
 
 INDEX 1. 
 
 ecclesiastical, 
 civil, 314—327 
 
 triple augment, 203 
 
 triumphal entry into Jerusalem, 
 date of the, 253; Messianic in 
 its externals, 254; two multi- 
 tudes at, 255 
 
 Truth, Jesus is the, 274; the 
 Gospel is the, 319 
 
 Twelve, the, spoken of as well 
 known, 165 
 
 typical characters in the Fourth 
 Gospel, xliii, 129 
 
 typical miracles, xliii, 351 
 
 310—313; the 
 
 Uncial manuscripts, table of, lv; 
 their relations to one another, 
 lvi 
 
 Unitarianism condemned, 136, 
 226, 345 
 
 Vedas quoted, 65 
 
 Versions, table of ancient, lvi 
 
 vine, allegory of, how suggested, 
 283 
 
 vinegar, 331 
 
 Virgil quoted, 158 
 
 voice in the wilderness, 78 
 voices from heaven, 258 
 
 washing the disciples’ feet, 264 
 
 washing the saints’ feet, 266 
 
 water, the living, 117; from Si- 
 loam, 177 
 
 water, Christ. walking on the, 
 151 
 
 Way, Jesus is the, 274, 275; 
 Christianity is the, 274 
 
 Westcott, on the relation between 
 the Fourth Gospel and the Syn- 
 optists, lili; on the discourse 
 on the Bread of Life, 153; on 
 5. John’s style, 219; on the 
 scene of, xvii, 298; on the nar- 
 ratives of the Passion and of 
 the Resurrection, 305, 338 
 
 Westcott and Hort on the number 
 of doubtful readings in N.T., 
 lviii; on the paragraph respect- 
 ing the adulteress, 363 
 
INDEX II, 
 
 wine, amount of water turned 
 
 into, 91; objections answered, 
 93 
 
 women prominent in §, John’s 
 
 319 
 
 narrative, xliii, 330 
 words from the cross, 361, 362 
 
 Xenophon quoted, 103 
 
 II. GREEK, 
 
 ἀγαπᾶν, 105, 137, 234, 352 
 
 ἁγιάζειν, 228, 302 
 
 ἀδελφοί, oi, 355 
 
 αἵματα, 70 
 
 alpew, 80, 222 
 
 αἰτεῖν, 278, 295 
 
 αἰτεῖσθαι, 240 
 
 αἰτία, 320 
 
 αἰῶνα, els τὸν, 200, 363 
 
 αἰώνιος, 105, 106, 363 
 
 ἀκολούθει μοι, 85 
 
 ἀληθινός, 68, 121, 155 
 
 ἀλλ᾽ iva, 68 
 
 “Adoyot, XXiil 
 
 ἀμὴν ἀμήν, 88 
 
 ἀνά, distributive, 91 
 
 ἀναβλέπειν, 207 
 
 ἀνακεῖσθαι, 268 
 
 ἀναμάρτητος, 18 
 
 ἀναπίπτω, 269 
 
 ἄνδρες and ἄνθρωποι, οἱ, 
 128 
 
 ἀντί, 74 
 
 ἀντιλέγειν, 325 
 
 ἀντλᾶν, 91 
 
 ἄνωθεν, 101, 110 
 
 ἀπαρχή, 859 
 
 ἀπείθειν, 112 
 
 ἀπό of distance, apparently trans- 
 posed, 239, 350 
 
 ἀποκρίνεσθαι, 135 
 
 ἀποστέλλειν, 67, 81 
 
 ἀποσυνάγωγος, 208 
 
 ἀπὸ τῶν used substantively, 350 
 
 ἀριστᾶν, 351 
 
 ἄρτι, 92, 296 
 
 ἀρχή, 62 
 
 ἀρχήν, τὴν, 190 
 
 ἀρχιερεῖς, 175 
 
 149, 
 
 ἀρχιτρίκλινος, 91 
 
 ἄρχομαι, 2θ4 
 
 ἄρχων, 100 
 
 ἄρχων, 0 τοῦ κόσμου τούτου, 258 
 αὐλή and ποίμνη, 221 
 
 ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ, 137, 298 
 
 ἀφῆκεν, 114, 128, 192 
 
 βαΐα, 254 
 
 βάλλειν, 133, 345 
 βαπτίζειν, 79, 82 
 ϑασιλικός, 126 
 βαστάζειν, 226, 252 
 δῆμα, 325 
 
 ϑόσκειν, 353 
 
 βραχίων Kuplov, 260 
 βρῶμα and βρῶσις, 126 
 
 γαζοφυλακίον, 189 
 
 γεγραμμένον ἐστίν, 95 
 
 γεωργός, 283 
 
 γίνεσθαι and εἶναι, 62, 65, 67 
 
 γίνεσθαι els, 294 
 
 γινώσκειν, 69, 98, 174, 200, 201, 
 228 
 
 γλωσσόκομον, 252 
 
 γογγύζειν, 158, 175 
 
 γραμματεῖς, 183 
 
 γραφή, ἡ, 97 
 
 δαιμόνιον, 199 
 δακρύειν, 243 
 δέδωκεν, 112 
 δηνάριον, 148, 251 
 
 διὰ τοῦτο, 135, 173 
 διασπορά, 176, 177 
 δικαιοσύνη, 292 
 
 δόξα, 72, 142, 143 
 δὸς δόξαν τῷ Θεῴ, 209 
 
380 
 δύναμις, 69, 92 
 
 “EBpaiorl, 132, 341 
 
 ἐγκαίνια, 224 
 
 Ἐγώ εἰμι, 151, 156, 190, 308 
 
 ἔθνος, 247, 248 
 
 εἰ with the aorist, 117; with the 
 imperfect, 144 
 
 εἰδέναι and γινώσκειν, 98 
 
 εἶναι and γίνεσθαι, 62, 65, 67 
 
 εἶναι ἐκ, 110 
 
 εἰς τέλος, 263 
 
 εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, 200, 363 
 
 ἐκ, different forces of, 102, 109, 
 110, 111, 116, 164, 257 
 
 ἐκ τούτου, 164, 324 
 
 ἐκ τῶν used substantively, 78, 
 179, 350 
 
 ἐκβάλλειν, 211 
 
 ἐκεῖνος, S. John’s use of, 67, 75, 
 134, 206, 212, 216 
 
 ἐκκεντάν, 335 
 
 ἐκπορεύεσθαι, 288, 289 
 
 ἐλέγχειν, 107, 292 
 
 ἐλήλυθεν ἡ wpa, 256 
 
 ἑλκύειν, 158, 259 
 
 Ἕλληνες, 117, 255 
 
 ἐμβλέπειν, 83 
 
 ἐμβριμᾶσθαι, 242 
 
 ἐμφανίζειν, 282 
 
 ἐμφυσᾶν, 343 
 
 év, different forces of, 97, 107, 
 189 
 
 ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί μου, 277, 281 
 ἐνταφιασμός, 252 
 ἐξηγεῖσθαι, 75 
 
 ἐξουσία, 69, 222 
 
 ἐπάρατος, 180 
 
 ἐπίγεια and ἐπουράνια, 104 
 ἐρωτᾶν, 240, 278, 29 
 ἐσχατη ἡμέρα, ἡ, 157 
 εὐχαριστεῖν, 149 
 
 ἔχειν μέρος, 265 
 
 ἕως, 205, 355 
 
 faw, 145 
 wn, 65, 256, 275 
 ζωὴ αἰώνιος, 105, 106, 363 
 
 ἡμέρα, ἡ ἐσχάτη, 157 
 
 INDEX ITI. 
 
 θεᾶσθαι, 72 
 
 θέλειν, 151, 165, 171, 197, 304 
 θεοσεβής, 210 
 
 θεωρεῖν, 147, 157 
 
 θυρωρός, 216 
 
 ἔδε and ἰδού, 80 
 
 ἴδια, Ta, 69 
 
 ἱερόν and ναός, 94, 96 
 Ἱεροσόλυμα and Ἱερουσαλήμ, 77 
 ἱμάτια, Ta, 264, 329 
 
 iva, xlvii, 124, 127, 201, 204 
 iva with the indicative, 299 
 Ἰουδαῖοι, ol, 77 
 
 Ἰσκαριώτης, 166 
 
 Ἰσραήλ, 104 
 
 καθίζειν, 325 
 
 καί intensive, 211 
 
 Καϊάφας, 247 
 
 καινος and νέος, 271 
 
 καιρός, 169 
 
 καλεῖν, 217 
 
 καλός, 220, 226 
 
 καλῶς, 198 
 
 karaxplvew, 186 
 καταλαμβάνειν, 66 
 
 κειρίαι, 245 
 
 κερματιστής, 94 
 
 Κηφᾶς, 85 
 
 κλαίειν, 242, 294 
 
 κλέπτης and λῃστής, 216, 321 
 κλῆμα, 283 
 
 κοιμᾶσθαι, 236 
 
 κολλυβιστής, 95 
 
 κομψότερον ἔχειν, 127 
 κόσμον, ἔρχεσθαι εἰς τὸν, 241 
 κόσμος, 69, 169 
 
 κόφινος, 149 
 
 κράβαττος, 133 
 
 κράζειν, 73, 174, 261 
 Kpavyatew, 245 
 
 κρίμα, 212 
 
 κρίνειν and κρίσις, 106, 139, 140, 
 
 187 
 κύριε, 117, 156, 212 
 λαλεῖν, 111, 191 
 
 λαλία and λόγος, 125, 196 
 λαμπάς, 307, 308 
 
λαός and ἔθνος, 247 
 Λιθόστρωτον, 325 
 
 λόγος, 111, 125, 163, 196 
 Λόγος, ὁ, 62 
 
 λούεσθαι, 265 
 
 λύειν, 185, 227 
 
 λύχνος, 140, 808 
 
 μακάριος, 267 
 μαρτυρία, 67, 82 
 μεθύσκεσθαι, 92 
 μέλλειν, 127, 166 
 μέν without δέ, 235 
 μένειν, 81 
 
 μέντοι, 122 
 
 μέρος ἔχειν, 265 
 Μεσσίας, 85, 122 
 μετὰ ταῦτα, 108, 265 
 μετὰ τοῦτο, 108 
 μετρητής, 91 
 
 μή interrogative, 123, 311 
 μὴ and οὐ, 164 
 μισθωτός, 220 
 μνημεῖον, 238 
 
 μονή, 273 
 
 μονογενής, 72 
 
 v ἐφελκυστικόν, 61 
 Ναζωραῖος, 308 
 
 ναῦς, 94, 96, 97 
 
 νέος and καινός, 271 
 νίπτω, 206 
 
 νόμος, 6, 227, 259, 288 
 νύμφη, 109 
 
 νύττειν, 333 
 
 ὁδός, ὁ, 274 
 
 ὀθόνια, 336 
 
 οἶδα, 98 
 
 ὄνομα, 70, 277, 251 
 ὄντως, 194 
 
 ὄξος, 331 
 
 ὄρθρου, 183 
 ὀρφανός, 219 
 
 οὖν, xlvii, 109, 159, 184, 309, 312, 
 
 313 
 
 οὗτος, 8. John’s use of, 64, 100, 
 
 111, 172 
 
 οὗτος as predicate, 106, 159, 299 
 
 INDEX II. 
 
 οὗτος contemptuous, 109, 
 
 171, 177, 207, 259 
 ὄφις, 104 
 ὀψάριον, 149 
 ὀψία, 151 
 ὄψις, 174, 245 
 
 παιδάριον, 148 
 
 παιδία, 349 
 
 παιδίον and παῖς, 127 
 πάντα and τὰ πάντα, 65 
 παρά, 67 
 
 παραδίδωμι, 266, 807 
 παράκλητος, 218 
 παρακύπτειν, 889 
 παραλαμβάνειν, 69 
 παρασκευή, 326, 333, 358 
 παροιμία, 217 
 
 παῤῥησίᾳ, 171 
 
 πᾶσα σάρξ, 299 
 
 Πατήρ, 6, 120 
 
 πέμπειν, 81 
 
 πέταλον, XVil 
 
 πηγή, 115 
 
 πιστεύειν, 67, 188, 155 
 πιστεύειν εἰς, Τ0 
 πιστικός, 251 
 πλανᾶσθαι, 180 
 πλήρωμα, 73 
 
 πνεῦμα, 103, 178, 242, 268 
 Πνεῦμα “Αγιον, 82, 281, 344 
 ποιεῖν, 106 
 
 ποιεῖν ἑαυτόν, 201 
 
 ποιεῖν τὴν ἀληθείαν, 107 
 ποιεῖσθαι, 273 
 ποιμαίνειν, 858 
 
 ποίμνη and αὐλή, 222 
 ποῖος, 227, 259, 317 
 πονηρός, ὁ, 802 
 
 πονηρός and φαῦλος, 106 
 πραιτώριον, 814 
 πράσσειν and ποιεῖν, 106 
 
 281 
 168, 
 
 πρό apparently transposed, 250, 
 263 
 
 προβατική, 131 
 προσεύχεσθαι, 240 
 προσκυνεῖν, 212 
 προσφάγιον, 349 
 προσφέρειν, 291 
 προφήτης, 119, 208 
 
382 INDEX II. 
 
 προφήτης, ὁ, 78, 150, 179 τίτλος, 328 
 προφήται, ol, 159 τρώγειν, 161 
 πρῶτον ὑμῶν, 287 
 πρῶτός μου, 18 ὕδατος, ἐξ, 102 
 ὑδρία, 91, 128 
 Ῥαββί, 88, 128 υἱὸς, 127, 259 
 ῥάπισμα, 812, 822 υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, ὁ, 88, 139 
 ῥήματα, 111 υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας, ὁ, 801 
 ἱΡωμαϊστί, 829 υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὁ, 82 
 
 ὑψωθῆναι, 105, 258 
 σάββατα, τὰ, 338 
 
 σάρξ, 71, 160, 161, 164, 299 φαίνειν, 66 
 
 σημεῖον, 92 φανεροῦν, 80, 92, 348 
 
 σκανδαλίζειν, 290 gaves, 307 
 
 σκελοκοπία, 333 φαύλος, 106 
 
 σκηνοπηγία, 168 _ φίλος τοῦ Καίσαρος, 325 
 
 σκηνοῦν, 71 φιλεῖν, 137, 234, 352 
 
 σκληρός, 163 φοίνιξ, 254 
 
 σκοτία, 66 φρέαρ, 115 
 
 σουδάριον, 245, 339 φυλάσσειν, 200, 261 
 
 σπεῖρα, 307 φωνεῖν, 217 
 
 στήκειν, lvii, 197 φωνή, 78, 141 
 
 συνάγεσθαι, 307 φώς, 68, 187, 205, 259 
 
 συνέδριον, 246 
 
 σφραγίζειν, 111 xaipw, 201 
 
 σχίσμα, 179 χάρις, 72 
 
 σώζειν ἐκ, 257 χειμαρροῦς, 306, 807 
 χειμών, 224 
 
 τάχιον, 839 χιτών, 329 
 
 τέκνα Θεοῦ, 69 Χριστός, ὁ, 74, 179 
 
 τέκνια, 211 χωρεῖν, 194 
 
 τελειοῦν, 124 
 
 τέρατα, 92 ψυχή, 242, 256, 257 
 
 τεταρταῖος, 244 ψυχὴν τιθέναι, 220 
 
 τηρεῖν, 200, 288 ψώμιον, 269 
 
 τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί; 90 
 
 Τιβεριάς, 146 apa, 84, 91, 127, 175, 256, 325 
 
 τιθέναι, 220 ‘Qoavvd, 254 
 
 CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY C, J. CLAY, M.A. AND SONS, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 
 
> oBeths aida 
 Juliasé 
 
 et Tabghah 
 
 THE LAKE OF 
 
 OR TIBERIAS. 
 
 The surfacect thei. alee is 
 
 682 feer below thelevelc# the 
 
 Mediterranean, it abounds in fish 
 WAIN : he waiter is clear and wholesome. 
 WP WA ie? ξν Lene th 124 miles . 
 ἐν ἷ Ξ Ξ Greatest width. 74 miles . 
 
 Ain 
 Νὰ Greatest depth 160 feet 
 
 Y, 
 V7, 
 
 ᾿ 
 
 ἫΝ, 
 
 Wii 
 
 { 
 
 —> 
 
 INNA BRIS 
 
 ἮΝ TARICHEA 
 
 Ss; 
 
 OW i, 
 
 F.Courtier, F.R.G.S. 
 
DAMASCUS. 
 
 PALESTINI 
 
 ΙΝ TUE TIME OF OUR SAVIOUR 
 
 Tos 
 
 ‘Tyre 
 
 Py 
 Scala'Tyriorum 
 
 Eedippa 
 
 - | 
 i 
 
 Ptoldmais) Ως 5 
 Gabor 
 
 ΜῈ Carmel 
 
 MeyMal ey, 
 
 : RL, i 
 ils, “τ : 
 Ana δ᾽ Ἵ ~ | 
 *Gadara nie iraa [Pitre 
 
 irbel 
 
 ‘a 
 
 Gopitotisnn — 
 
 CAESAREA 
 
 be 
 
 ΠΣ 
 
 Beto pees thar, 
 
 Beth gamut | 
 
 ΓΤ ῳ 
 =: K ἢ 
 ατιηταννι Δ πιο τα ἃ 
 ad i ν 
 - ἘρΊ τάμα | 
 J caps! | 
 Jami τ 7 Kay erick - | 
 "eRe τὴ THE TETRARCHIES, Xe 
 ERUSALED 5 { 
 Azoina Seay am 
 δον Bericht 
 ΠΣ me di 
 Trugheripon , 
 ον ἐς Licoyndre 
 Saris 
 fi τ 
 wh 
 Carried 
 r ΓΝ 
 Vata 
 4p 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 rom the Oninauce Survey) 
 
 Seale —Engfiak Yards 
 
 n eS eee 
 Cee ae --ἰπ aon 
 
 Haghty un Rnolish rot above the Malitevan 
 
 ANY 
 ᾿ 
 
 ἡ 
 ΠΗ 
 
 \ 
 | hy 
 TN 
 
a d 
 Φ Ae 
 
 ᾿ ᾿ pr oer o- cre ; 4 
 af ony ee ρμξυαβ σα» «τ ων τσ eRe πρό. 
 + aor ἢ ᾿ 7 
 
 > od “i / ; ’ 
 
 Ν Ὡς 4 # ef 
 
1 
 
 rn 
 ΠῚ 
 
 Cee 
 
ΓΝ Bone weed 
 
 at 
 
fie Pee? PRESS “SERIES. 
 
 COMPLETE LIST. 
 
 Author : 
 Aristophanes 
 
 Euripides 
 
 3» 
 Herodotus 
 
 3») 
 ” 
 Homer 
 ” 
 
 ” 
 Lucian 
 35 
 Plato 
 3) 
 
 ” 
 
 ᾿] 
 Plutarch 
 
 3} 
 Sophocles 
 Thucydides 
 
 Xenophon 
 
 1. GREEK. 
 Work 
 Aves—Plutus—Ranae 
 Vespae 
 Heracleidae 
 Hercules Furens 
 Hippolytus 
 Iphigeneia in Aulis 
 Hecuba 
 Alcestis 
 Orestes 
 Book v 
 
 io Wh. VID Be 
 5» VIII I—go, Ix 1—89g 
 
 Odyssey Ix, X 
 
 a XXI 
 Iliad vI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV 
 Somnium, Charon, etc. 
 Menippus and Timon 
 Apologia Socratis 
 Crito 
 Euthyphro 
 Protagoras 
 Demosthenes 
 Gracchi 
 Nicias 
 Sulla 
 Timoleon 
 Oedipus Tyrannus 
 Book II 
 Book VII 
 Agesilaus 
 Anabasis Vol. I. Text. 
 
 Ἢ Vol. II. Notes. 
 
 ” I, I 
 
 fa I, III, IV, V 
 
 5 II, VI, VII 
 Cyropaedeia I, 11 (2 vols.) 
 + III, IV, V 
 ” VI, VII, VIII 
 1 
 
 Editor Price 
 Green 3/6 cach 
 Graves 3/6 
 Beck ἃ Headlam 3/6 
 Gray ἃ Hutchinson 2/- 
 Hadley 2|- 
 Headlam 2/6 
 Hadley 2/6 
 
 Le In the Press 
 Wedd 4/6 
 Shuckburgh 3/- 
 
 ts 4|- each 
 
 5 2/6 cach 
 Edwards 2/6 “ 
 
 ” 2" 
 ον 2[- each 
 Heitland 3/6 
 Mackie 3/6 
 Adam 3/6 
 » 2/6 
 
 J.& A.M. Adam 4/6 
 
 Holden 4/6 
 ” 6|- 
 
 ” 5|- 
 
 ” 6]- 
 
 ” 6|- 
 Jebb 4/6 
 Spratt 5/- 
 Holden ΙΕ 
 Hailstone 2/6 
 Pretor 3]- 
 99 4/6 
 
 ” 4|- 
 
 ἢ 4|- each 
 Ae 2/6 each 
 Holden 6]- 
 ” 5/- 
 
 3) 5/- 
 
THE PITT PRESS SERIES. 
 
 2. LATIN. 
 Author Work Editor Price 
 Caesar De Bello Gallico 
 Com. I, III, VI, VIII Peskett 1/6 each 
 ἢ 5, I-III, and vir = 2|- cach 
 ” »» I-III ” 3/- 
 55 »  IvV-v Ἢ 1/6 
 = De Bello Civili. Com. 1 Ja 3]- 
 5 3 Com. III ‘ In the Press 
 Cicero Actio Prima in C. Verrem Cowie 1/6 
 ᾿: De Amicitia Reid 3/6 
 νν De Senectute = 3/6 
 5 Div. in Q. Caec. et Actio 
 Prima in C. Verrem Heitland & Cowie 3/- 
 Ἢ Philippica Secunda Peskett 3/6 
 μ᾿ Pro Archia Poeta Reid 2|- 
 Ὑ », Balbo " 1/6 
 5 » Milone a 2/6 
 ἐε » Murena Heitland 3/- 
 ᾿ », -Plancio Holden 4/6 
 i » sulla Reid 3/6 
 Somnium Scipionis Pearman 2|- 
 Cornelius Nepos Miltiades, Themistocles, Aris- 
 tides, Pausanias, Cimon Shuckburgh 1/6 
 = Hannibal, Cato, Atticus Ἢ 1/6 
 Horace Epistles. Bk1 me 2/6 
 + Odes and Epodes Gow Ln the Press 
 ἐς Odes. Books J, III J3 2/- each 
 Book I, Iv i 1/6 cach 
 Livy Books Iv, VI, IX, XXVII Stephenson 2/6 each 
 £ ον Whibley 2/6 
 a oo KK RT Dimsdale 2/6 each 
 Lucan Pharsalia. Bk1I Heitland & Haskins 1/6 
 τῇ Pharsalia. Bk ΝΠ Postgate Lu the Press 
 Lucretius Book v Duff 2|- 
 Ovid Fasti. Book vi Sidgwick 1/6 
 3 Metamorphoses, Bk 1. Dowdall 1/6 
 Plautus Epidicus Gray 3/- 
 τ Asinaria % 3/6 
 = Stichus Fennell 2/6 
 Pseudolus Auden In the Press 
 Quintus Curtius Alexander in India Heitland ἃ Raven 3/6 
 Tacitus Agricola and Germania Stephenson 3/- 
 = Hist. BkI Davies In the Press 
 Terence Hautontimorumenos Gray 3/- 
 Vergil Aeneid 1 to XII Sidgwick 1/6 each 
 ;; Bucolics 1/6 
 ᾿ Georgics I, II, and ΠῚ, Iv Ὄ 2|- each 
 ” Complete Works, Vol. 1, Text ,, 3/6 
 ? a 5 Vol. 11, Notes ,, 4/6 
 
 2 
 
Author 
 Corneille 
 
 9 
 De Bonnechose 
 
 3 
 
 THE PITT PRESS SERIES, 
 
 3. FRENCH. 
 Work Editor 
 La Suite du Menteur Masson 
 Polyeucte Braunholtz 
 Lazare Hoche Colbeck 
 Bertrand du Guesclin Leathes 
 
 », Part (With Vocabulary) ,, 
 
 3} 
 
 Delavigne Louis XI Eve 
 
 = Les Enfants d’ Edouard ia 
 D’Harleville Le Vieux Célibataire Masson 
 De Lamartine Jeanne d’Arc Clapin & Ropes 
 De Vigny La Canne de Jonc Eve 
 Erckmann-Chatrian La Guerre Clapin 
 Guizot Discours sur ]’Histoire de la 
 
 Révolution d’Angleterre Eve 
 
 Lemercier Frédégonde et Brunehaut Masson 
 
 Mme de Staél 
 
 Le Directoire Masson & Prothero 
 
 a Dix Années d’Exil κ΄. 
 Merimée Colomba Ropes 
 Michelet Louis XI ἃ Charles the Bold ., 
 
 Moliére Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme  Clapin 
 
 ae L’ Ecole des Femmes Saintsbury 
 
 e Les Précieuses ridicules Braunholtz 
 
 af » (Abridged Edition) + 
 
 2 Le Misanthrope = 
 Piron La Métromanie Masson 
 Ponsard Charlotte Corday Ropes 
 Racine Les Plaideurs Braunholtz 
 
 Ἔ » (Abridged Edition) nfs 
 Sainte-Beuve M. Daru. (Causeries du 
 
 Lundi, Vol. 1x) Masson 
 
 Saintine Picciola Clapin 
 Scribe & Legouvé Bataille de Dames ~ Bull 
 Scribe Le Verre d’Eau Colbeck 
 Sédaine Le Philosophe sans le savoir Bull 
 Souvestre Un Philosophe sous les Toits Eve 
 
 Le Serf ἃ Le Chevrier de Lorraine Ropes 
 
 # Le Serf (With Vocabulary) Ἷ 
 Thierry Lettres sur Jlhistoire de 
 
 France (XWI—xxIv) Masson & Prothero 
 ᾿ Récits des Temps Mérovin- 
 giens, I—III Masson & Ropes 
 Villemain Lascaris ou les Grecs du xv® Siécle Masson 
 Voltaire Histoire du Siécle de Louis 
 XIV, Pt 1, Ch. I—x111 Masson & Prothero 
 PA Pt 11, Ch. XIV—xXxXIV “ ak 
 3 Pt 111, Ch. xxv—end 3 a 
 Xavier de La Jeune Sibérienne. Le ΓΞ 
 Maistre Lépreux de la Citéd’ Aoste ᾿ 
 
 3 
 
 2/6 
 2/6 
 2/6 
 
 1/6 
 
THE PITT PRESS SERIES. 
 
 4. GERMAN. 
 Author Work Editor Price 
 Ballads on German History Wagner 2|- 
 Benedix Dr Wespe - Breul 3/- 
 Freytag Der Staat Friedrichs des 
 Grossen Wagner 2|- 
 German Dactylic Poetry ᾿ 3|- 
 Goethe Knabenjahre (1749—1761) Wagner ἃ Cartmell 2/- 
 Ἢ Hermann und Dorothea + Pe 3/6 
 * Iphigenie Breul In the Press 
 Grimm Selected Tales Rippmann 3|- 
 Gutzkow Zopf und Schwert Wolstenholme 3/6 
 Hacklander Der geheime Agent E. L. Milner Barry 3|- 
 Hauff Das Bild des Kaisers Breul 3|- 
 & Das Wirthshaus im Spessart Schlottmann 
 & Cartmell 3}- 
 -" Die Karavane Schlottmann 3|- 
 Immermann Der Oberhof Wagner 3/- 
 Klee Die deutschen Heldensagen Wolstenholme 3/- 
 Kohlrausch Das Jahr 1813 9 2|- 
 Lessing Minna von Barnhelm Wolstenholme 
 In the Press 
 Lessing & Gellert Selected Fables Breul 3|- 
 Mendelssohn  δδεϊθβοίβα Letters Sime 3|- 
 Raumer Der erste Kreuzzug Wagner 2|- 
 Riehl Culturgeschichtliche 
 Novellen Wolstenholme 3/- 
 ἐπ Die Ganerben & Die Ge- 
 rechtigkeit Gottes κέ 3|- 
 Schiller Wilhelm Tell Breul 2/6 
 ἢ id (Abridged Edition) ” 1/6 
 ὃ Geschichte des dreissigjah- 
 rigen Kriegs Book II. > 3/- 
 = Maria Stuart a 3/6 
 ~ Wallenstein I. (Lager and 
 Piccolomini) ,, 3/6 
 = Wallenstein II. (Tod) = 3/6 
 Uhland Ernst, HerzogvonSchwaben Wolstenholme 3/6 
 
 4 
 
THE PITT PRESS SERIES. 
 
 5. ENGLISH. 
 
 Author Work Editor Price 
 Mayor ASketchof Ancient Philoso- 
 phy from Thales to Cicero 3/6 
 Wallace Outlines of the Philosophy of Aristotle 4/6 
 Bacon History of the Reign of 
 King Henry VII Lumby 3/- 
 Cowley Essays ” 4/- 
 Gray Poems Tovey Zn Preparation 
 Macaulay Lord Clive Innes 1/6 
 More History of King Richard IIT Lumby 3/6 
 es Utopia - 3/6 
 Milton Arcades and Comus Verity 3/- 
 - Ode on the Nativity, δον. 6 
 gro, I] Penseroso ἃ Lycidas τ 2/ 
 τ Samson Agonistes 4 2/6 
 a Paradise Lost, Bks I, 11 s 2|- 
 ἐν 3 Bks ΠῚ, IV - 2|- 
 ae Ῥ Bks v, VI Ν 2|- 
 ΣΙ Be Bks VII, VIII 2/- 
 τὲ a Bks Ix, X a in Preparation 
 a ey Bks XI, XII 2/- 
 Pope Essay on Criticism West 2/- 
 Scott Marmion Masterman 2/6 
 Ἢ Lady of the Lake a 2/6 
 ss Lay of the last Minstrel Flather 2|- 
 ‘5 Legend of Montrose » Simpson 2/6 
 Shakespeare A Midsummer-Night’s Dream _ Verity 1/6 
 Ἢ Twelfth Night " 1/6 
 : Julius Caesar Pr 1/6 
 The Tempest x 1/6 
 Shakespeare & Fletcher Two Noble Kinsmen Skeat 3/6 
 Sidney An Apologie for Poetrie Shuckburgh 3/- 
 West Elements of English Grammar 2/6 
 és English Grammar for Beginners 1/- 
 Carlos Short History of British India 1/- 
 Mill Elementary Commercial Geography 1/6 
 Bartholomew Atlas of Commercial Geography 3/- 
 Robinson Church Catechism Explained 2|- 
 
THE PITT PRESS SERIES. 
 
 6. EDUCATIONAL SCIENCE. 
 
 Author Work Editor Price 
 Colbeck Lectures on the Teaching of Modern 
 Languages 2|- 
 Comenius Life and Educational Works Laurie 3/6 
 Three Lectures on the Practice of 
 Education 
 Eve I. On Marking 
 Sidgwick II. On Stimulus ues Ἧι 
 Abbott III. On the teaching of Latin 
 Verse Composition 
 Farrar General Aims of the Teacher) | y,) [6 
 Poole Form Management - Ὶ = 
 Locke Thoughts on Education Quick 3/6 
 Milton Tractate on Education Browning 2 - 
 Sidgwick On Stimulus τ|- 
 ΤΠ ΠΡ’. Theory and Practice of Teaching 46 
 
 7. MATHEMATICS. 
 
 Ball Elementary Algebra 4/6 
 Euclid Books I—VI, XI, XII Taylor 5/- 
 a Books I—VI 5 4|- 
 ” Books I—Iv Ἢ 3|- 
 Also separately 
 _ Books 1, ἃ 113 111, & IV; v, & v1; ΧΙ, & x11 1/6 each 
 Solutions to Bks 1—1v W. W. Taylor 6/- 
 Hobson & Jessop Elementary Plane Trigonometry 4/6 
 Loney Elements of Statics and Dynamics 7/6 
 Part 1. Elements of Statics 4/6 
 » 11. Elements of Dynamics 3/6 
 » Solutions of Examples, Statics and Dynamics 7/6 
 Mechanics and Hydrostatics 4/6 
 Smith, C. Arithmetic for Schools, with or without answers 3/6 
 ἐξ Part 1. Chapters I—vi1I. Elementary, with 
 or without answers 2|- 
 ue Part 11. Chapters Ix—xx, with or without 
 answers 2/- 
 Hale, G. Key to Smith’s Arithmetic 7/6 
 
 Lonpon: C. J. CLAY anp SONS, 
 
 CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, 
 AVE MARIA LANE. 
 GLASGOW : 263, ARGYLE STREET. 
 
 6 
 
Che Cambridge Bible for Schools 
 and Colleges, 
 
 GENERAL EpITors: 
 J. J. S. PEROWNE, D.D., ΒΙΒΗΟΡ or Worcester, 
 A. F. KIRKPATRICK, D.D., Rearus Proressor or Hesrew. 
 
 Ἐπ ς----- 
 
 Extra Feap. 8vo. cloth, with Maps when required. 
 Book of Joshua. Rev. G. F. Macnzar, D.D. 2s. 6d. 
 Book of Judges. Rev. J.J. Lias, M.A. 3s. 6d. 
 First Book of Samuel. Prof. Kirkpatrick, D.D. 3s. 6d. 
 Second Book of Samuel. Prof. Kirxpatricx, D.D. 3s. 6d. 
 First & Second Books of Kings. Prof. Lumpy, D.D. 3s. 6d. each. 
 Books of Ezra & Nehemiah. Prof. Ryitz,D.D. 4s. 6d. 
 Book of Job. Prof. Davipson, D.D. 5s. 
 Psalms. BookI. Prof. Krrxparricx, D.D. 3s. 6d. 
 Psalms. Books II and fil. Prof. Kirxparricn, D.D. 3s. 6d. 
 Book of Ecclesiastes. Very Rev. HE. H. Puumprre,D.D. 5s. 
 Book of Jeremiah. Rev. A. W. SrreANE, D.D. 4s. 6d. 
 Book of Ezekiel. Prof. Davipson, D.D. 5s. 
 Book of Hosea. Rev. T. K. Conyne, M.A.,D.D. 3s. 
 Books of Obadiah and Jonah. Arch. PERowNE. 2s. 6d. 
 Book of Micah. Rey. T. K. Coryne, M.A., D.D. Is. 6d. 
 Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah. Prof. Davipson, D.D. 
 In the Press 
 Books of Haggai, Zechariah & Malachi. Arch, PERownE.3s.6d. 
 Book of Malachi. Archdeacon PERowneE. Is. 
 Gospel according to St Matthew. Rev. A. Carr, M.A. 2s. 6d. 
 Gospel according to St Mark. Rev.G.F.Macuear,D.D. 2s.6d. 
 Gospel acc. to St Luke. Very Rev. F. W. Farrar, D.D. 4s. 6d. 
 Gospel according to St John. Rev. A. PLummer, D.D. 4s. θά. 
 Acts of the Apostles. Prof. Lumpy, D.D. 4s. 6d. 
 Epistle to the Romans. Rey. H. C.G. Movuue,D.D. 3s. 6d. 
 First and Second Corinthians. Rev. J. J. Liss, M.A. 2s. each. 
 Epistle to the Galatians. Rev. EK. H. Perowne, D.D. 1s. 6d. 
 Epistle to the Ephesians. Rey. H.C. G.Moutsz, D.D. 2s. 6d. 
 Epistle to the Philippians. Rev. H.C.G. Mouns, D.D. 2s. θά. 
 Colossians and Philemon. Rey. H. C. G. Moutez, D.D. 2s. 
 Epistles to the Thessalonians. Rev. G. G. Finpuay, B.A. 2s. 
 Epistles to Timothy & Titus. Rev. A. EK. Humpureys, M.A. 3s. 
 Epistle to the Hebrews. Very Rev. F. W. Farrar, D.D. 3s. θά. 
 Epistle of St James. Very Rev. Εἰ. H. Puumprre, D.D. 1s. 6d. 
 St Peter and St Jude. Very Rev. Εἰ. H. Puumprre, D.D. 2s. θά. 
 Epistles of St John. Rey. A. Puummer, D.D. 3s. 6d. 
 Book of Revelation. Rey. W. H. Simcox, M.A. 3s. 
 
 Other Volumes Preparing. 
 
 LONDON: C. J. CLAY anp SONS, 
 CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, 
 AVE MARIA LANE. 
 
Che Smaller . 
 Cambridge Bible for Schools, 
 
 Now Ready. With Maps. Price 1s, each volume. 
 
 Book of Joshua. 70. 5. Βιιάσκ, M.A. 
 
 Book of Judges. J. 5. Brack, M.A. 
 
 First Book of Samuel. Prof. Krrxparrick, D.D. 
 
 Second Book of Samuel. Prof. Kirxparricr, D.D. 
 
 First Book of Kings. Prof. Lumpy, D.D. 
 
 Second Book of Kings. Prof. Lumpy, D.D. 
 
 Gospel according to St Matthew. Key. A. Carr, M.A. 
 Gospel according to St Mark. Rev. G. F. Mactear, D.D. 
 Gospel according to St Luke. Very Rev. F. W. Farrar, D.D. 
 Gospel according to St John. Rey. A. PLummer, D.D. 
 Acts of the Apostles. Prof. Lumpy, D.D. 
 
 The Cambridge Greek Testament 
 
 for Schools and Colleges 
 GENERAL Epitor: J. J. 5. PEROWNE, D.D. 
 
 Gospel according to St Matthew. Rev. A. Carr, M.A. 
 With 4 Maps. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Gospel according to St Mark. Rev. G. F. Macuear, D.D. 
 With 3 Maps. 4s. 6d. 
 
 Gospel according to St Luke. Very Rev. F. W. Farrar. 
 With 4 Maps. 6s. 
 
 Gospel according to St John. Rev. A. Piummer, D.D. 
 With 4 Maps. 6s. 
 
 Acts of the Apostles. Prof. Lumpy, D.D. 4 Maps. 6s. 
 
 First Epistle to the Corinthians. Rev. J.J. Lias, M.A. 3s. 
 
 Second Epistle to the Corinthians. Rev. J.J. Lis, M.A. 3s, 
 
 Epistle to the Hebrews. Very Rey.F. W. Farrar, D.D. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Epistles of St John. Rey. A. Phummer, D.D. 4s. 
 
 GENERAL Epitor: Prof. J. A. ROBINSON, B.D. 
 
 Epistle to the Philippians. Rev. H. C. G. Moutz, D.D. 
 
 [In the Press. 
 Epistle of St James. Rev. A. Carr, M.A. 2s. θά. 
 Pastoral Epistles. Rev. J. H. Bernarp. [In Preparation. 
 Book of Revelation. Rev. W. H. Sumcox, M.A. 5s. 
 
 London: C. J. CLAY anp SONS, 
 
 CAMBRIDGE WAREHOUSE, AVE MARIA LANE. 
 
 Glasgow: 263, ARGYLE STREET. 
 Leipsig: F. A. BROCKHAUS. 
 few Bork: MACMILLAN AND CO. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY J. & C, F. CLAY, AT THE JNIVERSITY PRESS. 
 
τ 
 
 ποι ἡ δον = 
 
 > 
 
 τ Orgs 
 yw Ane 
 . a we 
 
 ri Fe Ot BAe. - 
 
 7 
 οὖν 65 tn λῶν ἢ 
 
 i Te | Δ on 
 
 δ, . Ms iv 
 ' ai , ὴ 
 ® (aye 1 ! 
 νυ 
 r ar i 
 Π «Ὁ ἝΝ. 
 6 8 , 
 ty 
 s ἢ 
 ὶ 
 , 
 i j ἊΝ 
 ᾿ a eh} 
 i ; 
 \ an 
 νι 
 > 
 ive 
 
RF 
 
Tian 
 1 1012 01262 8790 
 
 DATE DUE 
 
 PRINTEDINU.S.A. 
 
"ἢ