^Oy 11 1967 
 
 BS 2341 .C178 v. 4 1892 
 
 The Gospel according to St 
 John 
 
%\)t Camhrttrge MW for ^cliools 
 antr Collejjes. 
 
 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO 
 
 S. JOHN. 
 
 L 
 
ILontJOn: C. J. CLAY AND SONS, 
 
 CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY TRESS WAREHOUSE 
 
 AVE MARIA LANE. 
 
 arnmbritigir : DEIGHTON, BELL, AND CO. 
 
 ILcipjig: F. A. BROCKHAUS. 
 
 i^ctu gotk: MACMILLAN AND CO. 
 
Zijt Camirttrfle %Mt for ^tJ)Ciol5 
 anlr €ollt^m. 
 
 General Editor :— J. J. S. PEROWNE, D.D., 
 
 Bishop of Worcester. 
 
 THE GOSPEL ACCORDIN(^^d" *" A 
 
 S. JOHN. 
 
 WITH MAPS, NOTES AND INTRODUCTION 
 
 ,P,Y 
 
 THE REV. A. PLUMMER, M.A., D.D. 
 
 MASTER OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DURHAM, 
 FORMERLY FELLOW AND TUTOR OF TRINITY COLLEGE, OXFORD. 
 
 EDITED FOR THE SYNDICS OF THE UNIVERSITY PRESS 
 
 ©ambritige : 
 
 AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 
 1892 
 
 [All Rights reserved.'] 
 
ffiambriigc 
 
 I'KINTEI) BV C. J. CLAY M.A. AND SONS 
 AT THE UNIVR.RSITV PRESS 
 
PREFACE 
 BY THE GENERAL EDITOR. 
 
 The 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 dififered and 
 always will diflfer. 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 notes, with pointing out omissions, with 
 
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. 
 
 Deanery, Peterborough, 
 nth Feb. 1880. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGES 
 
 Introduction. 
 
 Chapter I. The Life of S. John 9—18 
 
 Chapter II. The Authenticity of the Gospel 18 — 32 
 
 Chapter III. The Place and Date 32 — 34 
 
 Chapter IV. The Object and Plan 34—38 
 
 Chapter V. The Characteristics of the Gospel ... 38 — 46 
 
 Chapter VI. Its Relation to the Synoptic Gospels 46 — 50 
 
 Chapter VII. Its Relation to the First Epistle ... 50—51 
 
 Chapter VIII. The Text of the Gospel 51—52 
 
 Chapter IX. The Literature of the Gospel 53 — 54 
 
 Analysis of the Gospel in Detail 55 — 58 
 
 Text and Notes 59 — 378 
 
 Appendices 379 — 382 
 
 Indices 383 — 388 
 
 Map of Galilee .facing title 
 
 „ ,, Sea OF Galilee at end of volume 
 
 ,, „ Palestine in the time ok our 
 
 Saviour do. 
 
 Plan of Jerusalem do. 
 
 The Text adopted in this Edition is that of Dr Scrivener's 
 Cambridge Paragraph Bible. A few variations from the ordi- 
 nary Text, chiefly in the spelling of certain vv^ords, and in the 
 use of italics, will be noticed. For the principles adopted by 
 Dr Scrivener as regards the printing of the Text see his In- 
 troduction to the Paragraph Bible, published by the Cambridge 
 Vniversity Press. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE LIFE OF S. JOHN. 
 
 The life of S. John falls naturally into two divisions, the 
 limits of which correspond to the two main sources of infor- 
 mation respecting him. (i) 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 S. 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 harmonious, and contain definite 
 traits and characteristics, enabling us to form a portrait, which 
 though imperfect is unique. 
 
 (1) Before the Departure from yerusalein. 
 
 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 S. James and S. John. Salome (see 
 
lo INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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 with the special intimacy granted to the 
 beloved disciple by his Lord, with the fact of S. James also 
 being among the chosen three, 3^d with the final committal of 
 the Virgin to St 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 lor 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, re- 
 mained 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 pre- 
 ferred 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 S. John belonged by birth and resi- 
 dence, sharing its characteristic energy and its impatience of 
 indecision and intrigue. Hence, when the Baptist proclaimed 
 the kingdom of the Messiah, the young fisherman at once be- 
 came 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 
 
p 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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 character appearing. And indeed though ap- 
 parently opposed they are not really so ; the one may beget 
 the other, and did so in him. 
 
 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 con- 
 clusion absolutely untenable. 
 
 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. 13). 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 pro- 
 claimed 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 
 
12 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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). 
 
 There was another movement of a very different kind, with 
 which we know that he did sympathize heartily. After cen- 
 turies 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 temp- 
 tations 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 followed, 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.' Assuming that the un- 
 named disciple (i. 40) is S. John, we infer (i. 41) that he pro- 
 ceeded to bring his brother S. James to Jesus as S. Andrew had 
 brought S. 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. 
 I — 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 Geth- 
 semane, '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), S. 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, (i) 'And John answered Him, 
 
INTRODUCTION. 13 
 
 saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in Thy name, and 
 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 S. James is included in the 'w<? 
 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 is mani- 
 fest. They are willing to go through the furnace in order to be 
 near the Son of God. When S. 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 S. 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 
 Lazanis and his sisters. He and S. Peter prepare the Last 
 Supper (Luke xxii. 8), at which S. Peter gets 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, 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 
 morning. (On the characteristics of the two as shewn in this 
 incident see notes on xx. 4 — 6.) We find them still together 
 
J4 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 in Galilee, seeking refreshment in their suspense by resuming 
 their old calling (xxi. 2) ; and here again their different charac- 
 ters shew themselves (see notes on xxi. 7). And the Gospel 
 closes with Christ's gentle rebuke to S. Peter's natural curiosity 
 about his friend. 
 
 In the Acts S. 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 J erusalem 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. It would be during this pro- 
 longed residence at Jerusalem that he acquired that minute 
 knowledge of the topography 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 : 
 (i) that wherever he was he was not idle, (2) that he was not at 
 Ephesus when S. Paul bade farewell to that Church (Acts xx.), 
 nor when he wrote the Epistle to the Ephesians, nor when he 
 wrote the Pastoral Epistles. That S. 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, 
 
INTRODUCTION. 15 
 
 H. E. III. xxxi. 3, V. xxiv. 3) as a priest wearing the sacerdotal 
 plate or mitre {petalon) 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. 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 a passing mention, (i) 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. 
 III. iii. 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 soqn 
 taken by them. When the chief recognised him he turned to 
 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. E. III. xxiii. from Clement of Alexandria). 
 
 (3) Towards the very end of his life, when he was so infiiin 
 that he had to be carried to church and was too weak to preach, 
 
i6 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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, Comni. in Ep. ad Gal. vi. lo). 
 
 Other traditions may be dismissed more briefly ; that in his 
 old age he amused himself with a partridge, and pleaded that 
 a bow could not always be bent, but needed relaxation ; that he 
 was thrown into a cauldron of boiling oil at Rome and was 
 none the worse ; that he drank hemlock without being harmed 
 by it ; 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 dis- 
 posed to believe : those who know the place must know whether 
 the soil does move or not ; and he has heard it from no untrust- 
 worthy people. 
 
 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 
 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 Moved the darkness rather than the light, because their 
 
INTRODUCTION. 17 
 
 works were evil' (iii. 19). Eternity for him was a thing not of 
 the future but of the present (iii. ^6, v. 24, vi. 47, 54) ; and 
 whereas the world tries to make time the measure of eternity, 
 he knows that eternity 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 estimated : for ' the world passeth away and the lust 
 thereof, but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever' 
 (i 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 seem.s 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 
 '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, 
 
 t 
 
 S. JOHN 
 
i8 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Its holy flame for ever bumeth, 
 
 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." 
 
 SOUTIIEY. 
 
 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 : (i) the silence of the Apostolic Fathers ; 
 (2) its rejection by Marcion, the Alogi, and perhaps another 
 sect. 
 
 (i) 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 Fourth 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 
 
INTRODUCTION. 19 
 
 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 v/riters 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 Apostohc Fathers is by no means 
 certain. The Epistle 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 Ignatian Epistles (c. a.d. 150) contains allusions to it, 
 and adaptations of it, which cannot seriously be considered 
 doubtful. Bishop Lightfoot^ says of the expression 'living 
 water' (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 'knows whence it cometh and whither it 
 goeth' [Thilad. vii.), " The coincidence (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 'being Himself the Door of the Father' 
 {Philad. ix.) he says, "Doubtless an allusion to John x. 9." 
 The Epistle of Poly carp (c. a.d. 150) contains almost 
 certain references to the First Epistle of S. 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. E. ill. 
 xxxix.). Basilides (c. a.d. 125) seems to have made use of 
 the Fourth Gospel. Justin Martyr (c. a.d. 150) knew the 
 
 ^ I am enabled to make these quotations from the great work of his 
 life through the great kindness of the Bishop of Durham. 
 
 I 
 
20 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Fourth Gospel. This may now be considered as beyond 
 reasonable doubt. Not only does he exhibit types of language 
 and doctrine closely akin to S. John's, but in the Dialogue with 
 Trypho^ Lxxxvill. (c a.d. 146) he quotes the Baptist's reply, 
 'I am not the Christ, but the voice of one crying' (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 S. 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 Clementine Homilies, Theophilus of Antioch 
 (the earliest writer who mentions S. John by name as the 
 author of the Gospel — c. A.D. 175), Athenagoras, Irenaeus, 
 Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian. Of these 
 none perhaps is more important than Irenaeus, the pupil 
 of Polycarp, who was the friend of S. 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 7nust be four Gospels, neither 
 more nor less {Haer. lil. i. i, xi. 8: comp. v. xxxvi. 2). So 
 firmly established had the Fourth Gospel become considerably 
 before the end of the second century. 
 
 (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. in. 
 xi. 9) as rejecting the Fourth Gospel and the promises of the i 
 Paraclete which it contains are the same as those whom Epi- 
 phanius with a contemptuous double entendre calls Alogi 
 
INTRODUCTION. 21 
 
 ('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 the best 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 'Logos' ; 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 Dejttmrgus 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 
 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 
 
 ^ See DoUinger's Hippolytus and Callistus, Chap. v. 
 
22 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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 
 opinion written by a contemporary of S. John. To concede 
 this is to concede the whole question. 
 
 ii. 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. To 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 
 held), the Jews had all along mistaken an inferior being for the 
 Supreme God. Other passages in the Gospel which are strongly 
 adverse to the theory of a Gnostic authorship will be pointed 
 out in the notes. 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. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 23 
 
 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. 
 
 (i) 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' (i John i. i), cannot well mean anything else. 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 ex- 
 amining the indirect evidence. But first it will be well to state 
 the enormous difficulties which would confront a writer who 
 proposed in the second century to forge a Gospel. 
 
 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. 
 
 I 
 
24 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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. I 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 
 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 histo- 
 rical 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 archfeo- 
 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 more numerous and far 
 more serious errors than those which critics (with what success 
 
INTRODUCTION. 25 
 
 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 S. John. (See Sanda)'^, Autho7-ship 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 tlie 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 betweeii Jews and Samari- 
 tans (iv. 9, 20, 22 ; viii. 48) ; estimate of women (iv. 27), of the 
 national schools {y\\. 15), of the ^Dispersion' (vii. 35), of A i>ra- 
 ham and the Prophets (viii. 52, 53), &c. &c. 
 
 He is quite familiar also with Jewish usages and observ- 
 ances. Among these we may notice baptism (i. 25, iii. 22, 23, 
 iv. 2), purification (ii. 6, iii. 25, xi. 55, xviii. 28, xix. 31), the 
 Jewish Feasts (ii. 13, 23, v. i, vi, 4, vii. 2, 37, x. 22, xiii. i, xviii. 
 28, xix. 31, 42), circumcision and the Sabbath (vii. 22, 23), law 
 oi evidence {y\\\. 17, 18). 
 
 The form of the Gospel, especially the style of the narra- 
 tive, is essentially Jewish. The language is Greek, but the 
 arrangement of the thoughts, 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 fre- 
 quent quotations but by the imagery employed ; — the lamb, the 
 living water, the manna, the shepherd, the vine, &c. And not 
 only so, but the Christian theology of the Evangelist is based 
 upon the theology of the O. T. 'Salvation is of the Jews' (iv, 
 22); Moses wrote of Christ (v, 46; i. 45); Abraham saw His 
 
26 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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, 36, 37; comp. ii. 22, xx. 
 9): and these fulfilments of Scripture are noticed not as in- 
 teresting 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. 
 
 The Evangelist was a Jew of Palestine. 
 
 This is shewn chiefly by his great topograpMcal 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 Nazareth^ (i. 46); Cana is 'of Galilee' (ii. i, xxi. 2) ; 
 Aenon is 'near to Salim,' and there are ' many waters ' there 
 (iii. 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) ; Ephralm is a city ' near to the wilderness ' 
 (xi. 54). Comp. the minute local knowledge implied in vi. 22 — 
 24, iv. II, 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. Bethesda is 
 ' a pool by the sheep-gate, having five porches ' (v. 2) ; Siloam 
 is ' a pool, which is by interpretation Sent ' (ix. 7) ; Solomoti's 
 porch is ' in the Temple ' (x. 23). Comp. the minute knowledge 
 of the city and suburbs implied in xviii. i, 28, xix. 13, 17 — 20, 
 41, 42. 
 
 The way in whicli the author quotes the 0. T. points to 
 the same conclusion. He is not dependent on the LXX. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 27 
 
 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. j8, 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 
 Alexandrian. (See note on 'the Word,' i. i.) 
 
 The Evangelist was an Eyewitness of most of the 
 events which he relates. 
 
 The narrative is crowded with figures, which are no mere non- 
 entities to fill up space, but which live and move. Where they 
 appear on the scene more than once their action throughout 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 Samaritan 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. i, iv. 40, 
 43, vi. 22, vii. 14, 37, xi. 6, 17, 39, xii. i, 12, xix. 31, xx. i, 26) 
 and hours (i. 39, iv. 6, 52, xix. 14 ; comp. iii. 2, vi. 16, xiii. 30, 
 xviii. 28, XX. I, 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. 
 
28 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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 (xviii. i — 13), almost all the details of the Passion 
 (xviii., 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 and ix. 35. 
 
 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 
 fiction 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 themselves (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. i — 3, v. 6, vi. 6, 
 15, vii. I, xiii. i, 3, 11, xvi. 19, xviii. 4, xix. 28) and can bear 
 witness to His feelings (xi. 33, 38, xiii. 21). 
 
 The Evangelist was the Apostle S. John. 
 
 The contents of the two previous sections are almost suffi- 
 cient to prove this last point. We know from the Synoptists 
 that three disciples were specially intimate with Jesus, Peter, 
 James, and his brother John. S. Peter cannot be our Evan- 
 gelist : he was put to death long before the very earliest date 
 to which the Fourth Gospel can be assigned. Moreover the 
 
INTRODUCTION. 29 
 
 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 S. 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' {egapa, 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. i, 3, 11, 
 iv. 13, 19, viii. 14). He is one of those enumerated in xxi. i, 
 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. i, 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 
 
30 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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 objeciiofis. 
 
 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 S. John the 
 Apostle, some of which are important and deserve a separate 
 answer. They are mainly these ; — 
 
 (i) 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;" {b) 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. 
 
 (i) 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 Apo- 
 calypse is doctrinally the uniting link between the Synoptists 
 and the Fourth Gospel" (Westcott). Great as are the differ- 
 ences between the Revelation and the Gospel, 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 be- 
 tween good and evil and its issue. In both Jesus Christ is the 
 
INTRODUCTION. 31 
 
 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 saturated with the O. T, Some re- 
 markable similarities of detail will be pointed out in the notes 
 (see on i. 14; xi. 44; xix. 2, 5, 13, 17, 20, 2>7)- The difference of 
 date will go a long way towards explaining the difference of 
 style. 
 
 (3 a) The question, 'How could S. John have studiously 
 elevated himself in every way above the Apostle Peter?' reminds 
 us of the famous question of Charles 11. to the Royal Society. 
 The answer to it is that S. John does nothing of the kind. 
 S. Peter takes the lead in the Fourth Gospel as in the other 
 three. His introduction 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). 
 
 {b) 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 letting us behind the scenes the phrase serves two 
 purposes : (i) 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 
 
32 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 was he singled out to be told who was the traitor (xiii. 23)? 
 Why was the care of the Lord's mother entrusted to him (xix. 26)? 
 Why was he allowed to recognise the Lord at the sea of Ti- 
 berias (xxi. 7) before any of the rest did so ? 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 
 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 to him. 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 S. 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 au- 
 thenticity 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 
 
INTRODUCTION. 33 
 
 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) 
 and of Clement of Alexandria (c. A.D. 190) ; and this is con- 
 firmed 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 Apos- 
 tolic doctrine. The destruction of Jerusalem had given alto- 
 gether a new turn to Christianity : it had severed the lingering 
 and hampering 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 the strangest compromises and colouring into mere pagan 
 speculation, called for a fresh statement, in terms adequate to 
 the emergency, and by a voice sufficient in authority, of Chris- 
 tian 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. 
 All this induces us to place the date of the Fourth Gospel as 
 late as possible; and tradition (as we have seen in Chap. l) 
 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, i.e. not much before A.D. 70. If Irenaeus is right in 
 saying th^t S. Luke's Gospel was not written till after the death 
 
 S. JOHN 7 
 
34 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 of S. Peter and S. Paul {Haer. III. i. i), 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 pubhshed, 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; 
 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. no to 165. Dividing this period into two, 
 we have this dilemma : — If the Gospel was published between 
 1 10 and 140, why did not the hundr-eds of Christians, who had 
 known S. 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 na7ne' (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- 
 
INTRODUCTION. 35 
 
 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 de- 
 sired effect. 
 
 The effect is twofold : (i) 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 
 uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free ; but Christ is 
 all and in all ; all are one in Christ Jesus (Col. iii. 11 ; Gal. iii. 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, 
 
 3-2 
 
36 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 III. xi.) it has been common to say that S. 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 
 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. E. ill. xxiv. ii) and 
 earlier it has been maintained that S. 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 he 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, in as much as He was not 
 generally recognised and welcomed, His presence in the world 
 necessarily involved a separation and a conflict ; a separation 
 
INTRODUCTION. 37 
 
 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. 
 These various episodes taken one by one go far to shew, — 
 taken all together and combined with the issue of the conflict 
 irrefragably prove, — 'that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.' 
 The main outlines of the plan are these : — 
 
 I. The Prologue or Introduction (i. i — 18). 
 
 1. The Word in His own Nature (i. r — 5). 
 
 2. His revelation to men and rejection by them 
 
 (i. 6-13). 
 
 3. His revelation of the Father (i. 14 — 18). 
 
 II. First main Division. Christ's Ministry, or His Revela- 
 
 tion OF Himself to the World (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. i — 11). 
 
 b. The Work (ii. 13 — xi. 57) 
 
 1. among Jews (ii. 13 — iii. 36), 
 
 2. among Samaritans (iv. i — 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 (i — 36), 
 
 2. of the Evangelist (37 — 43), 
 
 3. of Christ (44—50). 
 
 Close of Christ's public ministry, 
 
 III. Second main Division. The Issues of Christ's Ministry, 
 
 OR His Revelation of Himself to His Disciples 
 (xiii. — XX.). 
 
 d. The Inner Glorification of Christ In His last Dis- 
 
 courses (xiii. — xvii.). 
 
 1. His love in humiliation (xiii. i — 30). 
 
 1. His love in keeping His own (xiii. 31 — xv. 27). 
 
38 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 3. The promise of the Comforter and of His re- 
 
 turn (xvi.). 
 
 4. The prayer of the High-Priest (xvii.). 
 
 e. The outer Glorification of Christ In His Passion 
 
 (xviii., xix.). 
 
 I. The betrayal (xviii. i — 11). 
 
 1. The ecclesiastical and civil trials (xviii. 12 — 
 xix. 16). 
 
 3. The crucifixion and burial (xix. 17 — 42). 
 /. The Resurrection (xx.). 
 
 1. The manifestation to Mary Magdalene ( I — 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. The EriLOGUE or Appendix (xxi.). 
 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. 
 
 I. From the time of Clement of Alexandria (c. A.D. 190) 
 this Gospel has been distinguished as a 'spiritual Gospel' 
 (Eus. H. E. 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 S. John we have rather His tranquil and unbroken 
 union with His Father. The heavenly element which forms 
 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 
 
INTRODUCTION. 39 
 
 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 typical but thoroughly REAL 
 AND LIFELIKE GROUPS AND INDIVIDUALS as the Fourth. They 
 are sketched, or rather by their words are made to sketch them- 
 selves, with a vividness and precision which, as already observed, 
 is almost proof that the Evangelist was an eyewitness of what 
 he records. 
 
 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 
 jealousy for the honour of their master (iii. 26) ; the Samari- 
 tans, proud to believe from their own experience rather than 
 on the testimony of a woman (iv. 42) ; the multitude, sometimes 
 thinking 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 Phari- 
 sees 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 
 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. 
 
40 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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, iii. 23—36), S. Andrew and Mary of Bethany, all unfail- 
 ing in their allegiance ; S. 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 affec- 
 tion of Mary Magdalene (xx. i— 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 unin- 
 structed man born blind (see on xi. 21), and in contrast with 
 both the timid, hesitating confessions of Nicodemus, the learned 
 Rabbi (iii. I, 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 is the 'ruler of the feast' (ii. 9, 10), the 
 'nobleman' (iv. 49), the man healed at Bethesda (v. 7, 11, 
 
 H, 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. Symbolism 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 
 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 
 
INTRODUCTION. 41 
 
 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 ; 
 (i) 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. i — 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, in Judas going out into the 
 night, in the dividing of Christ's garments and the blood and 
 water from His side, &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 Testament are conveyed. 
 This leads us to another characteristic. 
 
 4. Though written in Greek, S. John's Gospel is in thought 
 and tone, and sometimes in the form of expression also, 
 
 thoroughly HEBREW, AND BASED ON THE HEBREW SCRIP- 
 TURES. Much has been already said on this point in Chap- 
 ter II. ii. (2), in shewing that the Evangelist must have been a 
 Jew. The Gospel sets forth two facts in tragic contrast : (i) 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 
 
42 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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 understood, will lead them to adore Him whom 
 they have crucified. This he does, not merely in general state- 
 me?iis (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 Bridegroom (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. 38, 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. Ixix.). 
 
 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. ii.), and also the arrangement of the miracles 
 in section 3 of this chapter, illustrate this feature of the 
 Gospel. Further examples in detail will be pointed out 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 
 
INTRODUCTION. 43 
 
 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 dififerences between the Fourth Gospel 
 and the Apocalypse (Eus. H. E. vii. 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 simphcity. And it is faultless for 
 the same reason ; blemishes being avoided because idioms and 
 intricate constructions are avoided. Elegant, idiomatic, clas- 
 sical Greek it is not. 
 
 {a) This, therefore, is one element in the style, — extreme 
 simplicity. The clauses and sentences are connected together 
 by simple conjunctions co-ordinately; they are not made to de- 
 pend one upon another ; 'In Him was life, and the life was 
 the light of men ; ' not * which was the light, &c.' Even where 
 there is strong contrast indicated a simple * and ' is preferred to 
 'nevertheless' or 'notwithstanding;' 'He came unto His own 
 home, and His own people received Him not.' In passages of 
 great solemnity the sentences are placed side by side without 
 even a conjunction ; 'Jesus answered... Pilate answered... Jesus 
 answered' (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. 
 
 ib) 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 
 employed for the sake of close connexion and emphasis. This 
 constant repetition is very impressive. A good example of it is 
 where 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 ; ' I am the good Shepherd; the 
 good Shepherd giveth His life for the sheep ; ' ' The light shineth 
 in the darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not;' 'In 
 the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and 
 
44 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the Word was God. Sometimes instead of repeating the sub- 
 ject S. John introduces an apparently superfluous demonstrative 
 pronoun ; * He that seeketh the glory of Him that sent Him, 
 this one is true' (vii. i8); * He that made me whole, ^.^rt/ wfl« 
 said unto me' (v. ii). The personal pronouns are frequently 
 inserted for emphasis and repeated for the same reason. This 
 is specially true of ' I ' in the discourses of Christ 
 
 {c) Although S. John connects his sentences so simply, and 
 sometimes merely places them side by side without conjunc- 
 tions, yet he very frequently points out a sequence in fact or in 
 thought. His two most characteristic particles are 'therefore' 
 ipvv) and * in order that ' (ti/a). ' Therefore ' occurs almost ex- 
 clusively in narrative, and points out that one fact is a conse- 
 quence of another, sometimes in cases where this would not 
 have been obvious ; ' He came therefore again into Cana of 
 Galilee' (iv. 46), because of the welcom.e He had received there 
 before ; 'They sought therefore to take Him' (vii. 30), because 
 of His claim to be sent from God. — While the frequent use of 
 'therefore' points to the conviction that nothing happens with- 
 out a cause, the frequent use of ' in order that ' points to the 
 belief that nothing happens without a purpose. S. John uses 
 * in order that ' not only where some other construction would 
 have been suitable, but also where another construction would 
 seem to be much more suitable ; * I am not worthy in order 
 that I may unloose ' (i. 27), * My meat is iit order that I may do 
 the will' (iv. 34) ; 'This is the work of God, in order that ye may 
 believe' (vi. 29); 'Who sinned, this man or his parents, iti order 
 that he should be born blind ?' (ix. 2) ; * It is expedient for you, 
 in order that I go away ' (xvi. 7). S. John is specially fond of 
 this construction to point out the working of the Divine pur- 
 pose, as in some of the instances just given (comp. v. 23, vi. 40, 
 50, X. 10, xi. 42, xiv. 16, &c. &c.) and in particular of the fulfil- 
 ment of prophecy (xviii. 9, xix. 24, 28, 36). In this connexion 
 an elliptical expression 'but in order that' ( = but this was 
 done in order that) is not uncommon ; ' Neither this man 
 sinned, nor his parents, but in order that, &c.' (ix. 3 ; comp. xi. 
 52, xiv. 31, XV. 25, xviii. 28). 
 
INTRODUCTION. 45 
 
 {d) S. 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 Ufe, and they 
 shall never perish ' (x. 28). 
 
 ((?) Another peculiarity, also of Hebrew origin, is mhuitetiess 
 of detail. Instead of one word summing up the whole action, 
 S. John uses two or three stating the details of the action ; 
 'They asked him and said to him' (i. 25); 'John bare witness, 
 saying^ {{. 32); ' ]esus cried aloiid in the Temple teac/iing and 
 saying' (vii. 28). The frequent phrase 'answered and said,' 
 illustrates both this particularity and also the preference for 
 co-ordinate sentences (a). 'Answered and said' occurs thirty- 
 four times in S. John, and only two or three times in the 
 Synoptists, who commonly write 'having answered said,' or 
 ' answered saying.' 
 
 {/) In conclusion we may notice a few of S. John's favour- 
 ite words and phrases; 'Abide' especially in the phrases 
 expressing abiding in one another; 'believe on' a person; 
 ' true ' as opposed to lying, and ' true ' as opposed to spurious, 
 'truly,' and 'truth;' 'witness' and 'bear witness;' 'the dark- 
 ness,' of moral darkness; 'the light,' of spiritual hght; 'life;' 
 'love;' eternal life;' *in frankness' or 'openly;' 'keep My 
 word;' 'manifest;' 'the Jews,' of the opponents of Christ; 'the 
 world,' of those alienated from Christ. The following words 
 and phrases are used by S. John only; 'the Paraclete' or 'the 
 Advocate,' of the Holy Spirit; 'the Word,' of the Son; 'only- 
 begotten,' of the Son; 'come out from God,' of the Son; 'lay 
 down My life,' of Jesus Christ; 'Verily, verily;' 'the ruler of 
 this world,' of Satan ; * the last day.' 
 
 These characteristics combined form a book which stands 
 alone in Christian literature, as its author stands alone among 
 
46 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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 S. 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. S. John passes over their institution in 
 silence. 
 
 The differences between the Fourth Gospel and the three 
 first are real and very marked : but it is easy to exaggerate 
 
INTRODUCTION. 47 
 
 them. They are conveniently grouped under two heads ; (i) dif- 
 ferences as to the scene and extent of Christ's ministry ; (2) dif- 
 ferences as to the view given of His Person. 
 
 (i) 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 ; {b) 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, {b) 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. I 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. ll. xxii, 5) must be borne in mind, that our 
 Lord fulfilled the office of a Teacher until He was over forty 
 years old, "even as the Gospel and all the elders bear witness. 
 
48 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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. i), 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 S. 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, S. 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 
 explained by two considerations : (a) the peculiarities of S. 
 John's own temperament; {6) the circumstances under which 
 
INTRODUCTION. 4^ 
 
 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. (J?) 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 (i 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 (i 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 
 wickedness' (i 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 
 Providence of God, in that an Apostle, and he the Apostle 
 S. John, was preserved for this crisis. It is scarcely too much 
 
 S. JOHN 4 
 
50 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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 S. 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. Sec 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 Introduction, pp. Ixxxii., Lxxxiii. 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." 
 
 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 
 
INTRODUCTION. 5! 
 
 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. 
 
 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 S. 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 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. 
 
 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. 
 
 Gi'eek Manuscripts. 
 Codex Sinaiticus (x). 4th century. Discovered by Tisch- 
 endorf in 1859 at the monastery of S. Catherine on Mount 
 Sinai, and now at St Petersburg. The whole Gospel. 
 
 4—2 
 
52 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Codex 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. 
 
 Codex Vaticanus (B). 4th century, but perhaps later than 
 the Sinaiticus. In the Vatican Library. The whole Gospel. 
 
 Codex Ephraemi (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. i — 41 ; iii. 33 — v. 16 ; 
 vi. 38 — vii. 3 ; viii. 34— ix. 11; xi. 8—46 ; xiii. 8 — xiv. 7 ; xvi. 
 21 — xviii. 36; XX. 26 — xxi. 25. 
 
 Codex Bezae (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 i. 16 — iii. 26 : but xviii. 13 — xx. 13 is by a later hand, 
 possibly from the original MS. 
 
 Codex Regius Parisiensis (L). 8th or 9th century. Nearly 
 related to the Vaticanus. At Tours. The whole Gospel, ex- 
 cepting xxi. 15 — xxi. 25. 
 
 A ncient VeTsions. 
 
 Old SyriaC (Curetonian). 2nd century. Four fragments ; 
 i. — 42; iii. 5 — vii. 35; vii. yi — viii. 53, omitting vn. 53 — viii. 11; 
 xiv. II — 29. 
 
 Vulgate Syriac (Peschito). 3rd century. The whole Gos- 
 pel. 
 
 Harclean Syriac (a revision of the Philoxenian Syriac ; 
 5th or 6th century). 7th century. The whole Gospel. 
 
 Old Latin (Vetus Latina). 2nd century. The whole Gospel 
 in several distinct forms. 
 
 Vulgate Latin (mainly a revision of the Old Latin by Je- 
 rome, A.D. 383 — 5). 4th century. The whole Gospel. 
 
 Memphitic (Coptic, in the dialect of Lower Egypt). 3rd 
 century. The whole Gospel. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 53 
 
 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.D. 
 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 S. Chrysostom's 88 Homilies on the 
 Gospel, which have been translated in the Oxford * Library of 
 the Fathers.' S. Augustine's 124 Lectures {Tractatus) on S. 
 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 pre- 
 vious forgers, and a considerable number of the quotations from 
 early authorities are taken from spurious works. 
 
 Of modern commentaries those of Cornelius k 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, 
 
54 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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 " un- 
 surpassed " — we may add, except by Dr Westcott's own. 
 
 Among original English commentaries those of Alford, Dun- 
 well, McClellan, Watkins, and Wordsworth are or are becom- 
 ing well known to all students. But immensely superior to all 
 preceding works is the one noticed above, that by Dr Westcott 
 in Vol. II. of the Speaker's Coynmentary oil N. T. Murray, 
 1880. 
 
 Other works which give very valuable assistance are Ellicott's 
 Historical Lectures on the Life of our Lord, Liddon's Bampton 
 Lectures, 1866, Sanday's Authorship and Historical Character 
 of the Fourth Gospel, and The Gospels in the Second Century, 
 and Westcott's Introductiott to the Study of the Gospels. 
 
 The present writer is bound to express his obligations, in 
 some cases very great, to the works mentioned above of Alford, 
 Dunwell, Ellicott, Liddon, McClellan, Sanday, Meyer, Watkins, 
 and Westcott, as well as to many others. The debt to Canon 
 Westcott would probably have been still greater if the notes to 
 the first fifteen chapters had not been written before the writer 
 of them had seen Vol. ll. of the Speaker's Cofnmentary : but 
 they have been revised with its help. It was originally intended 
 that Mr 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 aimed at in some 
 measure remedying the loss caused by Mr Sanday's retirement 
 by frequently quoting from his work on the Fourth Gospel. 
 These quotations are marked simply ' S.' with a reference to the 
 page. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 55 
 
 ANALYSIS OF THE GOSPEL IN DETAIL. 
 
 I. I— 18. THE PROLOGUE. 
 
 1. The Word in His own nature (i — 5), 
 
 2. His revelation to men and rejection by them (6 — 13). 
 
 3. His revelation of the Father (14 — 18). 
 
 r. 19-XIL so. THE MINISTRY. 
 
 a. [. 19 — II. II. Tlie Testimony. 
 
 I. The Testimony of the Baptist (i. 19 — 37) 
 
 io the deputation from yerusalem (19 — 28), 
 
 to the people (29 — 34), 
 
 to Andrew and yohn (35 — 37). 
 
 ^. The Testimony of Disciples (i. 38 — 51). 
 
 3. The Testimony of the First Sign (ii. i — 1 1). 
 
 b. II. 13 — XI. 57. The Work. 
 
 1. The Work among Jews (ii. 13 — iii. 36). 
 
 First cleansing of the Temple ( 1 3 — 22 ), 
 
 Belief without devotion (23 — 25). 
 
 The discourse with Nicodemus (iii. i — 21). 
 
 The baptism and final testimony ofjohti (22 — 36). 
 
 2. The Work among Samaritans (iv. i — 42). 
 
 3. The Work among Galileans (iv. 43 — 54). 
 
 4. The Work and conflict among mixed multitudes (v. — xi ). 
 (a) Christ the Source of Life (v.). 
 
 The sign at the pool of Bethsaida (i — 9). 
 The seqtiel of the sign (10 — 16). 
 The discourse on the Son as the Source nf Life (17- 
 47^. 
 
56 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 (^) Christ the Support of Life (vi.). 
 
 The sign on the land ; feeding the 5000 (i — 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). 
 
 (7) Christ the Source of Truth and Light (vii. viii.). 
 The controversy with His brethren (vii. i — 9). 
 The discourse at the F. of Tabernacles (lo — 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). 
 
 Christ the Source of Truth and Life illustra- 
 ted BY A Sign (ix.). 
 The prelude to the sign (i — 5). 
 The sign (6 — 12). 
 Opposite results of the sign (13 — 41). 
 
 (5) Christ is Love (x.). 
 
 Allegory of the Door of the Fold (i — 9). 
 Allegory of the Good Shepherd (11 — 18). 
 Opposite results of the teaching (19 — 2 1). 
 The discourse at the F. of the Dedication (22 — 38). 
 Opposite results of the discourse (39 — 42). 
 
 Christ is Love illustrated by a Sign (xi.) 
 The prelude to the sign (i — 33). 
 The sign (33—44)- 
 Opposite results of the sign (45 — 57). 
 
 XI L The Judgment. 
 
 :. The Judgment of men (i — 36). 
 
 The devotion of Alary (i — 8). 
 The hostility of the priests (9 — 11). 
 The enthusiasm of the people (12 — 18). 
 The discomfititre of the Pharisees (19). 
 The desire of the Gentiles (20 — 33). 
 The perplexity of the multitude (34 — ^,0). 
 
INTRODUCTION. 57 
 
 1. The Judgment of the Evangehst (37 — 43). 
 3. The Judgment of Christ (44 — 50). 
 
 XIII.— XX. THE ISSUES OF THE MINISTRY. 
 
 d. XIII.— XVII. The inner Glorification of Clirist in His last 
 
 Discourses. 
 
 I. His love in Humiliation (xiii. i — 30). 
 
 1. His Love in keeping His own (xiii. 31 — xv. 27). 
 
 Their union with Him illustrated by the allegory of 
 
 the Vine (xv. i — 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. i — 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 [xvW. i — 5), 
 for the Disciples (6 — 19), 
 for the whole Church (20 — 26). 
 
 e, XVIII. XIX. The outer Glorification of Christ in His Passion, 
 r. The Betrayal (xviii. i — 11). 
 
 2. The Jewrish or Ecclesiastical Trial (12 — 27). 
 
 3. The Roman or Civil Trial (xviii. 28 — xix. 16). 
 
 4. 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). 
 The two words, ^ I thirst,'' ^ It is finished' (28 — 30). 
 The hostile and the friendly petitions (31 — 42). 
 
 / XX. The Eesurrection and threefold Manifestation of Christ. 
 
 1. The first Evidence of the Resurrection (r — 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). 
 
58 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 XXI. THE EPILOGUE OR APPENDIX. 
 
 I . The Manifestation to the Seven and the Miraculous Draught 
 
 of Fishes (i — 14). 
 1. The Commission to S. Peter and Prediction as to his Death 
 
 (15—19)- 
 
 3. The misunderstood Saying as to the Evangelist (20 — ■23). 
 
 4. Concluding Notes (24, 25). 
 
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO 
 
 S. JOHN. 
 
 Chap. I. i — 18. The Prologue or Introduction. 
 
 The Gospel according to St John] This title exists in very 
 different forms, both ancient and modern, and is not original. As we 
 might expect, the oldest authorities are the simplest, and the heading 
 gradually increases in fulness; thus, i. According to jfohn, or O/yokn; 
 2. Gospel according to John ; 3. The Gospel according to yohn; 4. The 
 holy Gospel, &c. So also with the English Versions, from Wiclif s 
 simpleyww, or The Gospel o/Joon, to The Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ 
 according to John of the Geneva Bible. 
 
 Chap. I. 1 — 18. The Prologue or Introduction. 
 
 That the first eighteen verses are introductory is universally admitted : 
 commentators are not so unanimous as to the main divisions of this in- 
 troduction. A division into three nearly equal parts has much to com- 
 mend it : 
 
 I. The Word in His own Nature (\ — 5). 
 
 1. His Revelation to men atid rejection by them (6 — 13). 
 
 3. His Revelation of the Father (i\ — 18). 
 
 Some throw the second and third part into one, thus : 
 
 1. The historical manifestation of the Word (6 — 18). 
 Others again divide into two parts thus : 
 
 1. The Word in His absolute eternal Being {v. i). 
 
 2. The Word in relation to Creation (2 — 18). 
 
 And there are other schemes besides these. In any scheme the 
 student can scarcely fail to feel that the first verse is unique. Through- 
 out the prologue the three great characteristics of this Gospel, sim- 
 plicity, subtlety, and sublimity, are specially conspicuous ; and the 
 majesty of the first verse surpasses all. The Gospel of, the Son of 
 Thunder opens with a peal. 
 
6o S. JOHN, I. [w. I, 2. 
 
 I — 5. The Word in His own Nature. 
 
 1 T N the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with 
 a i God, and the Word was God. The same was in the 
 
 1—6. The Word in His own Nature. 
 
 1. In the beginning^ The meaning must depend on the context. 
 In Gen. i. i it is an act done 'in the beginning;' here it is a Being 
 existing 'in the beginning,' and therefore prior to all beginning. That 
 was the first moment of time; this is eternity, transcending time. Thus 
 we have an intimation that the later dispensation is the confirmation 
 and infinite extension of the first. ' In the beginning ' here equals 
 'before the world was,' xvii. 5. Compare xvii. 24; Eph. i. 4; and 
 contrast 'the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ,' Mark i. i, which 
 is the historical beginning of the public ministry of the Messiah (John 
 vi. 64): 'the beginning' here is prior to all history. To interpret 
 'Beginning' of God as the Origin of all things is not correct, as the con- 
 text shews. 
 
 ■was\ Not 'came into existence,' but was already in existence before 
 the creation of the world. The generation of the Word or Son of God is 
 thus thrown back into eternity. Thus S. Paul calls Him (Col. i. 
 15) ' the firstborn of every creature,' or (more accurately translated) 
 ' begotten before all creation,' like ' begotten before all worlds ' in 
 the Nicene creed. Comp. Heb. i. 8, vii. 3 ; Rev. i. 8. On these 
 passages is based the doctrine of the Eternal Generation of the Son : 
 see Articles of Religion, i. and II. The Arians maintained that there 
 was a period when the Son was not: S. John says distinctly that 
 the Son or Word was existing before time began, i.e. from all eternity. 
 
 the IVord] As early as the second century Sermo and Verbttm were 
 rival translations of the Greek term Logos = ''^ordL. Tertullian (fl. A.D. 
 195 — 210) gives us both, but seems himself to prefer Ratio. Sermo first 
 became unusual, and finally was disallowed in the Latin Church. The 
 Latin versions all adopted Verbum, and from it comes our translation, 
 ' the Word.' 
 
 None of these translations are at all adequate: but neither Latin nor 
 any modem language supplies anything really satisfactory. Verbum 
 and ' the Word ' do not give the whole of even one of the two sides of 
 Logos: the other side, which Tertullian tried to express by Ratio, is not 
 touched at all; for 6 X0705 means not only ' the spoken word,' but ' the 
 thought ' expressed by the spoken word ; it is the spoken word as expres- 
 sive of thought. It is not found in the N.T. in the sense of ' reason.' 
 
 The expression Logos is a remarkable one ; all the more so, because 
 S. John assumes that his readers will at once understand it. This 
 shews that his Gospel was written in the first instance for his own 
 disciples, who would be familiar with his teaching and phraseology. 
 
 Whence did S. John derive the expression. Logos ? 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, as is very commonly asserted. 
 
V. I.] S. JOHN, I. 6i 
 
 (i) In the Old Testament we find the Word or Wisdom of God per- 
 sonified, generally as an instniment for executing the Divine Will. We 
 have a faint trace of it in the 'God said ' of Gen. i. 3, 6, 9, ir, 14, &c. 
 The personification of the Word of God begins to appear in the 
 Psalms, xxxiii. 6, cvii. ■20, cxix. 89, cxlvii. 15. In Prov. viii. and ix. 
 the Wisdom of God is personified in very striking terms. This 
 Wisdom is manifested in the power and mighty v/orks of God ; that 
 God is love is a revelation yet to come. (2) In the Apocrypha the 
 personification is more complete than in O. T. In Ecclesiasticus 
 (c. B.C. 150 — 100) i. I — 20, xxiv. I — 22, and in the Book of Wisdom 
 (c. B.C. 100) vi. 22 to ix. 18 we have Wisdom strongly personified. In 
 Wisd. xviii. 15 the 'Almighty Word' of God appears as an agent of 
 vengeance. (3) In the Targtans, or Aramaic paraphrases of O.T.,the 
 development is carried still further. These, though not yet written 
 down, were in common use among the Jews in our Lord's time; and 
 they were strongly influenced by the growing tendency to separate the 
 Godhead 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. iii. 
 8, 9, instead of 'they heard the voice of the Lord God,' the Targums 
 have 'they heard the voice of the Word oi the Lord God;' and instead 
 of 'God called unto Adam,' they put 'the Word of the Lord called 
 unto Adam,' and so on. 'The Word of the Lord' is said to occur 150 
 times in a single Targum of the Pentateuch. In the iheosophy of the 
 Alexandrine y^ews, which was a compound of theology with philo- 
 sophy and mysticism, we seem to come nearer to a strictly personal 
 view of the Divine Word or Wisdom, but really move further away 
 from it. Philo, the leading representative of this religious specu- 
 lation (fl. A.D. 40 — 50), admitted into his philosophy very various, 
 and not always harmonious elements. Consequently his conception 
 of the Logos is not fixed or clear. On the whole his Logos means 
 some intermediate agency, by means of which God created material 
 things and communicated with them. But whether this Logos is one 
 Being or more, whether it is personal or not, we cannot be sure; and 
 perhaps Philo himself was undecided. Certainly his L-ogos is very 
 different from that of S. John; for it is scarcely a Person, and it is not the 
 Messiah. And when we note that of the two meanings of A6yoSy Philo 
 dwells most on the side which is less prominent, while the Targums 
 insist on that which is more prominent in the teaching of S. John, we 
 cannot doubt the source of his language. The Logos of Philo is pre- 
 eminently the Divine Reason. The Memra of the Targums is rather 
 the Divine Word ; i.e. the Will of God manifested in personal action; 
 and this rather than a philosophical abstraction of the Divine Intelli- 
 gence is the starting point of S. John's expression. 
 
 To sum up: — the personification of the Divine Word in O. T. is 
 poetical, in Philo metaphysical, in S. John historical. The Apocrypha 
 and Targums help to fill the chasm between O.T. and Philo; histoiy 
 itself fills the far greater chasm which separates all from S. John. 
 Between Jewish poetry and Alexandrine speculation on the one hand, 
 
62 S. JOHN, I. [vv. 3, 4. 
 
 3 beginning with God. All tlwigs were made by him ; and 
 
 4 without him was not any thing made that was made. In 
 
 and the Fourth Gospel on the other, lies the historical fact of the In- 
 carnation of the Logos, the life of Jesus Christ. 
 
 The Logos of S. John, therefore, is not a mere attribute of God, but 
 the Son of God, existing from all eternity, and manifested in space and 
 time in the Person of Jesus Christ. In the Logos had been hidden 
 from eternity all that God had to say to man ; for the Logos was the 
 living expression of the nature, purposes, and Will of God. (Comp. the 
 impersonal designation of Christ in i John i. I.) 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. 
 S. John knew that he possessed the key to this enigma. He therefore 
 took the phrase which human reason had lighted on in its gjopings, 
 stripped it of its misleading associations, fixed it by identifying it with 
 the Christ, and filled it with that fulness of meaning which he himself 
 had derived from Christ's own teaching. 
 
 with God] i.e. with the Father. 'With' = a/z/</, or the French chez: it 
 expresses the distinct Personality of the Logos. We might render 'face to 
 face with God,' or 'at home with God.' So, 'His sisters, are they not 
 all with us?' Matt. xiii. 56; comp. Mark vi. 3, ix. 19, xiv. 49; i Cor. 
 xvi. 7; Gal. i. 18; i Thess. iii. 4; Philem. 13; i John i. 2. 
 
 the Word was God] i. e. the Word partook of the Divine Nature, not 
 was identical with the Divine Person. The verse may be thus para- 
 phrased, ' the Logos existed from all eternity, distinct from the Father, 
 and equal to the Father.' Comp. ' neither confounding the Persons nor 
 dividing the Substance.' 
 
 2. The satne] More literally. He or Tills (Word), with emphasis 
 (comp. vii. 18). This verse takes up the first two clauses and com- 
 bines them. Such recapitulations are characteristic of S. John. 
 
 3. by him] Rather, througli Him. The universe was created by 
 the Father through the agency of the Son. Comp. i Cor. viii. 6; Col. 
 i. 16 (where see Lightfoot's note); Rom. xi. 36; Heb. xi. 10. That no 
 inferiority is necessarily implied by ' through,' as if the Son were a mere 
 instrument, is shewn by 1 Cor. i. 9, where the same construction is used 
 of the Father, ^through Whom ye were called, &c.' Note the climax 
 in what follows ; the sphere contracts as the blessing enlarges : existence 
 for everything ; life for the vegetable and animal world ; light for men. 
 
 without him, &c. ] Better, apart from Him, &c. Comp. xv. 5. 
 Antithetic parallelism ; emphatic repetition by contradicting the opposite : 
 frequent in Hebrew : one of the many instances of the Hebrew cast of 
 S. John's style. Comp. v. 20, x. 28; i John i. 5, ii. 4, 27, 28; Ps. 
 Ixxxix. 30, 31, 48, &c., &c. 
 
 not anythifig] No, not one ; not even one : stronger than ' nothing. ' 
 Every single thing, however great, however small, throughout all the 
 realms of space, came into being through Him. No event takes place 
 7vithout Him, — apart from His presence and power. Matt. x. 29; Luke 
 xii. 6. 
 
V. s] S. JOHN, 1. 63 
 
 him was life ; and the life was the light of men. And the s 
 light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended 
 it not. 
 
 that was made] Better, tkat hath been made. The aorist refers to 
 the fact of creation ; the perfect to the permanent result of that fact. 
 Contrast ' was made ' and ' hath been made ' here with ' was ' in w. i 
 and 2. ' Was made' denotes the springing into life of what was once 
 non-existent ; ' was ' denotes the perpetual pre-existence of the Word. 
 
 Some both ancient and modern writers would give the last part of v. 
 3 to z/. 4, thus : That which hath been made in Him was life ; i.e. those 
 who were born again by union with Him felt His influence as life with- 
 in them. It is very difficult to decide between the two punctuations. 
 Tatian [Oral, ad Graecos, xix.) has 'All things [were] by Him and with- 
 out Him hath been made not even one thing. ' See on v. 5. 
 
 4. In him was life\ He was the well-spring from which every 
 form of life — physical, intellectual, moral, spiritual, eternal — flows. See 
 on V. 26. 
 
 Observe how frequently S. 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. 
 
 the light] Not 'light,' but 'the Light,' the one true Light; absolute 
 Truth both intellectual and moral, free from all ignorance and all stain. 
 The Source of life is the Source of light. 
 
 the light of men] Man shares life with all organic creatures; light, or 
 Revelation, is for him alone. The communication of Divine truth before 
 the Fall is specially meant. 
 
 5. shineth] Note the present tense; the only one in the section. It 
 brings us down to the Apostle's own day : now, as of old, the Light 
 shines — in reason, in creation, in conscience, — and shines in vain. 
 Note also the progress : in w. i and 2 we have the period before Crea- 
 tion; in V. 3, the Creation; v. 4, man before the Fall; v. 5, man after 
 the Fall. 
 
 in darkttess] Better, in the darkness. The Fall is presupposed. 
 
 and the darkness] Mark the strong connexion between the two 
 halves of v. 5 as also between v. 4 and v. 5, resulting in both cases 
 from a portion of the predicate of one clause becoming the subject of 
 the next clause. Such strong connexions are frequent in St John. 
 Sometimes the whole of the predicate is taken ; sometimes the subject 
 or a portion of the subject is repeated. — By 'the darkness' is meant all 
 that the Divine Revelation does not reach, whether by God's decree or 
 their own stubbornness, ignorant Gentile or unbelieving Jew. 'Dark- 
 ness' in a metaphorical sense for spiritual and moral darkness is peculiar 
 to S. John, viii. 12, xii. 35, 46; i John i. 5, ii. 8, 9, 11. 
 
 comprehended it not] Or, apprehended it not: very appropriate of 
 that which requires mental and moral effort. Comp. Eph. iii. 18. The 
 darkness remained apart, unyielding, and unpenetrated. The words 
 'the darkness apprehendeth not the light' are given by Tatian as a 
 
64 S. JOHN, I. [vv. 6—9. 
 
 6 — 13. The Word revealed to Men and rejected by them. 
 
 6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 
 
 7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, 
 
 8 that all 7>ien through him might believe. He was not that 
 
 9 Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That 
 
 qtiolation{0>-at. ad Graecos, xiii.). He flourished a.d. 150 — 170: so 
 this is early testimony to the existence of the Gospel. This and the 
 reference to v. 3 (see note) are quite beyond reasonable dispute. 
 
 We have here an instance of what has been called the "tragic 
 tone" in S. John. He frequently states a gracious fact, and in imme- 
 diate 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. Comp. vv. 10 and 
 II, (ii. 24,) iii. II, 19, 32, v. 39, 40, vi. 36, 43, viii. 45, &c. The word 
 rendered 'comprehended' may also mean ^ overcame ;^ and this makes 
 good sense. Comp. xii. 35. 
 
 6 — 13. The Word revealed to Men and rejected by them. 
 
 6. There was a man] Rather, There arose n man, in contrast to 
 the 'was' in v. i. The word w<w from all eternity; John a;vj^, came 
 into existence, in time. Comp. x. 19. Note once more the noble sim- 
 plicity of language. 
 
 sent from Go3] i.e. a Prophet. Comp. 'I will j^w^/ my messenger,' 
 Mai. iii. i ; 'I will send yon Elijah the Prophet,' iv. 5. From the Greek 
 for 'send' {flpostello) comes our word 'Apostle.' 
 
 whose name was ^ohn] In the Fourth Gospel John is mentioned 20 
 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. See on 
 xi. 16. 
 
 7. for a witness] Better, for witness, i.e. to bear witness, not to 
 be a witness: what follows shews the meaning. The word 'witness' 
 and 'to bear witness' are very frequent in S. John's writings, and this 
 frequency should be marked by retaining the same translation through- 
 out : testimony to the truth is one of his favourite thoughts. 
 
 through him] i.e. through the Baptist, the Herald of the Truth. 
 Comp. V. 33; Acts X. 37, xiii. 24. 
 
 8. not that Light] Better, not the Light. The Baptist was not 
 the Light, but 'the lamp that is lighted and shineth' (see on v. 35). He 
 was lumen illuminatzim, not lumen illuminans. At the close of the 
 first century it was still necessary for S. John to insist on this. At 
 Ephesus, where this Gospel was ^vritten, S. Paul in his third missionary 
 journey had found disciples still resting in 'John's baptism,' Acts xix. 
 I — 6. 'By lamp-light we may advance to the day' (Augustine), 
 
 but was sent to] 'was sent' is not in the Greek. 'But (in order) that' 
 
vv. TO, II.] S. JOHN, I. 6s 
 
 was the true Light, which Hghteth every man that cometh 
 into the world. He was in the world, and the world was lo 
 made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto " 
 
 is an elliptical phrase occurring several times in this Gospel. It calls 
 attention to the Divine purpose. Comp. ix. 3, xiii. 18, xiv. 31, xv. 25. 
 
 9. That was, &c.] This verse is ambiguous in the Greek. Most 
 of the Ancient Versions, Fathers, and Reformers agree with our trans- 
 lators. Many modern commentators translate — the true Light, which 
 lighteth every man, was coming into the world : but 'was' and 'com- 
 ing' are almost too far apart in the Greek for this. There is yet a 
 third way ; — there was the true Light, which lighteth every man by 
 coming into the world. 'Was' is emphatic : 'there was the true Light,' 
 even while the Baptist was preparing the way for Him, The Baptist 
 came once for all ; the Light was ever coming. 
 
 The word for 'true' {alethinos) is remarkable: it means true as op- 
 posed to 'spurious,' not true as opposed to 'lying.' It is in fact the 
 old English 'very,' e.g. 'very God of very God.' Christ then is the 
 true, the genuine, the perfect Light, just as He is 'the perfect Bread' 
 (vi. 32) and 'the perfect Vine' (xv. i) : not that He is the only Light, 
 and Bread, and Vine, but that He is in reality what all others are in 
 figure and imperfectly. All words about truth are very characteristic 
 of S. John. 
 
 every man] not 'all men:' the Light illumines each one singly, not all 
 collectively. God deals with men separately as individuals, not in 
 masses. But though every man is illumined, not every man is the 
 better for it : that depends upon himself. 
 
 that cometh mto the world] A Jewish phrase for being born, fre- 
 quent in S. John (ix. 39, xi. 27, xvi. 28); see on xviii. 37. 'The world' 
 is another of the expressions characteristic of S. John : it occurs nearly 
 80 times in the Gospel and 22 in the First Epistle. This verse, Hippo- 
 lytus tells us {Refut. vii. x.), was used by Basilides in defending his 
 doctrine, and as he began to teach about a.d. 125, this is very early 
 evidence of the use of the Gospel. 
 
 10. attd the ^vorld] Note three points; (i) the close connexion 
 obtained by repetition, as in vv. 4 and 5 ; (2) the tragic tone, as \wv. 5 ; 
 (3) the climax. 'He was in the world' (therefore the world should have 
 known Him); 'and the world was His own creature' (therefore still 
 more it should have known Him); 'and (yet) the world knew Him 
 not.' 'And' = 'and yet' is very frequent in S. John ; but it is best not 
 to put in the 'yet;' the simple 'and' is more forcible. Comp. vv. 5 
 and II. 
 
 Note that 'the world ' has not the same meaning in w. 9 and 10. 
 Throughout N.T. it is most important to distinguish the various mean- 
 ings of 'the world.' It means (i) 'the universe;' Rom. i. 20: (2) 'the 
 earth;' v. 9; Matt. iv. 8: (3) 'the inhabitants of the earth;' v. 29, iv. 
 42 : (4) 'those outside the Church,' alienated from God; xii. 31, xiv. 17, 
 and frequently. In this verse the meaning slips from (2) to (4). 
 
 S. JOHN e 
 
66 S. JOHN, I. [vv. 12, 13. 
 
 13 his own, and his own received him not. But as many as 
 
 received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of 
 
 13 God, even to them that beheve on his name : which were 
 
 knew him noi] Did not acquire knowledge -of its Creator; did not 
 recognise and acknowledge Him. Comp. Acts xix. 15. 
 
 11. unto his own] In the Greek the first ' own ' is neuter, the second is 
 masculine, and this difference should be preserved : He came wiio His 
 own mheritance ; and His own people received Him not (see on vi. 37). 
 In the parable of the Wicked Husbandmen (Matt. xxi. 33 — 41) the 
 vineyard is 'His own inlieritance, ' the husbandmen are 'His own 
 people,' the Jews. Or, for 'His own inheritance' we might say 'His 
 own home^ as in xix. 27, where the Greek is the same. The tragic 
 tone is very strong here as in w. 5 and 10. 
 
 received] A stronger word than 'knew.' The exact meaning of the 
 Greek word is 'to accept what is offered.' Mankind in general did not 
 recognise the Messiah ; the Jews, to whom He was specially sent, did 
 not welcome Him. See on xix. 16. 
 
 Once more there is a climax; — 'He was' (z/. 9); 'He was in the 
 world' (z'. 10); 'He came unto His o\vn inheritance' (z*. 11). 
 
 12. received] Not the same Greek word as before : this denotes the 
 spontaneous acceptance of the Messiah by individuals, whether Jews or 
 Gentiles. He was not specially offered to any individuals as He was to 
 the Jewish nation. 
 
 po^ver] i.e. right, liberty, authority. We are bom with a capa- 
 city for becoming sons of God ; that we have as men. He gives us a 
 r?]^A/ to become such ; that we receive as Christians. Comp. v. 27, x. 
 18. 
 
 to become] Christ is from all eternity the Son of God ; men are em- 
 powered to become sons of God. Comp. Matt. v. 45. 
 
 the sons of God] Omit 'the:' cMldren of God. Both S. John and 
 S. Paul insist on the fundamental fact that the relation of believers to 
 God is 2l filial one. S. John gives us this fact on the human side; man 
 'must be born again' (iii. 3). S. Paul gives us the Divine side; God by 
 'adoption' makes us sons (Rom. viii. 16, 17, 21, 23; Gal. iv. 5). 
 
 even to them that believe] Explains who are the sons of God. The 
 test of a child of God is no longer descent from Abraham, but belief 
 in God's Son. 
 
 on his name] The construction 'to believe on' is characteristic of S. 
 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 on the object of belief. 'His 
 Name' is a frequent phrase in Jewish literature, both O. and N.T. It 
 is not a mere periphrasis. Names were so often significant, given some- 
 times by God Himself, that a man's name told not merely who he was, 
 but what he was: it was an index of character. So 'the Name of the 
 Lord' is not a mere periphrasis for 'the Lord;' it suggests His attributes 
 and His relations to us as Lord. Perhaps the name of Logos is specially 
 meant here ; and the meaning would then be to give one's entire ad • 
 
V. 14.] S. JOHN, I. 67 
 
 born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the 
 will of man, but of God. 
 
 14 — 18. The Incarnate Word's revelation of the Father. 
 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us. m 
 
 hesion to Him as the Incarnate Son, the expression of the Will and 
 Nature of God. Comp. iii. 18, xx. 31. 
 
 13. S. John denies thrice most emphatically that human generation 
 has anything to do with Divine regeneration. Man cannot become a 
 child of God in right of human parentage : descent from Abraham con- 
 fers no such 'power.' A bitter word to Jewish exclusiveness. 
 
 were borii\ Literally, were 'begGtten. Comp. i John v. i, 4, 18. 
 
 not ofblood^ The blood was regarded as the seat of physical life. 
 Gen. ix. 4; Lev. xvii. 11, 14, &c. 
 
 nor of the will of the fleshy Better, nor yet from will of flesh, i.e. 
 from any fleshly impulse. A second denial of any physical process. 
 
 nor of the will of mati] Better, nor yet from will of man, i.e. from 
 the volition of any earthly father : it is the Heavenly Father who wills 
 it. A third denial of any physical process. 
 
 There is an interesting false reading here. Tertullian (c. A.D. 200) 
 had '■was born' for ^were born,' making it refer to Christ; and he ac- 
 cused the Valentinians of corrupting the text in reading 'were born,' 
 which is undoubtedly right. This shews that as early as A.D. 200 there 
 were corruptions in the text, the origin of which was already lost. Such 
 things take some time to grow : by comparing them and tracing their 
 roots and branches we arrive at a sure conclusion that this Gospel can- 
 not have been written later than A.D. 85 — 100. See on v. 18 and ix. 
 
 14 — 18. The Incarnate Word's revelation of the Father. 
 
 14. And the Word was made flesh'] Or, ^oecsime flesh. This is the 
 gulf which separates S. John from Philo. Philo would have assented to 
 what precedes; from this he would have shrunk. From v. 9 to 13 we 
 have the subjective 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 {w. i and 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 important point is that the 
 Word became terrestrial and material : and thus the inferior part of man 
 is mentioned, the flesh, to mark His humiliation. He took the whole 
 of man's nature, including its frailty. "The majestic fulness of this 
 brief sentence," the Word became flesh, which affirms once for all the 
 union of the Infinite and the finite, "is absolutely unique." The Word 
 became flesh ; did not merely assume a body : and the Incarnate Word 
 is one, not two personalities. Thus various heresies, Gnostic and Eu- 
 tychian, are refuted by anticipation. 
 
 I 
 
68 S. JOHN, I. [v. 15. 
 
 (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten 
 
 15 of the Father,) full of grace and truth. John bare witness of 
 
 him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He 
 
 dwelt among us\ Literally, tabernacled among us, dwelt as in a tent. 
 The Tabernacle had been the seat of the Divine Presence in the wilder- 
 ness : when God became incarnate in order to dwell among the Chosen 
 People, 'to tabernacle' was a natural word to use. The word forms a 
 link between this Gospel and the Apocalypse : it occurs here, four times 
 in the Apocalypse, and nowhere else. Our translators render it simply 
 'dwell,' which is inadequate. Rev. vii. 15, xii. 12, xiii. 6, xxi. 3. 
 
 among us^ In the midst of those of us who \vitnessed His life. 
 
 we beheld'^ Or, contemplated. Comp. r John i. i. No need to 
 make a parenthesis. 
 
 his glor)/] The Shechinah. Comp. ii. 11, xi. 40, xii. 41, xvii. 5, 24; 
 2 Cor. iii. 7 — 18; Rev. xxi. 11. 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. In any case it is the 
 Evangelist's own experience that is indicated. Omit 'the' before the 
 second 'glory.' 
 
 as of\ i.e. exactly like. The glory is altogether such as that of an 
 only-begotten son. Comp. Matt. vii. 29. He taught exactly as one 
 having full authority. No article before 'only-begotten;' He was an 
 only-begotten Son, whereas Moses and the Prophets were but servants. 
 
 only begotten'^ Unigenitus. The Greek 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 Christ it occurs only in S. John's 
 writings; here,z'. 18, iii. 16, 18; i John iv. 9. It marks off His unique 
 Sonship from that of the 'sons of God' (v. 12). 
 
 of the Father] Literally, from the presence of a father; an only son 
 sent on a mission from a father: comp. v. 6. 
 
 fulll Looks forward to 'fulness' in v. 16. 
 
 grace] The original meaning of the Greek word is 'that which causes 
 pleasure.' Hence (i) comeliness, winsomeness: 'the words of grace' in 
 Luke iv. 22 are 'winning words.' (2) Kindliness, goodwill: Luke ii. 52 ; 
 Acts ii. 47. (3) The favour of God towards sinners. This distinctly 
 theological sense has for its central point \ht.freeness of God's gifts : they 
 are not earned. He gives them spontaneously through Christ. 'Grace' 
 covers all these three meanings. The third at its fullest and deepest is 
 the one here. It is as the Life that the Word is 'full of grace,' for 
 it is 'by grace' that we come to eternal life. Eph. ii. 5. 
 
 truth] It is as the Light that the Word is 'full of truth.' 
 
 16. bare witness] Better, bears witness. At the end of a long life 
 this testimony of the Baptist abides still fresh in the heart of the aged 
 Apostle. Three times in 20 verses (15, 27, 30) he records the cry which 
 was such an epoch in his own life. The testimony remains as a memory 
 for him, a truth for all. 
 
 and cried] Better, and cries. The word indicates strong emotion, 
 characteristic of a prophet. Comp. vii. 28, 37, xii. 44; Is. xl. 3. 
 
vv. 16, 17.] S. JOHN, I. 69 
 
 that Cometh after me is preferred before me : for he was 
 before me. And of his fulness have all we received, and 16 
 grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses, but grace '? 
 
 of whom I spake] As if his first utterance under the influence of the 
 Spirit had been scarcely intelligible to himself. 
 
 He that conieth after, &c.] The exact meaning seems to 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. But this is not quite certain. The words 
 translated 'is preferred before me,' or 'is become superior to me,' 
 literally mean ' has come to be before me ; ' and this may refer to time 
 and not to dignity. But the perfect tense 'has come to be, has become' 
 points to dignity rather than time. Moreover if 'has become before me' 
 refers to time, this is almost tautology with 'for He was before me,' 
 which must refer to time. 
 
 he was before me\ The Greek is peculiar, being the superlative instead 
 of the comparative ; not simply ^ prior to me,' but ^ first of me.' Perhaps 
 it means 'before me and first of all.' 
 
 16. The testimony of the Baptist to the incarnate Word is con- 
 firmed by the experience of all believers. The Evangelist is the 
 speaker. 
 
 And\ The true reading gives Because. 
 
 fulness] The Greek word, pleroma, is ' a recognised technical term 
 in theology, denoting the totality of the Divine powers and attributes.' 
 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 receives a 
 portion of it. See Lightfoot on Colossians, 1, 19 and ii. 9. 'Of His 
 fulness' means literally 'out of His fulness,' as from an inexhaustible 
 store. 
 
 all we] shews that the Evangelist and not the Baptist is speaking. 
 
 grace for grace] Literally, ^raci? In the place of grace, one grace suc- 
 ceeding another, and as it were taking its place. There is no reference 
 to the Christian dispensation displacing the Jewish. The Jewish dis- 
 pensation would have been called 'the Law,' not 'grace;' see next 
 verse, and comp. xvii. 22. 
 
 17. The mention of 'grace' reminds the Evangelist that this was the 
 characteristic of the Gospel and marked its superiority to the Law; for 
 the Law could only condemn transgressors, grace forgives them. 
 
 For] Better, Because. 
 
 by Moses] The preposition translated 'by' in w. 3, 10, 17, and 
 'through ' in v. 7, is one and the same in the Greek. The meaning in all 
 five cases is 'by means of Moses did not give the Law any more than 
 he gave the manna (vi. 32) : he was only the mediate agent by whose 
 hand it was given (Gal. iii. 19). 
 
70 S. JOHN, I. [v. 1 8. 
 
 i8 and truth came by Jesus Christ. No man hath seen God 
 at any time ; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom 
 of the Father, he hath declared him. 
 
 tneth] Like grace, truth is opposed to the Law, not as truth to false- 
 hood, but as perfection to imperfection. 
 
 came] Note the change from 'was given.' The grace and truth which 
 came through Christ were His own; the Law given through Moses was 
 not liis own. 
 
 Jesus Christ] S. 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 EvangeHst solemnly sums up the purpose of the Incarnation 
 of the Logos — to lie a visible revelation of the invisible God. It was in 
 this way that 'the truth came through Jesus Christ, 'for the truth cannot 
 be fully known, while God is not fully revealed. 
 
 No man] Not even Moses. Until we see 'face to face' (i Cor. xiii. 
 12) our knowledge is only partial. Symbolical visions, such as Ex. 
 xxiv. 10, xxxiii. ■23; i Kings xix. 13; Is. vi. i, do not transcend the 
 limits of partial knowledge. 
 
 hath seen] With his bodily eyes. 
 
 at any time] Better, ever yet; 'no one hath ever yet seen God;' but 
 some shall see Him hereafter. 
 
 t/te 07tly begotten Son] The question of reading here is very interest- 
 ing. Most MSS. and versions have 'the only-begotten Son' or 'only- 
 begotten Son.' But the thiee oldest and best MSS. and two others of 
 great value have 'only-begotten God.'' 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. which read 'only-begotten God' is very strong; 
 while the far larger group of MSS. which have 'Son' for 'God' is com- 
 paratively weak, for the same group of MSS. might be quoted in de- 
 fence of a multitude of readings which no one would think of adopting. 
 Again, the revised Syriac, which is among the minority of versions that 
 support 'God,' is here of special weight, because it agrees with MSS. 
 from which it usually differs. We conclude, therefore, that the very un- 
 usual expression 'only-begotten God' is the true reading, which has been 
 changed to the usual 'only-begotten Son,' a change which in an old 
 Greek MS. would involve the alteration of only a single letter. Both 
 readings can be traced up to the second century, which again is evidence 
 that the Gospel was written in the first century. Such differences take 
 time to spread themselves widely. See on Z". 13 and ix. 35. 
 
 in the bosom] Literally, into the bosom, which may mean that the 
 return to glory after the Ascension is meant. Comp. Mark ii. i, xiii. 
 16; Luke ix. 61. On the other hand the Greek for 'which is' points 
 to a timeless relation. 
 
 hath declared] Better, declared, acted as His interpreter. The Greek 
 word is used both in the LXX. and in classical authors of interpreting 
 
V. 19.] S. JOHN, I. 71 
 
 19 — 37. The Testimony of the Baptist. 
 19 — 28. His Testimony to the Deputation from J^erusalem. 
 And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent 19 
 
 the Divine Will. On the emphatic use of 'He' here comp. v. 33 and 
 see on X. i. In the First Epistle this pronoun {ekeinos) is used specially 
 for Christ; ii. 6, iii. 3, 5, 7, 16, iv. 17. 
 
 In this prologue we notice what may be called a spiral movement. 
 An idea comes to the front, like the strand of a rope, retires again, and 
 reappears later on for development and further definition. Meanwhile 
 another idea, like another strand, comes before us, and retires to re- 
 appear in like manner. Thus the Word is presented to us in v. i, is 
 withdrawn, and again presented to us in v. 14. The Creation comes 
 next in v. 3, disappears, and returns again in v. 10. Then 'the Light' 
 is introduced in v. 5, withdrawn, and reproduced in vv. 10, 11. Next 
 the rejection of the Word is put before us in v. 5, removed, and again 
 put before us in w. 10, n. 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 ex- 
 tends to the end of chap, xii., the subject being Christ's Ministry, 
 or. His Revelation of Himself to the World, and that in three 
 parts; THE Testimony (i. 19 — ii. 11), the Work (ii. 13 — xi. 57), and 
 the Judgment (xii.). These parts will be subdivided as we reach 
 them. 19 — 37 The Testimony of the Baptist (i) to the deputation 
 from Jerusalem, (2) to the people, (3) to S. Andrew and S. John: 
 3S — 51 The Testimony of the Disciples: ii. i — 11 The Testimony of the 
 First Sign. 
 
 19 — 37. The Testimony of the Baptist. 
 
 19 — 28. His Testimony to the Deputation from Jerusalem. 
 
 This section describes a crisis in the Baptist's ministry. 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 greater than other teachers, and his success was 
 greater than theirs. The miracle attending his birth, connected with 
 the public ministry of Zacharias in the Temple, was probably ^Vell 
 known. He had proclaimed that a new dispensation was at hand 
 (Matt. iii. 2), and this was believed to refer to the Messiah. But what 
 was John's own position? Was he the Messiah ? This uncertainty led 
 the authorities at Jerusalem to send and question John himself as to his 
 mission. No formal deputation from the Sanhedrin seems to have been 
 sent. The Sadducee members, acquiescing in the Roman dominion, would 
 not feel much interest. But to the Pharisee members, who represented 
 the religious and national hopes of their countiymen, the question was 
 vital; and they seeip to have sent an informal though influential depu- 
 
72 S. JOHN, I. [w. 20, 21. 
 
 priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art 
 
 20 thou ? And he confessed, and denied not ; but confessed, I 
 
 21 am not the Christ. And they asked him, What then ? Art 
 
 tation of ministers of religion {v. 19) from their own party (v. 24). S. 
 John was probably among the Baptist's disciples at this time, 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 as such he records it. 
 
 19. iAe reco7-d] Better, <Ae witness ; see on v. 7 and comp. iii. 1 1, 
 V. 31. 
 
 iAe yews] This term in S. John's Gospel commonly means the 
 o pponents o£ _Chrht, a meaning not found in the Synoptists, who seldom 
 use the termT Matt, xxviii. 15; Mark vii. 3; Luke vi. 3, xxiii. 51, are 
 the only instances excepting the title 'King of the Jews.' In them it is the 
 sects and parties (Pharisees, Scribes, Herodians, &c.) that are the typical 
 representatives of hostility to Christ. But S. John, writing later, with 
 a fuller realisation of the national apostasy, and a fuller experience of 
 Jewish malignity in opposing the Gospel, lets the shadow of this know- 
 ledge fall back upon his narrative, and ' the Jews ' are to him not his 
 fellow countrymen, but the persecutors and murderers of the Messiah. 
 'The name of a race has become the name of a sect.' He uses the 
 term about 70 times, almost always with this shade of meaning. 
 
 priests] The baptist himself was of priestly family (Luke i. 5); 
 hence priests were suitable emissaries. The combination ' priests and 
 Levites ' occurs nowhere else in N. T. Together they represent the 
 hierarchy. 
 
 TL'evites] Levites were commissioned to teaeh (aChron. xxxv. 3; Neh. 
 viii. 7 — 9) as well as serve in the Temple ; and it is asjeachers, similar 
 to the Scribes, that they are sent to the Baptist. The mention of Levites 
 as part of the deputation is the mark of a n 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. 
 
 IVJio art thou ?] with a strong emphasis on the 'thou.' 
 
 20. confessed, and denied not] Antithetic parallelism, as in v. 3. 
 but confessed] Rather, and he confessed, to introduce what he con- 
 fessed. 
 
 / am not the Christ] 'I' is emphatic, implying that some one else not 
 far distant is the Christ. Throughout the section (20 — 34) John 
 contrasts himself with the Christ by an emphasis on 'I.' 
 
 the Christ] It is to be regretted that our translators have so often 
 omitted the definite article before 'Christ,' although it is inserted in the 
 Greek. In the Gospel narratives the article should always be preserved 
 in English as here. Comp. Matt. xvi. 16, xxvi. 63; Mark viii. 29; and 
 contrast Matt. xxiv. 5; Luke xxiii. 35, 39, &c. To us 'Christ' is a 
 
vv. 22—24.] S. JOHN, I, 73 
 
 thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that 
 prophet ? And he answered, No. Then said they unto 2^ 
 him. Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them 
 that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? He said, I am 23 
 the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make L^^f-^- 
 straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet 
 Esaias. And they which were sent were of the Pharisees. 24 
 
 proper name, but to the Evangelists it is a title, '^the Christ,' the 
 Messiah so long expected. See Lightfoot, On Revision, p. 100. 
 
 21. What then .«'] ' What then are we to think?' or, * What then art 
 thou?' 
 
 Art thou Elias?\ The Scribes taught that Elijah would come again 
 before the coming of the Messiah (Matt. xvii. 10), and this belief is re- 
 peatedly alluded to in the Talmud. Comp. Mai. iv. 5. 
 
 / am not] A forger would scarcely have ventured on this in the face 
 of Matt. xi. 14, where Christ says that John is Elijah. But Christ is 
 there speaking figuratively (comp. Luke i. 17); John is here speaking 
 literally. He says he is not Elijah returned to the earth again. 
 
 that prophei\ Rather, tlie Prophet, the well-known Prophet o f Deut. 
 xviii. ifi, who some thought would be a second Moses, others a second 
 Elijah, others the Messiah. From vii. 40, 41 we see that some distin- 
 guished 'the Prophet' from the Messiah; and from Matt. xvi. 14 it 
 appears that Jeremiah or other prophets were expected to return. 
 Comp. 1 Esdras ii. 18; i Mace. xiv. 41. This verse alone is almost 
 enough to prove that the writer is a Jew. Who but a Jew would 
 know of these expectations? Or if a Gentile chanced to know them, 
 would he not explain them to his readers? In v. 25, vi. 14, 48, 69 our 
 translators have repeated the error of translating the definite article by 
 'that' instead of 'the.' 
 
 No] The Baptist knows that 'the Prophet' is the Messiah. His 
 replies grow more and more abrupt; ' I am not the Christ,' 'I am not,' 
 'No.' 
 
 22. Who art thou .?] They continue asking as to his person ; he 
 replies as to his office. In the presence of the Messiah the personality 
 of His Forerunner is lost. 
 
 23. I am the voice, &c.] Or, I am a. voice. The Synoptists use these 
 words of the Baptist as fulfilling prophecy. From this verse it would 
 seem as if they were first so used by himself. The quotation is almost 
 exact from the LXX. John was a Voice making known the Word, 
 meaningless without the Word. There is an almost certain reference to 
 this passage (19 — 23) in Justin Martyr, Trypho, Lxxxviil., which is 
 evidence that this Gospel was known before A.D. 150. 
 
 24. And they which, &c.] Perhaps the better reading is, a«^ there 
 had been sent some of the Pharisees. S. John mentions neither Sad- 
 ducees nor Herodians; only the Pharisees, the sect most opposed to 
 Christ, is remembered by the Evangelist who had gone furthest from 
 Judaism. 
 
74 S. JOHN, I. [vv. 25—29. 
 
 25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest 
 thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither 
 
 26 //;a/ prophet ? John answered them, saying, I baptize with 
 water : but there standeth one among you, whom ye know 
 
 27 not ; he it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, 
 
 28 whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose. These 
 things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John 
 was baptizing. 
 
 29 — 34. The Testimony of the Baptist to the people. 
 
 29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and 
 
 25. Why baptizest thou then ?] ' What right have you to treat Jews 
 as if they were proselytes and make them submit to a rite wliich im- 
 plies that til ey are impure?' Had they forgotten Zech. xiii. i; Ezek. 
 xxxvi. 25? 
 
 be not that Christ, &c.] Better, art not the Christ, nor yet Elijali, 
 nor yet the Prophet. See on v. 21. 
 
 26. ' You ask for my credentials; and all the while He Who is far 
 more than credentials to me is among you. I am not a prophet to fore- 
 tell His coming, but a herald to proclaim that He has come.' 
 
 27. He it is\ These words and ' is preferred before me ' are want- 
 ing in authority : the sentence should run, He that cometh after me, 
 whose shoe's latchet, &c., is standing in the midst of you, and 
 ye know Him not. ' Ye ' is emphatic ; ' Whom ye who question me 
 know not, but Whom I, the questioned, know.' 
 
 28. Belhabara\ The true reading is Bethany, which was changed to 
 Bethabara owing to the powerful influence of Origen, who could find no 
 Bethany beyond Jordan known in his day. But in 200 years the very 
 name of an obscure place might easily perish. Origen found ' Bethany ' 
 in almost all the MSS. The site of Bethabara or Bethany is lost now, 
 but it 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. 
 Bethabara has been identified with 'Abarah, one of the main Jordan 
 fords about 14 miles south 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.' 
 Thus Bethabara is the village or ford ; Bethania, the district on the 
 east side of the ford. See Conder, Handbook of the Bible, pp. 315, 
 320. But see Appendix D. 
 
 29 — 34. The Testimony of the Baptist to the people. 
 
 29. The next day] 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. The Evangelist 
 
vv. 30—32.] S. JOHN, I. ■ 75 
 
 saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the 
 sin of the world. This is he of whom I said, After me 30 
 Cometh a man which is preferred before me : for he was 
 before me. And I knew him not : but that he should be 31 
 made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing 
 with water. And John bare record, saying, I saw the 32 
 Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode 
 
 assumes that his readers are well acquainted with the history of the 
 Baptism and Temptation. 
 
 the Lamb of God] Evidently some Lamb well known to John's 
 hearers is meant, viz. the Lamb of Is. liii. (comp. Acts viii. 32); but 
 there may be an indirect allusion to the Paschal Lamb. With ' Behold' 
 comp. xix. 5, 14: with 'of God' comp. Gen. xxii. 8. 
 
 which taketh away, &c.] These words seem to make the reference to 
 Is. liii., esp. vv. 4, 5, 10, clear. The marginal reading, beafeth, is not 
 right here (i John iii. 5). 
 
 the sift] Regarding it as one great burden or plague. 
 
 of the world] Isaiah (liii. 8) seems to see no further than the redemp- 
 tion of the Jews : ' for the transgression of my people was he stricken.' 
 The Baptist knows that the Messiah comes to save the whole human 
 race, even those hostile to Him. 
 
 30. of whom] The best text gives, In behalf ^/"w/?^w. 
 
 31. And I knew him not] Or, / also knew Him not ; I, like you, 
 did not at first know Him to be the Messiah. There is no contradiction 
 between this and Matt. iii. 14. (i) 'I knew Him not' need not mean 
 ' I had no knowledge of Him whatever.' (2) John's professing that he 
 needed to be baptized by Jesus does not prove that he had already 
 recognised Jesus as the Messiah, but only as superior to himself. 
 
 that he should be made manifest] This was the Baptist's second duty. 
 He had (i) to prepare for the Messiah by preaching repentance; (2) to 
 point out the Messiah. The word for 'manifest' is one of S. John's 
 favourite words [phane7-02i}t); ii. 11, iii. 21, vii. 4, ix. 3, xvii. 6, xxi. i, 
 14; I John i. 2, ii. 19, 28, iii. 2, 5, 8, 9; Rev. iii. 18, xv. 4. 
 
 therefore atn I come] Better, for tliis cause (xii. 18, 27) came I (comp. 
 V. 16, 18, vii. 22, viii. 47). 
 
 baptizing with water] In humble contrast to Him Who baptizeth 
 with the Holy Ghost' {v. 33). ' IVith water' is literally 'in water ^ 
 here and v. 26. 
 
 32. bare record] Better, bare vriXn&ss ; comp. w. 7, 8, 15, 19, 34. 
 I saw] Better, /have beheld, or contemplated (i John iv. 12, 14), the 
 
 perfect of the verb used in w. 14 and 38. 
 
 like a dove] This was perhaps visible to Christ and the Baptist alone. 
 A real appearance is the natural meaning here and is insisted on by S. 
 Luke (iii. 22). And if we admit the 'bodily shape' at all, there can be 
 no sound reason for rejecting the dove. The marvel is that the Holy 
 Spirit should be visible in any way (comp. ' the tongues of fire,' Acts 
 ii. 3), not that He should assume the form of a dove in particular. Of 
 
1(^ S. JOHN, I. [vv. 11. 34- 
 
 33 upon him. And I knew him not : but he that sent me to 
 baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom 
 thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, 
 
 34 the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And 
 I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God. 
 
 course this visible descent of the Spirit made no change in the nature of 
 Christ. It served two purposes, (i) to make the Messiah known to the 
 Baptist, and through him to the world ; (2) to mark the official com- 
 mencement of the ministry of the Messiah, like the anointing of a king. 
 The whole incident is very parallel to the Transfiguration. In both 
 Christ is miraculously glorified previous to setting out to suffer; in 
 both a voice from heaven bears witness to Him; at both 'the goodly 
 fellowship of the Prophets ' is nobly represented. 
 
 33. And I knew him noi\ Or, as before, /also kneio Him not. The 
 Baptist again protests, that but for a special revelation he was as ignorant 
 as others that Jesus was the Messiahi. 
 
 he that sent me\ The special mission of a Prophet. Comp. v. 6. 
 
 the same said unto me] Better, lie said unto me : see on x. i. When 
 this revelation was made we are not told. 
 
 and remaining on him] Better, and abiding on Him. It is the same 
 word as is used in v. 32, and one of which S. John is very fond ; but 
 our translators have obscured this fact by capriciously varying the trans- 
 lation, sometimes in the same verse (v. 39, iv. 40; i John ii. 24, iii. 
 24). Thus, though most often rendered 'abide,' it is also rendered 
 'remain' (ix. 41, xv. 11, 16), 'dwell' (i. 39, vi. 56, xiv. 10, 17), 'con- 
 tinue' (ii. 12, viii. 31), 'tarry' (iv. 40, xxi. 22, 23), 'endure' (vi. 27), 
 ' be present ' (xiv. 25). In i John ii. 24 it is translated in three different 
 ways. See on xv. 9. 
 
 which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost] See on xiv. 26. This phrase, 
 introduced without explanation or comment, assumes that the readers 
 of this Gospel are well aware of this office of the Messiah, i. e. are 
 well-instructed Christians. The word baptizeth is appropriate, (i) to 
 mark the analogy and contrast between the office of the Baptist and 
 that of the Messiah; (2) because the gift of the Spirit is constantly 
 represented as an out-pouring. ' With,' as in vv. 26 and 31, is liter- 
 ally 'in.' 
 
 34. And I saw, and bare record] Better, .^mi// have seen a«i/ have 
 home witness. ' I have seen ' is in joyous contrast to ' I knew Him 
 not,' w. 31, 33. 'Have borne witness' is the same verb as in w. 
 7, 8 and 32 : hence * witness ' is preferable to ' record ' both here and in 
 V. 32. 
 
 the Son of God] The Messiah. This declaration of the Baptist 
 agrees with and confirms the account of the voice from heaven (Matt. iii. 
 
 17)- 
 
 These verses, 32 — 34, prove that S. John does not, as Philo does, 
 identify the Logos with the Spirit. 
 
vv. 35-38.] S. JOHN, I. 77 
 
 35 — 37. The Testimony of the Baptist to Andrew and "yohn. 
 
 Again the next day after John stood, and two of his 35 
 disciples ; and looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, 36 
 Behold the Lamb of God. And the two disciples heard 37 
 him speak, and they followed Jesus. 
 
 38 — 51, The Testimony of Disciples. 
 Then Jesus turned, and saw them following, and saith 33 
 
 35 — 37. The Testimony of the Baptist to Andrew and John. 
 
 35. Again\ Referring to v. 29 : it should come second ; The next 
 day again John was standing. 
 
 The difference_between this narrative and that of the Synoptists 
 
 (MattTTv. 18; MartT. 16; LuTce v. 2) is satisfactorily explained by sup- 
 posing 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 
 vvaT 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 
 (z/. 36), Who invites them to His abode (z/. 39) : they then witness His 
 miracfes (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. I3)._ See note on Mark i. 20. 
 
 Two of his disciples] One of these we are told was S. Andrew (v. 40!; 
 the other was no doubt S. John hims.elf, The account is that of an 
 eyewitness ; and his habitual reserve with regard to himself fully ac- 
 counts for his silence, if the other disciple was himself. If it was some 
 one else, it is difficult to see why S. John pointedly omits to mention 
 his name. 
 
 There was strong antecedent probability that the first followers of I 
 Christ would be disciples of the Baptist. The fact of their being so is / 
 one reason of the high honour in which the Baptist has been held from 1 
 the earliest times by the Church. 
 
 36. looking upon] having looked on with a fixed penetrating gaze. 
 Comp. V. 42; Mark x. 21, 27; Luke xx. 17, xxii. 61. 
 
 Behold the Lamb of God] This seems to shew that these disciples 
 were present the previous day (z/. 29) : hence there was no need to say 
 more than this. This appears to have been the last meeting between 
 the Baptist and Christ. 
 
 37. heard him speak] Although the declaration had not been ad- 
 dressed to them in particular. 
 
 they followed jfesus] The first beginning of the Christian Church. 
 But we are not to understand that they have already determined to be- 
 come His disciples. 
 
 38 — 51. The Testimony of Disciples. 
 
 38. saw them] Same verb as in tjv. 14 and 32. The context shews 
 that He saw into their hearts as well. For 'Then' read But. 
 
78 S. JOHN, I. [vv. 39—41. 
 
 unto them, What seek ye? They said unto him, Rabbi, 
 (which is to say, being interpreted, Master,) where dwellest 
 
 39 thou ? He saith unto them, Come and see. They came 
 and saw where he dwelt, and abode with him that day : 
 
 40 for it was about the tenth hour. One of the two which 
 heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon 
 
 41 Peter's brother. He first findeth his own brother Simon, 
 
 What seek ye?] i.e. in Me. He does not ask ' IVhom seek ye?' It 
 was evident that they sought Him. 
 
 Rabbi] A comparatively modern word when S. John wrotej_and there- 
 fore all the more requiring explanation to Gentile readers. S. John 
 often interprets between Hebrew and Greek; thrice in this section, 
 (Comp. 7/v. 41, 42.) 
 
 wJiere dwellest thou?] Better, where abidest Thou? (See on v. 33.) 
 
 They have more to ask than can be answered on the spot. Perhaps 
 
 'they think Him a travelling Rabbi staying with friends close by; and 
 
 they intend to visit Him at some future time. He bids them come at 
 
 I once : noiv is the day of salvation. 
 
 39. Co7ne and see] The more probable reading gives, Come and ye 
 shall see. 
 
 they came] Insert, therefore. 
 
 that day] That memorable day. 
 
 it was about the tenth hour] 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 improbable 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 mainly 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 S. John mentions the hour of the day, 
 ythis, 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 10 a.m. or 4 P.M^, 
 would suit the context : and while the antecedent probability that 
 S. John reckons time like the rest of the Evangelists will incline us 
 to 4 P.M., the fact that a good deal still remains to be done on this day 
 makes 10 a.m. rather more suitable. Origen knows nothing of S. John's 
 using the modern method of reckoning. 
 
 40. Andrew, Simon Peter's brother] Before the end of the first cen- 
 tury, therefore, it was natural to describe Andrew by his relationship to 
 his far better known brother. In Church History S. Peter is everything" 
 and S. Andrew nothing : but would there have been an Apostle Peter , 
 but for Andrew._ In the lists of the Apostles S. Andrew is always in 
 
V. 42.] S. JOHN, I. 79 
 
 and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, 
 being interpreted, the Christ. And he brought him to Jesus. 4^ 
 And when Jesus beheld him, he said. Thou art Simon the 
 son of Jona : thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by in- 
 terpretation, A stone. 
 
 the fir st group of four^but he is outside the chosen three^in spite of 
 this early call. 
 
 41. He fiy-st findeth, &c.] The meaning of 'first' becomes almost 
 certain when we remember S. John's characteristic reserve about him- 
 self. Both disciples hurry to tell their own brothers the good tidings^ 
 that Jhe Messiah has been found : S. Andrew finds his brother yfrj/^nd 
 afterwards S. John finds his ; but we are left to infer the latter point. 
 
 ""S.-^ Andrew thrice brings others to Christ; Peter^ the lad with the 
 loaves (vi. 8), and certain Greeksjxii. 22); and excepting Mark xiii. 3 
 we know scarcely 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 
 way in which the less prominent figures are sketclied. Besides 
 Andrew we have Philip, i. 44, vi. 5, xii. 21, xiv. 8; Thomas, xi. 16, xiv. 
 5 ; XX. 24 — 29 ; Nathanael, i. 45 — 52 ; Nicodemus, iii. i — 12, vii. 50 — 52, 
 xix. 39; Martha and Mary, xi., xii. i — 3. 
 
 We have found\ This does not prove that S. John is still with him, 
 only that they were together when their common desire and expecta- 
 tion were fulfilled. 
 
 Messias'\ The Hebrew form of this name is used by S. John only,_^ 
 here and iv. 25. Elsewhere the LXX. translation, 'the Christ,' is used. 
 Here 'the' before 'Christ' should be omitted. 
 
 42. beheld^ Same word as in v. 36, implying a fixed earnest look ; 
 what follows shews that Christ's gaze penetrated to his heart and read 
 his character. 
 
 Simon the son of y and] The true reading here and xxi. 15, 16, 17 
 is Simon the son o/John. There is a tradition that his mother's name was 
 Johanna. The Greek form /Snd may represent two distinct Hebrew 
 names, Jonah and Johanan = John. There is no need to make Christ's 
 knowledge of his name and parentage miraculous; Andrew in bringing 
 Simon would naturally mention them. 
 
 A stone] The margin and text should change places, Peter, being in 
 the text and 'a stone' in the margin, Hke 'the Anointed' in w. 41. This 
 new name is given with reference to the new relation into which the 
 person named enters ; comp. the cases of Abraham, Sarah, Israel. It 
 points to the future office of Simon rather than to his present character. 
 The form Cephas occurs nowhere else in the Gospels or Actsj but 
 comp. I Cor. i. 12, iii. 22, ix. 5; xv. 5, Gal. i. 18, ii. 9, 11, 14. 
 
 There is no discrepancy between this and Matt. xvi. 18. Here "Christ 
 gives the name Peter; there he reminds S. Peter of it. It is quite clear^ 
 from this that S. Peter was not first called among the Apostles, a point 
 on which the Synoptists leave us in doubt. 
 
8o S. JOHN, I. [vv. 43—46. 
 
 43 The day following Jesus would go forth into Galilee, and 
 
 44 findeth Philip, and saith unto him, Follow me. Now Philip 
 
 45 was of Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter. Philip 
 findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, 
 of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, 
 
 46 Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. And Nathanael 
 
 43. The day following\ Better, as in w. ■29, 35, The next day: the 
 Greek is the same in all three verses. We thus have four days accu- 
 rately marked^ (i) v. 19; (2) v. 29; (3) v. 35; (4) v. 44. A writer oT" 
 fiction would not have cared for such minute details; they might 
 entangle him in discrepancies. They are thoroughly natural as coming 
 from an eyewitness. See on ii. i. 
 
 Follow me] In the Gospels these words seem always to be the call ^ 
 to become a disciple. Matt. viii. 22, i,\. 9, xix. 21 ; Mark ii. 14, x.2i;_ 
 Luke V. 27, ix. 59; John xxi. 19. With two exceptions they are always 
 addressed to those who afterwards became Apostles. 
 
 44. Philip was of Bethsaida] In the Synoptists Philip is a mere_ 
 name in the lists of the Apostles : our knowledge of him comes from Si 
 John. See above on v. 42 and on xiv. 8. The local knowledge dis- 
 played in this verse is very real. S. John would possess it; a writer in 
 the second century would not, and would not care to invent. This is 
 Bethsaida of Galilee on the western shore, not Bethsaida Julias^, See 
 note on Matt. iv. 13. 
 
 45. Nathanael'\=''QL\{\. of God.' The name occurs Num. i. 8; r 
 Chron. ii. 14; i Esdras i. 9, ix. 22. Nathanael is commonly identified 
 with Bartholomews (i) 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 Sy- 
 noptists 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. 1 were Apostles (see note there). But all these rea- 
 sons do not make the identification more than probable. The framers 
 of our Liturgy do not countenance the identification : this passage ap- 
 pears neither as the Gospel nor as a Lesson for S. Bartholomew's Day. 
 
 We have found him, of whom, &c.] "A most correct representation 
 of the current phraseology, both in regard to the divisions of the O.T., 
 and the application of the Messianic idea." S. p. 35. 
 
 Moses] viz. in Deut. xviii. 15 grid in all the Messianic types, promises 
 to Adam, Abraham, &c. 
 
 yesus of Nazareth, the son of yoseph] The words are Philip's, and> 
 express the common belief about Jesus. It was natural to say He was 
 ' of or ' from Nazareth, ' as His home had been there ; still more natural 
 to call him 'the son of Joseph.' The conclusion that the Evangelist is 
 ignorant of the birth at Bethlehem, or of the miraculous nature of that 
 
vv. 47—49.] S. JOHN, I. 81 
 
 said unto him, Can there any good thing come out of 
 Nazareth? PhiHp saith unto him, Come and see. Jesus ^ 7 
 saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an 
 IsraeHte indeed, in whom is no guile. Nathanael saith 48 
 unto him, Whence knowest thou me ? Jesus answered and 
 said unto him. Before that Philip called thee, when thou 
 wast under the fig tree, I saw thee. Nathanael answered 49 
 
 birth, cannot be drawn from this passage. Rather, we may conclude 
 that he is a scrupulously honest historian, who records exactly what was 
 said, without making additions of his own. 
 
 46. Can there any good thing, &c.] All Galileans were despised for 
 their want of culture, their rude dialect, and contact with Gentiles7'_ 
 XTiey were to the Jews what Boeotians 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 dwelP 
 at Capernaum (Matt. iv. 13); He could do very little among 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). 
 S. Augustine would omit the question. Nathanael 'who knew the 
 Scriptures excellently well, when he heard the name Nazareth, was 
 filled with hope, and said, From Nazareth something good can come.' 
 But this is not probable. Possibly he meant no more than ' Can any 
 good thing come out of despised Galilee?' Nazareth being in Galilee. 
 Come and see] The best cure for ill-founded prejudice. Philip shews 
 the depth of his own conviction in suggesting this test, which seems to 
 have been in harmony with the practical bent of his own mind. See on 
 xii. 21 and xiv. 8. 
 
 47. saw Nathanael coming] This contradicts the theory that Christ 
 overheard Nathanael's question. S. John represents Christ's knowledge_ 
 of Nathanael as miraculous ; as in v. 42 He appears as the searcher of 
 hearts. 
 
 an Israelite indeed] In character as well as by birth j_ what follows 
 shews what is meant. The 'guile' may refer to the 'subtilty' of Jacob, 
 (Gen. xxvii. 35) before he became Israel : 'Behold a son of Israel, who 
 is in no way a son of Jacob.' The 'supplanter' is gone; the 'prince,' 
 remains. His guilelessness appears in his maki ng n o mock repudiation 
 of the character attributedjtojmn {ru. 48). He is freefrbna" 'the pri3e 
 that apes humility.' 
 
 48. under the fig tree] This probably means 'at home,' in. the re- 
 tirement of his own garden (i Kings iv. 25; Mic. iv. 4; Zeciii. lo^' 
 the Greek implies motion to under. Nathanael had perhaps been pray- 
 ing or meditating there; he seems to see that Christ knew what his 
 thoughts had been there. It was under a fig tree that S. Augustine 
 heard the famous ' Tolle, lege. ' 
 
 S. JOHN . 6 
 
82 S. JOHN, I. [vv. 50, 51. 
 
 and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God ; thou 
 
 50 art the King of Israel. Jesus answered and said unto him, 
 Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig tree, 
 beUevest thou? thou shalt see greater things than these. 
 
 51 And he saith unto him. Verily, verily, I say unto you. 
 Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God 
 ascending and descending upon the Son of man. 
 
 49. thou art the Son of God] We know from other passages that 
 this was one of the recognised titles of the Messiah; xi. 27; Matt. xxvi. 
 63; Markiii. 11, v. 7; ilukeiv.41. 'Son of David' was more common. 
 
 the Ki7ig of Israel] Omit 'the.' This phrase "is especially important, 
 because it breathes those politico-theocratic hopes, which since the 
 taking of Jerusalem, Christians at least, ifnbf Jews, must have entirely 
 laid aside." S. How could a Christian of the second century have 
 thrown himself back to this? 
 
 50. believest thou?] Or possibly, thou believest. Comp. xvi. 31, 
 XX. 29. The interrogative form is here best : He who marvelled at the 
 unbelief of the people of Nazareth here expresses joyous surprise at the 
 ready belief of the guileless Israelite of Cana. 
 
 51. Vei-ily, verily] The double 'verily' occurs ■zj times in t his 
 Gospel, and nowhere else, always in the mouth of Christ . It introduces 
 a truth of special solemnity and importancj, The single 'verily' nrr.urs 
 about 30 times in Matt.j 14 in Mark, and 7 in Luke. The word repre- 
 sents the Hebrew 'Amen,' which in the LXX. never means 'verily.' In 
 the Gospels it has no other meaning. The 'Amen' at the end of 
 sentences (Matt. vi. 13, xxviii. 20; Mark xvi. 20; Lukexxiv. 53; John 
 xxi. 25) is in every case of doubtful authority. 
 
 unto you] Plural; all present are addressed, Andrew, John, Peter 
 (James), and Philip, as well as Nathanael. 
 
 Hereafter] Better, from henceforth; from this point onwards 
 Christ's Messianic work of linking earth to heaven, and re-establishing 
 free intercourse between man and God, goes on. But the word is 
 wanting in the best MSS. 
 
 heaven open] Better, the heaven opened ; made open and remaining 
 so. 
 
 the angels of God] Like v. 47, an apparent reference to the life, nf, 
 Jacob, perhaps suggested by the scene, which may have been near to 
 Bethel. This does not refer to the angels which appeared after the 
 Temptation, at the Agony, and at the Ascension : rather to the perpetual_ 
 intercourse between God and the Messiah during His ministry. 
 
 the Son of man] 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 
 
vv. 1—4.] S. JOHN, 11. 83 
 
 Chap. II. i — 11. The Testimony of the First Sign. 
 
 And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Gali- 2 
 lee ; and the mother of Jesus was there : and both Jesus 2 
 was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. And when 3 
 they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They 
 have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I 4 
 
 Man' has three distinct uses; (i) in the Psalms, for the idealniaii; viii. 
 
 4 — 8, Ixxx. 17, cxliv. 3, cxlvi. 3 : (2) in Ezekiel, as the name by which the 
 
 Prophet is addressed by God; ii. i, 3, 6, 8, iii. i, 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's frailty: (3) in the 'night 
 visions' of Dan. vii. 13, 14, where 'One like a son of man came with 
 the clouds of heaveri7and 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 title was a nao one assumed by Christy and as 
 yet only dimly understood (comp. Matt. xvi. 13). 
 
 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 phraseology current in Palestine at the time of Christ'5_ 
 
 ministry, and able to give a lifelike picture of the Baptist and of Christ's 
 
 first d isciples. 
 
 Chap. II. 1 — 11. The Testimony of the First Sign. 
 
 1. the third day] From the calling of Philip (i. 43), the last date 
 given, making a week in all ; the first week, perhaps in contrast to the 
 last week (xii. i). 
 
 ' Cana of Galilee] To distinguish it from Cana of Asher (Josh. xix. 
 28). This Cana is not mentioned in O.T. ; it was the home of 
 Nathanael (xxi. 1), and is now generally identified with Kanet el-Jelil, 
 
 / about six miles N. of Nazareth. 
 
 I was there] Staying as a friend or relation of the family ; she speaks 
 to the servants as if she were quite at home in the house (v. 5). Joseph 
 has disappeared : the inference (not quite certain) is that in the interval 
 between Luke ii. 51 and this marriage — about 17 years— he had died. 
 
 2. and his disciples] Now five or six in number, Andrew, John, 
 Peter, Philip, Nathanael, and probably James. For 'both Jesus' read 
 
 j 'Jesus also.' 
 
 3. when they wanted wine] Better, 7vhen the wine failed. Perhaps 
 the arrival of these six or seven guests caused the want ; certainly it 
 would make it more apparent. To Eastern hospitality such a mishap 
 on such an occasion would seem a most disgraceful calamity. 
 
 They have no wine] Much comment has here obscured a simple text. 
 The family in which she was a guest was in a serious difficulty. Per- 
 
 6—2 
 
84 S. JOHN, II. [vv. S, 6. 
 
 5 to do with thee ? mine hour is not yet come. His mother 
 saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it. 
 
 6 And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the 
 manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three 
 
 haps she felt herself partly responsible for the arrangements : certainly 
 she would wish to help. What more natural than that she should turn 
 to her Son and tell Him the difficulty ? Probably she did not expect a 
 miracle, still less wish Him to break up the party, or begin a discourse 
 to distract attention from the want. The meaning simply is — 'They 
 have no wine; what is to be done?' 
 
 4. Woman, what have I to do with thee?] S. John alone of all the i ; 
 Evangelists never gives the Virgin's name. Here, as so often, he, 1 
 assumes that his readers know the main points in the Gospel narrativ-3: 
 or it may be part of the reserve which he exhibits with regard to all j 
 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 main- 
 tained that she is immaculate. 'Woman' of course implies no rebuke; 
 the Greek might more fairly be rendered 'Lady' (comp. xix. 26). Atthe ■ 
 same time it marks a difference between the Divine Son and the earthly 
 parent : He does not say, 'Mother.' But 'what have I to do with thee?' 
 t/oes imply rebuke, as is evident from the other passages where the 
 phrase occurs, Judg. xi. 12; i Kings xvii. 18; 2 Kings iii. 13; Matt, 
 viii. 29; Mark i. 24; Luke viii. 28. Only in one passage does the iliean- 
 ing 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 /or? 
 Chrysostom thinks for vanity; she wished to glorify herself through her 
 Son. More probably for interference : He will help, but in His own 
 way, and in His own time. Comp. Luke ii. 51. 
 
 viiiie hozer] 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 'manifesting 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. i, which confirm the 
 meaning here given to 'hour.' 
 
 5. Between the lines of His refusal her faith reads a better answer to . 
 her appeal. 
 
 6. six waterpots of stone\ As an eyewitness S. John remembers 
 their number, material, and size. The surroundings of the first miracle 
 would not easily be forgotten. It is idle to seek for any special mean- 
 ing in the number six. Vessels of stone were preferred as being less 
 liable to impurity. 
 
 purifying] Comp. Matt. xv. 2; Mark vii. 3 (see note); Luke xi. 39. \ 
 
vv. 7— lo.] S. JOHN, II. 85 
 
 firkins apiece. Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots 7 
 with water. And they filled them up to the brim. And he s 
 saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor 
 of the feast. And they bare it. When the ruler of the 9 
 feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew 
 not whence it was : (but the servants which drew the water 
 knew ;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, and 10 
 saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth 
 good wine ; and when men have well drunk, then that which 
 
 \ two or three firki)is\ 'Firkin' is an almost exact equivalent of the 
 Greek metretes, which was about nine gallons. The six pitchers, 
 therefore, holding from 18 to 27 gallons each, would together hold 106 
 to 162 gallons. 
 
 7. Fill the tvaterpots\ It is difficultto seethe meaning of this command, 
 if (as some contend) only the water which was drawn out was turned 
 into wine. The pitchers had been partially emptied by the ceremonial 
 ablutions of the company, i.e. pouring water over their hands. Note 
 that in His miracles Christ does not create ; He increases the quantity, 
 or changes the quality of things already existing. 
 
 to the briiii\ His Mother's words {v. 5) have done their work. Our 
 attention seems here to be called to the great quantity of water changed 
 into wine. 
 
 9. ruler of thefeast^ Perhaps manager of the feast would be better. 
 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. i, 2 is in 
 favour of the second. In any case the translation should be uniform in 
 these two verses, not sometimes 'governor,' sometimes 'ruler.' It is 
 the same Greek word in all three cases, a word occurring nowhere 
 else in N. T. The words also for 'water-pot' or 'pitcher' and for 
 'draw out' are peculiar to this Gospel; but they occur again iv. 7, 
 15, 28. 
 
 the water that was made wine] Or, the water now become wine. The 
 Greek seems to imply that all the water had become wine; there is 
 nothing to mark a distinction between what was now wine and what still 
 remained water. It is idle to ask at what precise moment the water 
 became wine : nor is much gained by representing the miracle as a series 
 of natural processes (rain passing through the vine into the grapes, 
 being pressed out and fermented, &c.) compressed into an instant. 
 Such compression is neither more nor less intelligible than simple 
 transition from water to wine. Moreover there was no vine. 
 
 which drew] Better, ■who had drawn. 
 
 called] Rather, calleth. 
 
 10. when men have well drunk] Our translators have timidly 
 shrunk from giving the full coarseness of the man's joke: it should be 
 
86 S. JOHN, II. [v. II. 
 
 is worse : but thou hast kept the good wine until now. 
 n This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and 
 manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on 
 him. 
 
 ■when they have become drunken, when they are drunk. In Matt. xxiv. 
 49; Acts ii. 15; I Cor. xi. 21 ; i Thess. v. 7; Rev. xvii. 2, 6, we have 
 the same word rightly translated. Tyndall and Cranmer were more 
 courageous here ; they have ' be dronke ; ' and the Vulgate has inebriati 
 fuerint. The error comes from the Geneva Bible. Of course he does 
 not mean that the guests around him are intoxicated : it is a jocular 
 statement of his own experience at feasts. Omit ' then.' 
 
 thou hast kept the good wine until now} This was true in a sense of 
 which he never dreamed. The True Bridegroom was there, and had 
 indeed kept the best dispensation until the last. 
 
 11. This beginning, &c.] Better, this, as a beginning of His 
 signs, did Jesus in Cana; i.e. it is the first miracle of all, not merely 
 the first at Cana. Thus S. John agrees with the Synoptists in repre- 
 senting the Messianic career as beginning in Galilee. This verse is 
 conclusive against the miracles of Christ's childhood recorded in the 
 Aprocryphal Gospels. See on iv. 48. Our translators often in this 
 Gospel, though very rarely in the other three, turn ' signs ' into 
 ' miracles.' 
 
 manifested} The same Greek word occurs in connexion with His last 
 miracle, xxi. i, 14, and the same English word should be used in all the 
 passages. Comp. vii. 4 and see on i. 31. 
 
 his glory} This is the final cause of Christ's 'signs,' His own and 
 His Father's glory (xi. 4), and these two are one. 
 
 and his disciples believed on him} 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 S. John give us the disciples' 
 point of view, here, z*. 17 and v. 22; very natural in a disciple, not 
 natural in a later writer. See on xi. 15 and xxi. 12. 
 
 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 valuable present to a 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 in- 
 toxicating, 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. 
 
V. 12.] S. JOHN, II. 87 
 
 After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his " 
 mother, and his brethren, and his disciples : and they con- 
 tinued there not many days. 
 
 Christ's honouring a marriage-feast with His first miracle gives His 
 sanction (i) to marriage, (2) to times of festivity. 
 
 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 hand-writing 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 
 therefore, that the almost simultaneous appearance of a Prophet like 
 John and a worker of miracles like Jesus attracted the attention of all 
 classes. 
 
 12. "Now follows a section of which we can only say with M. 
 Renan, that it constitutes a decisive triumph for our Gospel. ...If it 
 is at all an artificial composition, with a dogmatic object, why should 
 the author carry his readers thus to Capernaum — for nothing?" S. p. 52. 
 If S. John wrote it, all is simple and natural. He records this visit to 
 Capernaum because it actually took place, and because he well remem- 
 bers those ' not many days.' 
 
 wettt dozvn] Capernaum (the modern Tell-Hum) being on the shore 
 of the lake. It was situated in one of the most busy and populous dis- 
 tricts of Palestine, and was therefore a good centre. 
 
 Ats mother, and his brethren^ Natural ties still hold Him; in the 
 next verse they disappear. On the vexed question of the ' brethren of 
 the Lord ' see the Introdjiction to the Epistle of S. y antes. It is im- 
 possible to determine with certainty whether they are (i) 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 (i), the most- 
 natural view antecedently ; but it has against it the general consensus of 
 the Fathers, and the prevailing tradition of the perpetual virginity of 
 S. Mary. Jerome's theory, that they were our Lord's cousins, sons of 
 Alphaeus, is the one most commonly adopted, but vii. 5 (see note there) 
 is fatal to it, and it labours under other difficulties as well. (2J is on the 
 whole the most probable. 
 
 contijiued there\ Better, abode there. See on i. 33. 
 
 not many days] Because the Passover was at hand, and He must be 
 about His Father's business. 
 
 II. 13— XI. 57. The Work. 
 
 We here enter on the second portion of the first main division of the 
 Gospel, thus subdivided: — The Work (i) among ^eivs, (2) among 
 Samaritans, (3) among Galileans, (4) among mixed tmdtitudes. 
 
88 S. JOHN, II. [vv. 13—16. 
 
 II. 13— XI. 57. The Work. 
 II. 13 — III. 36. The Work a7nong Jews. 
 
 •3 And the Jews' passover was at hand, and Jesus went up 
 to Jerusalem, 
 
 14 — 22. The First Cleansing of the Temple. 
 
 14 And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep 
 
 15 and doves, and the changers of money sitting : and when he 
 had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of 
 the temple, and the sheep and the oxen; and poured out 
 
 i6the changers' money, and overthrew the tables; and said 
 
 II. 13— III. 36. The Work among Jews. 
 
 13. And the yews' passover\ Or, the passover of the Jews. An 
 indication that this Gospel was written outside Palestine : one writing 
 in the country would hardly have added 'of the Jews.' It is perhaps 
 also 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 purified the Temple. 
 S. John groups his narrative round the Jewish festivals : we have 
 (i) Passover; (2) Purim (?), v. i; (3) Passover, vi. 4; (4) Tabernacles, 
 vii. 2; (5) Dedication, x. 22; (6) Passover, xi. 55. 
 
 14 — 22. The First Cleansing of the Temple. 
 
 14. in the temple'] i.e. within the sacred enclosure, in the Court of__ 
 the Gentiles. The traffic would be very great at the approach of the 
 Passover. The account is very graphic, as of an eyewitness. Note 
 especially ' the changers of money sitting:' the sellers of cattle, &c., 
 would stand. 
 
 changers of money] Not the same Greek word as in v. 15. There 
 the word points to the commission paid on exchanges ; here the word 
 indicates a change from large to small coins. 
 
 15. when he had made a scourge] Peculiar to this account ; not in 
 the similar narrative of the Synoptists. 
 
 and the sheep, Saz^ Rather, \iOth. the sheep and the oxen. 'All 'does not 
 refer to the sellers and exchangers, but anticipates the sheep and the 
 oxen. The men probably fled at once. The order is natural; first the 
 driving out of the cattle, then the pouring out of the money and over- 
 turning the tables. The word for 'money' literally means 'something 
 cut up small,' hence ' change.' The common exchange would be foreign 
 money for Jewish, payments to the Temple being necessarily made in 
 Jewash coin. 
 
vv. 17, 18.] S. JOHN, II, 89 
 
 unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence ; make 
 not my Father's house a house of merchandise. And his 17 
 disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of 
 thine house hath eaten me up. 
 
 Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign 18 
 shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these t/wigs ? 
 
 16. said unto them that sold doves'] The doves could not be driven 
 out. He calls to the owners to take the cages away. Comp. Luke 
 ii. 24. 
 
 my Father's house] A distinct claim to Messiahship: it reminds 
 us of ' about My Father's business ' (which may also mean ' in My 
 Father's house') spoken in the same place some 17 years before, Luke 
 ii. 49. Possibly some who heard the Child's claim heard the Man's 
 claim also. 
 
 an house of merchandise] Two years later things seem to have grown 
 worse instead of better ; the Temple has then become ' a den of 
 robbers' or 'a bandits' cave.' See notes on Matt. xxi. 13 and Mark 
 xi. 17. 
 
 17. remembered] Then and there. Who could know this but a 
 disciple? Who would think of inventing it? See above on v. 11. 
 
 was written] Better, is written ; in the Greek it is the perf. part, 
 pass, with the auxiliary, which S. John almost always uses in quotations, 
 while the Synoptists commonly use the perf. pass. Comp. vi. 31,45, x. 
 34, xii. 14 (xix. 19). 
 
 hath eaten me up] Rather, will devour, or consume me, i.e. wear 
 me out. Ps. Ixix. 9, a psalm referred to again xv. 25 and xix. 28. 
 
 It is difficult to believe that this cleansing_£)f the Temple is identical 
 with the one placed by the Synoptists at the last Passover in Christ's 
 ministry; difficult also to see what is gained by the identification. If 
 they are the same event, either S. John or the Synoptists have made a 
 gross blunder in chronology. Could S. 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 conversion? When we consider the 
 immense differences which distinguish 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 diffi- 
 culty of believing that the Temple was twice cleansed is very slight. 
 Was Christ's preaching so universally successful that one cleansing would 
 be certain to suffice? And if two years later He found that the evil had 
 returned, would He not be certain to drive it out once more? Differ- 
 ences in the details of the narratives corroborate this view. 
 
 18. the yews] See on i. 19. 
 
 What sign shewest thoti] We have a similar question Matt. xxi. 23, 
 but the widely different answer shews that the occasion is not the same. 
 Such demands would be made often. 
 
go S. JOHN, II. [vv. 19—21. 
 
 19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, 
 
 20 and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, 
 Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt 
 
 21 thou rear it up in three days ? But he spake of the temple 
 
 19. Destroy this temple] It is S. Matthew (xxvi. 61) and S. Mark 
 (xiv. 58, see notes) who tell us that this saying was twisted into a 
 charge against Christ, but they do not record the saying. S. John, who 
 does record the saying, does not mention the charge. Such coincidence 
 can scarcely be designed, and is therefore evidence of the truth of both 
 statements. See on xviii. 11. The word used in these three verses for 
 'temple' means the central sacred building (tiaos), whereas that used in 
 V. 14 means the whole sacred enclosure {hieron). The latter is never 
 used figuratively. 
 
 raise it up\ In the charge His accusers turn this into build, a word 
 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 throughout ; 
 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. 
 
 20. Forty and six years, &c.] This was the third Temple*. Solomon^ 
 Temple was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar. Zerubbabel's^was rebuilt 
 by Herod the Great. The Greek implies that the building began 46 
 years ago, but not that it is now completed^- "The building of the 
 Temple, we are told by Josephus {Ant. xv. ii. 1), was begun in 
 the i8th 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. D. Comparing this with the data given in Luke iii. i, the question 
 arises, whether we are to reckon the 15th year of Tiberius from his 
 joint reign with Augustus, which began A. D. 12; or from his sole reign 
 after the death of Augustus, A. D. 14. This would give us A. D. 27 or 29 
 for the first public appearance of the Baptist, and at the earliest a.d. 28 
 or 30 for the Passover mentioned in this chapter." S. p. 65. 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 coincidence can have been planned; it involves 
 an intricate calculation, and even with the aid of Josephus absolute cer- 
 tainty cannot be obtained. " By what conceivable process could a 
 Greek in the second century have come to hit upon this roundabout ex- 
 pedient for giving a fictitious date to his invention?" S. p. 67. 
 
 rear ii up\ Better, raise it up ; the same verb as in v. 19. For other 
 instances of gross misunderstanding of Christ's words comp. iii. 4, 9, 
 iv. II, 15, 33, vi. 34, 52, vii. 35, viii. 22, 33, 52, xi, 12, xiv. 5. 
 
 21. spake\ Or, was speaking. Setting aside inspiration, S. John's 
 explanation must be admitted as the true one. What better in- 
 terpreter of the mind of Jesus can be found than ' the disciple whom 
 Jesus loved?' And he gives the explanation not as his only, but 
 
vv. 22—25.] S. JOHN, II. 91 
 
 of his body. When therefore he was risen from the dead, »2 
 his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them ; 
 and they beUeved the scripture, and the word which Jesus 
 had said. 
 
 2 3 — 2 5. Belief without Devotion. 
 
 Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the 25 
 feast day, many beUeved in his name, when they saw the 
 miracles which he did. But Jesus did not commit himself 24 
 unto them, because he knew all men, and needed not that 25 
 any should testify of man : for he knew what was in man. 
 
 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. 
 
 22. was risen} Better, was raised. Comp. xxi. 14; Acts iii. 15, 
 iv. 10, V. 30. 
 
 Ms disciples rememijred] They recollected it when the event that 
 explained it took place ; meanwhile what had not been understood had 
 been forgotten. Would anyone but a disciple give us these details 
 about the disciples' thoughts ? See on z^. 11. 
 
 ike scripttire\ O.T. prophecy, viz., Ps. xvi. 10 ; see on x. 35. 
 
 had said] Better, spake, on the present occasion. 
 
 23 — 25. Belief without Devotion. 
 
 23. in yerusalem at, &c.] More accurately, in yeriisalein, at the 
 Passover, dMiiiLS. the J^east. Note the exactness of detail. 
 
 when tKey saw the miracles] None of these have been recorded. 
 Comp. iv. 45, XX. 30. Faith growing out of such soil would be likely 
 to cease when the miracles ceased. ' When they saw ' should perhaps 
 be 'whilst they saw,' as if implying 'and no longer.' For 'miracles' 
 read signs, as in z/. 11. 
 
 24. did not commit] The same verb as 'many beliez'ed'' in v. 23. 
 ' Many trusted in His name ; but Jesus did not trust Himself unto 
 them.' The antithesis is probably intentional. 
 
 25. And needed not] Better, aw^ because He had no need. 
 
 for he knew] Better, for He of Himself knew. We have instances 
 of this supernatural knowledge in the cases of Peter, i. 42 ; Nathanael, 
 i. 47, 48; Nicodemus, iii. 3; the woman at the wejj, iv. 29; the! 
 disciples, vi. oT, 64 ; Lazarus, xi. 4, 15 ; Judas, xiii. 11 ; Peter, xxi. 17. I 
 
 Chap. III. 1 — 21. The discourse with Nicodemus. 
 
 This is the first of the eleven discourses ^f 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 
 authenticity; (i) because they are unlike the discourses in the Sy- 
 noptic Gospels, (2) because they are suspiciously like the First Epistle 
 
92 S. JOHN, III. [v. I. 
 
 Chap. III. i — 21. The discourse with Nicodemus. 
 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a 
 
 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 Dogi/ia, 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 sp ake like this man' (vii. 
 46) ; not even S. John, and still less any one else, cojild inv ent su ch 
 wojds. 
 
 But the objections urged above are serious and ought to be answered, 
 (i) The discourses in S. 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, .Jo 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 porlioiL 
 of it (vi. 41, 52), the hierarchial party opposed to Him. The discourses 
 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 S. John and in the Synoptists 
 are translations from an Aramaic dialect. Two translations 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 S. 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 S. John heard these dis- 
 courses from the time when he committed thern 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 
 very words used, sometimes the substance of what was said put into 
 
V. 2.] S. JOHN, III. 93 
 
 ruler of the Jews : the same came to Jesus by night, and a 
 said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come 
 from God : for no ina7t can do these miracles that thou 
 
 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. S. 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, &c. to be the reporter's own. But in ancient times__ 
 this distinction was not madci Thucydides uses the dramatic method, 
 yet Spartan and Athenian speak in Thucydidean Greek. And so every 
 clause of our Lord's speeches in S. John may be in S. John's Greeks- 
 yet every clause may contain the matter which our Lord spoke in 
 Aramaic. Again, S. 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. There was a inaii\ Better, Now there was a man. The con- 
 junction shows the connexion with what precedes : Nicodemus was 
 one of the 'many' who 'believed in His name,' when they beheld 
 His signs (ii. 23). 
 
 Nicodemus'] He is mentioned only by S. John. It is impossible 
 to say whether he is identical with the Nicodemus of the Talmud, 
 also called Bunai, who survived the destruction of Jerusalem. The 
 name was common both among Greeks and Jews. Love of truth and 
 fear of nian, candour and hesitation, seem to be combined in his cha- 
 racter. Comp. vii. 50, xix. 39. In xix. 39 his timidity is again noted 
 and illustrated. 
 
 a ruler of the Jews] A member of the Sanhedrin.^ii. 50. Comp. 
 xii. 42 ; Luke xxiii. 13, xxiv. 20. His coming by night is to avoid 
 the hostility of his colleagues : the Sanhedrin was opposed to Jesus. 
 Whether or no S. John was present at the interview we cannot be 
 certain : probably he was. Nicodemus would not fear the presence of 
 the disciples. 
 
 2. we knrw\ Others are disposed to believe as well as Nicodemus. 
 a teacher come from God] In the Greek the order is, that Thou 
 
 a}'t come from God as teacher. We are not sure that ' come from God ' 
 points to the Messiah, ' He that should come.' But if so, we see the 
 timidity of Nicodemus ; he begins with an admission of Christ's Messiah- 
 ship, and ends with the weak word ' teacher ;' the Messiah was never 
 thought of as a mere teacher. But ' come from God ' may only mean 
 divinely sent, as a Prophet (i. 6), or even less. 
 these miracles] Better, these sigrns, as in ii. ir. 
 
94 S. JOHN, III. [vv. 3— 5. 
 
 3 doest, except God be with him. Jesus answered and said 
 unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee. Except a man be 
 
 4 born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus 
 saith unto him. How can a man be born when he is old? 
 can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and 
 
 5 be bom? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee. 
 Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot 
 
 except God be with hitn] A similarly weak conclusion, shewing 
 timidity : one expects ' unless he be a Prophet, ' or ' the Messiah. ' 
 
 3. yesus afiswered] He answers his thoughts before they are ex- 
 pressed. See on ii. 25, and on i. 51. 
 
 borfi again] The word translated 'again' may mean either 'from 
 the beginning,' or 'from above.' By itself it cannot exactly mean 
 'again.' S. John uses the same word v. 31; xix. 11, 23. In all three 
 places, (see especially xix. 11), it means 'from above,' which is perhaps 
 to be preferred here: ' from the beginning' would make no sense. To 
 be 'bom from above' recalls being 'bom of God' in i. 13, (comp. 
 I John iii. 9, iv. 7, v. i, 4, 18). Of course being 'born from above' 
 is necessarily being ' born again ;' but ' again ' comes not so much 
 from the Greek word, as from the context. Comp. ' verily I say unto 
 you, except ye be converted and become as little children, ye shall not 
 enter into the kingdom of heaven.'' Matt, xviii. 3. 
 
 There is a probable reference to this passage (3 — 5) in Justin Martyr, 
 Apol. I. Ixi. If so, we have evidence that tliis Gospel was known 
 before A. D. 150. See on i. 23 and ix. i. 
 
 he cannot see] i.e. so as to partake of it. Comp. to 'see corruption,' 
 Ps. xvi. 10; to 'see evil,' xc. 15; to 'see death,' John viii. 51; Luke 
 ii. 26. 
 
 the kingdom of God] This phrase, so frequent in the Synoptists, 
 occurs only here and v. S in S. John. We may conclude that it was 
 the very phrase used. 
 
 4. whe^t he is old] He purposely puts the most impossible case ; 
 the words do not imply that he was an old man himself. It is difficult 
 to believe that Nicodemus really supposed Christ to be speaking of 
 
 ■ ordinary birth ; the metaphor of ' new birth ' for spiritual regeneration 
 cannot have been unfamiliar to him. Either he purposely misunder- 
 stands, in order to reduce Christ's words to an absurdity; or, more 
 probably, not knowing what to say, he asks what he knew to be a 
 foolish question. 
 
 the second time] This expression has contributed to the word which 
 probably means 'from above,' being translated 'again.' But 'to enter 
 a second time into his mother's womb' is simply a periphrasis for 'to be 
 bom' in the case of an adult. The word which means 'from above' is 
 not included in the periphrasis. It is precisely that which perplexes 
 Nicodemus ; so he leaves it out. 
 
 5. of water and of the Spirit] Christ leaves the foolish question of 
 Nicodemus to answer itself: He goes on to explain what is the real 
 
vv. 6—8.] S. JOHN, III. 95 
 
 enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the 6 
 flesh is flesh ; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 
 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. ^ 
 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the 8 
 
 point, and what Nicodemus has not asked, the meaning of 'from above:' 
 'of water and (of the) Spirit.' .The outward sign 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 
 witli water;' the JMessiah 'baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.' The Fathers, 
 both Greek and Latin, thus interpret the passage with singular una- 
 nimity. Thus once more S. John assumes without stating the primary 
 elements of Christianity. Baptism is assumed here as well known to his 
 1 eader, as the Eucharist is assumed in chap. vi. To a 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 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. 
 
 6. The meaning of 'birth from above' is still further explained by an 
 analogy. What a man inherits from his parents is a body with animal 
 life and passions ; what he receives from above is a spiritual nature with 
 heavenly aspirations and capabilities. What is born of sinful, human 
 nature is sinful and human; what is born of the Holy Spirit is spiritual 
 and divine. 
 
 7. Ye nmst\ The declaration is brought more closely home. In 
 znj. 3 and 5 Christ had made a very general statement, 'except a man.' 
 He now shews that none are exempt from it. 'Ye, the chosen people, 
 ye, the Pharisees, ye, the rulers, must all be born from above.' 
 
 8. The wind bloweth, &c.] This verse is sometimes taken very 
 differently : the Spirit breatheth where He willeth, mid thou hearest His 
 voice, but canst ttot tell whence He cometh and whither He goeth; so is 
 every one [born) who is born of the Spirit. The advantages of this 
 rendering are (i) that it gives to Pneuma the meaning which it almost 
 invariably has in more than 350 passages in N.T. in which it occurs, of 
 which more than 20 are in this Gospel. Although pneuma may mean 
 'the breath of the wind,' yet its almost invariable use in N. T. is 'spirit' 
 or 'the Spirit, ' while awfwzoj is used for 'wind:' (2) that it gives a better 
 meaning to 'willeth,' a word more appropriate to a person than to any- 
 thing inanimate: (3) that it gives io phSne the meaning which it has in 
 14 other passages in this Gospel, viz., 'articulate voice,' and not 'inar- 
 ticulate sound.' On the other hand this rendering (i) gives iopnei the 
 meaning 'breathes,' a meaning quite unknown in N.T. : (2) uses the 
 expression 'the voice of the Spirit,' also unknown to Scripture: (3) re- 
 quires the insertion of 'born' in the last clause, in order to make sense. 
 
96 S. JOHN, III. [vv. 9— II. 
 
 sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and 
 
 whither it goeth : so is every one that is born of the Spirit. 
 
 9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these 
 
 io things be? Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou 
 
 II a master of Israel, and knowest not these things ? Verily, 
 
 verily, I say unto thee. We speak that we do know, and 
 
 testify that we have seen ; and ye receive not our witness. 
 
 For the usual rendering may be pleaded (i) that it gives to fuel the 
 meaning which it has everywhere else in N.T., viz. in vi. i8 and five 
 other passages. Although /«« may mean 'breathes,' yet its invariable 
 use in N. T. is of the 'blowing' of the wind, while another word (xx. 
 22) is used for 'breathe:' (2) that it gives the most literal meaning to 
 'hearest:' (3) that the last clause makes excellent sense without any 
 repetition of 'bom.' The Aramaic word probably used by our Lord 
 has both meanings, 'wind' and 'spirit,' so that it is not impossible that 
 both meanings are meant to run concurrently through the passage. 
 "It was late a t niglit when our Lord had this interview with the Jewish 
 teacher! At Hie pauses in tlie conversation, we may conjecture, they 
 heard the wind without, as it moaned along the narrow streets of 
 Jgrusaleni ; and our Lord, as was His wont, took His creature into Ilii 
 service — the service of spiritual truth. The wind was a figure of the 
 .Spijit. Our Lord would have used the same word for both." (Liddon.) 
 There is a clear reference to this passage in the Ignatian Epistles, 
 Philad. VII. Thus we have evidence of the Gospel being known 
 certainly as early as A.D. 150, and probably A.D. 115. 
 
 so is every one'\ i.e. such is the case of every one : he feels the spiritual 
 influence, but finds it incomprehensible in its origin, which is from 
 above, and in its end, which is eternal life. 
 
 born of the Spiriti The Sinaitic MS. and two ancient versions read, 
 born of water and of the Spirit. The inserted words are a gloss. 
 
 9. How can these things be?'\ He is bewildered; there is no appear- 
 ing not to understand, as in v. 4. 'Be,' come to pass (see on i. 6). 
 
 10. Art thou a master of Israel} Better, art thou the teacher of 
 Israel, the well-known Rabbi, a representative of the supreme authority 
 in the Church? 
 
 11. We speak that we do know] The plural is no proof that any of 
 the disciples were present, though S. John at least may have been ; nor 
 does it necessarily include more than Christ Himself. The plurals may 
 be rhetorical, giving the saying the tone of a proverb; but the next verse 
 seems to shew that they do include others. Christ and his disciples tell 
 of earthly things, Christ alone of heavenly. 
 
 testif'\ Or, bear witness of (see on i. 7). 
 
 we have seen] Of which we have immediate knowledge. Comp. 
 i. 18; xiv. 7, 9. 
 
 and ye receive not] The tragic tone once more; see on i. 5. 'Ye 
 teachers of Israel, ' the very men who should receive it. 
 
vv, 12-16.] S. JOHN, III. 97 
 
 Tf I have told you earthly things^ and ye believe not, how 12 
 shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things ? And no 13 
 man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down 
 from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. And 14 
 as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so 
 must the Son of man be lifted up : that whosoever believeth 15 
 in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God 16 
 
 12. earthly things] Things which take place on earth, even though 
 originating in heaven, e.g. the 'new birth,' which though 'from 
 above,' must take place in this world. See notes on i Cor. xv. 40 and 
 James iii. 15. 
 
 heavenly things] The mysteries which are not of this world, the 
 Divine counsels respecting man's salvation. 
 
 13. tto man hath ascended up to heaven] No man has been in 
 heaven, so as to see and know these heavenly things, excepting Christ. 
 
 came dcnvn from heaven] Literally, out Of heaven ; at the Incarna- 
 tion. On ' the Son of Man ' see on i. 51. 
 
 which is in heaven] These words are omitted in the best MSS. If 
 they are retained, the meaning is 'Whose proper home is heaven.' 
 Or the Greek participle may be the imperfect tense (comp. vi. 62, ix. 
 25, xvii. 5), which was in heaven before the Incarnation. It is doubtful 
 whether in this verse we have any direct allusion to the Ascension, 
 though this is sometimes assumed. 
 
 14. the serpent] We here have som e evidence of the date "f thp 
 Gosp el. The Ophitic is the earliest (jnostTc system ^f which we have 
 full information. The serpent is the centre of the systeia, 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. ^ 
 
 even so] Christ here testifies to the prophetic and typical character of_ 
 theO.T. 
 
 must] It is so ordered in the counsels of God. Heb. ii. 9, 10. 
 
 be lifted up] On the cross : the lifting up does not refer to the exalta- 
 tion of Christ to glory. The glory to which the cross led (crux scala 
 coeli) is not included. Comp. viii. 28 and xii. 32; and for other 
 symbolic language about His death comp. Matt. xii. 40. 
 
 15. That] The eternal life of believers is the purpose of the 'must'- 
 in V. 14. For 'should' read may both here and in v. 16. 
 
 not perish, but] These words are not genuine here, but have been 
 taken from the next verse. When they are struck out it is better to take 
 'in Him' with 'have' than with 'believeth:' that every one who be- 
 lievetli may have in Him eternal life. 
 
 16 — 21. It is much disput ed whether what follow s is a continuatLon 
 of Christ's discourse, or the., comment of the Evangelist upou-it. The 
 fact that terms characteristic of S. John's theology are put into the 
 mouth of Christ, e.g. 'only-begotten' and 'the Light,' cannot settle the 
 
 S. JOHN 7 
 
98 S. JOHN, III. [vv. 17, 1 8. 
 
 so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that 
 whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have. 
 
 17 everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world 
 to condemn the world; but that the world through him 
 
 ,8 might be saved. He that beheveth on him is not con- 
 demned : but he that believeth not is condemned already, 
 because he hath not believed in the name of the only 
 
 question : the substance may still be our Lord's, though the wording is 
 S. John's. It seems unlikely that S. John would give us no indication 
 of the change from Christ's words to his own, if the discourse with 
 Nicodemus really came to a full stop in v. 15. See on vv. 31 — 36. 
 
 16. For] Explaining how God wills et ernal life to eve ry one that^ 
 believeth. 
 
 loved the world] The whole human racei__see on i. 10. This would 
 be a revelation to the exclusive Pharisee, brought up to believe that God 
 loved only the chosen people. The word for 'lo ve,' agapdn, is very 
 frequent both in this Gospel and in the First Epistie, ana may be con- 
 sidered characteristic of S. John. 
 
 that he gave his only begotten] This would be likely to remind 
 Nicodernus of the offering of Isaac. Comp. i John iv. 9; Heb. xi. 17; 
 Rom. viii. 32. See note on i. 14. 
 
 everlasting life] The Greek is the same as in the previous verse, and 
 the translation should be the same, eternal life. ^ 'Eternal life' is one 
 of the phrases of which S. John is fond. It occurs 17 times m the 
 Gospel (only eight in the Synoptics) and six times in the First Epistle. 
 In neither Gospel nor Epistle is 'eternal' (az'i^«?oj'j_applied to anything 
 but 'life.' On aidnios, which of itself does not necessarily mean 'ever- 
 lasting' or 'unending,' see note on Matt. xxv. 46. 
 
 17. the world] Note the emphatic repetition : the whole hum.an 
 race is meant, as in v. 16, not the Gentiles in particular. 
 
 not... to condemn] This does not contradict ix. 39, 'For judgment 
 am I come into this world.' Comp. Luke ix. 56. Since there are 
 sinners in the world Christ's coming involves a separation of them from 
 the good, a judgment, a sentence : but this is not the purpose of His 
 coining; the purpose is salvation. 'Condemn' is too strong here for 
 the Greek word, which is simply to J.ndge_^between good and badj^ but 
 the word frequently acquires the notion of ' condemn ^ from the context 
 (see on v. 29). Note the change of construction; not, 'to save the 
 world,' but 'that the world might be saved through Him.' The world_ 
 canjeject Him if it pleases. 
 
 18. is not condemned... is condemned already] Better, jV «(?/ judged 
 ...hath been judged already. The change of tense from present to 
 perfect must be preserved. Unbelievers have no need to be sentenced 
 by the Messiah; their unbelief is of itself their sentence. The next 
 verse explains how this is. ' Tudge J and * judgmeii t ' are among S. John's 
 characteristic words. 
 
vv. 19—21.] S. JOHN, III. 99 
 
 begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that 19 
 light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather 
 than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one ,0 
 that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, 
 lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth 21 
 truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made 
 manifest, that they are wrought in God. 
 
 19. And this is the condemnation'\ Rather, But tlie Judgment Is 
 this ; this is what it consists in : comp. xv. 12, xvii. 3. 
 
 and men loved darkness, &c.] The tragic tone again (see on i. 5). 
 Both words should have the article, loved the dark7iess rather than the 
 light. An understatement ; they hated the Light. There is probably 
 no allusion to Nicodemus coming to Jesus by night. He chose the 
 darkness, not because his deeds were evil, but because they were good. 
 He wished to conceal, not an evil deed from good men, but a good deed 
 from evil men. 
 
 deeds'] Better, works here and vv. 20, 21. 
 
 20. doeth evil] The Greek word for 'doeth' is not the same as that 
 in the next verse; but it is not quite certain that any distinction of 
 meaning is intended, although v. 29 inclines one to think so. There 
 the words are paired in precisely the same way as here. On the other 
 hand in Rom. vii. 15 — 20 these same two words are interchanged 
 indifferently, each being used both of doing good and of doing evil. 
 In order to make a distinction practiseth evil has been suggested. But 
 ' evil' also requires re-translation, for in the Greek it differs from ' evil ' in 
 V. 19. The meaning in this verse is rather 'frivolous, good-for-nothing, 
 worthless.' He that practiseth worthless things (the aimless trifler), 
 hateth the light, which would show him the true value of the inanities 
 which fill up his existence. 
 
 lest his deeds should] Better, in order that his works may not. 
 
 reproved] The margin gives 'discovered.' In viii. 9 the same word 
 is translated 'convict,' in viii. 46 'convince,' and in xvi. 8 'reprove' 
 with 'convince' in the margin. Of all these 'convict' is perhaps the 
 best ; in order that his works may not he convicted of being worth- 
 less, proved to be what they really are. See note on Matt, xviii. 15. 
 
 21. doeth truth] Or, as in i John i. 6, doeth the truth, the opposite of 
 'doing' or 'making a lie,' Rev. xxi. 27, xxii. 15. It is moral rather 
 than intellectual truth that is meant. To ' do the truth ' is to do that 
 which is true to the moral law (comp. viii. 32), that which has true 
 moral worth, as opposed to 'practising worthless things.' In i Cor. 
 xiii. 6 we have a similar antithesis : ' rejoicing with the tnith ' is opposed 
 to 'rejoicing in iniquity.'' 
 
 that his deeds may be made manifest] ' His ' is emphatic, ^his deeds ' 
 as opposed to those of him that doeth evil. ' Be made manifest ' 
 balances ' be reproved.' The one fears to be convicted ; the other 
 courts the light, not for self-glorification, but as loving that to which he 
 feels his works are akin. See on i. 31. 
 
roo S. JOHN, III. [vv. 22, 23. 
 
 22 — 36. The Baptism and Final Testimony of John. 
 
 M After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the 
 
 land of Judea ; and there he tarried with them, and baptized. 
 
 43 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, 
 
 wrought in God] Better, have been wrought in God. This is his 
 reason for wishing them to be made manifest; it is a manifestation of some- 
 thing divine. The Greek for ' that they are ' may mean ' because they 
 are.' 
 
 These three verses (19 — 21) shew t hat befo re the Incarnation, there ■ 
 
 were two classes of men in the AHorld ; a majority of evil-doerSj_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 (Luke ii. 25, 36), Nathanael, the dis- 
 ciples, &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. 
 
 22—36. The Baptism and Final Testimony of John. 
 
 22, 23. We have here a mark of authenticity similar to ii. 12. These 
 passages "it is impossible to regard as embodiments of dogma. It is 
 equally impossible to regard them as fragments detached from the mass 
 of tradition. The only conclusion remains, that they zxe. facts lodged in 
 the memory of a living witness of the events described." S. p. 86. 
 S. John records them, not for any theological purpose, but because he 
 was there, and remembers what took place. 
 
 and baptized} Or, was baptizing during his stay there, through his 
 disciples (iv. 2). Christ's baptism was not yet in the Name of the 
 Trinity (vii. 39) as ordered to the Apostles (Matt, xxviii. 19). It was a 
 continuation of John's baptism, accompanied by the operation of the 
 Spirit (v. 5). We have abundant evidence that John baptized before 
 Christ's public ministry commenced, and that the disciples baptized 
 after His ministry closed. That the one baptism should be the off- 
 spring of the other is probable enough antecedently; "yet t his is the 
 o ne passage in which it is positively stated that our Lord authorised _^ 
 baptism during His lifetime." S. p. 85. 
 
 23. yohn also was baptizing\ Not as a rival to the Messiah, but still 
 in preparation for Him. Although John knew that the Messiah had 
 come, yet He had not yet taken the public position which John had ex- 
 pected Him to take, and hence John was by no means led to suppose 
 that his own office in preaching repentance was at an end. There is no 
 improbability in Jesus and John baptizing side by side. But with this 
 difference; Jesus seldom, if ever, administered His own baptism; John 
 apparently always did administer his. 
 
 Aenon"] The name means 'springs.' The identifications of both 
 
vv. 24—27.] S. JOHN, III. loi 
 
 because there was much water there : and they came, and 
 were baptized. For John was not yet cast into prison. 24 
 Then there arose a question between some of John's disciples 25 
 and the Jews about purifying. And they came unto John, 26 
 and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond 
 Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same 
 baptizeth, and all men come to him. John answered and 27 
 said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him 
 
 Aenon and Salim remain uncertain. The most probable conjecture is 
 the Wady Far'ah, running from Mount Ebal to Jordan, an open vale, 
 full of springs. There is a Salim three miles south of the valley, and 
 the name of Aenon survives in 'Aintln, a village four miles north of the 
 waters. 
 
 much water] For immersion ; the Greek means literally many 
 waters. The remark shews that these places were not on the Jordan. 
 It would be gratuitous to say of the Jordan that ' there was much water 
 there. ' 
 
 24. This corrects the impression, naturally derived from the Synop- 
 tists, that Christ's public ministry did not commence till after the im- 
 prisonment of the Baptist. The whole of these first three chapters and 
 part of the fourth must be placed before Matt. iv. 12, where there are 
 great gaps in the history. 
 
 25. Then there arose] Better, there arose therefore; i.e. in conse- 
 quence of John's baptizing at Aenon. 
 
 a question] Or, questioning'. 
 
 between some of yohn''s disciples and the yews] Better, on the part 
 of John^s disciples with a Jew. 'A Jew ' for ' Jews ' is the reading of 
 the best authorities. We do not know what the question was ; probably 
 the efficacy of John's baptism as compared with Christ's, or as com- 
 pared with the ordinary ceremonial washings, for purifying from sin. 
 There is no clue as to who this Jew was. His question makes the dis- 
 ciples of John go at once to their master for his opinion about Jesus and 
 His success. 
 
 26. to whom, thou barest witness] Rather, to whom thou hast 
 borne witness. This was the monstrous thing in their eyes ; that One 
 who seemed to owe His position to the testimony of John should be con- 
 peting with him and surpassing him. 
 
 behold, the same] Or perhaps, behold, this fellow, expressing astonish- 
 ment and chagrin, and perhaps contempt. 
 
 all fnen] An exaggeration very natural in their excitement. The 
 picture is very true to life. Comp. the excited statement of the 
 Samaritan woman, iv. 29 ; and of the Pharisees, xii. 19 ; contrast 
 V. 32 and see on vi. 15. 
 
 27. A man can receive nothing, &c.] Comp. xix. 11. The meaning 
 of John's declaration is given in two ways: (i) 'Jesus could not have 
 this great success, unless it were granted Him from Heaven. This 
 
I02 S. JOHN, III. [vv. 28—30. 
 
 28 from heaven. Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I 
 
 29 am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him. He that 
 hath the bride is the bridegroom : but the friend of the 
 bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth 
 greatly because of the bridegroom's voice : this my joy 
 
 30 therefore is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease. 
 
 ought to satisfy you that He is sent by God ;' (2) 'I cannot accept the 
 position of supremacy, which you would thrust upon 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.' But it is quite possible 
 that both meanings are intended. 
 
 be giveti\ More literally, have been ^'z/^/. 
 
 28. Ye yourselves\ Though you are so indignant on my account. 
 bear me witness, that I said'] They had appealed to his testimony 
 
 (v. 26) ; he turns it against them. 
 
 before hint] 'Before Him, of whom you complain, whom I proclaim 
 to be the Christ.' In i. 26, 30, John spoke less clearly. 
 
 29. John explains by a figure his subordination to the Messiah, 
 
 He that hath the bride] Here only in this Gospel does this well- 
 known symbol occur. It is frequent both in O. T. and N. T. Is. liv. 
 5; Hos. ii. 19, 20; Eph. V. 32; Rev. xix. 7; xxi. 2, 9. Comp. 
 Song of Solomon, passim ; Matt. ix. 15, xxv. i. In O. T. it sym- 
 bolizes the relationship between Jehovah and His chosen people, in 
 N. T. that between Christ and His Church. 
 
 the friend of the bridegroom] 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 ; 
 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. 
 
 heareth him] i.e. listens attentively to do his bidding. 
 
 because of the bridegroom'' s voice] Heard in the midst of the 
 marriage-festivities. 
 
 is ftilfilled] i.e. has been /7/^//i?ar and still remains complete. Comp. 
 XV. II, XV). 24, xvii. 13; I John i. 4. 
 
 30. must] It is so ordained in the counsels of God. Comp. -jv. 7, 
 I4, ix. 4, X. 16, XX. 9. This joy of the friend of the Bridegroom, in full 
 view of the inevitable wane of his own influence and dignity, is in 
 marked contrast to the jealousy and vexation of his disciples. 
 
 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 
 
vv. 31, 32.] S. JOHN, III. 103 
 
 He that cometh from above is above all : he that is of the 31 
 earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth : he that cometh 
 from heaven is above all. And what he hath seen and 32 
 heard, that he testifieth ; and no man receiveth his testimony. 
 
 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 become 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, in loco. 
 
 There is no contradiction between this passage and Matt. xi. 1 — 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. that comethfrom ahove\ i.e. Christ. Comp. v. 13, viii. 23, He 
 'is above all,' John included. No one, however exalted a Prophet, 
 can rival Him. 
 
 is earthly'] There is loss instead of gain in obliterating the em- 
 phatic repetition of the words 'of the earth' as they appear in the 
 Greek. He that is of the earth, of tlie earth he is, and of the earth 
 he speaketh. This was John's case : he spoke of ' earthly things ' (see 
 on 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.' Note that 'speaking of the earth ^ is a very 
 different thing from ' speaking of the world'' (i John iv. 5). The one 
 is to speak of God's work on earth ; the other of what opposes, or at 
 least is other than, God's work. 
 
 he that coiiieth from heaven] A repetition with further development, 
 very characteristic of S. John's style. 
 
 32. what he hath seen and heard] In His pre-existence with 
 God ; V. II, i. 18. He has immediate knowledge of heavenly things. 
 
 that he testifieth] Better, that he witnessetll (see on i. 7). Precisely 
 this is the substance of His witness. 
 
 and no man] The tragic tone again; see on i. 5, and comp. v. 11. 
 ' No man ' is an exaggeration resulting from deep feeling : com- 
 paratively 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. 
 
I04 S. JOHN, III. [vv. 33—36. 
 
 33 He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that 
 
 34 God is true. For he whom God hath sent speaketh the 
 words of God : for God giveth not the Spirit by measure 
 
 35 unto him. The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all 
 
 36 things into his hand. He that believeth on the Son hath 
 everlasting life : and he that believeth not the Son shall 
 not see life ; but the wrath of God abideth on him. 
 
 receiveth his testimony^ Better, receiveth His witness. The Baptist 
 takes up Christ's words in z/. 11. 
 
 33. The Baptist shews at once that 'no man' is hyperbolical; there 
 are some who received the testimony. 
 
 hath received... hath set to his seal\ Better, received... set his seal. 
 
 his testimony] Ms witness. 'His' is emphatic, balancing 'God.' 
 ' He that received Christ^s witness, set his seal that God is true.' To 
 believe the Messiah is to believe God, for the Messiah is God's inter- 
 preter, i. 18. The metaphor is from sealing a document to express 
 one's trust in it and adherence to it. Comp. vi. 2"] ; 1 Cor. ix. 2. On 
 ' true ' see note on i. 9 ; ' true ' here is opposed to ' lying ' not to 
 ' spurious.' 
 
 34. whom God hath sent] Better, whom God sent, viz. Christ ' who 
 Cometh from above,' v. 31. 
 
 God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him] ' God ' is of doubtful 
 authority ; ' unto Him ' is not in the Greek. We must translate He 
 giveth not the Spirit by measure ; or, the Spirit giveth not by measure. 
 The former is better, and ' He ' probably means God ; so that the only 
 question is whether ' unto Him ' is rightly supplied or not. In trans- 
 lation it is best to omit the words, although there is a direct reference 
 to Jesus. 'Not by measure giveth He the Spirit,' least of all to 
 Jesus, ' for it pleased (the Father) thJ . in Him the whole plenitude (of 
 Divinity) should have its permanent abode,' Col. i. 19. Some take 
 ' He ' as meaning Christ, who gives the Spirit fully to His disciples. 
 
 35. loveth the Son] Comp. v. ao. This is the reason for His 
 giving all things into His hand. Christ is thus made 'Head over 
 all things ' (Eph. i. 22), and ' Lord of all ' (Acts x. 36). 
 
 36. hath everlasting life] Or, eternal life (see on v. 16). Note 
 the tense ; 'hath' not 'shall have.' Believers are already in possession 
 of eternal life. Christians often think of eternal life as something yet 
 to be won. It has been already given to them ; the question is whether 
 they will lose it again or not. The struggle is not to gain but to retain. 
 Comp. xvii. 3. 
 
 he that believeth not] This may also mean he that obeyeth not, and 
 this is better, for it is not the same word as ' he that believeth ' with 
 the negative added. The same correction seems to be needed, Acts 
 xiv. 2, xix. 9; Rom. xi. 30 (see margin). Comp. Heb. iv. 6, ii; 
 r Pet. iv. 17. 
 
 shall not see] Not only has not beheld, but has no prospect of 
 beholding. 
 
vv. 1—5.] S. JOHN, IV. 105 
 
 Chap. IV. i — 42. The Work among Samaritans. 
 
 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had 4 
 heard that Jesus made and baptized m(^e disciples than 
 John, (though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,) » 
 he left Judea, and departed again into Galilee. And he \ 
 must needs go through Samaria. Then cometh he to a 
 
 the wrath of God] This phrase occurs nowhere else in the Gospels. 
 It 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 to 
 believe. Comp. Matt. iii. 7; Luke iii. 7; Rom. i. 18, ix. 22, xii. 19. 
 
 abideth] Not ' shall come to him :' this is his portion already. He 
 is under a ban until he believes, and he refuses to believe : therefore 
 the ban remains. 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. 
 
 Chap. IV. 1 — 42. The Work among Samaritans. 
 
 1. When therefore the Lord knew] The ' therefore ' refers us back 
 to iii. 26. Of the many who came to Christ some told the Pharisees of 
 His doings, just as others told John. 
 
 the Pharisees] See on i. 24. 
 
 made and baptized] Literally, is makiiig' and baptizing, the very 
 words of the report are given. This is important as shewing the 
 meaning of the next verse, which is a correction not of the Evangelist's 
 own statement but of the report. In the Authorised Version S. John 
 seems to be correcting himself : he is really correcting the report carried 
 to the Pharisees. 
 
 than John] They did not object so much to John's making dis- 
 ciples. He disclaimed being the Messiah, and he took his stand on 
 the Law. Moreover, he ' did no miracle.' They could understand 
 his position much better than that of Jesus, and feared it less. See on 
 vi. 15. 
 
 2. yesus himself baptized not] Because baptizing is the work of 
 a minister, not of the Lord. Christ baptizes with the Holy Spirit 
 
 (i. 33)- 
 
 3. I/e left JudcEcC] The stronghold of the Pharisees and of the party 
 opposed to Christ. We are to infer, therefore, that this report made 
 them commence operations against Him. 
 
 departed again into Galilee] ' Again ' is somewhat wanting in au- 
 thority. It points to the period from i. 43 to ii. 12. Christ had come 
 up from Capernaum to Jerusalem for the Passover (ii. 13) : He now 
 returns to Galilee. It is sometimes assumed that this visit to Galilee 
 marks the beginning of the Galilean ministry recorded by the Sy- 
 noptists (comp. Matt. iv. 12). This may be correct, but it is not quite 
 certain. See note on Mark i. 14, 15. 
 
 4. he must tieeds go through Samaria] There was no other way, 
 
io6 S. JOHN, IV. [v. 5- 
 
 city of Samaria, which is called Sychar, near to the parcel 
 
 unless he crossed the Jordan and went round by Perea, as Jews some- 
 times did to avoid annoyance from the Samaritans (on the Samari- 
 tans, see note on Matt. x. 5). As Clirist was on his way /row Jerusalem, 
 and escaping from the ruling party there, He had less reason to fear 
 molestation. Comp. Luke ix. 53. 
 
 5 — 42. Doubt has been thrown on this narrative in three different 
 ways, (i) On a 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 fundamental 
 mistake. But it is notorious that the Samaritans did look for a Mes- 
 siah, 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 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 
 allowing, 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 afterwards, 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. 
 (3) 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 colonists from Assyria (2 Kings xvii. 24) ; 
 and the sixth is the adulterated worship of Jehovah. If cur interpreting 
 Scripture depends upon our guessing such riddles as this, we may well 
 despair of the task. But the allegory is a pure fiction, i. When S. 
 John gives us an allegory, he leaves no doubt that it is an allegory. 
 There is not the faintest hint here. 1. 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. 3. There is a singular impropriety in making 
 the five 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 topography is 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. 
 
 5. Then cometh he\ Better, He comet h therefore ; because that was 
 His route. 
 
 a city of Samaria] City is used loosely, and must not be supposed 
 to imply anything large. Capernaum, which Josephus calls a village, 
 the Evangelists call a city. 'Town' would be better as a transla- 
 tion. Samaria is the insignificant province of Samaria into which 
 
vv. 6—8.] S. JOHN, IV. T07 
 
 of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph. Now Jacob's 6 
 well was there. Jesus therefore, being wearied with his 
 journey, sat thus on the well : and it was about the sixth 
 hour. There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water : 7 
 Jesus saith unto her, Give me to drink. (For his disciples 8 
 
 the old kingdom of Jeroboam had dwindled. Omit 'which is' before 
 'called.' 
 
 called Syc/tar] ' Called ' may be another indication that this Gospel 
 was written outside Palestine or it may mean that Sychar was a nick- 
 name ('liar' or 'drunkard'). In the one case Sychar is a different place 
 from Sychem or Shechem, though close to it, viz. the modern Askar: 
 in the other it is another name for Sychem, the Neapolis of S. John's 
 day, and the modern Naplus. The former view is preferable, though 
 certainty is impossible. Would S. John have written 'Neapolis' if 
 Sychem were meant? He writes Tiberias (vi. i, 23, xxi. i): but 
 Tiberias was probably a new town as well as 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. Naplus has 
 many wells close at hand. 
 
 that yacob gave to his son yoseph'\ Gen. xxxiii. 19, xlviii. 22; Josh, 
 xxiv. 32. Abraham bought the ground, Jacob gave it to Joseph, and 
 Joseph was buried there. 
 
 6. Jacob'' s well] Or, spring [v. 11). It still exists, but without 
 spring-water ; one of the few sites about which there is no dispute, in 
 the entrance to the valley between Ebal and Gerizim. 
 
 sat thus on the well] Or, was sitting thus (just as He was) by the 
 spring. All these details mark the report as of one who had full 
 information. 
 
 about the sixth hour] See on i. 39. This case again is not decisive 
 as to S. John's mode of reckoning the hours. On the one hand, noon 
 was an unusual hour for drawing water. 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 
 conversation 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. a woman 0/ Samaria] i.e. of the province; not of the city of 
 Samaria, at that time called Sebaste, in honour of Augustus, who had 
 given it to Herod the Great. Herod's name for it survives in the modern 
 Sebustieh. A woman of the city of Samaria would not have come all 
 that distance to fetch water. In legends this woman is called Photina. 
 
 Give vie to drink] Quite literal, as the next verse shews. He asked 
 her for refreshment because His disciples had gone away. 'Give me the 
 spiritual refreshment of thy conversion' is a meaning read into the words 
 and not found in them. 
 
io8 S. JOHN, IV. [vv. 9- 1 1. 
 
 9 were gone away unto the city to buy meat.) Then saith 
 the woman of Samaria unto him, How t's it that thou, being 
 a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria ? 
 
 ■o For the Jews have no deaUngs with the Samaritans. Jesus 
 answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of 
 God, and who it is that saith to thee. Give me to drink ; 
 thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given 
 
 I" thee living water. The woman saith unto him. Sir, thou 
 hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep : from 
 
 8. to buy meat"] i.e. food, not necessarily flesh. The meat-offering 
 was fine flour and oil without any flesh. Lev. ii. i. The Greek word 
 here means 'nourishment.' 
 
 9. woman of Samaria] In both places in this verse we should 
 rather have Samaxltan woman: the Greek is not the same as in v. 7. 
 The adjective lays stress on the national and religious characteristics. 
 For 'then' read therefore, as xnv. 5. 
 
 How is zV] Feminine pertness. She is half-amused and half- 
 triumphant. 
 
 being a yew] She knew Him to be such by His dress and by His 
 language. 
 
 for the yews, &c.] Omit the articles; for yews have no dealings with 
 Samaritans. This is a remark, not of the woman, but of S. John, to 
 explain the woman's question. As He was on his way from Jerusalem 
 she probably thought He was a Judaean. The Galileans seem to have 
 been less strict ; and hence His disciples went to buy food of Samaritans. 
 Some important authorities omit the remark. 
 
 10. the gift of God\ What He is ready to give thee, what is now 
 held out to thee, thy salvation. For 'knewest' read hadst known. 
 Comp. xi. 21, 32, xiv. 28, where we have the same construction; and 
 contrast v. 46 and viii. 19, where the A. V. makes the converse mistake 
 of translating imperfects as if they were aorists. 
 
 thoti wouldest have asked of him] instead of His asking of thee: 
 'thou' is emphatic. 'Spiritually our positions are reversed. It is 
 thou who art weary, and foot-sore, 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, J?omans, vii. See on vi. 33, to 
 which there is a clear reference in this same chapter. The passage with 
 these references to the Fourth Vjospel 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 as early as A.D. 115. See on 
 iii. 3. 
 
 11. Sir] A decided change from the pert 'How is it?' in v. 9. His 
 words and manner already begin to impress her. 
 
 the well is deep] Not the same word for 'well' as irxv. 6. There the 
 spring in the well is the chief feature : here it is rather the deep hole 
 
w. 12— T4.] S. JOHN, IV. ro9 
 
 whence then hast thou that living water? Art thou greater 12 
 than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank 
 thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle? Jesus 13 
 answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this 
 water shall thirst again : but whosoever drinketh of the 14 
 
 in which the spring was. Earlier travellers have called it over a 100 
 feet deep : at the present time it is about 75 feet deep. 
 
 that living water] Better, the living water, 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?' Among the 
 various answers we may at once set aside any reference to baptism. 
 Faith, God's grace and truth, Christ Himself, are other answers. The 
 difference between them is at bottom not so great as appears on the 
 surface Christ here uses the figure of water, as elsewhere of bread 
 (vi.) and light (viii. 12), the three most necessary things for life. But 
 He does not here 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. 
 
 12. Art thou greater] ' Thou ' is very emphatic ; Surely Thou art 
 not greater. Comp. viii. 53. The loquacity of the woman as con- 
 trasted with the sententiousness of Nicodemus is very natural, while on 
 the other hand she shews a similar perverseness in misunderstanding 
 spiritual metaphors. 
 
 our fatlicr Jacob] 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 would not affect the texture of the nation 
 more than the French refugees among ourselves. Others hold that the 
 Samaritans were from the first a mongrel nation, a mixture of heathen 
 colonists with Jewish inhabitants, left behind by Shalmaneser. But 
 there is nothing to shew that he did leave any behind (2 Kings 
 xyiii. 11); Josephus says {Ant. ix. xiv. i) that 'he transplanted a// the 
 people.' When the Samaritans asked Alexander the Great to excuse 
 them frojn 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 a 'stranger' (Luke xvii. 18), literally 'one of a different 
 race.' 
 
 which gave us the well] This has no foundation in Scripture, but no 
 doubt was a Samaritan tradition. She means, the well was good enough 
 for him, and is good enough for us; hast Thou a better? 
 
no S. JOHN, IV. [vv. 15—20. 
 
 water that I shall give him shall never thirst ; but the water 
 that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water spring- 
 
 15 ing up into everlasting life. The woman saith unto him, 
 Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come 
 
 16 hither to draw. Jesus saith unto her. Go, call thy husband, 
 
 17 and come hither. The woman answered and said, I have 
 no husband. Jesus said unto her. Thou hast well said, I 
 
 18 have no husband : for thou hast had five husbands ; and he 
 whom thou now hast is not thy husband : in that saidst 
 
 19 thou truly. The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that 
 
 20 thou art a prophet. Our fathers worshipped in this moun- 
 
 13. 14. Christ leaves her question unanswered, like that of Nicodemus 
 (iii. 4, 5), and passes on to develop the metaphor rather than explain 
 it, contrasting the literal with the figurative sense. Comp. iii. 6. 
 
 14. shall never tliirsi\ Literally, will certainly not thirst for ever, 
 for the craving is satisfied as soon as ever it recurs. See on viii. 51. 
 
 springing tip into everlastitig life\ Not that eternal life is some 
 future xosViA to be realised hereafter; it is the iynmediate result. The 
 soul in which the living water flows has eternal life. See on v. 36 and 
 iii. 16. 
 
 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. 13; Zech. xiii. i, xiv. 8. But the Samaritans rejected all but 
 the Pentateuch. 
 
 to draw] Same word as in ii. 8, 9; peculiar to this Gospel. 
 
 16. Go, call thy husband] 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. hast well said] i.e. saidst rightly. Comp. viii. 48; Matt. xy. 
 7; Luke xx. 39. There is perhaps a touch of irony in the 'well.' 
 
 18. five husbands] To be understood quite literally. They were 
 either dead or divorced, and she was now living with a man without 
 being married to him. 
 
 in that saidst thou truly] Better, this (one thing) thou hast salA. truly. 
 Christ exposes the falsehood which lurks in the literal truth of her 
 statement. 
 
 19. a prophet] One divinely inspired with supernatural knowledge, 
 I Sam. ix. 9. Note the gradual change in her attitude of mind towards 
 
V. 21.] S. JOHN, IV. Ill 
 
 tain ; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where viai 
 ought to worship. Jesus saith unto her. Woman, believe =1 
 me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this moun- 
 
 Him. First, off-hand pertness {v. 9); then, respect to His gravity of 
 manner and serious words i^. 11); next, a misunderstanding 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. ^i). 
 
 20. Convinced that He can read her life she shrinks from inspection 
 and hastily turns the conversation from herself. In seeking a new 
 subject she naturally catches at one of absorbing interest to every 
 Samaritan. Mount Gerizim shorn of its temple suggests 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? Does an immoral life destroy all 
 interest in Romanism, Ritualism, and the like? 
 
 in this mountain'] 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 B.C. 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. 
 
 ye say] Unconsciously she admits that One, whom she has just con- 
 fessed to be a Prophet, is against her in the controversy. Comp. 
 Deut. xii. 13. 
 
 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 un- 
 needed, and the soul knows even as it is known. There is nothing so 
 like them in their sublime infinitude of comprehension, and intense 
 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 like these that 
 strike home to the hearts of men, as in the most literal sense Divine. " 
 S. p. 95. 
 
 21. believe me] This formula occurs here only ; the usual one is ' I 
 say unto you.' 
 
 the hour cometh] No article in the Greek; there cometh an hour. 
 Christ decides neither for nor against either place. The utter ruin on 
 Gerizim and the glorious building at Jerusalem will soon be on an 
 equality. Those who would worship the Father must rise above such 
 
112 S. JOHN, IV. [vv. 22, 23. 
 
 as tain, nor_y^/ at Jerusalem, worship the Father. Ye worship 
 ye know not what : we know what we worship ; for salvation 
 
 23 is of the Jews. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the 
 true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and iti 
 
 distinctions of place. A time is coming when all limitations of worship 
 will disappear. 
 
 22. ye know not what] Or, that which ye know not. 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 that of the Jews might well be called ignorance. 
 
 we know what we worship] Or, we worship that which we know. 
 The first person plural here is not similar to that in iii. 1 1 (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.' 
 
 salvation is of the yc%vs\ Literally, the salvation, the expected salva- 
 tion, is of the yews; i.e. proceeds from them (not belongs to \\^^xn), in 
 virtue of the promises to Abraham (Gen. xii. 3, xviii. 18, xxii. 18) and 
 Isaac (xxvi. 4). This verse is absolutely fatal to the theory that this 
 Gospel is the work of a Gnostic Greek in the second century (see on 
 xix. 35). That salvation proceeded from the Jews contradicts the fun- 
 damental principle of Gnosticism, that salvation was to be sought in the 
 higher knowledge of which Gnostics had the key. Hence those who 
 uphold such a theory of authorship assume, in defiance of all evidence, 
 that this verse is a later interpolation. The verse is found in all MSS. 
 and versions. 
 
 23. the hour cometh] As before, there cometh an hour. What 
 follows, a7id it is noio here, could not be added in v. 21. The local 
 worship on Gerizim and Zion must still continue for a while ; but there 
 are already a few who are rising above these externals to the spirit of 
 true worship, in which the opposition between Jew and Samaritan 
 disappears. 
 
 the true tvorshippers] The same word for 'true' as in i. 9 (see note 
 there); 'true' as opposed to what is 'spurious' and 'unreal.' Worship 
 to be genuine, real, and perfect must be offered in spirit and truth. 
 
 in spirit] This is opposed to all that is carnal, material, and of the 
 earth earthy; — 'this mountain,' the Temple, limitations of time and 
 place. Not that such limitations are wrong ; but they are not of the 
 essence of religion, and become wrong when they are mistaken for the 
 essence of religion. 
 
vv. 24—26.] S. JOHN, IV. 113 
 
 truth : for the Father seeketh such to worship him, God is 24 
 a Spirit : and they that worship him must worship him in 
 spirit and in truth. The woman . saith unto him, I know 25 
 that Messias cometh, which is called Christ : when he is 
 come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that 26 
 speak unto thee am he. 
 
 in triitJi] (Omit 'in') i.e. in harmony with the Nature and Will of 
 God. In the sphere of intellect, this means recognition of His Pre- 
 sence 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. 
 
 for the Father seeketh, &c.] Better, for such the Father also seeketh 
 for His worshippers. ' Such' is very 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. Note how three times in succession Christ speaks 
 of God as the Father (tjv. 21, 23) : perhaps it was quite a new aspect 
 of Him to the woman. 
 
 24. God is spirit, and must be approached in that part of us which 
 is spirit, in the true temple of God, ' which temple ye are.' 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. Messias] See note on i. 41. There is nothing at all improbable 
 in her knowing the Jewish name and using it to a Jew. The word 
 being so 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 substance 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 whole tenour of the narrative and 
 is contradicted by w. 8 and 27. 
 
 ■which is called Christ] Probably a parenthetic explanation of the 
 Evangelist's (but contrast i. 41), 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' poiflts 
 to the belief that Moses was to appear again, 
 
 when he is come] Or, when He comes, 'He' is in emphatic con- 
 trast to other teachers. 
 
 all things] In a vague colloquial sense. 
 
 26. am he] This is correct, although ' He' is not expressed in the 
 Greek. It is the ordinary Greek affirmative (comp. 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 
 
 S. JOHN 8 
 
TI4 S. JOHN, IV. [vv. 27—31. 
 
 27 And upon this came his disciples, and marvelled that he 
 talked with the woman : yet no man said, What seekest 
 
 28 thou? or, Why talkest thou with her? The woman then 
 left her waterpot, and went her way into the city, and saith 
 
 29 to the men, Come, see a man, which told me all things that 
 
 30 ever I did : is not this the Christ ? Then they went out of 
 the city, and came unto him. 
 
 31 In the mean while his disciples prayed him, saying, 
 
 we remember Matt. xvi. 20, xvii. 9 ; Mark viii. 30. But one great 
 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 the announcement ; quite another for disci- 
 ples and others to make Him known promiscuously. 
 
 27. talked with the womati\ Rather, was talldiig; with a wo?nan, 
 contrary to the precepts of the Rabbis. ' Let no one talk with a wo- 
 man in the street, no not with his own wife.' The woman's being a 
 Samaritan would increase their astonishment. 
 
 What seekest thou ?^ Probably both questions are addressed (hypo- 
 thetically) to Christ ; not one to the woman, and the other to Him. 
 
 28. The woman then] Better, The woman therefore; because of 
 the interruption. 
 
 te/t her watei-pot] Same word for 'waterpot' as in the miracle at 
 Cana, and used nowhere else. Her leaving it shews that her errand is 
 forgotten, or neglected as of no moment compared with what now lies 
 before her. This graphic touch comes from one who was there, and 
 saw, and remembered. 
 
 29. all things that ever I did] How natural is this exaggeration ! 
 In her excitement she states not what He had really told her, but what 
 she is convinced He could have told her. Comp. 'all men' in iii. 26, 
 and 'no man' in iii. 32. This strong language is in all three cases 
 thoroughly in keeping with the circumstances. 
 
 is not this the Christ?] Rather, Is this, can this be, the Christ? A 
 similar error occurs xviii. 17, 25. Although she believes it she thinks it 
 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. 
 The form of question is similar to that in v. 33 : both are put in a form 
 that anticipates a negative answer ; num not nonne. 
 
 30. went out and came] Literally, went out a«a^ were com- 
 ing. The change of tense from aorist to imperfect gives vividness. 
 We are to see them coming along across the fields as we listen to the 
 conversation that follows, 31 — 38. 
 
 31. In the mean while] Between the departure of the women and 
 the arrival of her fellow-townsmen. 
 
vv. 32— 36.] S. JOHN, IV. 115 
 
 Master, eat. But he said unto them, I have meat to eat 32 
 that ye know not of. Therefore said the disciples one to 33 
 another, Hath any man brought ' him ought to eat ? Jesus 34 
 saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that 
 sent me, and to finish his work. Say not ye, There are 35 
 yet four months, and then cometh harvest? behold, I say 
 unto you, Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for 
 they are white already to harvest. And he that reapeth 36 
 
 Master, gat] Better, Babbi, eat. 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, iii. 2, 26, vi. 25 (comp. Matt, xxiii. 7, 8). Appa- 
 rently 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. I have meat, &c.] The pronouns 'I' and 'ye' are emphatically 
 opposed. His joy at the woman's conversion prompts Him to refuse 
 food: not of course that His human frame could do without it, but 
 that in His delight He feels for the moment no want of food. 
 
 33. Hath any man brought hit?t] The emphasis is on 'brought.' 
 ' Surely no one hath brought Him any thing to eat.' Another instance 
 of dulness as to spiritual meaning. In ii. 20 it was the Jews; in iii. 4 
 Nicodemus; m v. ri the Samaritan woman; and now the disciples. 
 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 Evan- 
 gelists. 
 
 34. My meat is to do the will, &c.] Literally, My food is tliat I 
 may do the will of Him that sent Me and thus finish His work. It is 
 Christ's aim and purpose that is His food. Comp. v. 36, viii. 56. These 
 words recall the reply to the tempter ' man doth not live by bread 
 alone,' and the reply to His parents ' Wist ye not that I must be about 
 my Father's business.' Luke iv. 4, ii. 49. 
 
 35. Say not ye] The pronoun is again emphatic. 
 
 There are yet four months, &c.] This cannot be a proverb. No 
 such proverb is known ; and a proverb on the subject would have to be 
 differently shaped ; e.g. ' From seedtime to harvest is four months,' or 
 something of the kind. So that we may regard this saying as a niaik 
 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. 
 
 are white already to harvest] 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 instruction Christ sees the abundant harvest of souls that is 
 
Ii6 S. JOHN, IV. [vv. 37—39- 
 
 receiveth wages, and gatheieth fruit unto life eternal : that 
 both he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice to- 
 
 37 gether. And herein is that saying true, One soweth, and 
 
 38 another reapeth. I sent you to reap that whereon ye 
 bestowed no labour: other men laboured, and ye are entered 
 
 39 into their labours. And many of the Samaritans of that 
 
 to follow. 'Already' is the last word in the Greek sentence ; and from 
 very ancient times there has been a doubt whether it belongs to this 
 sentence or the next. Some of the best MSS. give 'already' to the 
 next sentence; 'already he that reapeth receiveth wages.' But MS. 
 authority in punctuation is not of much weight. The received punc- 
 tuation is perhaps better; 'already' at the end of v. 35 being in 
 emphatic contrast to ' yet' at the beginning of it. 
 
 36. unto life etcnial\ Another small change without reason (comp. 
 xii. 25, xvii. 3). Our translators vary between 'eternal life,' 'life 
 eternal,' 'everlasting life,' and ' life everlasting ' (xii. 50). The Greek 
 is in all cases the same, and should in all cases Idc translated ' eternal 
 life.' See on iii. 16. Here 'into eternal life' would perhaps be better: 
 'eternal life' is represented as the granary into which the fruit is 
 gathered, not the future result of the gathering. See on v. 14. Comp. 
 for similar imagery, ' The harvest truly is plenteous, but the labourers 
 are few, &c.' Matt. ix. 37, 38. 
 
 that both] i.e. In order that both: shewing that this was God's pur- 
 pose and intention. 
 
 he that soweth] Christ, not the Prophets. 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. 
 
 he that reapeth] Christ's ministers. 
 
 37. And herein is that saying true] Rather, For herein is the say- 
 ing (proved) true, i.e. is shewn to be the genuine proverb capable of 
 realisation, not a mere empty phrase. 'True' is opposed to 'unreal' 
 not to 'lying.' See on v. 23, i. 9 and vii. -28. ' Herein ' refers to what 
 precedes : comp. xv. 8 and ' by this ' which represents the same Greek 
 in xvi. 30. 
 
 38. I sent you, Sec] The pronouns are again emphatically opposed, 
 as in V. 32. 
 
 other men] Christ, the Sower; but put in the plural to balance 'ye' 
 in the next clause. In v. 37 both are put in the singular for the sake 
 of harmony; 'One soweth' (Christ), 'another reapeth' (the disciples). 
 All the verbs in this verse are perfects excepting 'sent;' have not 
 laboured, have laboured, have entered. 
 
 39. many of the Satnaritans] Strong proof of the truth of v. 35. 
 These Samaritans outstrip the Jews, and even the Apostles, in their 
 readiness to believe. The Jews rejected the testimony of their own 
 Scriptures, of the Baptist, of Christ's miracles and teaching. The 
 Samaritans accept the testimony of the woman, who had suddenly be- 
 come an Apostle to her countrymen. 
 
vv. 40-44-] S. JOHN, IV. 117 
 
 city believed on him for the saying of the woman, which 
 testified, He told me all that ever I did. So when the 43 
 Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that 
 he would tarry with them : and he abode there two days. 
 And many moe believed because of his own word; and ^^ 
 said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy 
 saying : for we have heard him ourselves, and know that 
 this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world. 
 
 43 — 54. The Work among Galileans. 
 
 Now after two days he departed thence, and went into 43 
 Galilee. For Jesus himself testified, that a prophet hath no 4-) 
 
 40. besought Aim] Or, kept beseeching' ///w. How different from 
 His own people at Nazareth ; Matt. xiii. 58 ; Luke iv. 29. Comp. the 
 thankful Samaritan leper, Luke xvii. 16, 17. 
 
 tarry with them\ Better, abide with them. See on i. 33. They per- 
 haps mean, take up His abode permanently with them, or at any rate 
 for some time. 
 
 42. thy saying] Not the same word as in v. 39, the Greek for 
 which is the same as that translated 'word ' ia v. 41. Vv. 39 and 41 
 should be alike, viz. 'word,' meaning 'statement' in v. 39 and ' teach- 
 ing ' in z*. 41. Here we should have 'speech' or 'talk.' In classical 
 Greek /alia has a slightly uncomplimentary turn, 'gossip, chatter.' But 
 this shade of meaning is lost in later Greek, though there is perhaps a 
 slight trace of it here; 'not because of thy talk;' but this being doubt- 
 ful, 'speech' will be the safer translation. The whole should run, no 
 longer is it because of tliy speech that we believe. In viii. 43 lalia 
 is used by Christ of His own words ; see note there. 
 
 we have heard him ourselves] Better, we have heard for ourselves. 
 There is no 'Him' in the Greek. 'The Christ' is also to be omitted. 
 It is wanting in the best MSS. 
 
 the Saviour of the world] It is not improbable that such ready hearers 
 would arrive at this great truth before the end of those two days. It 
 is therefore unnecessary to suppose that S. John is here unconsciously 
 giving one of his own expressions (i John iv. 14) for theirs. 
 
 43—54. The Work among Galileans. 
 
 43. after two days] Literally, after the two days mentioned in 
 V. 40. 
 
 and went] These words are wanting in the best MSS. 
 
 44. For fesus himself testified] This is a well-knovra difficulty. As 
 in XX. 17, we have a reason assigned which seems to be the very 
 opposite 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 
 
ri8 S. JOHN, IV. [v v. 45— 49. 
 
 45 honour in his own country. Then when he was come into 
 Gahlee, the Galileans received him, having seen all the 
 things that he did at Jerusalem at the feast : for they also 
 
 46 went unto the feast. So Jesus came again into Cana of 
 Galilee, where he made the water wine. And there was 
 a certain nobleman, whose son was sick at Capernaum. 
 
 47 When he heard that Jesus was come out of Judea into 
 Galilee, he went unto him, and besought him that he would 
 come down, and heal his son : for he was at the point of 
 
 48 death. Then said Jesus unto him, Except ye see signs and 
 
 49 wonders, ye will not believe. The nobleman saith unto 
 
 Origen, that by 'his own country' is meant Judaea, 'the home of the 
 Prophets.' 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 found there. The appeal to 
 Judaea had in the main been a failure. 
 
 45. all the things that he did'\ Of these we have a passing notice ii. 
 23. 'The Feast' means the Passover, but there is no need to name it, 
 because it has already been named, ii. 23. 
 
 46. where he made the water wznel and therefore would be likely to 
 find a favourable hearing. For ' So Jesus came ' read He came there- 
 fore. See on vi. 14. 
 
 nobletnati] Literally, king^s man, i.e. ofiBcer in the service of the 
 Mng', Herod Antipas; but whether in a civil or military office, there is 
 nothing to shew. ' Nobleman ' is, therefore, not at all accurate : the 
 word has nothing to do with birth. It has been conjectured that this 
 official was Chuza (Luke viii. 3), or Manaen (Acts xiii. i). 
 
 47. that he would come dozvn] Literally, in order that he might 
 come down ; comp. v. 34, v. 7, 36, vi. 29, 50. 
 
 at CaJ>ernaum] 20 miles or more from Cana. 
 
 48. signs and wonders'] Christ's miracles are never mere 'wonders' 
 to excite astonishment; they are 'signs' of heavenly truths as well, and 
 this is their primary characteristic. Where these two words are joined 
 together 'signs' always precedes, excepting four passages in the Acts, 
 where we have ' wonders and signs.' This is the only passage in 
 which S. John uses 'wonders' at all. In ii. 11 the word translated 
 ' miracles ' is the same as the one here translated ' signs.' See below, 
 V. 54. 
 
 ye will not beheve\ In marked contrast to the ready belief of the 
 Samaritans. The form of negation in the Greek is of the strong 
 kind ; ye will in no wise believe. See note on i Cor. i. 22. Faith based 
 on miracles is of a low type comparatively, but Christ does not reject it. 
 Comp. X. 38, xiv. 1 1, XX. 29. This man's faith is strengthened by being 
 put to test. The words are evidently addressed to him and those about 
 liim, and they imply that those addressed are Jews. 
 
vv. 50— 54-] S. JOHN, IV. 119 
 
 him, Sir, come down ere my child die. Jesus saith unto 50 
 him, Go thy way ; thy son liveth. And the man believed 
 the word that Jesus had spoken unto him, and he went his 
 way. And as he was now going down, his servants met 51 
 him, and told hhn, saying, Thy son liveth. Then inquired 52 
 he of them the hour when he began to amend. And they 
 said unto him, Yesterday at the seventh hour the fever left 
 him. So the father knew that // was at the same hour, in 53 
 the which Jesus said unto him. Thy son liveth : and himself 
 believed, and his whole house. This is again the second s^ 
 
 49. ere my child die\ This shews both the man's faith and its 
 weakness. He believes that Christ's presence can save the child ; 
 he does not believe that He can save him without being present. 
 
 50. the man believed^ The father's faith is healed at the same time 
 as the son's body. 
 
 had spoken\ Better, spake; aorist, not pluperfect. 
 
 52. began to atnend'\ Or, was somewiat better; a colloquial 
 expression. The father fancies that the cure will be gradual. The 
 fever will depart at Christ's word, but will depart in the ordinary way. 
 He has not yet fully realised Christ's power. The reply of the servants 
 shews that the cure was instantaneous. 
 
 Yesterday at the seventh hour] Once more we have to discuss S. John's 
 method of counting the hours of the day. (See on i. 39 and 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 he would not 
 be likely to loiter on the way. 7 a.m. is incredible; he would have 
 been home long before nightfall, and the servants met him some dis- 
 tance from home. 7 P. M. is improbable ; the servants would meet him 
 before midnight. Thus the modern method of reckoning from midnight 
 to midnight does not suit. Adopting the Jewish method from sunset to 
 sunset, the seventh hour is i P. M. He would scarcely start at once in the 
 mid-day heat; nor would the servants. Supposing they met him after 
 sunset, they might speak of i p.m. 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 in- 
 stance must be regarded as not decisive. But the balance here seems to 
 incline to what is antecedently more probable, that S. John reckons 
 the hours, like the rest of the Evangelists, according to the Jewish 
 method. 
 
 53. himself believed] This is the last stage in the growth of the 
 man's faith, a growth which S. John sketches for us here as in the case 
 of the Samaritan woman. In both cases the spiritual development is 
 thoroughly natural, as also is the incidental way in which S. John places 
 it before us. 
 
 and his whole house] The first converted family. 
 
 64. This is again the second, &c.] Rather, This again as a second 
 
I20 S. JOHN, IV. [v. 54. 
 
 miracle that Jesus did, when he was come out of Judea into 
 GaUlee. 
 
 miracle (or sigti) did yesus, after lie had come out ofyudaea i7ito Galilee. 
 Both first and second had similar results : the first confivmed the faith of 
 the disciples, the second that of this official. 
 
 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 con- 
 tend 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, 01 ' cen- 
 turion ' may be a slip. Eight very marked points of difference be- 
 tween 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 care- 
 lessness or misinformation either to the Synoptists or to S. John. 
 
 (i) Here a 'king's man' pleads for his son; there a centurion for his 
 servant. 
 
 (2) Here he pleads in person ; there the Jewish elders plead for 
 him. 
 
 (3) Here the father is probably a Jew; there the centurion is cer- 
 tainly a Gentile. 
 
 (4) Here the healing words are spoken at Cana ; there at Caper- 
 naum. 
 
 (5) Here the malady is fever ; there paralysis. 
 
 (6) Here the father wishes Jesus to come; there the centurion begs 
 him not to come. 
 
 (7) Here Christ does not go; there apparently he does. 
 
 (S) Here the father has weak faith and is blamed (w. 48); there 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 con- 
 veying 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, there- 
 fore, 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. 
 
 Chaps. V. — XI. The Work among mixed multitudes, 
 CHIEFLY Jews. 
 
 The Work now becomes a conflict 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 
 
V. I.] S. JOHN, V. 121 
 
 Chaps. V. — XL The Work among mixed multitudes^ 
 chiefly Jews. 
 
 Chap. V. Christ the Source of Life. 
 
 I — 9. The Sign at the Fool of Bethesda. 
 
 After this there was a feast of the Jews ; and Jesus went 5 
 
 opposite results of Christ's work: comp. vi. 60 — 71, vii. 40 — 52, ix. 
 '3—41, X. 19, 21, 39—42, xi. 45—57. 
 
 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 religious according 
 to the light allowed him; Nicodemus, the learned ecclesiastic, skilled in the 
 Scriptures, but ignorant of the first elements of religion ; the Samaritan 
 woman, immoral in life and schismatical in religion, but simple in heart 
 and readily convinced; and the royal official, weak in faith, but pro- 
 gressing gradually to a full conviction. But as yet there is little evi- 
 dence of hostility to Christ, although the Evangelist prepares us for it 
 (i. II, ii. 18 — 20, iii. 18, 19, 26, iv. 44). Henceforth, however, hos- 
 tility 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. Two miracles form the 
 introduction to two great discourses: two miracles illustrate two dis- 
 courses. The healing at Bethesda and the feeding of the 5000 lead to dis- 
 courses 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 Lave under 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 contradiction and enmity. 
 
 Chap. V. Christ the Source of Life, 
 
 In chaps, v. and vi. the word 'life' occurs 18 times; in the rest 
 of the Gospel 18 times. 
 
 This chapter falls into two main divisions ; (i) The Sign at the Pool of 
 Bethesda and its Sequel (i — 16); (2) The Discourse on the Son as the 
 Source of Life (17 — 47). 
 
 1 — 9. The Sign at the Pool of Bethesda. 
 
 1. After this^ Better, After these things, a more indefinite se- 
 quence. 
 
 a feast of the Jews\ This is the reading of highest authority, although 
 some important MSS. read ^ the feast of the Jews,' probably because 
 from very early times this feast was believed to be the Passover. 
 
122 S. JOHN, V. [vv. 2, 3. 
 
 2 up to Jerusalem. Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep 
 market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Be- 
 
 3 thesda, having five porches. In these lay a great multitude 
 
 If * a feast ' 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, &c. 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 else- 
 where. Almost every other feast, and even the Day of Atonement, 
 have 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 of the Jews from Haman, 
 and took its name from the lots which he caused to be cast (Esther iii. 
 7, ix. 24, ■26, ?8). 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 Jerusalem 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, therefore Christ would discountenance the feast itself. 
 
 2. there is at JerusaleniX This is no evidence whatever that the 
 Gospel was written before the destruction of Jerusalem. The pool 
 would still exist, even if the building was destroyed ; and such a build- 
 ing, as being of the nature of a hospital, would be likely to be spared. 
 Even if all were destroyed the present tense would be natural here. 
 See on xi. 18. 
 
 by the sheep market'] There is no * market ' in the Greek, and no 
 reason for supposing that it ought to be supplied. The margin is pro- 
 bably right: sheep-gsXe. We know from Neh. iii. i, 32, xii. 39 that 
 there was a sheep-gate; so called probably from sheep for sacrifice being 
 sold there. It was near the Temple. The adjective for 'sheep-' occurs 
 nowhere else in N.T. but here, and nowhere in O.T. but in the 
 passages in Nehemiah. But so little is known of this gate, and the 
 ellipsis of ' gate ' is so unparalleled that we cannot regard this explana- 
 tion as certain. Another translation is possible, with a change of case 
 in the word for pool ; Now there is in Jerusalem, by the sheep-pool, a 
 place called in the Hebrew tongiie Bethesda. 
 
 in the Hebrew tongue] * Hebrew ' means Aramaic, the language 
 spoken at the time, not the old Hebrew of the Scriptures. See on 
 XX. 16. 
 
 Bethesda] ' House of mercy,' or possibly ' House of the Portico,' or 
 ac;ain ' of the Olive.' The name Bethesda does not occur elsewhere. 
 
vv. 4—7.] S. JOHN, V. 123 
 
 of impotent folk^ of blind, halt, withered, waiting for the 
 moving of the water. For an angel went down at a certain 4 
 season into the pool, and troubled the water : whosoever 
 then first after the troubling of the water stepped in, was 
 made whole of whatsoever disease he had. And a certain $ 
 man was there, which had an infirmity thirty afid eight 
 years. When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had 6 
 been now a long time i?i that case, he saith unto him. Wilt 
 thou be made whole ? The impotent tnan answered him, 7 
 
 The traditional identification with Birket Israil is not commonly advo- 
 cated now. The ' Fountain of the Virgin ' is an attractive identifica- 
 tion, as the water is intermittent to this day. This fountain is connected 
 with the pool of Siloam, and some think that Siloam is Bethesda. 
 That S. John speaks of Bethesda here and Siloam in ix. 7, is not con- 
 clusive against this : for Bethesda might be the name of the building 
 and Siloam of the pool; and the Greek for 'called' here is strictly 
 'called iti additiort'' or 'jz<mamed,' as if the place had some other 
 name. 
 
 Jive porches] Or, colonnades. These would be to shelter the sick. The 
 place seems to have been a kind of charitable institution. 
 
 3. lay a great multitude'] Better, were lying a multitude. 
 
 blind, halt, withered] These are the special kinds of ' impotent folk. ' 
 
 ■waiting for the fnoving of the water] These words and the whole of 
 V. 4 are almost certainly an interpolation, though a very ancient one. 
 They are omitted by the best MSS. Other important MSS. omit v. 4 
 or mark it as suspicious. Moreover, those MSS. which contain the 
 passage vary very much. The passage is one more likely to be inserted 
 without authority than to be omitted if genuine; and very probably it 
 represents 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 in its elements, and the people 
 may or may not have been right in supposing that it was most efficacious 
 when the spring was most violent. 
 
 6. which had an infirmity, &c.] Literally, who had passed thirty- 
 eight years in his infirmity. Not that he was 38 years old; evidently 
 he was more; but he had had this malady 38 years. 
 
 6. knew] Or, perceived, perhaps supernaturally (see on xvi. 19), 
 but He might learn it from the bystanders: the fact was very likely 
 notorious. 
 
 Wilt thou ?] Or, more strongly. Dost thou will ? 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? 
 
124 S. JOHN, V. [vv. 8— II. 
 
 Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me 
 into the pool : but while I am coming, another steppeth 
 
 8 down before me. Jesus saith unto him, Rise, take up 
 
 9 thy bed, and walk. And immediately the man was made 
 whole, and took up his bed, and walked : and on the same 
 day was the sabbath. 
 
 lo — 1 6. TJie Sequel of the Sign. 
 
 10 The Jews therefore said unto him that was cured, It is 
 the sabbath day : it is not lawful for thee to carry thy 
 
 11 bed. He answered them. He that made me whole, the 
 
 Probably in order to rouse the sick man out of his lethargy and de- 
 spondency. It was the first step towards the man's having sufficient 
 faith : he must be inspired with some expectation of being cured. 
 The question has nothing to do with religious scruples; 'Art thou 
 willing to be made whole, although it is the Sabbath?' 
 
 7. / have no man] He is not only sick but friendless. 
 
 is troubledl No doubt this took place at irregular intervals, else 
 there would be no need to wait and watch for it. 
 
 to put me itito the pooT] Literally, in order to (iv. 47) throw me into 
 the pool ; 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 
 ballein ( = tlirow) has become weakened in meaning. Comp. xiii. 2, 
 XX. 35. 
 
 while I am coming] Unaided, and therefore slowly. 
 
 another steppeth dorvn] This seems to shew that the place where the 
 bubbling appeared was not large. He does not say ' others step down 
 before me :' one is hindrance enough. 
 
 8. /^ise, take tip thy bed] As in the case of the paralytic (Mark 
 ii. 9), Christ makes no enquiry as to the man's faith. Christ knew 
 that he had faith ; and the man's attempting to rise and carry his bed 
 after 38 years of impotency was an open confession of faith. His bed 
 would probably be only a mat or rug, still common in the East. 
 
 It is scarcely necessary to discuss whether this miracle can be iden- 
 tical with the healing of the paralytic let down through the roof (Matt. 
 ix.; Mark ii.; Luke v.). Time, place, details and context are all dif- 
 ferent, especially the important point that this miracle was wrought on 
 the Sabbath. 
 
 10—16. The Sequel of the Sign. 
 
 10. The yews} The hostile party, as usual : probably members of 
 the Sanhedrin (see on i. 19). They ignore the cure and notice only 
 what can be attacked. They had the letter of the law very strongly on 
 their side. Comp. Exod. xxiii. 12, xxxi. 14, xxxv. 2, 3; Num. xv. 32; 
 Neh. xiii. 15; and especially Jer. xvii. 21. 
 
 11. Ne that made me whole"] The man's defiance of them in the 
 
vv. 12—14.] S. JOHN, V. 125 
 
 same said unto me, Take up thy bed, and walk. Then 12 
 asked they him, What man is that which said unto thee, 
 Take up thy bed, and walk? And he that was healed 13 
 wist not who it was ; for Jesus had conveyed himself away, 
 a multitude being in that place. Afterward Jesus findeth m 
 him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art 
 made whole : sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto 
 
 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 same said unto me'\ Better, 'He said to tne,' 'He' being em- 
 phatic: see on X. i. 
 
 12. What man is that which"] Better, Wlio is the man that, 'man' 
 being contemptuous, almost = 'fellow.' Once more they ignore the 
 miracle, and attack the command. They ask not, ' Who cured thee, 
 and therefore must have Divine authority?' but, ' Who told thee to 
 break the Sabbath, and therefore could not have it?' Christ's com- 
 mand was perhaps aimed at these erroneous views about the Sabbath. 
 
 13. had conveyed himself a7iiay\ Better, withdrew. Originally the 
 word signified 'to Stoop out of the vi'ay of,' 'to bend down as if to 
 avoid a blow.' Here only in N. T. The word might also mean, 'swam 
 out of,' which would be a graphic expression for making one's way 
 through a crowd. 
 
 a multitude being in that place] This is ambiguous. It may explain 
 either why Jesus withdrew, viz. to avoid the crowd, or how he with- 
 drew, viz. by disappearing among the crowd. Both make good sense. 
 
 14. Aftei-ward] Literally, after these things, as va v. i. Proba- 
 bly 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 
 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 con- 
 templation 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.' 
 
 sin no more] Or perhaps, continue no longer in sin. Comp. [viii. 
 II,] XX. 17. The man's conscience would tell him what sin. Comp. 
 [viii. 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 clearest evidence in any given 
 case. Suffering serves other ends than being a punishment for sin : 
 'whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth;' and comp. ix. 3. 
 
 a worse thing] Not necessarily hell : even in this life there might be 
 
126 S. JOHN, V. [vv. 15—17. 
 
 15 thee. The man departed, and told the Jews that it was 
 Jesus, which had made him whole. 
 
 16 And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to 
 slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day. 
 
 17 — 47. The Discourse on the Son as the Source of Life. 
 »7 But Jesus answered them. My Father worketh hitherto, 
 
 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 responsibity. Comp. Matt. xii. 45; 2 Pet. ii. 20. 
 
 15. told the yews'] Not in malice against Jesus, nor in any hope of 
 converting His opponents. Neither of these is probable, nor is there 
 the least evidence of either. Rather, he continues his defiance of them 
 [v. 11). He had given as his authority for breaking the Sabbath 'He 
 that made me whole.' Having found out that it was the famous 
 teacher from Galilee, he returns to give them this additional proof of 
 authority. 
 
 16. And therefore'] Better, And on this account, or, and for this 
 cause (xii. 18, 27). It is not St John's favourite particle 'therefore.' but 
 a preposition and pronoun. Comp. v. 18. 
 
 and sought to slay him] These words are not genuine here, but 
 have been inserted from v. 18. The other two verbs are both in the 
 imperfect tense expressing continued action ; ' used to persecute, con- 
 tinued to persecute;' 'used to do, habitually did.' From which we 
 may infer thr.t some of the unrecorded miracles (ii. 23, iv. 45) were 
 wrought on the Sabbath : unless the Evangelist is speaking from their 
 point of view; 'because (as they said) He habitually did these things 
 on the Sabbath.' 
 
 17 — 47. The Discourse on the Son as the Source of Life. 
 
 17. answered them] This was how He met their constant persecu- 
 tion. The discourse which follows (see introductory note to chap, iii.) 
 may be thus analysed. (S. p. 106.) It has two main divisions — I. 
 The prerogatives of the Son of God (17 — 30). II. The unbelief of the 
 Jeivs (31 — 47). These two are subdivided as follows: I. i. 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). 3. This intimacy proved by the twofold power committed to the 
 Son (a) of communicating spiritual life (21 — 27), ((5) of raising the 
 dead (28, 29). 4. The Son's qualification for these high powers is the 
 perfect harmony of His Will \vith that of the Father (30). II. i. The 
 Son's claims rest not on His testimony alone, nor on that of John, but 
 on that of the Father (31 — 35). 2. The Father's testimony is evident 
 {a) in the works assigned to the Son (36), {b) in the revelation which 
 the Jews reject (37 — 40). 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 condemn them. 
 
vv. 1 8, 19.] S. JOHN, V. 127 
 
 17 — 30. Thi Frerogatives and Powers of the Son of God. 
 and I work. Therefore the Jews sought the more to 18 
 kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, 
 but said also that God was his Father, making him- 
 self equal with God. Then answered Jesus and said unto 19 
 them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do 
 nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do : for 
 
 17 — 30. The Prerogatives and Powers of the Son of God. 
 
 17, 18. Defence of healing on the Sabbath based on the relation of 
 the Son to the Father. 
 
 My Father worketh hitherto, &c.] Or, 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 
 activity 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. 
 
 18, Therefore'] Better, For this cause. See on v. 16, vi. 65, 
 vii. 21, 22, viii. 47, ix. 23, x. 17, xii. 39, xiii. 11, xv. 19, xvi. 15. 
 
 the more] Shewing that the persecution spoken of in v. 16 included 
 attempts to compass His death. Comp. Mark iii. 6. This ' seeking to 
 kill ' is the blood-red thread which runs through the whole of this 
 section of the Gospel: comp. vii. i, 19, 25, viii. 37, 40, 59, x. 31, 
 xi. S3, xii. 10. 
 
 had broken] Literally, was loosing or relaxing ; i.e. making less 
 binding. As in v. 15, the A.V. puts pluperfect for imperfect. 
 
 making hiynself equaF] They fully understand the force of the parallel 
 statements, 'My Father is working; I am working also.' 'Behold,' 
 says Augustine, ' the Jews understand what the Arians fail to under- 
 stand.' 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. ca7t do nothing of himself] It is impossible for Him to act with 
 individual self-assertion independent of God, because He is the Son: 
 Their Will and working are one. The Jews accuse Him of blasphemy ; 
 and blasphemy implies opposition to God: but He and the Father are 
 most intimately united. 
 
128 S. JOHN, V. [vv. 20—22. 
 
 what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son 
 
 20 hkewise. For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth 
 him all things that himself doeth : and he will shew him 
 
 21 greater works than these, that ye may marvel. For as the 
 Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth i/mn; even so 
 
 22 the Son quickeneth whom he will. For the Father judgeth 
 
 bat what he seeih, &c.] Better, unless He seeth the Father doing it. 
 
 20. For the Father loveth the So>i\ 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. 
 
 he will sJie-cv him, &c.] Or, Greater works than these will He shew 
 Him. 'The Father will tjive 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. Comp. v. 36, ix. 4, x. 25, 32, 37, 
 xiv. II, 11, XV. 24. 
 
 21 — 29. The intimacy of the Son with the Father proved by the two- 
 fold power committed to the Son (a) of cotnmtinicating spiritual life, 
 (b) of causing the bodily resurrectiott 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 '\% 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 oi v. 28 and still 
 more of v. 29 is quite conclusive against spiritual resurrection being 
 meant there : what in that case could ' the resurrection of damnation ' 
 mean? Verses 24 and 25 are equally conclusive against a bodily resur- 
 rection being meant here: what in that case can 'an hour is coming, 
 and now is ' mean? 
 
 21. raiseth up the dead'\ 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 who 
 will not believe. The 'whom He will' would be almost unintelligible 
 if actual resurrection from the grave were intended. 
 
 22. For the Father judgeth no mari\ Rather, For not even doth the 
 Father (to Whom judgment belongs) judge any man. The Son there- 
 fore has both powers, to make alive whom He will, and to judge : but 
 the second is only the corollary of 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 
 
vv. 23—25.] S. JOHN, V. 129 
 
 no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son : 
 that all men should honour the Son, even as they honour 23 
 the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not 
 the Father which hath sent him. Verily, verily, I say unto 24 
 you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that 
 sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into 
 condemnation ; but is passed from death unto life. Verily, 25 
 verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, 
 when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God : and 
 
 not be made alive. Here, as in iii. 17, 18, the judgment is one of con- 
 demnation; but this comes from the context, not from the word. 
 
 hath committed'l Or, given ; there is no reason for varying the com- 
 mon rendering. 
 
 23. honoureth not the Father\ Because he refuses to honour the 
 Father's representative. 
 
 which hath sefit} Better, which sent.' See on xx. 21. 
 
 24. He that heareth'] We see from this that ' whom He will ' {v. 11) 
 implies no arbitrary selection. It is each individual who decides for 
 himself whether he will hear and believe. 
 
 believeth on him tJiat sent me\ Omit 'on;' there is no preposition in 
 the Greek. 
 
 hath everlasting life'] Or, hath eternal life : see on iii. 16. Note the 
 tense ; he hath it already, it is not a reward to be bestowed hereafter : 
 see on iii. 36. 
 
 shall not come into condemnation] Better, cometla not into judg- 
 ment. 
 
 is passed from death into life] Or, is passed over out of death into life 
 (comp. xiii. i ; i John iii. 14). This is evidently equivalent to escaping 
 judgment and attaining eternallife, clearly shewing that death is spiritual 
 death, and the resurrection from it spiritual also. This cannot refer to 
 the resurrection of the body. 
 
 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; z'. 25 states that already some are in this happy case. 
 
 The hour is coming] Better, Tliere cometlx an hour: comp. iv. 
 21, 23. 
 
 and now is] These words also exclude the meaning of a bodily resur- 
 rection; the hour for which had not yet arrived. The few cases iti 
 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 now 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 witli 
 V. 24 shews. If a spiritual resurrection be understood, ' and now is ' is 
 perfectly intelligible : Christ's ministry was already winning souls from 
 spiritual death, 
 
 S. JOHN Q 
 
I30 S. JOHN, V. [vv. 26—28. 
 
 26 they that hear shall live. For as the Father hath life in 
 himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; 
 
 27 and hath given him authority to execute judgment also, 
 
 28 because he is the Son of man. Marvel not at this : for the 
 
 26. so hath he given to the Son'\ Better, so gave He also to the Son. 
 Comp. ' the living Father hath 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 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. Hath given him authority to execute judgment also\ Better, gave 
 Hitn authority to execute jicdgrnent, when He sent Him into the world. 
 'Also' is not genuine. See on i. 12, and comp. x. 18. 
 
 because he is the Son of matt] Rather, because He is a son of man ; 
 i.e. not because He is the Messiah, but because He is a human being. 
 In the Greek 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. 51, iii. 13, 14, vi. 27, 53, 62, viii. 28, &c. Because the Son 
 emptied Himself of all 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 parallehsm both in S. Matthew and S. Luke And yet once 
 
 grant the authenticity of this passage, and there is nothing in the 
 Johannean Christology that it does not cover." S. p. 109. 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 S. Matthew and S. 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 S. John; 
 how far the precise wording is his we cannot tell. This section of it 
 (21 — 27) bears very 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. Marvel not] Comp. iii. 7. Marvel not that the Son can grant 
 spiritual life to them that believe, and separate from them those who will 
 
w. 29—31.] S. JOHN, V. 131 
 
 hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall 
 hear his voice, and shall come forth ; they that have done 29 
 good, unto the resurrection of life ; and they that have done 
 evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. I can of mine 30 
 own self do nothing : as I hear, I judge : and my judgment 
 is just ; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of 
 the Father which hath sent me. 
 
 31 — 47. The tinbelief of the Jews. 
 If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true. 31 
 
 not believe. There cometh an hour when He shall cause a general resur- 
 rection 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. 
 
 all that are in the graves] 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 resurrection cannot be meant. 
 
 29. done evil] Or, practised wortMess things. See on iii. 20. 
 unto the resurrection of danuiation] Better, unto the resurrection 
 
 of judgment. It is the same Greek word as is used in w. 32, 27. 
 These words are the strongest proof that spiritual resurrection cannot 
 be meant. Spiritual resurrection must always be a resurrection of life, 
 a passing from spiritual death to spiritual life. A passing from spiritual 
 death io judgment is not spiritual resurrection. This passage, and Acts 
 xxiv. 15, are the only fl'/r^c/ assertions in N.T. of a bodily resurrection 
 of the wicked. It is implied, Matt. x. 28; Rev. xx. 12, 13. A 
 satisfactory translation for the Greek words meaning 'judge' and 
 'judgment' cannot be found: they combine the notions of 'sepa- 
 rating' and 'judging,' and from the context often acquire the further 
 notion of ' condemning.' See on iii. 17, 18. 
 
 30. The Son's qualification for these high powers is the peifect 
 harmony between His Will and that of the Father. 
 
 I can of mine own self] Change to the first person. 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. 
 
 as I hear] From the Father : Christ's judgment is the declaration 
 of that which the Father communicates to Him. And 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. Comp. Matt, 
 xxvi. 39. 
 
 31 — 47. The unbelief of the Jews. 
 31 — 35. These claims rest not on My testimony alone, nor on that of 
 yohn, hut 071 that of the Father. 
 
 31. my witness is not true] Nothing is to be understood; the words 
 
 9—2 
 
132 S. JOHN, V. [vv. 32—36. 
 
 32 There is another that beareth witness of me ; and I 
 know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is 
 
 33 true. Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the 
 
 34 truth. But I receive not testimony from man : but these 
 
 35 things I say, that ye might be saved. He was a burn- 
 ing and a shining hght : and ye were willing for a season 
 
 36 to rejoice in his light. But I have greater witness than 
 
 are to be taken quite 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. There is another'] Not the Baptist, as seems clear from v. 34 ; 
 
 but the Father, comp. vii. 28, viii. 26. It has been already remarked 
 
 how much there is in this Gospel about 'witness,' 'bearing witness,' 
 
 and the like : see on i. 7. 
 
 /^ 33. Ye sent unto "John, and he bare witness] Better, Ye have sent 
 
 V unto John, and he hatli toome zvitness. ' What ye have heard from 
 
 him is true; but I do not accept it, for I need not the testimony of 
 
 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. 
 
 y 35. He was a bunting and a shining light] A grievous mistranslation, 
 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, hewasfht lamp wMch is kindled and (so) sMnetb. 
 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. 
 The word here, and Matt. vi. 22, translated 'light,' is translated 
 'candle' 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. i). 
 The imperfects in this verse seem to imply that John's career is closed ; 
 he is in prison, if not dead, 
 j were willing for a season] Like children, they were glad to djsport 
 "J 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 another 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 assigned 
 to Me, (fi) in the revelation which ye do not receive. 
 
 36. / have greater witness than that of John] Better, / have the 
 
vv. 37, 38-] S. JOHN, V. 133 
 
 that of John : for the works which the Father hath given 
 me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness 
 of me, that the Father hath sent me. And the Father 37 
 himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. 
 Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his 
 shape. And ye have not his word abiding in you ; for 38 
 
 witness wMcli Is greater than John ; or, the witness which I have 
 is greater than John, viz. the works 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 ; iv. 48, x. 38. 
 
 to finish^ Literally, in order that I may accomplish; comp. xvii. 
 4. This was God's purpose. See on iv. 34, 47, ix. 3. S. John is very 
 fond of the construction 'in order that,' 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 S. 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. 
 
 which hath sent me, hath borne witness'] There is a difference of 
 tense in the Greek which should be retained : the Father which sent 
 Me (once for all at the Incarnation) He hath borne witttess (for a long 
 time past, and is still doing so) of Me. 
 
 Ye have neither, &c.] 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, ' voice ' in the Greek 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 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 testim'ony 
 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 ye have not his word\ ' And hence it is that ye have no 
 inner appropriation of the word ' — seeing that ye have never received 
 it either by hearing or vision. • His word ' is not a fresh testimony 
 different from the 'voice' and 'shape:' all refer to the same thing, — 
 the testimony of Scripture to the Messiah. 
 
134 S. JOHN, V. [vv. 39—41. 
 
 39 whom he hath sent, him ye believe not. Search the Scrip- 
 tures ; for in them ye think ye have eternal life : and they 
 
 40 are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me, 
 
 41 that ye might have life. I receive not honour from men. 
 
 for whom he hath seni\ Better, because whom He sent. This is 
 the proof of the previous negation: one who had the word abiding 
 in his heart could not reject Him to whom that word bears witness. 
 Comp. I John ii. 14, 24. 
 
 39. Search the Scriptures] 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. 
 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, ' and ye will not come.' 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 on i. 5. The reproach 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. 
 
 for in them ye think] ' Ye' is emphatic; because ye are the people 
 who think; it is your own opinion. Not that they were wrong in 
 thinking that eternal life was to be found in the Scriptures ; their error 
 was in thinking that they, who rejected the Messiah, had found it. 
 Had they searched aright they would have found both the Messiah and 
 eternal life. 
 
 they are they] See on x. i, 
 
 40. ye will not come to me] Not the future of 'to come,* but the 
 present of 'to ^vill:' ye are not willing to come to Me. This is at the 
 root of their failure to read Scripture aright, their hearts are estranged. 
 They have no tvill to find the truth, and \vithout that no intellectual 
 searching will avail. Note that here again man's will is shewn to be 
 free; the truth is not forced upon him; he can reject it if he likes. 
 Comp. iii. 19. 
 
 that ye might have life] 'Ye fancy ye find life in your searching of 
 the Scriptures, and ye refuse to come to Me in order to have it in 
 reality.' 
 
 41 — 44. N'ot that I seek glory from men ; hcul I done so, you would 
 have received Me. Your worldliness prevents you from receiving One 
 whose motives are not worldly. 
 
 41. I receive not honour] It is nothing to Me; I have no need of it, 
 and refuse it : comp. v. 34. Glory would perhaps be better than 
 'honour' both 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 
 
vv. 42-45-] S. JOHN, V. 135 
 
 But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you. 42 
 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not : 43 
 if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. 
 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, 4t 
 and seek not the honour that co)neth from God only ? Do 4S 
 not think that I will accuse you to the Father : there is one 
 
 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 com- 
 plaint. The desire of glory from men is what blinds your eyes to the 
 truth.' 
 
 42. But I know you] Once more Christ appears as the searcher of 
 hearts; comp. i. 47, 50, ii. 24, 25, iv. 17, 18, 48, v. 14. 
 
 in you] Or, in yotirselves, 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 oiwill {v. 40) that makes them reject and persecute the Messiah. 
 
 43. and ye receive me not] The tragic tone as in w. 39, 40, 'I come 
 with the highest credentials, as My Father's representative (comp. viii. 
 42), and ye reject Me.' 
 
 come in his own name] As a false Messiah or as Antichrist. Sixty- 
 four pretended Messiahs have been counted. Comp. Matt. xxiv. 24. 
 
 44. How can ye believe] The emphasis is on 'ye.' How is it possible, 
 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 accusation. 
 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. 
 
 from- God otdy] Rather, from tlie only God, from Him who alone 
 is God ; whereas by receiving glory from one another they were making 
 gods of one another; so that it is they who really 'make themselves 
 equal with God' {v. 18). The Greek is not similar to Matt. xvii. 8 or 
 Luke V. 21, but to xvii. 3 ; i Tim. vi. 16. Comp. Rom. xvi. 27; i Tim. 
 i. 17; Jude 25. Note the absence of the article before the first 'honour' 
 and its presence before the second : they receive glory, such as it is, 
 from one another, and are indifferent to the glory, which alone deserves' 
 the name. 
 
 The whole verse should run thus. How can ye believe, seeing that ye 
 receive glory one of another ; and the glory which comethfrom the only 
 God ye seek not. 
 
 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. Do not iJmik] As you might be disposed to do after hearing 
 these reproaches. 
 
136 S. JOHN, V. [w. 46, 47. 
 
 46 that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. For had 
 ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me : for he 
 
 47 v/rote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall 
 ye believe my words ? 
 
 that I will accuse you] If this refers to the day of judgment (and the 
 future tense seems to point to that), there are two reasons why Christ 
 will not act as accuser (i) because it would be needless; there is another 
 accuser ready; (2) because He will be acting as Judge. 
 
 there is one] Your accuser exists already; he is there with his charge. 
 Note the change from future to present : Christ will not be, because 
 Moses is, their accuser. 
 
 in whom ye trust] Literally, on whom ye have set your hope. 
 
 46. had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me] Better, \iye 
 believed Moses, ye would believe Ale: the verbs are imperfects, not 
 aorists. See on viii. 19 (where we have a similar mistranslation), 42, 
 ix. 41, XV. 19, xviii. 36. Contrast the construction in iv. 10, xi. 21, 32, 
 xiv. 28. This proves that Moses is their accuser. 
 
 for he wrote of me] Christ here stamps with His authority the au- 
 thority of the Pentateuch. He accepts, as referring to Himself, the 
 Messianic types and prophecies which it contains. Comp. Luke xxiv. 
 
 27. 44- 
 
 47. if ye believe not] The emphatic words are ' his and ' My. Most 
 readers erroneously emphasize 'writings' and 'words.' The comparison 
 is between Moses and Christ. It was a simple matter of fact that Moses 
 had written and Christ had not: the contrast between writings and 
 words is no part of the argument. Comp. Luke xvi. 31; 'If they hear 
 not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one 
 rose from the dead.' 
 
 my words] Or, My sayings. It is not the plural of 'word' (\670s) 
 in v. 38, but another substantive {p-qfiara) used by S. John only in the 
 plural. Comp. vi. 63, 68, viii. 47, xii. 47, xv. 7; where the separate say- 
 ings are meant; whereas in vi. 60, viii. 43, 51, xii. 48, xv. 3 it is rather 
 the teaching as a whole that is meant. 
 
 Chap. VI. 
 
 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 suificient 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 
 
vv. I, 2.] S. JOHN, VI. 137 
 
 Chap. VI, Christ the Support of Life. 
 
 I — 15. The Sign on the Land ; Feeding the Five Thousand. 
 
 After these things Jesus went over the sea of Gahlee, 6 
 which is the sea of Tiberias, And a great multitude 2 
 
 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 S. John's plan. 
 
 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. 
 
 Chap, VI, Christ 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 divisions; 
 I. The Sign on the Land, the Sign on the Lake, and the Sequel of the 
 Signs (i — 25). 1. The Discourse on the Son as the Support of Life 
 (26 — 59). 3. The opposite Results {§0 — 71). 
 
 1 — 15. The Sign on the Land; Feeding the Five Thousand, 
 
 1. After these things'] See on v. i. How long after we cannot tell ; 
 but if the feast in v. i is rightly conjectured to be Purim, this would 
 be about a month later in the same year, which is probably a.d. 29, 
 But S. 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. i ; from Nicodemus to the 
 Baptist's discourse, iii. 22, 25; from that to the scene at Sychar iv. i — 
 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 con- 
 nexion 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 (see on v. 25) : in S. Matthew it is in connexion 
 with the death of the Baptist: in S. 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. 
 
 ■went over the sea of Galilee'] To the eastern or north-eastern shore. 
 The scene shifts suddenly from Judaea (v. 18) to Galilee; but we are 
 told nothing about the transit. 
 
 which is the sea of Tiberias] (Here, z^. 23 and xxi. i only). Added to 
 describe the sea more exactly, especially for the sake of foreign readers. 
 
138 S. JOHN, VI. [vv. 3—5. 
 
 followed him, because they saw his miracles which he did 
 
 3 on them that were diseased. And Jesus went up into a 
 
 4 mountain, and there he sat with his disciples. And the 
 
 5 passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh. When Jesus then 
 
 Another slight indication that this Gospel was written outside Palestine : 
 inside Palcbtine such minute description would be less natural. 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. The town was built during our 
 Lord's life time by Herod Antipas, who called it Tiberias out of com- 
 pliment 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. The new town would naturally be much better known and 
 more likely to be mentioned when S. John wrote than when the earlier 
 Evangelists wrote. 
 
 2. a great nmltitttde\ All the greater seeing that the Baptist was 
 no longer a counter-attraction, and that the Twelve had returned from 
 their mission, in which they had no doubt excited attention. This 
 multitude went round by land while Christ crossed the water. All the 
 verbs which follow are imperfects and express continued and habitual 
 action; 'were following Him, because they were beholding the signs 
 which he was doing, &c., i.e. after He landed He kept on working 
 miracles of healing, and these continually attracted fresh crowds. 
 
 3. into a 7nonntain'\ Rather, into the mountain, or, perhaps the 
 mountainous fart of the district. The definite article indicates fami- 
 liarity with the locality. Comp. v. 15. We have no means of deter- 
 mining the precise eminence. 
 
 4. And the passover"] Better, Now the Passover. 
 
 a feast of the Jeivs] Rather, the feast of the Jews. Possibly this 
 near approach of the Passover is given merely as a 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 Passover large 
 bands of pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem would be passing along 
 the east shore of the lake. But we find that the multitude 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 interpretation of the verse 
 is uncertain. Still more 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. Of this 
 there is no indication whatever. It is safest to regard the verse as a 
 mere note to time. In any case the addition of 'the feast of the Jews' 
 again indicates that the author is writing away from Palestine. From 
 vii. I it would seem that Jesus did not go up to Jerusalem for this 
 Passover 
 
vv. 6— 8.] S. JOHN, VI. 139 
 
 lift up his eyes, and saw a great company come unto him, 
 he saith unto Philip, Whence shall we buy bread, that these 
 may eat ? And this he said to prove him : for he himself 6 
 knew what he would do. Philip answered him. Two ^ 
 hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them, 
 that every one of them may take a little. One of his s 
 
 6. When Jesus then, &c.] Better, Jesus therefore havtng lifted 
 up His eyes and seen that a great multitude cometh. 
 
 he saith unto Philip] Why 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 neighbourhood. Any or all of these suggestions may be 
 correct. As Judas kept the bag 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 S. John, solely from our Lord 
 Himself." This is difference, but not contradiction : S.John's narra- 
 tive does not preclude the possibility of the disciples having sponta- 
 neously applied to Christ for help either before or after this conversa- 
 tion with Philip. "For the rest the superiority in distinctness and 
 precision is all on the side of S. John. He knows to whom the ques- 
 tion 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. The whole 
 scene could be transferred to canvas without any difficulty." S. pp. 
 121 — 123. 
 
 Whence shall we buy'\ Or, whence must we buy ; the deliberative 
 subjunctive. 
 
 6. to prove him\ This need not mean more than to try whether he 
 could suggest any way out of the difficulty; but the more probable 
 meaning is to test his faith, to try what impression Christ's words and 
 works have made upon him. 
 
 he himself] without suggestions from others. 
 would do] Or, was ahout to do. 
 
 7. Two hundred pennyworth] Two hundred shillingsworth would 
 more accurately represent the original. The denarius was the ordi- 
 nary 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 ;f 7, 
 from the other, nearly double that. S. Philip does not solve the diffi- 
 culty; he merely states it in a practical way; a much larger amount 
 than they can command would still be insufficient. See notes on Mark 
 viii. 4. 
 
 8. One of his disciples'\ Of course this does not imply that Philip 
 
I40 S. JOHN, VI. [w. 9— II. 
 
 disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, saith unto him, 
 9 There is a lad here, which hath five barley loaves, and two 
 
 10 small fishes ; but what are they among so many ? And 
 Jesus said. Make the men sit down. Now there was much 
 grass in the place. So the men sat down, in number about 
 
 11 five thousand. And Jesus took the loaves ; and when he 
 had given thanks, he distributed to the disciples, and the 
 disciples to them that were set down ; and likewise of the 
 
 was not a disciple; the meaning rather is, that a disciple had been 
 appealed to without results, and now a disciple makes a communication 
 out of which good results flow. There seems to have been some con- 
 nexion between S. Andrew and S. Philip (i. 44, xii. 12). In the lists of 
 the Apostles in Mark iii. and Acts i. S. Philip's name immediately follows 
 Andrew's. On S. Andrew see notes on i. 40, 41. The particulars 
 about Philip and Andrew here are not found in the Synoptists' account. 
 
 9. a lad] And therefore able to carry very little. The word is a 
 diminutive in the Greek, a little lad; it might also mean 'servant,' but 
 this is less likely. 
 
 barley loaves] The ordinary coarse food of the lower orders ; Judg. 
 vii. 13. S. John alone mentions their being of barley, and that they 
 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. 
 
 two small fishes] Better, two fislies, although the Greek (opsaria) 
 is a diminutive. 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 
 purpose, the word came gradually to mean 'fish' in particular. Philip 
 had enlarged on the greatness of the difficulty ; Andrew insists rather 
 on the smallness of the resources for meeting it. 
 
 10. much grass] As we might expect early in April (v. 4). S. 
 Mark (vl. 39, 40) mentions how they reclined in parterres, by hun- 
 dreds and by fifties, on the green grass. This arrangement would 
 make it easy to count them. 
 
 the men sat down] The women and children were probably apart 
 by themselves. S. Matthew (xiv. 21) tells us that the 5000 included 
 the men only. Among those going up to the Passover there would 
 not be many women or children. 
 
 11. zuhen he had giveti thanks] 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 (r) all four narratives notice it; 
 (2) it is pointedly mentioned again v. 23; (3) it is also mentioned in 
 both recounts of the feeding of the 4000 (Matt. xv. 36; Mark viii. 6). 
 
 to the disciples, and the disciples] These words are wanting in 
 
vv. 12—14.] S. JOHN, VI. 141 
 
 fishes as much as they would. When they were filled, he 12 
 said unto his disciples, Gather up the fragments that remain, 
 that nothing be lost. Therefore they gathered thejn to- 13 
 gether, and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the 
 five barley loaves, which remained over and above unto 
 them that had eaten. Then those men, when they had seen 14 
 the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that 
 prophet that should come into the world. 
 
 authority ; the best texts run, He distributed to them that were Ij^ng 
 down. 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. Gather up the fragments^ 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 
 invented 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. baskets\ All four accounts have the same word for basket, 
 cophinus, i.e. the wallet which every Jew carried when on a journey, to 
 keep himself independent of Gentile food, which would be unclean. 
 Comp. Juvenal in. 14. Each of the Twelve gathered into his own 
 wallet, and filled it full. Moreover in referring to the miracle the 
 word cophimis is used (Matt. xvi. 9). In the feeding of the 4000 
 (Matt. XV. 37; Mark viii. 8), and in referring to it (Matt. xvi. 10), a 
 different word for basket, sptiris, is used. Such accuracy is evidence 
 of truth. See note on Mark viii. 8. S. Mark tells us that fragments 
 of fish were gathered also. The remnants far exceed in quantity the 
 original store. 
 
 The expedients to evade the obvious meaning of the narrative are • 
 worth mentioning, as shewing how some readers are willing to ' violate 
 all the canons of historical evidence,' rather than admit the possibility 
 of a miracle: (i) that food had been brought over and concealed in 
 the boat; (2) that some among the multitude were abundantly sup- 
 plied 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 (i) or (2) excite even a suspicion that 
 He was the Messiah, much less kindle such an enthusiasm as is 
 recorded \rvv. 15? And if the whole is an illustration of Matt. vi. 33, 
 what meaning in the allegoiy can be given to this popular enthusiasm ? 
 There are "rationalising expedients that are considerably more incre- 
 dible than miracles." S. p. 126. 
 
 14. Then those fnen] Rather, The men therefore. 
 
 the miracle that Jesus did'\ Better, the sign that He did. The 
 name Jesus has been inserted here, as elsewhere, because this once 
 
142 S. JOHN, VI. [v. 15. 
 
 IS When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come 
 and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed 
 again into a mountain himself alone. 
 
 was 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 S. in Lent and 2nd S. after Easter the words 'Jesus said' have 
 been inserted. In all cases a desire for clearness has caused the inser- 
 tion. Comp. viii. 21. 
 
 that prophet that should come] Literally, the Prophet that Cometh: 
 the Prophet of Deut. xviii. 15 (see on i. 21). But perhaps the Greek 
 participle here only represents the Hebrew participle, which is properly 
 present, but is often used where a future participle would be used 
 in Latin or Greek. S. John alone tells us the effect of the miracle 
 on those who witnessed it: comp. ii. 11, 23. These two verses 
 (14, 15) supply "a decisive proof that the narrative in the fourth 
 Gospel is not constructed out of that of the Synoptists, and we might 
 almost add a decisive proof of the historical character of the Gospel 
 itself.. The Synoptists have nothing of this... Yet how exactly it 
 corresponds with the current Messianic expectations! Our Lord had 
 performed a miracle; and at once He is hailed as the Messiah. But 
 it is as the Jewish, not the Christian Messiah. The multitude would 
 take Him by force and make Him king. At last they have found 
 the leader who will lead them victoriously against the Romans and 
 'restore the kingdom to Israel.' And just because He refused to do 
 this we are told a few verses lower down that many of His disciples 
 'went back, and walked no more with Him,' and for the same cause, a 
 year later, they crucified Him. It is this contrast between the popular 
 Messianic belief and the sublimated form of it, as maintained and 
 represented by Christ, that is the clue to all the fluctuations and oscil- 
 lations to which the belief in Him was subject. This is why He was 
 
 confessed one day and denied the next It is almost superfluous to 
 
 point out how impossible it would have been for a wTiter wholly ab 
 extra to throw himself into the midst of these hopes and feelings, and 
 to reproduce them, not as if they were something new that he had 
 learned, but as part of an atmosphere that he had himself once 
 breathed. There is no stronger proof both of the genuineness and of 
 the authenticity of the fourth Gospel than the way in which it reflects 
 the current Messianic idea." S. pp. 123, 124. 
 
 15. take him by force'] Carry Him up to Jerusalem and proclaim 
 Him king at the Passover. This again is peculiar to S. John. In his 
 Epic he points out how the enmity of Christ's foes increases; and 
 nothing increased it so much as popular enthusiasm for Him : comp. 
 iii. 26, iv. I — 3, vii. 40, 41, 46, viii. 30, ix. 30 — 38, x. 21, 42, xi. 45, 
 46, xii. 9 — II. 
 
 again] He had come down to feed them. 
 
vv. i6— 21.] S. JOHN, VI. 143 
 
 16 — 21. 2'he Sign on the Lake ; Walking oti the Water. 
 
 And when even was now come, his disciples went down 16 
 unto the sea, and entered into a ship, and went over the sea 17 
 towards Capernaum. And it was now dark, and Jesus was 
 not come to them. And the sea arose by reason of a great 18 
 wind that blew. So when they had rowed about five and 19 
 twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Jesus walking on the sea, 
 and drawing nigh unto the ship : and they were afraid. But 20 
 he saith unto them, It is I ; be not afraid. Then they 21 
 
 into a mountain\ Better, as in v. 3, into the tnotintain, or the hill 
 country. 
 
 himself alone] S. Matthew and S. Mark tell us that the solitude He 
 sought was for prayer. S. Luke (ix. 18) mentions both the solitary 
 prayer and also a question which seems to refer to this burst of enthu- 
 siasm for Christ; 'Whom say the people that I am?' Thus the various 
 accounts supplement one another. 
 
 16 — 21. The Sign on the Lake; Walking on the Water. 
 
 16. when e'ven was no7v come] S. Matthew (xiv. 15, 23) makes two 
 evenings; this was in accordance with Jewish custom. It is the 
 second evening that is here meant, from 6 p.m. to dark. 
 
 went down] From Matt. xiv. 22 and Mark vi. 45 we leam that 
 Christ 'constrained' His disciples to embark: this points either to 
 their general unwillingness to leave Him, or to their having shared the 
 wish to make Him a king by force. S. Luke omits the whole 
 incident. 
 
 17. toward Capernaum] S. Mark says 'unto Bethsaida' which was 
 close to Capernaum. See notes and map at Matt. iv. 13 and Luke v. i. 
 For 'went over the sea' we should read were coming over the sea, i.e. 
 were on their way home. 
 
 was not come] More accurately, was not yet come. 
 
 18. the sea arose] Literally, was becoming thoroughly agitated, so 
 that their Master's following them in another boat seemed impossible. 
 For the vivid description comp. Jonah i. 13. 
 
 19. five and twenty or thirty furlongs] This pretty closely corre- 
 sponds with *in the midst of the sea' (Matt. xiv. 24). The lake is 
 nearly seven miles across in the vridest part. 
 
 walking on the sea] There is no doubt that this means on the sur- 
 face of the water, although an attempt has been made to shew that the 
 Greek may mean ' on the sea-shore.' Even if it can, which is perhaps 
 somewhat doubtful, the context shews plainly what is meant. How 
 could they have been afraid at seeing Jesus walking on the shore? 
 S. Mark tells us that it was about the fourth watch, i.e. between 3.0 
 and 6.0 a.m. S. Matthew alone gives S. Peter's walking on the sea. 
 
 20. It is I] Literally, lam (comp. xviii. 5). 
 
144 S. JOHN, VI. [v. 22. 
 
 willingly received him into the ship : and immediately the 
 ship was at the land whither they went. 
 
 22 — 25. The Sequel of the two Signs. 
 22 The day following, when the people which stood on the 
 
 21. they willingly received }m}i\ Rather, they were willing to 
 receive Him. The mistranslation seems to have arisen from a wish to 
 make this account agree with that of S. Matthew and S. Mark, who 
 say that he entered the boat. It is probably due to Beza, who for the 
 Vulgate's voluerunt recipcre substitutes volente animo receperunt. S. 
 John leaves us in doubt whether He entered the boat or not ; he is not 
 correcting the other two accounts: this would require 'but before He 
 could enter it the boat was at the land.' 
 
 immediatclyl We are probably to understand that this was miracu- 
 lous; not a mere favourable breeze which brought them to land before 
 they had recovered from their surprise : but the point is uncertain and 
 unimportant. 
 
 whither they we;/t] Better, luhither they were going, or intending 
 to go. The imperfect tense helps to bring out the contrast between 
 the difficulty of the first half of the voyage, when they were alone, and 
 the ease of the last half, when He was with them. The word for 
 ' going' implies departure, and looks back to the place left. 
 
 The Walking on the Sea cannot be used as evidence that the writer 
 held Docetic views about Christ, i.e. believed that His Body was a 
 mere phantom. A Docetist would have made more of the incident, 
 and would hardly have omitted the cry of the disciples 'It is a spirit' 
 (Matt. xiv. 26; comiD. Mark vi. 49). Docetism is absolutely excluded 
 from this Gospel by i. 14, and by the general tone of it throughout. 
 Comp. xix. 34, 35, XX. 20, 27. 
 
 22 — 25. The Sequel of the two Signs. 
 
 22 — 24. We have here a complicated sentence very unusual in 
 S. John (but comp. xiii. i — 4); it betrays "a certain literary awk- 
 wardness, but great historical accuracy The structure of the sen- 
 tence is no argument against the truth of the statements which it con- 
 tains. On the contrary, if these had been fictitious, we may be sure 
 that they would have been much simpler. Indeed a forger would 
 never have thought of relating how the crowd got across the sea at all. 
 We see the natural partiality with which the Evangelist dwells upon 
 scenes with which he is familiar. He had been a fisherman on the sea 
 of Galilee himself. He knew the boats of Tiberias from those of 
 Capernaum and the other cities, and had probably friends or relations 
 in that very crowd." S. pp. 126, 127. 
 
 22. the people\ An instance of the caprice of our translators in 
 creating differences. The same Greek word is translated 'multitude' 
 in V. 2, 'company' in v. 5, and 'people' here, v. 24, &c. ; miUtitude 
 would be best throughout. 
 
vv. 23—26.] S. JOHN, VI. 145 
 
 other side of the sea saw that there was none other boat 
 there, save that one whereinto his disciples were entered, 
 and that Jesus went not with his disciples into the boat, 
 but that his disciples were gone away alone ; (howbeit there 23 
 came other boats from Tiberias nigh unto the place where 
 they did eat bread, after that the Lord had given thanks :) 
 when the people therefore saw that Jesus was not there, 24 
 neither his disciples, they also took shipping, and came to 
 Capernaum, seeking for Jesus. And when they had found 25 
 him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, 
 when earnest thou hither? 
 
 26 — 59. The Discourse on the Sofi as the Support of Life. 
 Jesus answered them and said. Verily, verily, I say 26 
 
 on the other side of the sea\ On the eastern side where the miracle 
 took place. 
 
 save that one whereinto his disciples were entered'^ The only words of 
 this sentence that are of certain authority are save one ; the rest is pro- 
 bably an explanatory note. 
 
 were gone away\ Better, went away. 
 
 23. Howbeit there came'] This awkward parenthesis explains how 
 there came to be boats to transport the people to the western shore 
 after they had given over seeking for Christ on the eastern. 
 
 after that the Lord had given thanks] Unless the giving thanks was 
 the turning-point of the miracle it is difficult to see why it is men- 
 tioned again here : see on z/. 11. 
 
 24. they also took shipping] More literally, they themselves entered 
 Into the boats, i.e. the boats that had come from Tiberias, driven 
 in very possibly by the gale which had delayed the Apostles : ' also ' 
 is not genuine. Of course there is no reason to suppose that all who 
 had been miraculously fed crossed over j but a sufficient number of them 
 to be called a ' multitude. ' 
 
 25. on the other side oj the sea] This now means the western shore ; 
 in V. 22 it meant the eastern. From v. 59 we have the locality fixed 
 very distinctly as the synagogue at Capernaum. 
 
 when earnest thou] Including how? they suspect something mi- 
 raculous. Christ does not gratify their curiosity : if the feeding of the 
 5000, which they had witnessed, taught them nothing, what good 
 would it do them to hear of the crossing of the sea? ' Camest Thou 
 hither' is literally 'hast Thou come to be here:' comp. i. 15. 
 
 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 
 of strife. This marvellous discourse is a well-known field of contro- 
 
 S. JOHN 10 
 
146 S. JOHN, VI. [v. 26. 
 
 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 (i) 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, 
 (i) 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 
 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 the very greatest 
 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 z'. 51 
 does the reference to the Eucharist become clear and direct. Rather 
 the discourse refers to a/l 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 extensive. The well-known words of Augustine, crede et man- 
 
V. 27.] S. JOHN, VI. 147 
 
 unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, 
 but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled. 
 Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that 27 
 meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son 
 of man shall give unto you : for him hath God the 
 
 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 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, II. p. 113. 
 
 The discourse may be thus divided ; i. 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; ill. 51 — 58, Further definition of the identification as 
 consisting in the giving of His Body and outpouring of His Blood. 
 S. p. 128. On the language and style see introductory note to 
 chap. III. 
 
 26 — 34. Distinction betiveen the material bread and the Spiritual Bread. 
 
 26. not because ye saw the miracles^ Better, 7iot because ye saw 
 signs. There is no article in the Greek; and the strict meaning of 
 ' signs ' should be retained. They had seen the miracle, but it had 
 not been a sign to them ; it had excited in them nothing better than 
 wonder and greediness. The plural does not necessarily refer to more 
 than the one sign of the Feeding; the generic plural. 
 
 27. Labour not for, &c.] Better, Work not for, &c. The trans- 
 lation in the margin is preferable, to keep up the connexion with 
 verses 28, 29, 30. The people keep harping on the word ' work.' 
 
 the meat which perisheth] Better (to avoid all ambiguity), the foo'd 
 that perisheth: 'meat' in the sense of 'flesh-meat' is not intended. 
 Comp. (iv. 13) 'whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again.' 
 The discourse with the Samaritan woman should be compared through- 
 out: ' the food which abides ' here corresponds with ' the living water' 
 there; ' the food that perisheth' with the water of the well. 'Perisheth ' 
 not merely in its sustaining power, but in itself: it is digested and 
 dispersed (Matt. xv. 17; i Cor. vi. 13). 
 
 endureth unto everlasting life'] Better, abldeth unto eternal life: 
 see on i. 33 and iii. 16. 
 
31 
 
 148 S. JOHN, VI. [vv. 28—32. 
 
 aS Father sealed. Then said they unto him, What shall we 
 
 29 do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered 
 and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye 
 
 30 believe on hi7n whom he hath sent. They said therefore 
 unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, 
 and believe thee? what dost thou work? Our fathers did 
 eat manna in the desert ; as it is written, He gave them 
 
 32 bread from heaven to eat. Then Jesus said unto them, 
 Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that 
 
 for him hath God the Father seated] Better (preserving the em- 
 phasis of the Greek order), for Hitn the Father sealed, even God. 
 'Sealed,' i.e. authenticated (iii. 33), as the true giver of this food 
 (i) 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. The7t said they] They said therefore. 
 
 What shall we do, that we might work] Better, what must we do 
 that we may work. They see that His words have a moral meaning ; 
 they are to do works pleasing to God. But how to set about this ? 
 
 29. the work of Cod] They probably were thinking of works of 
 the law, tithes, sacrifices, &c. Christ tells them of one work, one moral 
 act, from which all the rest derive their value, — belief in Him whom 
 God has sent. 
 
 that ye believe] Literally, that ye tnay believe. S. John's favourite 
 form of expression, indicating the Divine purpose, Comp. v. 50 and 
 V. 36. 
 
 30. What sign shewest thou then] ' Thou ' is emphatic : ' what 
 dost Thou on Thy part?' They quite understand that in the words 
 'Him whom He hath sent' Jesus is claiming to be the Messiah; but 
 they want a proof. Their enthusiasm had cooled, their curiosity had 
 increased, during the night. After all, the feeding of the 5000 was 
 less marvellous than the manna, and Moses was not the Messiah. Note 
 that whereas He uses the strong form, ' believe on Him,' they use the 
 weak one, ' believe Thee.' See last note on i. 12. 
 
 what dost thou work] They purposely choose the very word that He 
 had used in v. 29. The emphasis is on ' what.' 
 
 31. manna] More exactly, the manna. 
 
 He gave them bread from lieaven to eat] A rough quotation of ' had 
 rained down manna upon them to eat' (Ps. Ixxviii. 24). They artfully 
 suppress the nominative (which in the Psalm is 'God'), and leave 
 'Moses' to be understood. Possibly Neh. ix. 15 is in their thoughts; 
 if so, there is the same artfulness. On 'it is written* see on ii. 17. 
 'From heaven' is literally 'out of heaven.' 
 
 32. Afoses gave you not] Christ shews them that He quite under- 
 stands their insinuation: they are comparing Him unfavourably with 
 
vv. 33-35] S. JOHN, VI. 149 
 
 bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true 
 bread from heaven. For the bread of God is he which 33 
 Cometh down from heaven, and giveth Hfe unto the world. 
 Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this 34 
 bread. And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of Ufe : as 
 
 Moses. He denies both their points; (i) that Moses gave the manna; 
 (2) that the manna was in the truest sense bread from heaven. 
 
 giveth you the true bread, &c.] Literally, giveth you the bread 
 out of heaven {which is) the true bread; 'true' in the sense of 'real' 
 and 'perfect' (see on i. 9); the manna was but the type, and therefore 
 imperfect. Note the change of tense from 'gave' to 'giveth:' God 
 is continually giving the true bread ; it is not a thing granted at one 
 time and then no more, like the manna. 
 
 33. the bread of God is he whichi Better, the bread of God is 
 that which. Christ has not yet identified Himself with the Bread ; 
 it is still impersonal, and hence the present participle in the Greek. 
 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. 
 
 giveth life unto the 'world\ Without this Bread mankind is spiritu- 
 ally dead; and this is the point of the argument (the introductory 'for' 
 shews that the verse is argumentative): we have proof that it is the 
 Father who gives the really heavenly Bread, for it is His Bread that 
 quickens the whole human race. 
 
 34. Then said they'\ They said therefore. 
 
 Lord, evermore give us this bread'\ 'Lord' is too strong, and makes 
 the request too much like the prayer of a humble believer. Our trans- 
 lators wisely vary the rendering of Kyrie, using sometimes ' Lord,' and 
 sometimes ' Sir.' Here, as in the conversation with the Samaritan 
 woman, 'Sir' would be better. Not that the request is ironical; it is 
 not the mocking prayer of the sceptic. Rather it is the selfish petition 
 of one whose beliefs and aspirations are low. As the Samaritan 
 woman thought that the living water would at any rate be very useful 
 (iv. 15), so these Jews think that the true bread is at least worth 
 having. He fed them yesterday, and they are hungry again ; He talks 
 to them of food that endureth ; it will be well to be evermore supplied 
 with this food, which is perhaps another manna with greater sustaining 
 powers. They do not disbelieve in His power, but in His mission. 
 
 35 — 50. Identification of the Spiritual Bread with Christ. 
 
 35. / am the bread of life. The pronoun is very emphatic : comp. 
 iv. 26. As in v. 30, He passes from the third to the first person. 
 'Bread of life' means 'bread that giveth life.' Comp. 'the tree of 
 life' (Gen. ii. 9, iii. 22, 24), 'the water of life' (Rev. xxi. 6, xxii. i). 
 In the remainder of the verse 'He that cometh to Me' = 'he that be- 
 lieveth on Me,' and 'shall never hunger' = ' shall never thirst;' i.e. the 
 believer shall experience the continual satisfaction of his highest spiri- 
 
ISO S. JOHN, VI. [vv. 36—39. 
 
 he that cometh to me shall never hunger j and he that 
 
 36 believeth on me shall never thirst. But I said unto you, 
 
 37 That ye also have seen me, and believe not. All that the 
 Father giveth me shall come to me ; and him that cometh 
 
 38 to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from 
 heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that 
 
 39 sent me. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, 
 
 tual needs. The superiority of Christ to the manna consists in this, 
 that while it satisfied only bodily needs for a time, He satisfies spiri- 
 tual needs for ever. 
 
 36. / said unto you] 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 refer- 
 ence may easily be to one of the countless unrecorded sayings of Christ, 
 or possibly to the general sense of v. 37 — 44. In the latter case 'you' 
 must mean the Jewish nation, for those verses were addressed to Jews 
 at Jerusalem. See on x. 26, where there is a somewhat similar case. 
 That 'I said' means 'I would have you to know,' and has no refer- 
 ence to any previous utterance, does not seem very probable. 
 
 ye also have seen me\ ' Also' belongs to ' have seen,' not to ' ye,* as 
 most English readers would suppose : ye have even seen me (not merely 
 heard of me), and (yet) do not believe. The tragic tone again. See on 
 i. 5, 10, II. 
 
 37 — 40. Digression on the blessedness of those who come to Christ 
 as believers. 
 
 37. All that the Father giveth... him that cometK\ There is a signi- 
 ficant change of gender in the Greek which is obscured in the English 
 version; 'all that' is neuter, all tliat wMch ; what is given is treated 
 as impersonal, mankind en masse; what comes, with free will, is mas- 
 culine. Men are given to Christ without their wills being consulted ; 
 but each individual can, if he likes, refuse to come. There is no coer- 
 cion. Comp. similar changes of gender in i. 11, xvli. 2. 
 
 shall come to me, and him that cometh... For I came down'] The 
 verb 'come' here represents three different Greek verbs, but there is 
 no such great difference between them as to make it worth while to 
 change so familiar a text ; yet it would be more literal to translate all 
 that the Father giveth Me, to Me shall come, and him that approacheth 
 Ale I will in no wise cast out; for I have descended, &c. The second 
 ' Me' is emphatic, the first and third are not. 
 
 38. / came dowii] Better, I ajn come doivn or have descended. 
 Four times in this discourse Christ declares that He is come down 
 from heaven; verses 38, 50, 51, 58. The drift of these three verses 
 (38 — 40) is; — How could I cast them out, seeing that I am come to do 
 my Father's will, and He wills that they should be received ? 
 
 39. this is the Father's will, &c.] The true reading is ; this is the 
 will of Him tliat sent Me. 
 
w. 40— 42.] S. JOHN, VI. T51 
 
 that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, 
 but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is 40 
 the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth 
 the Son, and beHeveth on him, may have everlasting life : 
 and I will raise him up at the last day. 
 
 The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am 41 
 the bread which came down from heaven. And they said, 42 
 Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose Tather and 
 
 that of all] Literally, in order that of all : see on v. ■29. 
 
 all which he hath given me] ' AH' is neuter as in v. 37, and is placed 
 first for emphasis. In the Greek it is a nominativus pendetis. 
 
 raise it up again at the last day] This gracious utterance is repeated 
 as a kind of refrain, verses 40, 44, 54. 'Again' may be omitted. 
 This is 'the resurrection of life' (v. 29), 'the first resurrection,' the 
 resurrection of the just. 
 
 the last day] This phrase is peculiar to S.John, and occurs seven 
 times in this Gospel. Elsewhere it is called 'the Day of the Lord,' 
 'the Great Day,' &c. 
 
 40. And this is the will of him that sent me] The true reading is ; 
 For this is the rvill of My Father. The opening words of verses 39 and 
 40, being very similar, have become confused in inferior MSS. The 
 best MSS. have 'Father' in this verse, where 'the Son' is mentioned, 
 not in V. 39, where He is not. Moreover this verse is explanatory of 
 V. 40, and opens with ' for;' it shews who are meant by ' all which He 
 hath given me, ' viz. every one that contemplateth the SoJt and believeth 
 on Hitn. ' Seeth' is not strong enough for the Greek word here used : 
 the Jews had seen Jesus; they had not contemplated Him so as to 
 believe. 'Contemplate* is frequent in S. John and the Acts, elsewhere 
 not. Comp. xii. 45, xiv. 19, xvi. 10, 16, 19. 'That' again = m order 
 that. 
 
 I will raise him up] The Greek construction is ambiguous ; pos- 
 sibly 'raise' depends upon 'that' as 'va.v. 39: and that I should raise 
 him up. ' I' is here very emphatic; ' by My power as Messiah.' 
 
 41. The yews then murmured at him] Better, The fezus therefore 
 muttered respecting Him, talked in an under tone among themselves 
 about Him : it does not necessarily mean that they found fault, though 
 the context shews that they did (comp. v. 61, vii. 12). From the men- 
 tion of the Jews we are to understand that there were some of the hos- 
 tile party among the multitude, perhaps some members of the Sanhe- 
 drin ; but not that the whole multitude were hostile, though carnally- 
 minded and refusing to believe without a further sign. Comp. i. 19, 
 ii. 18, v. 10, vii. II, &c. 
 
 / atn the bread which came down from heavett] They put together 
 the statements in verses 33, 35, 38. 
 
 42. Is not this] Or, Is not this fellow; the expression is con- 
 temptuous. 
 
152 S. JOHN, VI. [vv. 43—46- 
 
 mother we know? how ts it then that he saith, I came 
 
 43 down from heaven? Jesus therefore answered and said unto 
 
 44 them, Murmur not among yourselves. No man can come 
 to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him : 
 
 45 and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the 
 prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every 
 7nan therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the 
 
 46 Father, cofneth unto me. Not that any man hath seen the 
 
 whose father and mother we knoiv] 'We know all about His parent- 
 age; there is nothing supernatural or mysterious about His origin.' 
 Nothing can be inferred from this as to Joseph's being alive at this 
 time : the probability is that he was not, as he nowhere appears in the 
 Gospel narrative; but this cannot be proved. 
 
 how is it then, &c.] Better, How doth He now say, I am come 
 down. 
 
 43 — 46. Digression on the difficulty of coming to Christ as a believer. 
 
 43. Murmur not] Christ does not answer their objection 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. draw him] It is the same word as is used xii. 32 ; 'will draw all 
 men unto Me.' The word does not necessarily imply force, still less 
 irresistible force, but merely atlractijn of some kind, some inducement 
 to come. Comp. 'with loving-kindness have I drawn thee' (Jer. 
 xxxi. 3), and Virgil's trahit sua quetnqiie voluptas. 
 
 45. in the prophets] The direct reference is to Isa. liv. 13, but 
 there are similar passages Jer. xxxi. 33, 34; Joel iii. 16, 17. The 
 quotation explains what is meant by the Father's drawing men, viz., 
 enlightening them. The 'therefore' in the second half of the verse is 
 not genuine: 'therefore' is very common in the narrative portion of 
 this Gospel, very rare in the discourses. On 'it is written' see on 
 ii. 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 therefore was probably a Jew of Palestine. 
 
 Every man therefore that hath heard, &c.] And no others: only 
 those who have been enlightened by the Father can come to the 
 Son. 
 
 46. Not that any man hath seen] To be enlightened and taught by 
 the Father it is not necessary to see Him. "That is a privilege 
 reserved for a later stage in the spiritual life, and is only to be attamed 
 mediately through the Son (comp. i. 18)." S. p. 129. 
 
vv. 47-5I-] S. JOHN, VI. 153 
 
 Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father. 
 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath 47 
 everlasting life. I am that bread of life. Your fathers did f^ 
 eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. This is the 50 
 bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat 
 thereof, and not die. I am the living bread which came si 
 down from heaven : if any mail eat of this bread, he shall 
 live for ever : and the bread that I will give is my flesh, 
 
 he which is of God] Or, He which is from God, with whom He was 
 previous to the Incarnation; i. i, 14, viii. 42, xvi. 27. 
 
 47 — 50. Christ returns from answering the Jews to the main subject. 
 
 47. hath everlasting life] i¥aM eternal ///i" (iii. 16). Note the tense. 
 Christ solemnly assures them (the double 'Verily') that the believer is 
 already in possession of eternal life. See on iii. 36 and v. 24. 
 
 48. that bread of life] Better, the Bread of life. Comp. v. 32, 
 i. 21, 25, vi. 14, where the same exaggerated translation of the Greek 
 article occurs. 
 
 49. Christ answers them out of their own mouths. They had spoken 
 of the manna as superior to the multiplied loaves and fishes ; but the 
 manna did not preserve men from death. The same word is used both 
 in V. 49 and v. 50 ; therefore for ' are dead ' it will be better to substi- 
 tute died. Moreover, the point is, not that they are dead now, but that 
 they perished then ; the manna did not save them. They ate the matttia 
 
 and died. 
 
 50. that a man may eat] S. John's favourite form of expression 
 again, indicating the Divine intention : comp. v. 29, vi. 34, viii. 56, 
 &c. ' Of this purpose is the Bread which cometh down from heaven ; 
 in order that a man may eat thereof and so not die.' Comp. i John v. 3. 
 
 51 — 58. Further definition of the identification of the Spiritual Bread 
 with Christ as consisting in the givitig 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. the living bread] Not merely the Bread of life (v. 48), the life- 
 giving Bread, but the living Bread, having life in itself, which life is 
 imparted to those who partal<e of the Bread. 
 
 which came down] At the Incarnation. Now that the Bread is iden- 
 tified 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 con- 
 tinually 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. 
 
 he shall live for ever] Just as ' living Bread ' is a stronger expression 
 than ' Bread of life,' so ' live for ever ' is stronger than ' not die.' 
 
 and the bread that I will give] The precise wording of this sentence 
 
154 S. JOHN, VI. [vv. 52—54. 
 
 52 which I will give for the life of the world. The Jews there- 
 fore strove amongst themselves, saying, How can this fnan 
 
 53 give us his flesh to eat ? Then Jesus said unto them, 
 Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of 
 the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no Hfe in you. 
 
 54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal 
 
 is somewhat uncertain, but the best reading seems to be : and the Bread 
 that I will give is My Flesh for the life of the world. That in Christ's 
 mind these words 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 Eucharist is shewn from the use of ' Flesh ' (sarx) 
 and not ' Body ' {soma). In all places where the Eucharist is mentioned 
 in N. T. we have 'Body,' not ' Flesh;' Matt. xxvi. 26; Mark xiv. 22; 
 Luke xxii. 19; i 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 Sacrament. 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 to all those means by which the death of Christ 
 is appropriated, especially the Eucharist. Not that Christ is here 
 promising that ordinance, but uttering deep truths, which apply, and 
 which He intended to apply, to that ordinance, now that it is in- 
 stituted. 
 
 62. strove among themselves'] Their excitement increases ; they have 
 got beyond muttering among themselves (v. 41). 
 
 give us his flesh to eat] ' To eat ' is their own additioil ; they wish 
 to bring out in full the strangeness of His declaration. 
 
 63. Then said fesus] Better, Therefore ^a/f/y^MJ.' see on z/. 45. 
 and drink his blood] 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 for- 
 bidden to taste even the blood of animals (Gen. ix. 4 ; Lev. xvii. 10 — 16). 
 These words point still more distinctly to His propitiatory death ; for 
 'the blood is the life' which He ofifered 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. 
 
 no life in you] Literally, no life in yourselves : for the source of 
 life is absent. The next four verses explain more fully how this is. 
 
 54. The gracious positive of the previous minatory negative. From 
 the warning as to the disastrous consequences of not partaking He 
 
vv. 55—58.] S. JOHN, VI. 155 
 
 life ; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh 55 
 is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that 56 
 eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, 
 and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I 57 
 live by the Father : so he that eateth me, even he shall live 
 by me. This is that bread which came down from heaven : 58 
 not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead : he that 
 eateth ^this bread shall live for ever. 
 
 passes to a declaration of the blessed consequences of partaking, 
 viz. eternal life, and that at once, with resurrection among the just 
 hereafter. 
 
 55. my flesh is meat indeed, &c.] According to the best reading; 
 My Flesh is true food and My Blood is true drink ; i.e. this is no mis- 
 leading metaphor, but an actual fact. 
 
 56. dwelleth in me, and I in him'] Or, abideth in Me and I in 
 him. This is one of S. John's very characteristic phrases to express the 
 most intimate mutual fellowrship and union. The word 'abide' is also 
 characteristic, as we have seen. Comp. xiv. 10, 20, xv. 4, 5, xvii. 21; 
 I John iii. 24, iv. 16. Christ is at once the centre and circumference 
 of the life of the Christian ; the source from which it springs, and the 
 ocean into which it flows ; its starting-point and its goal. 
 
 57. Not a mere repetition of the previous statement but an enlarge- 
 ment of it. The result of this close union is perfect life, proceeding as 
 from the Father to the Son, so in like manner from the Son to all 
 believers. 
 
 the living Father] The absolutely Living One, the Fount of all life, 
 in whom is no element of death. The expression occurs nowhere else. 
 Comp. Matt. xvi. 16; 2 Cor. vi, 16; Hebr. vii. 25. For 'hath sent' 
 read sent. 
 
 By the Father] Better because of the Father, i.e. because the Father 
 is the Living One. Similarly, 'by Me' should be because of Me, 
 i.e. because he thus derives life from Me. 
 
 he that eateth me] 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. 
 
 even he] Or, be also. 
 
 58. This is that bread] Better, this is the Bread: see on v. 48. 
 The verse is a general summing up of the whole, returning from -the 
 imagery of Flesh and Blood to the main expression of the discourse — 
 the Bread that came down from heaven and its superiority to all earthly 
 food. 
 
 not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead] Better, not as the 
 fathers did eat and died (see on v. 49) : ' your ' and ' manna ' are 
 wanting in the best MSS. It is not in that way that the Bread comes 
 down from heaven, nor is it such food. 
 
 eateth of] Omit 'of,' as in vv. 54, 56: 'of is rightly inserted in 
 w. 26,50, 51. 
 
156 S. JOHN, VI. [vv. 59—62. 
 
 5y These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in 
 Capernaum. 
 
 60 — 71. Opposite Results of the Discourse. 
 
 60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard 
 
 61 this, said. This is a hard saying ; who can hear it ? When 
 Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he 
 
 62 said unto them. Doth this offend you ? What and if ye 
 
 69. in the synagogue] Or, in synagogue, as we say * in church :* 
 there is no article in the Greek. Comp. xviii. •20. The verse is a mere 
 historical note, stating definitely what was stated vaguely in v. 22 as 
 'the other side of the sea.' ' These things ' naturally refers to the whole 
 discourse from v. 26 ; we have no sufficient evidence of a break between 
 V. 40 and z/. 41. On the other hand there is strong evidence that from 
 V. 26 to V. 58 forms one connected discourse spoken at one time in the 
 synagogue at Capernaum. The site of Capernaum is not undisputed 
 (see on Matt. iv. 13) ; but assuming Tell Hum to be correct, 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. Many therefore of his disciples'] Including many more than the 
 Apostles. 
 
 This is a hard saying] Or, Hard is this speecli. Not hard to under- 
 stand, but hard to accept. The word for 'hard ' means originally 'dry,' 
 and so 'rough;' and then in a moral sense, 'rough, harsh, offensive.' 
 Nabal the churl has this epithet, i Sam. xxv. 3 ; and the slothful ser- 
 vant in the parable of the Talents calls his master a ^ hard man,' Matt. 
 xxv. 24 Here the meaning is : 'This is a repulsive speech ; who can 
 listen to it ?' It was the notion of eating flesh and drinking blood thai 
 specially scandalized them. See on v. 47. 
 
 61. knew in himself] Again He appears as the reader of the heart. 
 Comp. i. 42, 47, ii. 24, 25, iv. 18, v. 14, 42, vi. 26, &c. More 
 literally the verse runs: A^ow yesus knowing iti Himself that His dis- 
 ciples are viuttering about it : see on v. 41, vii. 1 2. They talked in 
 a low tone so that He could not hear : but He knew without hearing. 
 
 62. What atid if, &c.] Literally, If therefore ye should toehold the 
 Son of man ascending where He was before ? The sentence breaks off 
 (aposiopesis) leaving something to be understood : but what is to be 
 understood ? 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 ? ' Against this 
 interpretation it is urged (i) That S. John does not record the Ascen- 
 sion. But it is assumed, if not here and iii. 13, yet certainly xx. 17 as a 
 
vv. 63—65.] S. JOHN, VI. 157 
 
 shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before ? 
 It is the spirit that quickeneth ; the flesh profiteth nothing : 63 
 the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they 
 are life. But there are some of you that believe not. For 64 
 Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed 
 not, and who should betray him. And he said. Therefore 65 
 
 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 hypolhetically ; ' ?/" ye 
 should \i^o\A,^ x^o\. '■ivhen ye j>4a// behold.' (3) That in this case we 
 should expect 'but' instead of 'therefore.' Possibly, but not neces- 
 sarily. The alternative interpretation is to make the ' ascending ' 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, xvii. 11, 13): 
 and in that case we supply ; ' Will not the sight of a suffering Messiah 
 offend you still more ?' 
 
 63. that quickenetK\ Literally, that tnaketh alive or giveth life. 
 The latter would perhaps be better to bring out the connexion with 
 ' they are life' at the end of the verse. 
 
 the fleshy Not, '■My Flesh,' which would contradict v. 51. The 
 statement is a general one, but has reference to Himself. ' My Flesh ' 
 in V. ^\ means 'My 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. Even Christ's flesh in this sense 'profiteth 
 nothing.' (Comp. iii. 6.) Probably there is a general reference to 
 their carnal ideas about the Messiah: it is "in our Lord's refusal to 
 assume the outward insignia of the Messianic dignity, and in His per- 
 sistent spiritualisation of the Messianic idea" that we must seek "the 
 ultimate cause" of the defection of so many disciples. S. pp. 141, 
 142. 
 
 the words] Or, the sayings: see on v. 47. 
 
 that /speak] The true reading is; that I have spoken, in the dis- 
 course just concluded. 
 
 64. someof you that believe not] There were some of those who followed 
 Him and called themselves His disciples, who still did not believe on 
 Him. The better order is, there are of you some. 
 
 knew from the beginning] It is impossible to fix the exact limits of 
 this; the meaning of 'the beginning' must depend on the context (see 
 on i. i). Here the most natural limit is 'knew from the beginning of 
 their discipleship,' when they first became His followers. Comp. ii. 
 24. 25. 
 
 who should betray him] Or, who it was that should betray Him. 
 To ask, 'Why then did Jesus choose Judas as an Apostle?' is to ask in 
 
IS8 S. JOHN, VI. [vv. 66-69. 
 
 said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it 
 were given unto him of my Father. 
 
 66 From that tijne many of his disciples went back, and 
 
 67 walked no more with him. Then said Jesus unto the 
 
 68 twelve. Will ye also go away? Then Simon Peter answered 
 him, Lord, to whom shall we go ? thou hast the words of 
 
 69 eternal life. And we believe and are sure that thou art 
 
 a special instance for an answer to the insoluble enigma 'Why does 
 Omniscience allow wicked persons to be born? Why does Omnipo- 
 tence allow evil to exist?' The tares once sown among the wheat, both 
 must 'grow together till the harvest,' and share sunshine and rain 
 alike. 
 
 65. Therefore^ Better, For this cause (xii. 18, 27): see on v. 16, 
 18, vii. ?2, viii. 47. 
 
 said I unto yoii] v. 44; comp. v. 37, and see notes on both. 
 zvere given unto him of my Father\ Have been given unto him of 
 the Father. 
 
 66. Fi-om that time'] This may be the meaning, but more probably 
 it means itt consequence of that. Hereupon has somewhat of the ambi- 
 guity of the Greek, combining the notions of time and result. The 
 Greek phrase occurs here and xix. 12 only in N.T. 
 
 67. the t%velve\ The first mention of them; S. John speaks of 
 them familiarly as a well-known body, assuming that his readers are 
 well acquainted with the expression (see on v. 62). 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 and Mary Magdalene are introduced in the same abrupt way 
 (xviii. 29, xix. 25). 
 
 Will ye also go away .?] Better, Surely ye also do not wish to go 
 away? 'Will' is too weak; it is not the future tense, but a separate 
 verb, 'to will.' There is a similar error vii. 17 and viii. 44. Christ 
 knows not only the unbelief of the many, but the belief and loyalty of 
 the few. 
 
 68. Then Simon Peter] Omit 'Then.' S. Peter, as leader, primus 
 inter pares, answers here as elsewhere in the name of the Twelve 
 (see note on Mark iii. 17), and answers with characteristic impetuosity. 
 The firmness of His conviction shews the appropriateness of the name 
 given to him i. 42. His answer contains three reasons in logical order 
 why they cannot desert their Master: (i) 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 Jesus is He. See on v. 47. 
 
 69. we believe] Rather, we have believed : the perfect tense im- 
 plies that the faith and knowledge which they possess have been theirs 
 for some time past. 'Are sure' means literally ' have come to know.' 
 
vv. 70, 71.] S. JOHN, VI. 159 
 
 that Christ, the Son of the Hving God. Jesus answered 70 
 them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a 
 devil ? He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon : for 71 
 he // was that should betray him, being one of the twelve. 
 
 thou art that Christ, &c.] These words seem to have been imported 
 hither from S. Peter's Confession, Matt. xvi. 16. The true reading 
 here is; Thou art the Holy One of God. This is altogether a different 
 occasion from Matt. xvi. 16, and probably previous to it. The Con- 
 fessions are worth comparing. I. 'Thou art the Son of God' (Matt. 
 xiv. 33); in this the other Apostles joined. 1. '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. 
 
 70 . Have I nut chosen you twelve'] O r, Did not I choose you the Twelve 
 (comp. xiii. 18)? Here probably the question ends : and one of you is a 
 devil is best punctuated without an interrogation; it is a single state- 
 ment in tragic contrast to the preceding question. It would be closer 
 to the Greek to omit the article before 'devil' and make it a kind of 
 adjective; and one of you is devil, i.e. devilish in nature: but this is 
 hardly English. The words contain a half-rebuke to S. 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 singular- 
 ity 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. yudas Iscariot, the son of Sitnon] The better reading is; Judas, 
 the son of Simon Iscariot. If, as seems probable, the name Iscariot 
 means 'man of Kerioth,' a place in Judah, it would be natural enough 
 for both father and son to have the name. Assuming this to be cor- 
 rect, Judas was the only Apostle who was not a Galilean. 
 
 that should betray] That was to betray ; not the same phrase as in 
 V. 64. 
 
 being one of the twelve] ' Being' is of doubtful genuineness. The 
 tragic contrast is stronger without the participle : for he was to betray 
 Him, one of the Twelve. 
 
 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 over- 
 looked that in all references to His death and the purpose of it Jesus 
 could rely upon the light which Xht. future would throw on these utter- 
 ances : 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. " 
 
 Chap. VII. 
 " 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 
 
i6o S. JOHN, VII. [vv. 1—3. 
 
 Chap. VII. Christ the Source of Truth and Light. 
 I — 9. The controversy with His brethren. 
 
 7 After these things Jesus walked in Galilee : for he would 
 
 not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him, 
 
 2 Now the Jews' feast of tabernacles was at hand. His 
 
 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, in- 
 clined to believe, but held back by the more sophisticated citizens of 
 the metropolis. These meanwhile apply the fragments of Rabbinical 
 learning at their command in order to test the claims of the new pro- 
 phet. In the background looms the dark shadow of the hierarchy 
 itself, entrenched behind its prejudices and refusing to hear the cause 
 that it has already prejudged. A single timid voice is raised against 
 this injustice, but is at once fiercely silenced." S. p. 144. 
 
 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. 
 
 Chap. VII. Christ the Source of Truth and Light. 
 
 Chapter vii. has three main divisions : i . The controversy with His 
 bi'ethren (i — 9); 2. His teaching at the Feast of Tabernacles (10 — 39); 
 3. The effect of His teaching ; division both in the multitude and in the 
 Sanhedrin (40 — 52). 
 
 1—9. The controversy with His brethren. 
 
 1 After these things^ The interval_ is again vague (see introductory 
 note to chap. vi. ) ; but companng vi. 4 with vii. 2 we see that it covers 
 about five months, the interval between the Passover and the Feast 
 of Tabernacles. 
 
 walked in Galilee'] To this ministry in Galilee, of which S. John 
 tells us nothing, most of the incidents narrated Matt, xiv. -^4 — xviii. ^^ 
 belong. The tenses here are all imperfects, implying contmued action. 
 
 he would not walk in yewry\ From this we understand that He 
 did not go up to Jerusalem for the Passover mentioned vi. 4. 'Jewry' 
 is found here in all the English versions excepting Wiclifs ; it was 
 common in the earlier translations. But in the A.V. it has been 
 retained (probably by an oversight) only here, Luke xxiii. 5, and Dan. 
 V. 13: elsewhere Judsea has been substituted. In Dan. v. 13 the 
 same word is translated both 'Jewry' and ' Judah !' Comp. the 
 Prayer Book version of Ps. Ixxvi. i . 
 
 2. the yews' feast of tabernacles'] Again an indication that the 
 Gospel was written outside Palestine: see on vi. i, 4. An author 
 writing in Palestine would be less likely to specify it as 'the feast 
 
vv. 4, S-] S, JOHN, VII. i6i 
 
 brethren therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and go 
 into Judea, that thy disciples also may see the works that 
 thou doest. For there is no man that doeth any thing in 4 
 secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly. If 
 thou do these things, shew thyself to the world. For s 
 
 of the yews' Tabernacles was the most joyous of the Jewish festivals. ' 
 It had two aspects; (i) a commemoration of their dwelling in tents 
 in the wilderness, {2) a harvest-home. It was therefore a thanks- 
 giving (i) for a permanent abode, (2) for the crops of the year. It | 
 began on the 15th of the 7th month, Tisri (about our September), : 
 and lasted seven days, during which all who were not exempted ; 
 through illness or weakness 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 Jerusalem. 
 
 3. His brethrett] See on ii. 12. 
 
 Depart hence'] The bluntness of this suggestion, given alm.ost 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, 31). They 
 shared the ordinary beliefs of the Jews about the Messiah, and there- 
 fore did not believe in their Brother. But His miracles perplexed 
 them, and they wished the point brought to a decisive issue. There 
 is no treachery in their suggestion; its object is not to put Him in the 
 power of His enemies. 
 
 thy disciples also] His brethren seem to imply that they themselves 
 are not His disciples even nominally. 
 
 4. there is no man that doeth] More simply, no man doeth. 
 
 and he himself seeketh] i. e. no one does anything in secret and is 
 thereby personally seeking to act with openness. To conceal His 
 miracles is to deny His Messiahship; the Messiah must accept His 
 position. 
 
 to be known openly] Literally, to be in openness or frankness. The 
 word for ' frankness ' occurs nine times in this Gospel and four times 
 in the First Epistle ; not in Matt, or Luke ; only once in Mark. 
 
 If thou do these things] Feeding the 5000, and other miracles. If 
 Thou doest such miracles at all, do them at Jerusalem at the Feast 
 and convince the whole nation. It is assuming a false position to 
 do such things and hide them in obscure parts of Galilee : it is 
 claiming to be the Messiah and being afraid to shew one's credentials. 
 
 S. JOHN 1 1 
 
i62 S. JOHN, VII. [vv. 6—8. 
 
 6 neither did his brethren beHeve in him. Then Jesus said 
 unto them, My time is not yet come : but your time is 
 
 7 alway ready. The world cannot hate you ; but me it 
 hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are 
 
 8 evil. Go ye up unto this feast : I go not up yet unto this 
 
 They knew probably that He had not gone up to Jerusalem for the 
 Passover. 
 
 shew thyself] Better, manifest Thyself. See on i. 31, xxi. i, and 
 comp. ix. 3, xvii. 6. 
 
 5. For neither did his brethren believe in him\ Or, For not even 
 did His brethren (as one would expect) believe on Him. It is mar- 
 vellous 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 Alphseus. Certainly one 1 
 of the sons of Alphjeus (James) was an Apostle; probably a second\ 
 was (Matthew, if Levi and Matthew are the same person, as is almost I 
 universally admitted); possibly a third was (Judas, if 'Judas of James' I 
 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 con- ' 
 verted. If then one, two, or three sons of Alphseus were Apostles, I 
 how could it be true that the sons of Alphseus ' did not believe on I 
 Him?' 'His brethren' cannot be the sons of Alphaeus. 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. I Cor. ix, 5, Gal. i. 19). 
 
 6. Then Jesus said] Better, Jesus therefore saith. 
 
 My time is not yet come] i. e. My time for manifesting Myself to the 
 world ; 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 ex- 
 cellent sense. See last note on ii. 4. 
 
 7. The world] Unbelievers; the common meaning in S. John. 
 In V. 4 'the world ' means all mankind. See on i. 10. 
 
 cannot hate yoti] Because you and it are of one mind ; because you 
 are part of it: it cannot hate itself; see on xv. 19. Hence it is that 
 they can always manifest themselves : they can always count upon 
 favourable surroundings and a sympathetic audience. 
 
 me it hateth] Comp. iii. 20, vii. 34, 36, viii. ^i, xii. 39. 
 
 8. Go ye up unto this feast] 'Ye' is emphatic; 'this' is wanting 
 in authority; we should read, go ye up unto tine feast. 
 
 I go not up yet] ' Yet,' though very ancient, is possibly no part 
 of the original text : it may have been inserted to avoid the charge of 
 the heathen critic Porphyry, that Jesus here shews fickleness or deceit, 
 and therefore cannot be Divine. But the sense is the same, whether 
 
w. 9— II.] S. JOHN, VII. 163 
 
 feast ; for my time is not yet full come. When he had said 9 
 these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee. 
 
 10 — 39. The Discourse at the Feast of Tabernacles. 
 
 But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also to 
 up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret. 
 Then the Jews sought him at the feast, and said. Where is n 
 
 ' yet ' is inserted or not. He means ' I am not going now ; not going 
 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 is meant by the negative. 
 
 9. he abode still in Galilee] This in conjunction with v. r shews 
 that S. 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. 
 
 This opening scene (i — 9) "is described by M. Renan as a 'gem 
 of history ' (un petit tresor historique). He argues justly that an 
 apologist, writing merely ad probandum, would not have given so 
 much prominence to the unbelief which Jesus met with in His own 
 family. He insists, too, on the individualising traits which the whole 
 section bears. The brethren of Jesus are not ' types ' but living men ; 
 their ill-natured and jealous irony is only too human." S. pp. 144, 
 145- 
 
 10 — 39. The Discourse at the Feast of Tabernacles. 
 
 Of this section w. 10 — 15 form a sort of introduction. 
 
 "An equal degree of authenticity belongs to the verses which follow, 
 10 — 15. The whispered enquiries and debatings among the people, 
 the secret journey, the sudden appearance in the temple in the midst 
 of the Feast, and in particular the question that alludes to the Rab- 
 binical schools and the custom of professed teachers to frequent them, 
 compose a varied, clear, and graphic picture that has every circum- 
 stance of probability in its favour. " S. pp. 145, 146. 
 
 10. unto the feast] These words have become transposed ; they be- 
 long to the first clause, not to the second ; Now when His brethren were 
 gone up to tbe feast, then He also went up. This being so, it becomes 
 possible, if not probable, that Christ's declaration ' I go not up to this 
 Feast' is true, even when made to mean ' I shall not go up at all.' AH 
 that is certain is that Christ appeared when the Feast was half over {^v, 
 14). 
 
 not openly] Not in the general caravan, but either 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. 
 
 11. the yews] The hostile party, as usual: comp. ». i. Both hei-e 
 and in v. 6 'then' should rather be therefore: comp. vi. 53, 67, 68. 
 
i64 S. JOHN, VII. [vv. 12-16. 
 
 12 he? And there was much murmuring among the people 
 concerning him : for some said, He is a good man : others 
 
 13 said, Nay ; but he deceiveth the people. Howbeit no t7ian 
 spake openly of him for fear of the Jews. 
 
 14 Now about the midst of the feast Jesus went up into the 
 
 15 temple, and taught. And the Jews marvelled, saying, How 
 loknoweth this 7fian letters, having never learned? Jesus 
 
 The force of the ' therefore ' here is ' because they did not find Him in 
 the caravan of pilgrims from Galilee.' 
 
 sought... and said^ Both verbs are imperfects of continued action. 
 They do not mention His name, — perhaps in contempt; 'Where is that 
 man?' Comp. ix. 28. 
 
 12. murmuring] Talking in an under tone, not necessarily com- 
 plaining : see on vi. 41, 61. Here some are for, and some against Him. 
 'Among the people ' should rather be among the multitudes ; the word 
 is plural, and this is the only place in the Gospel where the plural is 
 used : the singular {He leadeth tlie multitude astray) is common. 
 
 13. no man] 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. 
 
 for fear of the yews\ Literally, for the fear of the yews, i.e. on 
 account of the prevalent fear of the hierarchy and official representatives 
 of the nation. 
 
 14. about the midst of the feast] Literally, But now, when the feast 
 was at the middle, or was half way fast ; i.e. about the fourth day. But 
 the expression is a vague one, so that we cannot be certain which 
 day. 
 
 went up into the temple] Whether He had been in Jerusalem or not 
 since the beginning of the Feast, is uncertain : see on v. 10. This is per- 
 haps the first occasion of His publicly teaching in the Temple; when 
 He cleansed it (ii. 13 — 17) He delivered no discourse. 
 
 15. And the ^etvs marvelled] According to the best MSS. , The fews 
 therefore marvelled. 'Therefore' should also be inserted in v. 16; 
 Jesus therefore answered them. S. John's extreme fondness for this 
 particle in narrative is worth keeping in view. 
 
 How knoweth this man letters] Or, this fellow, as in vi. 42. 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 
 themselves to any expression of astonishment about Him. The sub- 
 stance of His doctrine excites no emotion in them, but they are 
 astounded that He should possess learning without having got it accord- 
 :ng to ordinary routine. He had never attended the schools of the 
 
vv. 17—19-] S. JOHN, VII. 165 
 
 answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his 
 that sent me. If any man will do his will, he shall know 17 
 of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak 
 of myself. He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own 18 
 glory : but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same 
 is true, and no unrighteousness is in him. Did not Moses 19 
 
 Rabbis, and yet His interpretations of Scripture shewed a large amount 
 of biblical and other knowledge. That does excite them. In Acts xxvi. 
 24, ' much learning doth make thee mad,' the word there translated 
 ' learning ' is the same as the one here translated ' letters.' 
 
 16 — 36. The remark made on the Jews' question va. v. 15 applies 
 also to their questions and comments throughout this dialogue. They 
 are too exactly in keeping with what we know of the Jews in our Lord's 
 day to be the invention of a Greek more than a century later. They 
 "are all exactly what we should expect from the popular mode of inter- 
 preting and applying the Messianic prophecies." S. p. 146. 
 
 16. My doctrine is not mine'\ ' The teaching which I give does not 
 originate with Me ; that is the reason why I have no need to learn in 
 the schools. He Who sent Me communicates it to Me.' 
 
 17. If any man will do his willl As in vi. 67 and viii. 44, ' will ' is 
 too weak ; it is not the simple future, but the verb ' to will :' If any man 
 willeth to do His will. 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 
 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. 
 
 he shall kno7v'] Literally, He shall come to know, recognise. See on 
 V. 26 and viii. 55. 
 
 whether it be of God, &c.] Literally, whether it proceeds from God (as 
 its Fount), or I speak from Myself. Comp. v. 30, xv. 4. 
 
 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. 
 
 the same is true] and therefore does not speak of himself, for who- 
 ever speaks what comes from himself is not true. 
 
 no tmrighteotisness is in him] Or, luirighteousness is not in him. 
 S. 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 S. 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 ' (i John i. 6), ' to do a 
 lie' (Rev. xxi. 27, xxii. 15). 
 
i66 S. JOHN, Vll. [vv. 20— 22. 
 
 give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? 
 
 20 Why go ye about to kill me ? The people answered and 
 said, Thou hast a devil : who goeth about to kill thee ? 
 
 21 Jesus answered and said unto them, I have done one work, 
 
 22 and ye all marvel. Moses therefore gave unto you cir- 
 cumcision, not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers; 
 
 There is no need to suppose that anything is omitted between 18 
 arid 19, though the transition is abrupt. Christ has answered them 
 and now takes the offensive. He exposes the real meaning of their 
 cavilHngs; they seek His life. 
 
 19. Did not Moses give you the law?'\ Here the question should 
 probably end : and none of you doeth the laiv should be a simple state- 
 ment in contrast to the question preceding. The argument is similar to 
 V. 45 ; Moses in whom they trust condemns them. Moreover it is an 
 argiimentwn ad hominem : ' ye are all breakers of the law, and yet 
 would put Me to death as a breaker of it.' 
 
 20. Thou hast a devil'\ The multitude who have come up from the 
 provinces know nothing of the designs of the hierarchy, although 
 dwellers in Jerusalem (v. 25) are better informed. These provincials 
 think He must be possessed to have such an idea. 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 in- 
 sanity, and the insanity is attributed to demoniacal possession. In viii. 
 48 the same remark is made, but in a much more hostile spirit (see note 
 there); 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. I have done'] Better, I did. Comp. v. 23. 
 
 one zvorh] The healing of the impotent man at Bethesda : it excited 
 the astonishment of all as being wrought on the Sabbath. Christ re- 
 minds them that on that occasion all, and not the rulers only, were 
 offended. 
 
 Most modem editors add to this verse the words translated 'there- 
 fore ' in V. 11 [it is not S. John's favourite particle (see on v. 15), but a 
 preposition with a pronoun =for this cause, on account of this] ; ' and 
 ye all marvel on account of this.' But this is cumbrous, and unlike 
 S. John, who begins sentences with this phrase (v. 16, 18, viii. 47, x. 17, 
 xii. 3Q; mistranslated 'therefore' in all cases) rather than ends them 
 with it. The old arrangement is best. 
 
 22. Moses therefore gave] Better, For this cause (xii. 18, 27) Moses 
 hath given. Comp. viii. 47. 
 
 of Moses... of the fathers] 'Originating with Moses... originating 
 Avith the fathers.' Circumcision originated with the Patriarchs, and 
 \Avas a more ancient institution than the Sabbath. When, therefore, 
 the two ordinances clashed, the younger had to give place; it was 
 more fit that the Sabbath should be broken, than that circumcision 
 should be administered on the wrong day. If then the Sabbath 
 
vv. 23—27.] S. JOHN, VII. 167 
 
 and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man. If a man 23 
 on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of 
 Moses should not be broken ; are ye angry at me, because 
 I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day ? 
 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous 24 
 judgment. Then said some of them of Jerusalem, Is not 25 
 this he, whom they seek to kill? But lo, he speaketh 16 
 boldly, and they say nothing unto him. Do the rulers 
 know indeed that this is the very Christ ? Howbeit we 27 
 know this man whence he is : but when Christ cometh, no 
 
 could give way to a mere ceremonial observance, how much more 
 might it give way to a work of mercy? The law of charity is older 
 and higher than any ceremonial law. 
 
 on the sabbath^ Rather, on a Sabbath; so also in v. 23. 
 
 23. that the law of Moses should not be broken'] i.e. the law about 
 circumcision on the eighth day (Lev. xii. 3), which was a re-enactment 
 of the patriarchal law (Gen. xvii. 12), Some adopt the inferior ren- 
 dering in the margin ; ' without breaking the law of Moses, ' or ' with- 
 out the law of Moses being broken;' in which case 'the law of Moses' 
 means the law about the Sabbath. 
 
 are ye angt-y] The word occurs nowhere else in N.T. It signifies 
 bitter and violent resentment. 
 
 because I have made'] Better, 3^«:a«ji? I made. Comp. z'. 21. 
 
 24. according to the appearance] ' According to the appearance ' 
 Christ's act was a breach of the Sabbath. This is almost certainly the 
 meaning, although the word translated 'appearance' may mean 'face,' 
 and is rightly translated 'face' in xi. 44 (see note there). There is no 
 reference here to Christ's having ' no form nor comeliness,' as if He 
 meant ' Judge not by My mean appearance. ' 
 
 25. Then said some] Or, Some therefore said (see on vi. 53, vii. 
 II, 15), i.e. in consequence of Christ's vindication of Himself. These 
 inhabitants of the capital know better than the provincials, who speak 
 in V. 20, what the intentions of the hierarchy really are. 
 
 26. boldly] Or, with frankftess, or openness ; the same word as in 
 V. 4, where (as in xvi. 29) it has a preposition; here and v. 13 it is the 
 simple dative. 
 
 Do the rulers know] The word here translated 'know' is not the one 
 translated 'know' in vv. 28, 29. The latter is the most general word 
 for 'know:' this means rather to 'acquire knowledge.' Have the 
 rulers come to know (or recognised)! See on i. 10. In the next verse 
 we have both words. Comp. viii. 55. 
 
 that this is the very Christ] 'Very' is wanting in auth~rity: that 
 this man is the Christ is the right reading. This suggestion, however, 
 is only a momentary thought. They at once raise a difficulty which 
 for them demolishes the suggestion. 
 
 27. when Christ cotneth] Better, when the Christ cometh: see on i. 20. 
 
i68 S. JOHN, VII. [w. 28, 29. 
 
 28 man knoweth whence he is. Then cried Jesus in the 
 temple as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and ye 
 know whence I am : and I am not come of myself, but he 
 
 29 that sent me is true, whom ye know not. But I know him : 
 
 no man knoweth whence he iV] Literally, no man comes to know (see 
 on V. 26 and viii. 55) whence He is. ' Whence' does not refer to the 
 Messiah's birthplace, which was known (z/z/. 41, i,i); nor to His remote 
 descent, for He was to be the Son of David (ibid.); but to His parent- 
 age (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 carries conviction with it, and shews how familiar the 
 ideas current among the Jews at that time were to S. John. It never 
 occurs to him to explain. The belief might easily grow out of Isa. 
 liii. 8, 'Who shall declare His generation?' Justin Martyr tells us 
 of a kindred belief, that the Messiahship of the Messiah would be 
 unknown, even to Himself, until He was anointed by Elijah. ( Trypho, 
 pp. 226, 336.) 
 
 28. Then cried yesus"] Better, Jesus therefore cried aloud. The I 
 word translated ' cried ' signifies a loud expression of strong emotion. I 
 He is moved by their gross misconception of Him, a fact which the J 
 weakening of 'therefore' into 'then' obscures. Comp. ». 37, i- 15, 
 xii. 44. 
 
 itt the templel S. John well remembers that moving cry in the 
 Temple ; the scene is still before him and he puts it before us, although ■* 
 neither 'in the Temple' nor ' as He taught' is needed for the narrative 
 (see V. 14). 
 
 Ye both know me, &c.] Various constructions have been put upon 
 this: (i) that it is a question; (2) that it is ironical; (3) a mixture of 
 the two; (4) a reproach, i.e. that they knew His Divine nature and 
 maliciously concealed it. None of these are satisfactory. The words 
 are best understood 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 the sake of 
 which they are willing to resist the evidence both of Scripture and of 
 His works, is complied with; for they know not His real immediate 
 origin. 
 
 and I am not come of myself 1 ' Of Myself is emphatic ; and (yet) of 
 Myself I am not come. Comp. viii. 42. The 'and' introduces a con- 
 trast, as so often in S. John: 'ye know My person, and ye know My 
 parentage; and yet of the chief thing of all, My Divine mission, ye 
 know nothing. See on v. 30. 
 
 but he that sent me is true'\ The word for 'true' here is the same as 
 occurs i. 9 in 'the true Light' (see note there): the meaning, there- 
 fore, is not 'truthful' but 'real, perfect;' He that sendeth Me is a real 
 sender^ One who in the highest and most perfect sense can give a mis- 
 
vv. 30—32.] S. JOHN, VI I. 169 
 
 for I am from him, and he hath sent me. Then they 30 
 sought to take him : but no inan laid hands on him, 
 because his hour was not yet come. And many of the 31 
 people believed on him, and said. When Christ cometh, will 
 he do moe miracles than these which this man hath done ? 
 The Pharisees heard that the people murmured such things 32 
 concerning him; and the Pharisees and the chief priests 
 
 sion. But perhaps here and in Rev. iii. 7 and xix. 11 the distinction 
 between the two words for 'true' is not very marked. Such refine- 
 ments (the words being alike except in termination) have a tendency to 
 become obscured. 
 
 29. / know hiin\ ' I ' in emphatic contrast to the preceding * ye,' 
 which is also emphatic. 'I know Him, for I came forth from Him, 
 and it is He, and no other, that sent Me.' ' Sent' is aorist, not perfect. 
 Comp. the very remarkable passage Matt. xi. 27. 
 
 30. Then they sought] Better, Tlierefore they kept seeking (im- 
 perfect of continued action) in consequence of His publicly claiming 
 Divine origin and mission. 'They' means the rulers, the Sanhedrin; 
 not the people, who are mentioned in the next verse. 
 
 but no man laid hajids] Rather, and no man laid hands, 'and' 
 introducing a contrast as in v. 28. See on xxi. 3. That ' and' in 
 S. John often = ' and yet,' as here, is most true; that 'and' ever = 'but' 
 is true neither of S. John nor of any other Greek writer. 
 
 because his hour] The hour appointed by God for His Passion (xiii. 
 I ), 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. And many of the people] Our version is somewhat perverse ; 
 in V. 30 'and' is arbitrarily turned into 'but;' here 'but' is turned 
 into 'and.' But (on the other hand, i.e. in contrast to the nilers) of 
 the multitude tnany believed on Him (as the Messiah) and kept saying 
 (in answer to objectors), When the Christ (see on v. 17 and i. 20) 
 cometh, will He do more signs than this man did? They express not 
 their own doubts but those of objectors in saying ' when the Chrjst 
 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. 
 
 32. heard that the people murmured such things] Better, heard the 
 multitude muttering these things (see on v. 11): it was not reported 
 to them, they heard it themselves, and they went and reported it in the 
 Sanhedrin, which gives an order for His apprehension. Note that i: 
 this the reckless hierarchy, who were mainly Sadducees, combine witl 
 the Pharisees (comp. v. 45, xi. 47, 57, xviii. 3;. 
 
m S. JOHN, VII. [vv. 33-35- 
 
 33 sent officers to take him. Then said Jesus unto them, Yet 
 a little while am I with you, and then I go unto him that 
 
 34 sent me. Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and 
 
 35 where I am, thither ye cannot come. Then said the Jews 
 among themselves, Whither will he go, that we shall not 
 find him? will he go unto the dispersed among the Gentiles, 
 
 33. Then said yesus] Better, as in v. 30 and often, Therefore said 
 yesus, i.e. in consequence of their sending to arrest Him : probably He 
 recognised the officers waiting for an opportunity to take Him. Ac- 
 cording to the best MSS., 'Unto them' should be omitted: Christ's 
 words are addressed to the officers and those who sent them. 
 
 It is very difficult to decide on the precise meaning of Christ's words. 
 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. 
 
 intto Aim that sent mc\ One suspects that here S. John is translat- 
 ing 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. Ye shall seek me] From xiii. 33 it seems almost certain that 
 these words are not to be understood of seeking His li/e: rather of 
 seeking for help at His hands. Comp. viii. 21. It is best, however, 
 not to limit their application to any particular occasion, such as the 
 destruction of Jerasalem, the great hour of Jewish need. 
 
 -where I am, thither ye cannot come] ' Thither' is not in the Greek 
 and is perhaps better omitted, so as to bring out the emphatic oppo- 
 sition between ' I ' and ' ye.' 
 
 35. Then said the yews] The yetvs therefore said, i.e. in con- 
 sequence of what Christ had said, shewing that it is to the official 
 representatives of the nation that His words are addressed. 
 
 Whither will he go, &c. ] Better, Where does this fellow intend to 
 go, seeing that we shall not find Him ? Does He intend to go unto 
 the dispersion among the Gentiles, &c. 
 
 the dispersed] Or, the dispersion, meaning those Jews who were 
 dispersed among the heathen outside Palestine; the abstract for the 
 concrete, like 'the circumcision' for the Jews generally. The word 
 for 'dispersion' (diaspora), occurs James i. i and i Pett_j.— * (see 
 
vv. 36, 37-] S. JOHN, VII. 171 
 
 and teach the Gentiles ? What manner of saying is this 36 
 that he said, Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me : and 
 where I am, thither ye cannot come ? 
 
 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood 37 
 and cried, saying. If any man thirst, let him come unto me, 
 
 notes there), and nowhere else in N.T. There were thtfiechief 
 colonies o f these ' dispersed ' or ' scattered ' Jews, in B abylo nia, Egyp t, 
 and S yria^ whence t]iey spread over the whole world, ' Moses of old 
 time nam in every city tnem that preach" him,-' Acts xv. i\. These 
 opponents of Christ, therefore, suggest that He means to go to the I 
 Jews scattered among the Gentiles in order to reach the Gentiles and 
 teach them — the very mode of proceeding afterwards adopted by the » 
 Apostles. 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 the word 
 translated 'Gentiles' (margin 'Greeks') were rendered 'Hellenists,' 
 i. e. Grecised Jews. Hellenes, or ' Greeks,' in N. T. always means 
 Gentiles or heathen. See on xii. 20. 
 
 36. What mamier of saying is this] Or, What is this sajrlng? 
 ' this ' being contemptuous, like ' this precious saying.' They know 
 that their scornful suggestion is not true. 
 
 37. In the last day, that great day] Now on the last day, the 
 great day. This was probably not the seventh day, but the ^eighth 
 day, which according to Lev, x xiii. 36, 39; Num. xxix. 3£j^ Neh. 
 Yiii-J^_was reckoned along with tt»g gpve^j ^ days ~of the feast prober.— 
 To speak of the seventh day^s ' 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). In keeping with 
 the solemnity of the day Christ solemnly takes up His position and 
 cries aloud with deep emotion (see on v. 28). 
 
 stood] Or, was standing. 
 
 If any man thirst] The conjectural reference to the custom of . 
 pouring water at the Feast of Tabernacles is probably correct. On I 
 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 i, 
 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, (S'c). The pouring of the water would be suggestive enough. 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 com- 
 plete. Mere pouring of water could not quench even bodily thirst; 
 
172 S. JOHN, VII. [vv. 38—40. 
 
 38 and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath 
 
 39 said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But 
 this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him 
 should receive : for the Holy Ghost was not yet given ; 
 because that Jesus was not yet glorified.) 
 
 40 — 52, Opposite Results of the Discourse, 
 
 40 Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, 
 
 Christ could satisfy spiritual thirst. ' Therefore with joy shall ye draw 
 water out of the wells of salvation.' Isa. xii. 3. 
 
 38. as the scripture hath said] This 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, Iviii. 11; Zech. xiii. i, xiv. 8, &c. But none of them contain the 
 very remarkable expression 'out of his belly.' 
 
 rivers of living water] In the Greek ' rivers ' stands first with strong 
 emphasis; rivers out of his belly shall flow, (rivers) of living water, 
 in marked contrast to the ewer of water poured each day during the 
 Feast. ' He that believeth on me ' is of course a stage far in advance 
 of ' if any one thirst.' A man may thirst for spiritual satisfaction, and 
 yet not end in believing on Christ. 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 Christian cannot fail to impart the spirit of Christianity to others. 
 
 39. this spake he of the Spirit] S. John's interpretation is to be 
 accepted, whatever may be our theory of inspiration, (i) 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 dispensation of the Spirit had not come. 
 
 the Holy Ghost was not yet give ft] Both 'the Holy' and 'given' 
 are of doubtful authority : ' given ' is omitted by nearly all MSS. except 
 the Vatican; it gives the right sense. Like 'Holy Spirit' in i. 33, 
 'Spirit ' has no article and means a power of the Spirit. 
 
 because that fesus was not yet glorified] Comp. xvi. 7; 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 Para- 
 clete and representative of Christ for the carrying on of His work." 
 Meyer. 
 
 40—52. Opposite Results of the Discourse. 
 
 40. Many of the people, &c.] According to the best authorities ; 
 
w. 41—45-] S. JOHN, VII 173 
 
 said, Of a truth this is the Prophet. Others said, This is the 4« 
 Christ. But some said. Shall Christ come out of Galilee ? 
 Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed 42 
 of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David 
 was ? So there was a division among the people because 43 
 of him. And some of them would have taken him ; but no 44 
 man laid hands on him. 
 
 Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; 4S 
 
 Of the multitude, therefore, some, when they heard these words, 
 were sajrlng, or, began to say. 
 
 Of a truth this is the Prophef] The Prophet of Deut, xviii. 15, 
 whom some identified with the Messiah, others supposed would be the 
 fore-runner of the Messiah. Here he is plainly distinguished from the 
 Messiah. See on i. 21 and vi. 14. 
 
 41. Others said. ..some said] Both verbs, as in v. 40, are imperfects 
 of repeated action ; iept sayiyig, used to say. 
 
 Shall Christ cofne out of Galilee] We have here an instance how 
 little attention 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). Why, doth the Christ come out of 
 Galilee? It is quite inadmissible to infer, because S. 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. On the other hand, could 
 a Greek of the second century invent these discussions of the Jewish 
 multitude ? 
 
 42. of the seed of David] Ps. cxxxii. 11; Jer. xxiii. 5; Isa. xi. i, 10. 
 out of the town of Bethlehem] Literally, from Bethlehem, the 
 
 Tillage where David was. Mic. v. 2 ; i Sam xvi. 
 
 43. a division] Schisma, whence our word ' schism.' It means a 
 serious and possibly violent division: ix. 16, x. 19; i Cor. i. 10, 
 xii. 25; comp. Acts xiv. 4, xxiii. 7. In N. T. it is never used in the 
 modem sense of a separation yr^iw 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. 
 
 among the people] In the multitude. 
 
 44. some of them] Some of the multitude, provoked by the con- 
 troversy, would on their own responsibility have carried Him before the 
 Sanhedrin. These 'some' are not the officers mentioned in the next 
 verse. 
 
 45. Then came the officers] Better, 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 over-awed by the majesty of His words [v. 46). 
 
174 S. JOHN, VII. [w. 46— 51. 
 
 and they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him ? 
 
 46 The officers answered, Never man spake Uke this man. 
 
 47 Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived ? 
 
 48 Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him? 
 
 49 But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed. 
 
 50 Nicodemus saith unto them, (he that came to Jesus by 
 
 51 night, being one of them,) Doth our law judge any man, 
 
 to the chief priests and Pha7-isees'\ See on v. 32. 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. 
 
 they said] The pronoun used (ekeinoi) indicates that they are 
 regarded as alien or hostile to the narrator. 
 
 Why have ye not brought] Why 616. ye not bring? 
 
 46. Never man spake like this man] The reading is doubtful ; some 
 of the best MSS. have Never man SO spake. Possibly Christ said a 
 good deal more than is recorded by S. John. 
 
 47. the Pharisees] That portion of the Sanhedrin which was most 
 jealous of orthodoxy, regarded both by themselves and others as models 
 of correct belief: see next verse. For 'then' read therefore. 
 
 Are ye also deceived] Strong emphasis on ' ye ;' Surely ye also have 
 not been led astray, ye, the officers of the Sanhedrin ! Comp. v. 11. 
 
 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? 
 
 49. this people] Very contemptuous; this multitude of yours 
 (comp. 35, 36), whose ignorant fancies you prefer to our deliberate 
 decisions. 
 
 who knoweth not the law] The form of negative used implies cen- 
 sure ; knoweth not when it ought to know. They ought to know that 
 a sabbath-breaker cannot be the Messiah. 
 
 are cursed] A mere outburst of theological fury. A formal excom- 
 munication of the whole multitude by the Sanhedrin (comp. ix. 12) 
 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. 
 
 60. he that came to jfesus by night] The better reading seems to be, 
 he that came to Him before. See on iii. i, 2. His 'being one of 
 them' contradicts what is implied in v. 48, that no member of the 
 Sanhedrin believed on Him. 
 
 51. Doth our law] 'Law' 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 lawyers 
 were forgetting such plain and simple texts as Deut. i. 16, 17, xvii. 8, 
 xix. 15; involving the most elementary principles of justice. 
 
V. 52.] S. JOHN, Vn. 175 
 
 before it hear him, and know what he doeth ? They 52 
 answered and said unto him, Art thou also of Gahlee? 
 Search, and look : for out of Galilee ariscth no prophet, v^ 
 
 any man, before it hear him] Literally, the man (prosecuted) ex- 
 cept It first hear from himself. 
 
 52. Art thou also of Galilee ?] ' Surely thou dost not sympathize 
 with Him as being a fellow-countryman?' They share the popular 
 belief that Jesus was by birth a Galilean (v. 41). 
 
 out of Galilee ariseth no prophet] Either their temper makes them 
 forgetful, or in the heat of controversy they prefer a sweeping state- \y 
 ment to a qualified one. Jonah of Gath-hepher (2 Kings xiv. 25) was 
 certainly of Galilee ; Nahum of Elkosh may have been, but the situa- 
 tion of Elkosh is uncertain; Hosea was of the northern kingdom, but 
 whether of Galilee or not is unknown ; Abelmeholah, whence Elisha 
 came, was in the north part of the Jordan valley, possibly in Galilee. 
 Anyhow, their statement is only a slight and very natural exaggera- 
 tion (comp. iv. V. 29). 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 it is no part of the Gospel of S. John, (i) In both 
 tone and style it is very unlike his writings. His favourite words and 
 expressions are wanting; others that he rarely or never uses are found. 
 {2) It breaks the course of the narrative, which runs smoothly enough 
 if this paragraph be omitted; and hence a few of the MSS. which 
 contain it place it at the end of the Gospel. (3) All the very serious 
 amount of external evidence 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 over- 
 whelmingly 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, (i) 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. (3) It is easy to see 
 how prudential reasons may in some cases have caused its omission 
 (the fear of giving, as S. Augustine says, peccandi imptinitatem mulier- 
 ibus) ; difficult to see what, excepting its truth, can have caused its 
 insertion. (4) Though it is found in no Greek MS. earlier than the 
 sixth century, nor in the earliest versions, nor is quoted as by S. John 
 until late in the fourth century, yet Jerome says that in his time it was 
 
176 S. JOHN, VII. VIII. [vv. S3; 1,2. 
 
 g And every man went unto his own house. Jesus went 
 
 2 unto the mount of Ohves. And early in the morning he 
 
 came again into the temple, and all the people came unto 
 
 contained 'm many Greek and Latin MSS.' (Adv. Pelag. Ii. 17), and 
 these must have been as good as, or better than, the best MSS. which 
 we now possess. 
 
 The question as to who is the author, cannot be answered. There is 
 not sufficient material for a satisfactory conjecture, and mere guesswork 
 is worthless. The extraordinaiy 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 in illustration of viii. 15, and hence have got into the text. 
 
 63. That this verse, as well as viii. i, 3, is omitted in most MSS. 
 shews that prudential reasons cannot explain the omission of the para- 
 graph in more than a limited number of cases. Some MSS. omit only 
 viii. 3 — II. 
 
 every man went unto his orvn house] To what meeting this refers 
 we cannot tell : of course not to the meeting of the Sanhedrin just 
 recorded by S. John. It is unfortunate that the verse should have been 
 left as the end of this chapter instead of beginning the next. 
 
 Chap. VIII. 
 
 1. the mount of Olives'] S. John nowhere mentions the Mount of 
 Olives (comp. xviii. i), and when he mentions a new place he com- 
 monly adds an explanation: i. 44, iv. 5, v. 2, vi. i, xix. 13, 17. The 
 phrase for 'went unto' is not found in S. John. Both occur in all 
 three Synoptists. 
 
 2. And early in the morning, &c.] Comp. Luke xxi. 37, 38; 'and 
 in the day time He was teaching in the temple, and at night He went 
 out and abode in the mount that is called the mount of Olives. And 
 all the people came early in the morning to Him in the temple for to 
 hear Him.' The phrase for 'all the people' used by S. Luke is the 
 phrase which occurs here : S. John never uses it. S. John uses the 
 word for 'people' only twice; it occurs more than thirty times in 
 S. Luke, and more than twenty times in the Acts. The word for 
 'came early' is a verb derived from the word for 'early' which occurs 
 here: S. John uses neither. 
 
vv. 3— 6.] S. JOHN, VIII. 177 
 
 him ; and he sat down, and taught them. And the scribes 3 
 and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; 
 and when they had set her in the midst, they say unto him, 4 
 Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. 
 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be s 
 stoned : but what sayest thou ? This they said, tempting 6 
 him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus 
 
 sat down] To teach with authority. Comp. Matt. v. i, xxiii. 2; 
 Mark ix. 35. 
 
 3. (/le scribes and Pharisees'] This phrase is used thrice by S. Luke, 
 once each by S. Matthew and S. Mark. S. John nowhere mentions 
 the scribes: he speaks of the hierarchy as 'the chief priests' or 'rulers' 
 with or without 'the Pharisees,' or else simply as 'the Jews.' Here 
 we are probably not to understand an official deputation from the 
 Sanhedrin: there is nothing to shew that the woman had been taken 
 before the Sanhedrin before being brought to Christ. 
 
 brought imto him] Literally, bring unto Hitn. The bringing her 
 was a wanton outrage both on her and on all generous and modest 
 spectators. She might have been detained while the case was referred 
 to Christ. The statement 'in the very act' is another piece of brutal 
 indelicacy; and the Greek verb, hath heen taken, adds to this. 
 
 5. Moses in the law] Of the two texts given in the margin of our 
 Bible, Lev. 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 betrothed woman 
 sinning in the city, stoning is specified as the punishment (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. 
 
 but ivhat sayest thou 1] Better, What therefore sayest Thoic ? This is 
 the only place in the whole paragraph where S.John's favourite particle 
 'therefore' occurs; and that not in the narrative, where S. John makes 
 such frequent use of it, but in the dialogue, where he very rarely 
 employs it. Scarcely anywhere in this Gospel can a dozen verses of 
 narrative be found without a 'therefore; ' but see ii. i — 17, and contrast 
 iv. I — 26, XX. I — 9. 
 
 6. tempting him] The Greek word for ' tempting' is frequent in the* 
 Synoptists of trying to place Christ in a difficulty; never so used in 
 S. John, who, however, uses it once of Christ ' proving ' Philip 
 (vi. 6). 
 
 that they might have to accuse him] 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 popularity, 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 
 
 S. JOHN I 2 
 
178 S. JOHN, VIII. [v. 7. 
 
 stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as 
 
 ■J though he heard them not. So when they continued asking 
 
 him, he Uft up himself, and said unto them, He that is 
 
 without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. 
 
 parallel to the question about tribute, and they hoped to bring Him into 
 collision either with the Law and Sanhedrin or with the Roman Govern- 
 ment. If He said she was nol 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 
 punishment (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. 
 
 stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground '\ 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. Ii. 
 532: 'Without uttering a syllable, by merely raising the eyebrows, or 
 stooping down, or fix ittg the eyes upon the ground, you may baffle un- 
 reasonable importunities.' 'Wrote' should perhaps be ' kept writing' 
 (comp. vii. 40, 41), or ' began to ivrite, made as though He would write' 
 (comp. Luke i. 59). Either rendering would agree with this interpreta- 
 tion, which our translators have insisted on as certain by inserting the 
 gloss (not found in any earlier English Version), 'as though He heaid 
 them not. ' But it is just possible that by writing on the stone pave- 
 ment 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 continued asking] They will not take the hint, whatever 
 His gesture meant. 
 
 without sin] The Greek word occurs nowhere else in N.T., but it is 
 quite classical: 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. i — 5 ; Rom. xiv. 4. As to its application to them 
 comp. Matt. xii. 39; Mark viii. 38. He is contending not against 
 punishment being inflicted by human law, but against men taking the 
 law into their own hands. 
 
 a stone] Rather, tlie stone, according to the Received Text and some 
 MSS.; i.e. the stone required for executing the sentence. Others take 
 it of the first stone, which the witnesses were to throw (Deut. xvii. 7). 
 But Christ does not say 'let him cast the first stone,' but 'let him be first 
 of you to cast the stone.' 
 
vv. 8— II.] S. JOHN, VIII. 179 
 
 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. 8 
 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own 9 
 conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, 
 ez>en unto the last : and Jesus was left alone, and the woman 
 standing in the midst. When Jesus had lift up htjuself, 10 
 and saw none but the woman, he said unto her. Woman, 
 where are those thine accusers ? hath no Jtian condemned 
 thee? She said. No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, n 
 Neither do I condemn thee : go, and sin no more. 
 
 8. again he stooped down] He again declines to have the office of 
 judge thrust upon Him. The Reader of men's hearts knew how His 
 challenge must work : no one would respond to it. 
 
 and wrote on the ground] A Venetian MS. ascribed to the tenth 
 century has the remarkable reading 'wrote on the ground the sins of 
 each one of them.' The same strange idea appears in Jerome, shewing 
 how soon men began to speculate as to what He wrote. Others sup- 
 pose that He wrote His answer in v. 7. As has been shewn (v. 6), it 
 is not certain that He wrote anything. 
 
 9. being convicted by their own conscience] These words are probably 
 a gloss added by some copyist, like *as though He heard them not,' 
 added by our translators {v. 6). 
 
 beginning at the eldest] Literally, beginning at the elders: but it 
 means the elders in years, not the Elders ; so that our translators have 
 done well to avoid a literal rendering which would have been mislead- 
 ing. Meyer suggests that the oldest would be shrewd enough to slip 
 away at once without compromising themselves further ; certainly they 
 would have the largest experience of life and its temptations. 
 
 was left alone] Not that there were no witnesses, but that they had 
 withdrawn to a distance. The graphic precision of this verse indicates 
 the account of an eyewitness. 
 
 standing in the midst] Literally, being in the midst, where the 
 brutality of her accusers had placed her {v. 3). 
 
 10. none but the woman] The word for 'but' or 'except' occurs 
 nowhere in S. John's writings excepting Rev. ii. ^25; frequently in 
 S. Luke, five times in S. Matthew, five times in S. Paul's Epistles, 
 once in S. Mark, and nowhere else. 
 
 hath no man condemned thee?] Literally, Did no man condemn thee? 
 But here the English perfect may idiomatically represent the Greek 
 aorist : see on v. 29. The word for 'condemn' is a compound not found 
 anywhere in S. John's writings, but occurring nine times in the Synop- 
 tists. S. John uses the simple verb, which means 'judge,' but often 
 acquires the notion of judging unfavourably from the context (see on 
 iii. 17 and v. 29). 
 
 11. No tnan, Lord] We must bear in mind that 'Lord' may be too 
 strong a translation of the Greek word, which need not mean more than 
 •Sir' (see on vi. 34). But as we have no such ambiguous word in 
 English, 'Lord' is best. 
 
 12 — 2 
 
i8o S. JOHN, VIII. [v. 12. 
 
 VIII. 12 — IX. 41. Christ the Source of Truth and Light 
 {contimied'). 
 
 12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the ^t 
 light of the world : he that foUoweth me shall not walk in 
 
 Neither do I condemn thee\ 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 S. 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 whether she was penitent or not. 
 
 go, and sin no more} Or, go and continue no longer in sin. The 
 contrast between the mere negative declaration and the very positive 
 exhortation is striking. See on v. 14. 
 
 VIII. 12 — IX. 41. Christ the Source of Truth and Light 
 {co9ttmncd). 
 
 In viii. 12 — 46 the word 'true' occurs six times, the word 'truth' 
 seven times. 
 
 12. l^hen spake yesus agaiti unto tkeni] The paragraph vii. 53 
 — viii. II 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, yesus spake unto them, i.e. because the attempt to interfere 
 with Him had failed. How long the interval was we do not know, 
 v'but probably the evening of the same day. 
 
 I am the light 0/ the world\ 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, 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.' 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. 
 
w. 13—15.] S. JOHN, VIII. t8i 
 
 ./^darkness, but shall have the light of life. The Pharisees 13 
 therefore said unto him, Tlaou bearest record of thyself; 
 thy record is not true. Jesus answered and said unto them, 14 
 Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true : for 
 I know whence I came, and whither I go ; but ye cannot 
 tell whence I come, and whither I go. Ye judge after the ^si/),.z 
 
 he that foUoweth me] This expression also is in favour of the refer- 
 ence. The illumination in the Court of the Women commemorated the 
 /■pillar of fire which led the Israelites through the wilderness, as the 
 ^/'pouring of the water of Siloam commemorated the water flowing 
 from the Rock. ' The Lord went before them by day in a pillar of 
 a cloud (0 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 hi tie wise walk in darkness. The negative 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 (p. 4) closely con- 
 nected, while darkness is opposed to both. 
 
 shall have the light of life} Not merely 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. 
 
 13. Thozi bearest record] Our translators have again been some- 
 what capricious. The words which in verses 13 and 14 they render 
 'record' and 'bear record, ' they render in verses 17 and 18 'witness' 
 and 'bear witness.' The latter rendering is to be preferred. The 
 Pharisees attempt to cancel the effect of Christ's impressive declaration 
 by urging against Him a formal objection, the validity of which He 
 had been heard to admit (v. 31): Thou bearest witness of Thyself; 
 Thy witness is not true. 
 
 14. Though I bear record] Better, even if / bear witness. 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). 
 
 a7id whither I go] i.e. by Death and Ascension. 
 
 but ye cannot tell] Better, But ye know not. They knew neither 
 of these points respecting themselves ; how should they know it re- 
 specting Him? Man knows not either the origin or the issue of liis 
 life. ' Ye ' is emphatic. 
 
 whence I came, and zohither I go] For ' and ' read or with the best 
 MSS. Note the change from 'came,' which refers to the Incarnation, 
 His having once come from the Father, to 'come,' which refers to 
 His perpetual presence with mankind. Note also the balanced pa- 
 rallelism of the verse and comp. w. 35, 38, vii. 6. 
 
 15. Ye judge after the flesh] According to His outward form, the 
 form of a servant : comp. vii. 24. From the context 'judge ' here 
 acquires an adverse sense, and virtually means 'condemn:' comp. 
 
t82 S. JOHN, VIII. [vv. 16—19. 
 
 16 flesh ; I judge no vian. And yet if I judge, my judgment 
 
 is true : for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent 
 
 j:a,\i7 me. It is also written in your law, that the testimony of 
 
 ^^ i8*t'wo men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself, 
 
 19 and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me. Then 
 
 said they unto him, Where is thy Father ? Jesus answered, 
 
 Ye neither know me, nor my Father : if ye had known me, 
 
 iii. 17, 18, vii. 51. Judging Him to be a mere man they had con- 
 demned His testimony respecting Himself as invalid. ' Ye ' and ' I ' 
 are in emphatic opposition, 
 
 I judge no man] Neither 'after the flesh,' nor 'as ye do,' nor 
 anything else is to be supplied. No such addition can be made in 
 V. 16, and therefore cannot be made here. The words are best taken 
 quite simply and literally. ' My mission is not to condemn, but to 
 save and to bless.' Comp. xii. 47. 
 
 16. And yet if I jndge\ Or, But even if I judge, like 'even if I 
 bear witness' (z*. 14). 'I judge no man; not because I have no 
 authority, but because judging is not what I came to do. 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 
 commission yet acting independently ; but of One sent by God acting 
 in union with His Sender.' Comp. v. 30. 
 
 17. // is also written in your law\ Literally, But in the latv also, 
 your law, it is written. ' Your ' is very emphatic ; ' the Law about 
 which you profess to be so jealous. ' Comp. ' Thou art called a Jew, 
 and restest on the Law' (Rom. ii. 17). 
 
 the testimony of two men is true] Better, the witness of two, &c. 
 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 
 a fortiori : if the testimony of two men is true, 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' (i John v. 9). 
 
 18. / am one that bear witness of tnyself] Or, It is I who bear 
 witness of Myself (in My words and works), and there beareth witness 
 of Me the Father, who sent Me (in Scripture and the voice from 
 Heaven). 
 
 19. Then said they] They said therefore. 
 
 Where is thy Father!] 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, ^ Sheiv us the Father: we see one 
 of Thy two witnesses; shew us the other.' 
 
 if ye had known me, &c.] Better, If ye knew Me, ye would know, 
 
vv. 20—22.] S. JOHN, VIII. 183 
 
 ye should have known my Father also. These words spake 20 
 Jesus in the treasury, as he taught in the temple : and no 
 man laid hands on him ; for his hour was not yet come. ^ 
 
 Then said Jesus again unto them, I go my way, and ye 21 
 shall seek me, and shall die in your sina^: whither I go, ye 
 cannot come. Then said the Jews, Will he kill himself.? 22 
 
 &c. (There is a similar error v. 46). It is in the Son that the 
 Father reveals Himself. Comp. xiv. 9, xvi. 3 ; and for the construction 
 comp. V. 42. 
 
 20. in the treasury] 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 ; and if there was, it is not probable that 
 Christ would be able to address the multitude 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 seems 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 \vas teaching 
 close to His enemies' head quarters. 
 
 21. Then said jfesus agaitt unto thein] The name 'Jesus' should 
 be omitted both here and in the preceding verse (see on vi. 14), and 
 'then' should be therefore (see on vi. 45, 53, 68, vii. 15, 30, 33, 
 35, 45). He said, therefore, again to them. 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. There is no distinct mark of time between vii. 37 (the 
 
 (close of the Feast of Tabernacles) and x. 22 (the Feast of the Dedi- 
 cation), an interval of two months. See introductory note to chap. vi. 
 
 I go my way] There is no 'my way' in the Greek; the word is the 
 same as for 'I go' in v. 14 and vii. 33 ; but to avoid abruptness we may 
 render, I go away. Possibly in all three passages there is a side refer- 
 ence to the Jews who were now leaving Jerusalem in great numbers, the 
 Feast of Tabernacles being over. 
 
 shall seek me] See on vii. 33, 34. Here Christ is more explicit; He 
 does not say 'shall not find Me,' but 'shall die in your sin.' So far 
 from finding Him and being delivered by Him, they will perish most 
 miserably. In your sin shall ye die. ' Sin' is emphatic, and is singular, 
 not plural, meaning 'state of sin.' 
 
 22. Will he kill himself?] They see that He speaks of a voluntary 
 departure, and perhaps they suspect that He alludes to His death. So 
 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 !' 
 
i84 S. JOHN, VIII. [w. 23—25, 
 
 23 because he saith, Whither I go, ye cannot come. And he 
 said unto them, Ye are from beneath ; I am from above : 
 
 24 ye are of this world ; I am not of this world. I said there- 
 fore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins : for if ye 
 
 25 believe not that I am he^ ye shall die in your sins. Then 
 said they unto him. Who art thou ? And Jesus saith unto 
 them, Even^the same that I said unto you from the begin- 
 
 23. Ye are from beneath^ At first sight it might seem as if this 
 meant 'ye are from hell.' Christ uses strong language later on (z/. 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.' The pronouns throughout are emphatically opposed. 
 The whole verse is a good instance of 'the spirit of parallelism, the in- ^ 
 forming power of Hebrew poetry,' which runs more or less through the 
 whole Gospel. Comp. xiv. 27. 
 
 24. ye shall die in your sins\ Here 'die' is emphatic, not 'sin ' as 
 '\VlV. 21. Moreover the plural is here correct; it is no longer the state 
 of sin generally, but the separate sins of each that are spoken of. 
 Before it was 'in your sin shall ye die;' here it is 'ye shall die in your 
 sins.' 
 
 for if ye believe not'\ This is the only way in which they can be de- 
 livered — faith in Him. Comp. i. 12, iii. 15 — 18, vi. 40. 
 
 that I a>n he] Better, that I am. It not merely means 'that I am 
 the Messiah,' but is the great name, which every Jew at once under-) 
 stood, I AM. Comp. w. 28, 58, xiii. 19, xviii. 5; Ex. iii. 14; Deuti-^ 
 xxxii. 39; Isa. xliii. 10. 
 
 25. Then said the}'] They said theref ore. 
 
 Who art thou ?] 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 themselves, 
 in this context they are plain enough. As in v. 19, they pretend not to 
 understand, and contemptuously ask, Thou, who art Thoit? The pro- 
 noun 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. 
 
 Evefi the same that I said unto you from the beginning] This is a I 
 passage of well-known difficulty, and the meaning will probably always)*' 
 remain uncertain, (i) It is doubtful whether it is a question or not. 
 (2) Of the six or seven Greek words all excepting the word meaning 'unto 
 you' can have more than one meaning. (3) There is a doubt whether 
 we have six or seven Greek words. To discuss all the possible render- 
 ings would go beyond the scope of this volume. What I from the 
 beginning am also speaking to you of is perhaps as likely as any transla- 
 tion to be right. And it matters little whether it be made interrogative 
 or not. Either, ' Do you ask that of which I have been speaking to you 
 
vv. 26—29.] S. JOHN, VIII. 185 
 
 ning. I have many things to say and to judge of yon : 26 
 but he that sent me is true ; and I speak to the world those 
 things which I have heard of him. They understood not 27 
 that he spake to them of the Father. Then said Jesus unto 23 
 them, When ye have Hft up the Son of man, then shall ye 
 know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but 
 as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things. And 29 
 
 from the first?', in which case it is not unlike Christ's reply to Philip 
 (xiv. 9); or, 'I am that of which I have been speaking to you all 
 along. ' 
 
 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. It is as the Truth and the 
 Light that He appears in these discourses. 
 
 which I have heard of hirn^ Better, what I heard from Him, these 
 things I speak unto the world, i.e. precisely these and nothing else. 
 Comp. V. 39. 
 
 27. They understood not that he spake"] Better, they perceived not 
 that He was speaking. This statement of the Evangelist has seemed 
 to some so unaccountable after v. 18, that they have attempted to make 
 his words mean something else. But the meaning of the words is quite 
 unambiguous, and is not incredible. 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 St John records 
 it. 
 
 28. Then said yesus unto them] Better, as so often (see on v. 21), 
 Therefore said Jesus, i. e. in consequence of their gross want of percep- 
 tion. ' Unto them' is of doubtful authority. 
 
 When ye have lifted up\ On the Cross: comp. iii. 14 and xii. 32. 
 The Crucifixion was the act of the Jews, as Peter tells them in Solomon's 
 Porch (Acts iii. 13 — 15). 
 
 then shall ye know\ Better, then shall ye perceive. It is the same 
 verb as is used in v. 27, and evidently refers back to that (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. 
 
 that I am he] See on v. 24. 
 
 but as my Father hath taught me] Better, 6ut that as My father 
 
l86 S. JOHN, VIII. [vv. 30, 31. 
 
 he that sent me is with me : the Father hath not left me 
 
 30 alone ; for I do always those things that please him. As 
 he spake these words, many believed oji him. 
 
 31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed oa him, 
 
 taught Me, i.e. before the Incarnation; aorist, not perfect, like 'heard' 
 in V. 26. The construction depending on 'then shall ye understand' 
 continues to the end of this verse, and possibly down to 'is with Me.' 
 
 29. iAe Father hath not left me alone] Here again we have an 
 aorist, not a perfect; 'He left Me not alone^ ('the Father' being omitted 
 in the best MSS.). 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 we must keep the aorist ; He left. But if 
 it refers to Christ's experience in each particular case, the perfect may 
 be substituted ; He hath left. In some cases 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. 
 
 for T do always] Or, because the things which are pleasing to Him 
 I always do. 'I' and 'always' are emphatic; and 'always' literally 
 means 'on every occasion,' which is somewhat in favour of the second 
 interpretation in the preceding note. 'He hath never left me alone, 
 because in every case I do what pleaseth Him.' The emphasis on 'I' 
 is perhaps in mournful contrast to the Jews. In any case it is a distinct 
 claim to Divinity. What blasphemous effrontery would such a declara- 
 tion be in the mouth of any but the Incarnate Deity. The theory that 
 Jesus was the noblest and holiest 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. 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. 
 
 30. many believed on him] Nothing exasperated His opponents so 
 much as His success ; and therefore in leading us on to the final cata- 
 strophe, the Evangelist carefully notes the instances in which He won,^ 
 though often only for a time, adherents and believers. See on vi. 15. 
 Among these 'many' were some of the hierarchy {v. 51). 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 to something higher, but under which it 
 breaks down. 
 
 31. Then said yesus to those yews which believed on him] Better, 
 yesus said, therefore, to the yews who had believed Him. There is a 
 change in the expression respecting their belief. In v. 30 S. John 
 
vv. 32—34.] S. JOHN, .VI 1 1. 187 
 
 If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed ; 
 
 and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you 32 
 
 free. They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and .33 ''^ ';''^ 
 
 were never in bondage to any matt : how sayest thou, Ye ' ' ' 
 
 shall be made free? Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, 3t 
 
 I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of 
 
 uses the strong phrase 'believed on Him;' here he uses the much 
 weaker 'believed Him' (see on i. 12), as if to prepare us for the col- 
 lapse of their faith. 
 
 If ye continue, &c.] Or, If ye abide in My word (see on i. 33), ye 
 axe truly My disciples. Both 'ye' and ' My' are emphatic: 'you on 
 your part' — 'the word that is Mine.' "The new converts, who come 
 forward with a profession of faith, receive a word of encouragement as 
 well as of warning. They were not to mistake a momentary impulse 
 for a deliberate conviction." S. p. 155. ' If ye abide in My word, so 
 that it becomes the permanent condition of your life, then are ye My 
 disciples in truth, and not merely in appearance after being carried 
 away for the moment.' 
 
 32. the truth\ Both Divine doctrine (xvii. 17) and Christ Himself 
 (xiv. 6) ' whose service is perfect freedom.' See on xviii. 37. 
 
 shall make you free] Free from the moral slavery of sin. Comp. 
 the Stoics' dictum — ' The wise man alone is free.' 
 
 33. They answered him] Or, unto Him, according to the best 
 MSS. 'They' must mean 'the Jews who had believed Him' [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 mo- 
 mentary belief, as well as to those who had never believed at all. 
 
 Abraham^ s seed] Comp. 'kings of peoples shall be of her' (Sarah), 
 and 'thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies' (Gen. xvii. 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. Some, who think such forget- 
 fulness incredible, interpret ' we have never been laivftclly 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 to be slaves. 'But we know that already.' This, however," 
 is somewhat 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. iii. 4, iv. 15, vi. 34. 
 
 34. Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin] Better, Every- j^' 
 one who continues to commit sin is the bond-servant of sin. ' Com- 
 mitteth sin' is too weak for the Greek: Christ does not say that a 
 single act of sin enslaves. 'To commit (poiein) sin' is the opposite of 
 
i88 S. JOHN, VIII. [xv. 35—38. 
 
 35 sin. And the servant abideth not in the house for ever : 
 
 36 but the son abideth ever. If the Son therefore shall make 
 
 37 you free, ye shall be free indeed. I know that ye are^ 
 Abraham's seed ; but ye seek to kill me, because my word 
 
 38 hath no place in you. I speak that which I have seen with 
 
 'to do the Truth' (iii. 21). Again, 'servant,' though often a good 
 translation where nothing degrading is implied, is not strong enough, 
 where, as here, the degradation is the main point. Moreover, the 
 connexion with z^. 33 must be kept up. The words for 'bondage' and 
 'servant' are cognate; therefore either 'bondage' and 'bond-servant,' 
 or 'slavery' and 'slave,' must be our renderings. 
 
 Some have thought that we have here an echo of Rom. vi. 16, which 
 of course S. John may have seen. But why may not both passages be 
 original? The idea that vice is slavery is common in all literature: 
 frequent in the classics. 2 Pet. ii. 19 is probably an echo either of thisv 
 passage or of Rom. vi. 16. Comp. Matt. vi. 24. 
 
 35. And the servant, &c.] 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. " The thought is throughout profound and instructive ; and to a 
 Jew, always ready to picture to himself the theocracy or the kingdom 
 of heaven under the form of a household, it would be easily intelligible." 
 S. p. 157. 
 
 36. If the Son therefore, &c.] As before, any son is meant. ' If the 
 son ematficipates you, your freedom is secured ; for he is always on the 
 spot to see that his emancipation is carried out.' The statement is 
 general, but of course with special reference to the Son of God. If 
 they will abide in His word {v. 31), He will abide in them (vi. 56), 
 and will take care that the bondage from which His word has freed 
 them is not thrust upon them again. 
 
 shall be free indeed"] Not the same word as is translated 'indeed' in 
 z*. 31. 'Indeed' or 'in reality' may do here; 'in truth' or 'truly' in 
 z*. 31. Both words are opposed to mere appearance. 
 
 37. Christ's words seem gradually to take a wider range. They 
 are no longer addressed merely to those who for a moment had believed 
 on Him, but to His opponents generally, whose ranks these short- 
 lived believers had joined. 
 
 Abraham^ s seed] 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 {v. 39). Comp. ' neither, because they are 
 the seed of Abraham, are they all children' (Rom. ix. 8). 
 
 hath no place in yoti] Rather, maketh no advance in you. His 
 word had found place in them for a very short time ; but it made no 
 progress in their hearts: it did not abide in tliem and they did not 
 abide in it [v. 31). They had stifled it and cast it out. 
 
 38. / sfeak, &c.] The text here is a Httle uncertain, but the fol- 
 
vv. 39—41.] S. JOHN, VIII. 189 
 
 my Father : and ye do that which ye have seen with your 
 father. They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our 39 
 father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's 
 children, ye would do the works of Abraham. But now 4° 
 ye seek to kill me, a man. that hath told you the truth, 
 which I have heard of God : this did not Abraham, Ye 41 
 do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him. We 
 
 lowing seems to have most authority ; / speak the things which / 
 have seen with {My) Father: ye also, therefore, do the things which 
 ye heard from [yom^ father. ' I speak those truths of which I have 
 had direct knowledge from all eternity with the Father ; you, there- 
 fore, following My relation to the Father, commit those sins which 
 your father suggested to you.' Christ does not say who their father is; 
 but he means that morally they are the children of the devil. The 
 'therefore' (rare in discourses) is severely ironical. The connexion of 
 V. 38 with V. 37 is not quite obvious. Perhaps it is this: — My words 
 make no progress in you, because they are so different in origin and 
 nature from your acts, especially your attempt to kill Me. It is pos- 
 sible to take the latter half of the verse as an imperative ; and do ye 
 therefore the things which ye heard from the Father. 
 
 39. Abraham is our father'X They see that He means some other 
 father than Abraham ; possibly they suspect His full meaning, soon to 
 be expressed {v. 44). 
 
 If ye were Abrahatri's children] The true reading seems to be, if ye 
 are Abraham^ s children, which has been altered to 'if ye were,^ so as 
 to run more smoothly with the second clause. But the reading of the 
 second verb is also doubtful, and perhaps we should read, do (imper.) 
 the works of Abraham. 
 
 40. ' On the contrary, ye seek to commit murder, and a murder of 
 the most heinous kind. Ye would kill One who hath spoken unto 
 you the truth, tiiith which He learnt from God.' 
 
 a 7nan that hath told you] This pointed insertion of 'man' possibly 
 looks forward to v. 44, where they are called the children of the great 
 man-slayer, lusting like him for blood. The Lord nowhere else uses i/^ 
 this term of Himself. 
 
 this did not Abrakatn] A litotes or understatement of the truth. 
 Abraham's life was utterly unlike the whole tenour of theirs. What 
 could there be in common between 'the Friend of God' (Jas. ii. 23) and 
 the enemies of God's Son? 
 
 41. Ye do the deeds of your father] Better, Ye are doing the works 
 of your father. The word here rendered 'deeds' is the same as that 
 rendered 'works' in v. 39. 'Ye' is emphatic, in contrast to Abraham. 
 This shews them plainly that spiritual parentage is what He means. In 
 v. 39 they still cling to Abraham, although He has evidently assigned 
 them some other father. Here they drop literal parentage and adopt 
 His figurative language. 'You are speaking of spiritual parentage. 
 Well, our spiritual Father is God.' 
 
igo S. JOHN, VIII. [vv. 42, 43. 
 
 be not born of fornication ; we have one Father, even God. 
 
 42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would 
 love me : for I proceeded forth and came from God ; 
 
 43 neither came I of myself, but he sent me. Why do ye not 
 understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my 
 
 We be not born offornication\ The meaning of this is vei^ much dis- 
 puted. The following are the chief explanations : (i) Thou hast denied 
 that we are the children of Abraham, then we must be the children of 
 some 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) 'We 
 are not a 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 com- 
 monly known, and this foul Jewish lie, perpetuated from the second 
 century onwards (Origen, c. Celsum I. xxxii.), was not yet in exis- 
 tence. (5) 'We were not born of spiritual fornication; our sonship hasi 
 not been polluted with idolatry. If thou art speaking of spirituali 
 parentage, 'we have one Father, even God.' This last seems the best. 
 Idolatry is so constantly spoken of as whoredom and fornication through- 
 out the whole of the O.T., that in a discussion about spiritual father- 
 hood this image would be perfectly natural in the mouth of a Jew. 
 Exod. xxxiv. 15, 16; Lev. xvii. 7; Judg. ii. 17; 2 Kgs. ix. 11; Ps. 
 Ixxiii. 27; Isa. i. 21', Jer. iii. i, 9; Ezek. xvi. 15; &c. &c. See esp. 
 Hos. ii. 4. There is a proud emphasis on 'we;' — ^we are not idolaters, 
 like Thy friends the Gentiles' (comp. vii. 35). 
 
 we have one Father\ Or, one Father we have, with emphasis on the 
 'one,' in contrast to the many gods of the heathen. 
 
 42. Moral proof that God is not their father; if they were God's 
 children they would love His Son. Comp. xv. 23, and 'every one that 
 loveth Him that begat loveth Him also that is begotten of Him' 
 (i John V. i). For the construction comp. v. 19, v. 46, ix. 41, xv. 19, 
 xiii. 36 : in all these cases we have imperfects, not aorists. Contrast 
 iv. 10, xi. 21, 32, xiv. 28. 
 
 I proceeded forth and came from God'\ Rather, /came out (see on 
 xvi. 28) from God and am here from God among you. Surely then 
 God's true children would recognise and love Me. 
 
 neither came I of myself] Rather, For not even of Myself have I 
 come. The 'for' must on no account be omitted; it introduces a proof 
 that He is come from God. ' For (not only have I not come from any 
 other than God) I have not even come of My own self-determination.' 
 
 43. my speech... f//jy word] 'Speech' is the outward expression, the 
 language used; 'thy speech bewrayeth thee' (Matt. xxvi. 73; comp. 
 Mark xiv. 70). Besides these two passages the word for 'speech' is 
 used only iv. 42, where it is rendered 'saying,' and here. 'Word' is the 
 meaning of the expression, the teaching conveyed in the language used. 
 They perpetually misunderstand His language, because they cannot 
 
V. 44-] S. JOHN, VIII. 191 
 
 word. Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of 44 
 your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the 
 beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no 
 
 appreciate His meaning. They are 'from beneath' {v. 23), and He is 
 speaking of 'tilings above' (Col. iii. i); they are 'of this world,' and 
 He is telling of 'heavenly things' (iii. 12); they are 'natural,' and He is 
 teaching 'spiritual things' (i Cor. ii. 14; see note there). They '<:a«- 
 «o/hear;' it is a moral impossibility: they have their whole character 
 to change before they can understand spiritual truths. 
 
 44. Ye are of your father the devill At last Christ says plainly, what 
 He has implied in w. 38 and 41. 'Ye' is emphatic; 'ye, who boast 
 that ye have Abraham and God as your Father, ye are morally the 
 Devil's children.' Comp. i John iii. 8, 10, which 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 wdcked one' (Matt. xiii. 38); 'ye make him 
 twofold more the child of hell than yourselves' (Matt, xxiii. 15). With 
 this denunciation generally compare those contained in Matt. xi. 20 — 24, 
 xxiii. 13 — 36. "It is likely that dialogues of this sort would be of not 
 infrequent occurrence, especially just at this time when the conflict is 
 reaching its climax. It is likely too that they would be of the nature of 
 dialogues broken by impatient interruptions on the part of the Jews, 
 and not always a continuous strain of denunciation as in Matt, xxiii." 
 S. p. 159. 
 
 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 demonology, 
 according to which the father of the devil is the God of the Jews, is 
 utterly unscriptural, and does not suit the context here. 
 
 and the lusts of your father ye will do] Rather, ye will to do. See 
 on vi. 67, vii. 17 ; and comp. v. 40. 'Ye love to gratify the lusts which 
 characterize him, especially the lust for blood. Being his children, ye 
 are like him in nature.' 
 
 Ife was a murderer from the beginning] The word for 'murderer' 
 etymologically means 'man-slayer,' and seems to connect this passage 
 with V. 40 (see note there). The devil was a murderer by causing the 
 Fall, and thus bringing death into the world. Comp. 'God created 
 man to be immoi tal, 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' (i John iii. 12, 15). 
 
 and abode not in the truth] Rather, ajtd staudeth not in the truth. 
 The verb is not S. John's favourite word 'abide' (see on i. 33), but 
 
192 S. JOHN, VIII. [vv. 45-48. 
 
 truth in him. When he speaketh a he, he speaketh of his 
 
 45 own : for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I 
 
 46 tell you the truth, ye believe me not. Which of you con- 
 vinceth me of sin ? And if I say the truth, why do ye not 
 
 47 believe me ? He that is of God heareth God's words : ye 
 43 therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God. Then 
 
 (according to the common reading) the same that is used in i. 35, iii. •29, 
 vii. 37, &c. Though perfect in form it is present in meaning: therefore 
 not 'hath stood,' still less 'stood' or 'abode,' but standeth. The true 
 reading, however, is probably not hesteken, but esteken, the imperfect of 
 stekein (i. 26; Rom. xiv. 4), a stronger form of the verb; stood firm. 
 Truth is a region from which the devil has long since departed. 
 
 he speaketh of his owii] Literally, he speaketh out of his own; out of 
 his own resources, out of his own nature; the outcome is what might be 
 expected from him. 
 
 for he is a liar, and the fatlier ofit'\ Better, because he is a liar and 
 the father thereof, i.e. father of the har, rather than father of the lie 
 (understood in liar). Here again a monstrous misinterpretation is gram- 
 matically possible; — 'for he is ^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 S. John. It is 
 strange that any modern critics should have thought demonology so 
 extravagant compatible with the theology of the Fourth Gospel. 
 
 45. And because I tell you, &c.] Better, But because I speak the 
 truth, ye do not believe me. 'Ye will listen to the devil [v. 38) ; ye will 
 believe a lie: but the Messiah speaking the truth ye will not believe.' 
 The tragic tone once more: comp. i. 5, 10, 11, ii. 24, iii. 10, 19, &c. 
 
 46. Which ofyoii convinceth me of sin?] Or, convicteth Me of sin (see 
 on iii. 20). Many rebuked Christ and laid sin to His charge: none brought 
 sin home to His conscience. There is the majesty of Divinity in the chal- 
 lenge. What mortal man would dare to make it? See on v. 29, and 
 comp. xiv. 30, and xv. lo; i John iii. 5; i Pet. i. 19, ii. 22. Note 
 the implied connexion between sin generally and falsehood, as between 
 righteousness and truth, vii. 18. 
 
 And if I say the truth] Better, If I say truth. No MSS. have the 
 article, and the best MSS. omit the conjunction. ' If I am free from 
 sin (and none of you can convict Me of sin), I am free from falsehood 
 and speak the truth. Why then do ye on your part refuse to believe 
 Me?' ' Ye ' is emphatic. 
 
 47. Christ answers His own question and at the same time gives a 
 final disproof of their claim to call God their father {v. 41). 
 
 heareth God^s 7vords] Christ here assumes, what He elsewhere 
 maintains explicitly, that He speaks the words of God [v. 16, iii. 34, 
 vii. 16, xvii. 8). 
 
 ye therefore hear them not] Better, for this cause (xii. 18, 27) ye heat 
 not. It is not S. John's favourite particle 'therefore,' but, as in 
 V. 16, 18, vi. 65, vii. 22 (see notes there), a preposition and pronoun 
 
V. 49] S. JOHN, VIII. 193 
 
 answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well 
 that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil? Jesus an- 49 
 swered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and 
 
 with which he not unfrequently begins a sentence to prepare the 
 way for a ' because ' afterwards. These characteristics of his language 
 should be preserved in English, and kept distinct, so far as is possible. 
 In the First Epistle he uses the very same test as Christ here applies 
 to the Jews ; ' 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' (iv. 6). 
 
 48. Then answered the ^ews] The best MSS. omit the particle, 
 which if it were genuine should be rendered ' therefore,' not 'then:' 
 The Jews answered. This denial of their national prerogative of being 
 sons of God seems to them malicious frenzy. He must be an enemy of 
 the peculiar people and be possessed. 
 
 Say we not well] i.e. rightly: comp. iv. 17, xiii. 13, xviii. 23. *We' 
 is emphatic; 'we at any rate are right.' 
 
 /hat thou art a Samaritan'] " Nowhere else do we find the designa- 
 tion ' a Samaritan ;' yet it might naturally — we might say inevitably — 
 be given to one who seemed to attack the exclusive privileges of the 
 Jewish people." S. pp. 159, 160. 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 Tabernacles. The parable of the Good Samaritan was probably not 
 yet spoken. 
 
 and hast a devil] It is unfortunate that we have not two words in our 
 Bible to distinguish diabolos, ' the Devil ' (v. 44, xiii. 1 ; Matt. iv. i ; 
 Luke viii. 12 ; &c., &c.), from daimonion or daimdn, ' a devil,' or ' un- 
 clean spirit.' 'Fiend,' which Wiclif sometimes employs (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. / have not a devil] He does not notice the charge of being a 
 Samaritan. For Him it contained nothing offensive, for Re 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 ' / have not a demon, but ye have. ' 
 Rather it means '/ have not a demon, but honour My Father; whde 
 yotc on the contrary dishonour My Father through Me.' 
 
 S.JOHN 13 
 
194 S. JOHN, VIII. [vv. 50—53. 
 
 50 ye do dishonour me. And I seek not mine own glory : 
 
 51 there is one that seeketh and judgeth. Verily, verily, I say 
 unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see 
 
 52 death. Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that 
 thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets ; 
 and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never 
 
 53 taste of death. Art thou greater than our father Abraham, 
 
 50. And I seek not mine own glory'] Better, But I seek not My glory. 
 ' It is not because I seek glory for Myself that I speak of your dis- 
 honouring Me : My Father seeks that for Me and pronounces judgment 
 on you.' Comp. v. 54 and v. 41. 
 
 51. If a man keep my saying] Better, if a man keep Afy word. 
 This is important, to shew the connexion with verses 31 and 43 and also 
 with V. 24. In all these the same Greek word is used, logos. The 
 phrase * keep My word ' is one of frequent occurrence in this Gospel : 
 verses 52, 55, xiv. 23, xv. 20, xvii. 6 : as also the kindred phrase ' keep 
 My commandments:' xiv. 15, 21, xv. 10: comp. i John ii. 3, 4, 5, iii. 
 22, 24, V. 2, 3. 'Keeping' means not merely keeping in heart, but 
 obeying and fulfilling. This is the way in which they may escape the 
 judgment just spoken of. So that there is no need to suppose that 
 while verses 49, 50 are addressed to His opponents, 2/. 51 is addressed 
 after a pause to a more friendly section, a change of which there is no 
 hint. 
 
 shall never see death] Literally, shall certainly not behold death for 
 ever. But 'for ever' belongs, like the negative, to the verb, not to 
 ' death.' It does not mean ' he shall see death, but the death shall not 
 be eternal:' rather 'he shall certainly never see death,' i.e. he already 
 has eternal life (v. 24) and shall never lose it. 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 the 
 same, 'shall certainly never.' Comp. x. 28, xi. 26. 
 
 62. Now we know that thou hast a devil] ' It was somewhat of 
 a conjecture before, but now we recognise clear evidence of it.' 
 
 Abraham is dead] Abraham died. Again they shew a gross want 
 of perception and ' do not understand His speech ' {v. 43). They can- 
 not discern a spiritual truth, but understand Him to be speaking 
 of physical death. ' My saying ' should be ' My word ' as in f. 51. 
 
 he shall never taste of death] In their excitement they exaggerate 
 His language. The metaphor ' taste of death ' is not taken from a 
 death-cup, but from the general idea of bitterness. It is frequent in the 
 classics. 
 
 63. Art thou greater] Exactly parallel to iv. 12. 'Thou' is emphatic: 
 ' Surely Thou art not greater than our father Abraham, who died ? — 
 And the prophets died.' An anacoluthon, like their exaggeration, very 
 naturaL Strictly the sentence should run, ' and than the prophets, who 
 died?' 
 
w- 54—57-] S. JOHN, VIII. 195 
 
 which is dead ? and the prophets are dead : whom makest 
 thou thyself? Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my s^ 
 honour is nothing : it is my Father that honoureth me ; of 
 whom ye say, that he is your God : yet ye have not known 55 
 him ; but I know him : and if I should say, I know him 
 not, I shall be a liar like unto you : but I know him, and 
 keep his saying. Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my 56 
 day : and he saw it, and was glad. Then said the Jews s? 
 
 64 — 66. 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. If I honour myself] Better, If I shall have glorified Myself, 
 My glory is nothing. It is not the same word as is rendered ' honour ' 
 in V. 49, therefore another English word is desirable. There is My 
 Father who glorlfieth Ale — in miracles and the Messianic work generally. 
 Comp. V. 50. 
 
 55. Yet ye have not known him ; but I know hini\ Once more we 
 have two different Greek words for ' know ' in close proximity, and the 
 difference is obliterated in our version (comp. vii. 15, 17, -26, 27, xiii. 7, 
 xiv. 7, and see on vii. 26). Here the meaning is, And ye have not 
 recognised Him; but I know Him, the latter clause referring to His 
 immediate essential knowledge of the Father. 
 
 a liar like unto you] Or, Like unto you, a liar. Referring back to 
 V. 44. 
 
 keep his saying] Or, keep His word, as in verses 51, 52. Christ's 
 whole life was a continual practice of obedience: Heb. v. 8; Rom. v. 
 19; Phil. ii. 8. 
 
 66. rejoiced to see my day] Literally, 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 S. John's prefer- 
 ence for the construction expressing a purpose, where other construc- 
 tions 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. 
 
 and he saw it, and was glad] A very important passage with regard 
 to the intermediate state, shewing that the soul does not, as some main- 
 tain, 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 plain statement of the fact. The word for ' was glad ' expresses 
 a calmer, less emotional joy than the word for ' rejoiced,' and therefore 
 both are appropriate : ' exulted ' while still on earth ; ' was glad ' in 
 Hades. Thus the ' Communion of Saints ' is assured, not merely in 
 parables (Luke xvi. 27, 28), but in the plainer words of Scripture. 
 Comp. Heb. xii. i. 
 
 67. Theti said the Jews] Better, Therefore said the Jews. 
 
 13—2 
 
196 S. JOHN, VIII. [vv. s8, 59. 
 
 unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou 
 
 58 seen Abraham ? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say 
 
 59 unto you. Before Abraham was, I am. Then took they up 
 stones to cast at him : but Jesus hid himself, and went out 
 of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so 
 passed by. 
 
 Thou art not yet fifty years ol<r\ The reading, ' forty years,' which 
 Chrysostom 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 tradition that He taught at a much later age. He says (ll. xxii. 5), 
 a quadrigesirno auteni et quiiiqztagesifno anno declmat jam in aetatem 
 seniorem, quam habens Dominns Piaster ducebat, sicut evangeliiim et 
 omnes seniores testantur qui in Asia apud yoannem discipulum Domini 
 convenerunt. By ' evangelium ' he probably means this passage. But 
 ' fifty years ' is a round number, the Jewish traditional age of full man- 
 hood (Num. iv. 3, 39, viii. 24, 25). There is no reason to suppose that 
 Jesus was nearly fifty, or looked nearly fifty. In comparing His age 
 with the 2000 years since Abraham the Jews would not care to be pre- 
 cise so long as they were within the mark. 
 
 58. Be/ore Abraham was, I am] Here our translators have lament- 
 ably gone back from earlier translations. Cranmer has, ' Ere Abraham 
 ivas born, I am ;' and the Rhemish, 'Before that Abraham was made, I 
 am,' following the Vulgate, Antequam Abraham fieret. Ego sum. See 
 notes on 'was' in i. 1, 6. 'I am' 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. 
 
 59. Then took they up stones'] Or, Therefore took they up stones, i.e. 
 in consequence of His last words. They see clearly what He means. 
 He has taken to Himself the Divine Name and they prepare to stone 
 Him for blasphemy. Material lying there for completing and re- 
 pairing the Temple would supply them with missiles. Comp. x. 31, 33. 
 
 but Jesus hid himself] 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. Here we need not sup- 
 pose 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 multitude 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.' 
 
 going through the midst of them, and so passed by] These words are 
 apparently an insertion, and probably an adaptation of Luke iv. 
 30. No English Version previous to the one of 161 1 contains the 
 passage. 
 
 As a comment on the whole discourse see i Pet. ii. 22, 23, remem- 
 bering that S. Peter was very possibly present on the occasion. 
 
vv. I, 2.] S. JOHN, IX. 197 
 
 Chap. IX. Christ the Source of Truth and Light illustrated 
 by a Sign. 
 
 I — 5. The Prelude to the Sign. 
 
 And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind 9 
 from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, 2 
 Master, who did sin, this mati, or his parents, that he was 
 
 " 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 ver. 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 was in all probability 
 drawn by a Jew who had been himself an early disciple of Christ." S. 
 p. 160. 
 
 Chap. IX. Christ 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 re- 
 vealed to his soul. 
 
 1 — 5. The Prelude to the Sign. 
 
 1. And as "Jesus passed dj/] Or, And as He was passing by. This 
 was possibly on His way from the Temple (viii. 59), or it may refer to 
 a later occasion near the Feast of the Dedication (x. 22). We know 
 that this man begged for his living {v. 8), and that beggars frequented 
 the gates of the Temple (Acts iii. 2), as they frequent the entrances of 
 foreign churches now. 
 
 blind from his birtli\ The man would be repeatedly stating this fact 
 to passers by. The Greek for ' from his birth ' occurs nowhere else in 
 N. T. Justin Martyr uses the phrase twice of those whom Christ 
 healed ; Trypho LXix. ; Apol. i. xxii. No source is so probable as 
 this verse, for nowhere else is there an account of Christ's healing 
 a congenital disease. See on i. 23 and iii. 3. 
 
 2. Masier'\ Better, Rabbi : see on i v. 31. 
 
 who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind ?\ 
 Literally, that he should be born blind (see note on viii. 56). 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 connected with the suffering being 
 specially mentioned, without much thought as to possibilities or pro- 
 babilities. But this is not quite satisfactory. The disciples name 
 
198 S. JOHN, IX. [vv. 3, 4. 
 
 3 born blind? Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, 
 nor his parents : but that the works of God should be made 
 
 4 manifest in him. I must work the works of him that sent 
 
 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 Commandment and of every 
 one's experience. But how could a man be born blind for his own sin? 
 Four answers have been suggested, (i) The predestinarian notion 
 that the man was punished for sins which God knew he would commit 
 in the course of 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-exi.^tence 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 a connexion between suffering and sin in in- 
 dividuals (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. 
 
 but that] i.e. he was born blind in order that. This elliptical use of 
 ' but (in order) that ' is common in S. John, and illustrates his fondness 
 for the construction expressing a purpose : see on i. 8 and viii. 56. 
 
 the works of God] All those in which He manifests Himself, not 
 miracles only. Comp. xi. 4. There is an undoubted reference to this 
 passage (i — 3) in the Clementine Homilies (xix. 22), the dale of which 
 is about A. D. 150. Comp. x. 9, 27. 
 
 4. I must work, &c.] The reading here is somewhat dcJubtful, as to 
 whether 'I* or 'we,' 'Me' or 'us' is right in each case. The best 
 authorities give, We ?nust work the works of Him that sent Me, and this, 
 the more difficult reading, is probably correct. Some copyists altered 
 'we' into 'I' to make it agree with 'Me,' others altered 'Me' into 'us' 
 to make it agree with 'we.' 
 
 ' 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. So also He says 'My Father' and 'your 
 Father,' 'My God' and 'your God;' but not 'our Father,' or 'our 
 God ' (xx. 17). 
 
vv. 5—7.] S. JOHN^ IX. r99 
 
 me, while it is day : the night cometh, when no man can 
 work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of 5 
 the world. 
 
 6 — 12. The Sign. 
 
 When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, 6 
 and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes 
 of the blind man with the clay, and said unto him, Go, 7 
 wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, 
 
 ■while it is day] Or, so long as ii is day, i. e. so long as we have 
 life. Day and night here mean, as so often in Hterature of all kinds, 
 life and death. Other explanations, e. g. opportune and inopportune 
 moments, the presence of Christ in the world and His withdrawal from 
 it, — are less simple and less suitable to the context. If 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), wheti no one can work. ' No 
 one;' not even Christ Himself as man upon earth: comp. xi. 7 — 10; 
 Ps. civ. 23. 
 
 5. As long as I am in the world] Better, Whensoever / am in the 
 world ; it is not the same construction as 'so long as it is day.' 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.' 
 
 /am the light of the world'\ Or, I am light to the world: no article. 
 Contrast viii. 12. 
 
 6—12. The Sign. 
 
 6. anointed the eyes of the blind man wi/h the clay] ' Of the 
 blind man ' should probably be omitted, ' of it ' inserted, and the ren- 
 dering in the margin adopted : spread the clay of it (clay made with 
 the spittle) upon his eyes. 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. Else- 
 where He uses spittle; to heal a blind man (Mark viii. 23); to heal a 
 deaf and dumb man (Mark vii. 33). Spittle was believed to be a 
 remedy for diseased eyes (comp. Vespasian's reputed miracle, Tac. 
 Nist. IV. 81, and other instances); 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. 32). This helps us to con- 
 clude why He willed to use means, instead of healing without even a 
 word ; viz. to help the faith of the sufferer. It is easier to believe, when 
 means can be perceived ; it is still easier, when the means seem to be 
 appropriate. 
 
 7. wash in the pool] Literally, wash ittto the pool, i. e. ' wash off 
 
7.00 S. JOHN, IX. [vv. 8— II. 
 
 Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came 
 seeing. 
 
 8 The neighbours therefore, and they which before had 
 seen him that he was bhnd, said, Is not this he that sat and 
 
 9 begged ? Some said, This is he : others said, He is Hke 
 
 10 him : but he said, I am he. Therefore said they unto him, 
 
 11 How were thine eyes opened ? He answered and said, A 
 man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed mine 
 
 the clay into the pool,' or, 'go to the pool and wash.' The washing 
 was probably part of the means of healing (comp. Naaman) and was a 
 strong test of the man's faith. 
 
 Si/oam] Satisfactorily identified with Birket Silw&n 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. 
 
 which is by interpretation^ Literally, which is interpreted. 
 
 Sent'\ This is an admissible interpretation ; but the original meaning 
 is rather Sending, i. e. outlet of waters, 'the waters of Shiloah that go 
 softly' (Isa. viii. 6). S. John sees in the word ' nomen et omen ' of the 
 man's cure. Perhaps he sees also that this water from the rock is an 
 image of Him who was sent from the Father. 
 
 and came seeittg] ' Came,' not back to Christ, who had probably 
 gone away meanwhile (v. 12), but to his own home, as would appear 
 from what follows. Has any poet ever attempted to describe this man's 
 emotions on first seeing the world in which he had lived so long ? 
 
 "The scene in which the man returns seeing and is questioned by his 
 neighbours, is vividly described. So too is the whole of that which 
 follows, when the Pharisees come upon the stage. We may accept it 
 with little short of absolute credence. If the opponents of miracles 
 could produce a single Jewish document, in which any event, known not 
 to have happened, was described with so much minuteness and 
 verisimilitude, then it would be easier to agree with them." S. pp. 
 162, 163. 
 
 8. had seen him, that he was blind'\ The true reading is, saw him 
 that he was a beggax, or perhaps, because he was a beggar, i. e. he was 
 often seen in public places. 
 
 he that sat and begged^ Or, h^ that sitteth and beggeth ; present parti- 
 ciples with the article to express his general habit. 
 
 9. Some said'\ Or, Otbers said, making three groups of speakers 
 in all. 
 
 He is like him\ The better reading is, No, but he is like him. The 
 opening of his eyes would greatly change his look and manner : this 
 added to the extreme improbability of a cure made them doubt his 
 identity. 
 
 11. A man that is called Jesus'X This looks as if he had heard 
 
vv. 12—14.] S. JOHN, IX. 201 
 
 eyes, and said unto me, Go to the pool of Siloam, and 
 wash : and I went and washed, and I received sight. 
 Then said they unto him, Where is he ? He said, I know 12 
 not. 
 
 13 — 41. Opposite Results of the Sign. 
 
 They brought to the Pharisees him that aforetime was 13 
 bUnd. And it was the sabbath day when Jesus made the m 
 
 little of the fame of Jesus. But the better reading gives, 'The man that 
 is called Jesus,' which points the other way. 
 
 made clay\ He does not say how, for this he had not seen. The rest 
 he tells in order. Omit the words ' the pool of.' 
 
 /received sight] The Greek may mean either 'I looked up,' as in 
 Mark vi. 41, vii. 34, xvi. 4, &c. ; or ' I recovered sight,' as Matt. xi. 5; 
 Mark x. 51, 52, &c. ' I looked up ' does not suit w. 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. Where is he .?] That strange (ekeinos) Rabbi who perplexes us 
 so much. 
 
 / knoiv not\ This shews that he did not return to Jesus after he was 
 healed {v. 7). ' He said' should be, He salth. 
 
 13 — 41. Opposite Results of the Sign. 
 
 13. They brought, &c.] Better, they bring him to the Pharisees, him 
 that once was blind. These friends and neighbours are perhaps well- 
 meaning people, not intending to make mischief. But they are uncom- 
 fortable 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 Sanhedrin is 
 'the chief priests and (the) Pharisees' (vii. 45, xi. 47, 57, xviii. 3), or 
 ' the Pharisees and the chief priests ' (vii. 32). 
 
 14. it was the sabbath'] We cannot be sure whether this is the last 
 day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vii. 37) or the next Sabbath. There 
 were seven miracles of mercy wrought on the Sabbath s i. Withered 
 hand (Matt. xii. 9) ; 2. Demoniac at Capernaum (Mark i. 21); 3. Si- 
 mon's wife's mother (Mark i. 29) ; 4. Woman bowed down eighteen 
 years (Luke xiii. 14) ; 5. Dropsical man (Luke xiv. i); 6. Paralytic at 
 Bethesda (John v. 10) ; 7. Man bom blind. 
 
202 S. JOHN, IX. [vv. 15—19. 
 
 rs clay, and opened his eyes. Then again the Pharisees also 
 asked him how he had received his sight. He said unto 
 them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and do 
 
 £6 see. Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is 
 not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. 
 Others said. How can a man that is a sinner do such mira- 
 
 i7cles? And there was a division among them. They say 
 unto the blind man again, What sayest thou of him, that 
 he hath opened thine eyes? He said. He is a prophet. 
 
 18 But the Jews did not beheve concerning him, that he had 
 been blind, and received his sight, until they called the 
 
 rg parents of him that had received his sight. And they asked 
 
 15. Then again] Better, Again, therefore. The man is becoming 
 impatient of this cross-questioning : he answers much more briefly than 
 at first (v. 11). 
 
 16. This matt is not of God'] Comp. * He casteth out devils through 
 the prince of the devils' (Matt. ix. 34); like this, an argument of the 
 Pharisees. The fact of a miracle is not denied : but it cannot have been 
 done with God's help; therefore it was done with the devil's help. 
 
 How can a man that is a sinner, &c.] The less bigoted, men like 
 Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, shew that the argument cuts both 
 ways. They also start from the ' sign,' but arrive at an opposite con- 
 clusion. Comp. Nicodemus' question, vii. 51. Perhaps Christ's teach- 
 ing about the Sabbath (v. 17 — 23) has had some effect. 
 
 there was a division] See on vii. 43. 
 
 17. There being a division among them they appeal to the man him- 
 self, 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 IVhat sayest thou of Him, because He opened thine eyes? 
 ' Thou ' is emphatic ; ' thou shouldest know so.mething of Him.' They 
 do not raise the question of fact ; the miracle as yet is not in dispute. 
 His answer shews that only one question is asked, and that it is not the 
 question of fact. 
 
 He is a prophet] i.e. one sent by God to declare His will; a man 
 with a special and Divine mission; not necessarily predicting the future. 
 Comp. iv. 19, iii. 2. 
 
 18. But the Jews did not believe] Better, 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 z/. 22 S. 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). 
 
 19. Three questions in legal form. Is this your son? Was he born 
 blind? How does he now see? 
 
vv. 20—24.] S. JOHN, IX. 203 
 
 them, saying, Is this your son, who ye say was born bUnd? 
 how then doth he now see ? His parents answered them 20 
 and said. We know that this is our son, and that he was 
 born blind : but by what means he now seeth, we know 21 
 not ; or who hath opened his eyes, we know not : he is of 
 age ; ask him : he shall speak for himself. These words 22 
 spake his parents, because they feared the Jews : for the 
 Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that 
 he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue. 
 Therefore said his parents, He is of age ; ask him. Then 'J 
 
 •who ye say\ Emphasis on 'ye,' implying 'we do not believe it;' 
 literally, of whom ye say that he was born blind. 
 
 21. by what means] Better, how, as in vv. 10, 15, 19, 26. In their 
 timidity they keep close to the precise questions asked. 
 
 who hath opened] Better, who opened. 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 \f\\\ speak concerning himself.' See on 
 V. 23. 
 
 22. had agreed] It does not appear when ; but we are probably to 
 understand an informal agreement among themselves rather than a 
 decree of the Sanhedrin. A formal decree would be easily obtained 
 afterwards. The word for ' agreed ' is used of the agreement with Judas 
 (Luke xxii. 5, where it is translated 'covenanted'), and of the agreement 
 of the Jews to kill S. Paul (Acts xxiii. 20), and nowhere else. 'As- 
 sented' in Acts xxiv. 9 is a different compound of the same verb. 
 
 that if any man] Literally, in order that if any man: what they 
 agreed upon is represented as the purpose of their agreement. See on 
 w. 2, 3, and viii. 56. 
 
 put out of the synagogue] i. e. excommunicated. The Jews had three 
 kinds of anathema, (i) 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 V4as very rarely if ever used. It is doubtful whether the second 
 was in use at this time for Jews ; 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 
 (Judg. V. 23) : Comp. Ezra x. 8. The word for 'out of the synagogue' 
 is peculiar to S. John, occurring xii. 42, xvi. 2, and nowhere else. 
 
 23. Therefore] Better, For this cause (xii. i8, 27): comp. i. 31, 
 V. 16, 1 8, vi. 65, viii. 47. 
 
 He is of age ; ask hit?i] Or, Jle is of fxill age; ash Aim himaelL This 
 
204 S. JOHN, IX. [vv. 25—28. 
 
 again called they the man that was blind, and said unto 
 him, Give God the praise : we know that this man is a 
 
 25 sinner. He answered and said, Whether he be a sinner 
 or no, I know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was 
 
 26 blind, now I see. Then said they to him again, What did 
 
 27 he to thee? how opened he thine eyes? He answered them, 
 I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore 
 
 28 would you hear // again? will ye also be his disciples? Then 
 
 is the right order of the clauses here, and they have been altered in the 
 Received Text oiv. 21 to match this verse. 
 
 24. Then again called they\ Literally, They called, therefore, a 
 second time. They had cross-questioned the parents apart from the 
 son, and now try to browbeat the son, before he finds out that his parents 
 have not discredited his story. 
 
 Give God the praise\ Better, Give glory to God (comp. v. 41 and 
 viii. 54); it is the same word for 'glory' as in i. 14, ii. 11, vii. 18, viii. 
 50. Even 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; i Sam. vi. 5; Ezra x. 11; i Esdr. 
 ix. 8; 2 Cor. xi. 31. Wiclif, with the Genevan and Rhemish Versions, 
 is right here. Tyndale and Cranmer have misled our translators. 
 
 ■we know that, &c. ] ' We ' with emphasis ; ' we, the people in authority, 
 who have the right to pronounce decisively. So it is useless for you to 
 maintain that He is a Prophet.' 
 
 25. He answered^ Better, Therefore he answered. He will not 
 commit himself, but keeps to the incontrovertible facts of the case. 
 
 whereas I was blind '\ Literally, being a blind man, but the Greek 
 participle may be either present or imperfect; either 'being by nature a 
 blind man' or 'being formerly blind.' In iii. 13 and xix. 38 we have 
 the same participle, and a similar doubt as to whether it is present or 
 imperfect : so also in v. 8. 
 
 26. Being baffled, they return to the details of the fact, either 
 to try once more to shake the evidence, or for want of something better 
 to say. 
 
 27. I have told you\ Rather, /told ^(??<. 
 
 and ye did not hear] Or possibly, and did ye not hear? This avoids 
 taking 'hear' in two different senses; (i) 'pay attention,' (2) 'hear.' 
 The man loses all patience, and will not go through it again. 
 
 wherefore would ye hear\ Or, wherefore do ye wish to hear. 
 
 ■will ye also, &c.] Or, Surely ye also do not wish to hecome His dis- 
 ciples. The form of the question is similar to that in vi. 67 and vii. 52 
 (comp. iv. 29, vii. 35). Moreover, it is not the future tense, but the verb 
 'to will' or 'wish' (comp. v. 40, vi. 67, vii. 17, viii. 44). Lastly, the 
 difference between 'be' and 'become' is easily preserved here, and is 
 worth preserving (comp. viii. 58^. The meaning of 'also' has been 
 
vv. 29—31.] S. JOHN, IX. 205 
 
 they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but we 
 are Moses' disciples. We know that God spake unto Moses : 29 
 as for this fellow, we know not from whence he is. The 30 
 man answered and said unto them, Why herein is a mar- 
 vellous thing, that ye know not from whence he is, and yet 
 he hath opened mine eyes. Now we know that God heareth 31 
 not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and 
 
 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. Then they reviled hint] Omit 'then.' The word for 'revile' 
 occurs nowhere else in the Gospels. Comp. i Pet. ii. 23. Argument 
 fails, so they resort to abuse. 
 
 Thott art his disciple^ Better, Thou art that man's disciple. They 
 use a pronoun which expresses that they have nothing to do with Him. 
 Comp. V. 12 and vii. ir. 
 
 The pronouns are emphatic in both v. 28 and z/. 29 : ' Thou art His 
 disciple; but we are Moses' disciples. We know that God\xaX}a. spoken 
 to Moses; but as for Mw fellow, &c.' 
 
 29. tliat Godspakel Literally, thai God'iidJtla. 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 'it is written' is strictly 'it has been written,' 
 or 'it stands written:' i.e. it once was written, and the writing still 
 remains. But this is perhaps one of those cases where the Greek 
 perfect is best represented by the English aorist (see on viii. 29, 10 
 for the converse). 
 
 we know not from whence he is'] We know not what commission He 
 has received, nor who has sent Him. Comp. viii. 14 and contrast vii. 
 27. Once more He is compared with Moses, as in the synagogue at 
 Capernaum (vi. 31, 32). 
 
 30. a marvellous thing\ Some of the best MSS. read 'the marvel- 
 lous thing.' ' 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 threir 
 evident discomfiture. 
 
 31. God heareth not sinners] i.e. 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. Ixvi. 
 18, 19; Job. xxvii. 8, 9; Isa. i. 11 — 15. 
 
2o6 S. JOHN, IX. [vv. 32—36. 
 
 32 doeth his will, him he heareth. Since the world began was 
 it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was 
 
 33 born blind. If this man were not of God, he could do 
 
 34 nothing. They answered and said unto him, Thou wast 
 altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us? And they 
 
 35 cast him out. Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and 
 when he had found him, he said unto him. Dost thou 
 
 36 believe on the Son of God? He answered and said, Who is 
 
 a worshipper of God'\ Or, God-fearing, religious. The word occurs 
 nowhere else in N.T. The man supposes that miracles must be answers 
 to prayer. Only good men can gain such answers to prayer. Only a 
 very good man could gain such an unprecedented answer as this. 
 
 32. Since the world begaii\ There is no healing of the blind in 
 O. T. 
 
 33. 0/ God] Or, from God: comp. i. 6. 
 
 he could do nothing] The context limits the meaning — nothing at all 
 like this, no miracle. 
 
 34. Thou wast altogether born in sins] ' In sins (first for emphasis) 
 every part of thy nature (comp. xiii. 10) has been steeped from thy 
 birth ; thou wast born a reprobate. ' They hold the same belief as the 
 disciples, that sin before birth is possible, and maliciously exclude not 
 only the alternative 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 been contending that no 
 miracle had been wrought; now they throw his calamity in his face as 
 proof of his sin. 
 
 Dost thou teach tis ?] • Dost thou, the bom reprobate, teach us, the 
 authorized teachers?' 
 
 they cast him out] Or, they put him forth : see on x. 4. This pro- 
 bably does not mean excommunication, (i) The expression is too 
 vague. (■2) There could not well have been time to get a sentence of 
 excommunication passed. (3) The man had not incurred the threat- 
 ened penalty; he had not 'confessed that He was Christ' {v. 22). Pro- 
 voked by his impracticability and 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. 
 
 35. Dost thou believe] There is a stress on 'thou.' 'Dost thou, 
 though others deny and blaspheme, believe ? ' 
 
 On the Son of God] 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 'the Son of man,' which moreover is the 
 expression that our Lord commonly uses respecting Himself in all four 
 Gospels (see on i. 51). But the reading 'The Son of God' is very 
 strongly supported, and is at least as old as the second century ; for Ter- 
 tullian, who in his work Against Fraxeas quotes largely from this 
 Gospel, in chap. xxiL quotes this question thus, Tu credis in Filiuin 
 
vv. 37, 38.] S. JOHN, IX. 207 
 
 he, Lord, that I might believe on him? And Jesus said 37 
 unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that 
 talketh with tliee. And he said, Lord, I believe. And he 38 
 worshipped him. 
 
 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' {v. 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 on i. 13, 18. 
 
 36. Who is he, Lord'X We should perhaps insert ' and ' or ' then ' 
 with some of the best MSS., and Who is He? or, Who is He then? 
 This ' and ' or ' then ' has the effect of intensifying the question. Comp. 
 ' and who is my neighbour ?' (Luke x. 29) ; ' Who then can be saved ? ' 
 (xviii.26); ' Who is he M^« thatmaketh meglad?' (2 Cor. ii. 2). 'Lord' 
 should perhaps be 'Sir' as in iv. 11, 15, 19, 49; v. 7 (seeon vi. 34): not 
 until V. 38 does he reach the point at which he would call Jesus ' Lord.' 
 But it is the same Greek word in both cases, though the amount of 
 reverence with which he uses it increases, as in the parallel case of the 
 woman at the well. 
 
 that I viight believe'] Literally, in order that /may believe, S. John's • 
 favourite construction again, as in irv. 2, 3, 22. 
 
 37. Thou hast both seen him] Better, Thou hast even seen Him, and 
 He that speaketh with thee is He. The latter half of the sentence is 
 similar to the declaration in iv. 26. "This spontaneous revelation to 
 the outcast from the synagogueyfwafj its only parallel in the similar reve- 
 lation to the outcast from the nation." Westcott. Not even Apostles 
 are told so speedily. 
 
 38. Lord, I believe] Or, I believe. Lord : the order is worth keep- 
 ing. Comp. the centurion's confession (Matt, xxvii. 54). There is no 
 need to suppose that in either case the man making the confession knew 
 anything like the full meaning of belief in the Son of God : even Apo- 
 stles 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 gratui- 
 tous to suppose that a special revelation was granted to him. There is 
 no hint of this in the narrative, nor can one see why so great an excep- 
 tion to God's usual dealings with man should have been made. 
 
 he worshipped him] This shews that his idea of the Son of God in- 
 
2o8 S. JOHN, IX. [vv. 39— 41. 
 
 39 And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, 
 that they which see not might see; and that they which 
 
 40 see might be made blind. And some of the Pharisees 
 which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, 
 
 41 Are we blind also? Jesus said unto them. If ye were bhnd, 
 
 eludes attributes of Divinity. The word for 'worship ' occurs elsewhere 
 in this Gospel only in iv. 20 — 24 and xii. 20, always of the worship of 
 God. 
 
 39 — 41. "The concluding verses contain a saying which is thoroughly 
 in the manner of the Synoptists (cf. Matt. xv. 14; xxiii. 16, 17, 24, 26). 
 It also supplies a warranty for ascribing a typical significance to miracles. 
 
 That the Synoptists do not relate this miracle does not affect its his- 
 torical character, as the whole of these events in Judaea are equally 
 
 omitted by them The vague and shifting outlines of the Synoptic 
 
 narrative allow ample room for all the insertions that are made in them 
 with so much precision by S. John." S. pp. 165, 166. 
 
 39. And yesus said] 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 are addressed to the bystanders generally, among whom are 
 some of the Pharisees. 
 
 For judgment I am come] Better, For judgment I came. The pre- 
 cise form of word for 'judgment' occurs nowhere else in this Gospel. 
 It signifies not the act of judging (v. 22, 24, 27, 30) but its result, a 
 'sentence' or 'decision' (Matt. vii. 2, Mark xii. 40, Rom. ii. 1, 3, &c.), 
 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 (iiL 19). See on i. 9 and xviii. 37. The 
 pronoun is emphatic. 
 
 they which see not] 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 !' 
 
 might see] Better, may see, may really see, may pass from the dark- 
 ness of which they are conscious, to light and truth. 
 
 they which see] 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 ? 
 
 might be made blind] Or, may become blind, really blind (Isa. vi, 
 10), may pass from their fancied light into real darkness. 
 
 40. And some of] Better, Those of. 
 
 Are we blind also ?] Or, Surely we also axe not blind 7 See on 
 
V. 41.] S. JOHN, IX. 209 
 
 ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore 
 your sin remaineth. 
 
 V. 27. 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.' 
 
 41. I/y^ were blind^ Christ returns to His own meaning of * blind ' 
 or ' they which see not ' in v. 39. ' If ye were conscious of your own 
 spiritual darkness, if ye yearned and strove to reach the light, j^ would 
 not have sin (see on xv. 22) ; for either ye would find the light, or, if ye 
 failed, the failure would not lie at your door.' For the construction 
 comp. v. 46; viii. 19, 42; xv. 19; xviii. 36. 
 
 therefore your sin remaineth'] Better, your sin abldeth (see on i. 33): 
 ' therefore ' is an insertion, and must be omitted. ' 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 possession of it. Those 
 who confess their ignorance and contend against it, (i) cease to be re- 
 sponsible for it, (2) have a good prospect of being freed from it. Those 
 who deny their ignorance and contend against instruction, (i) remain 
 responsible for their ignorance, (2) have no prospect of ever being freed 
 from it. Comp. iii. 36. 
 
 Chap. X. Christ is Love. 
 
 l a. cha pters v. and vi. two miracles, the healing of the paralytic and 
 the feedir^of the five thousand, formed the introduction to two discourses 
 in which Christ is set forth as the Source and the Sttpport 0/ Li/sj^ In 
 
 r chapters vii. and viii^jve have a discourse in which He is set fojjh as 
 tHe Source of Trtith and Lights and this is illustrated (ix.) by His 
 gmng physical and spiritual sight to the man born blind. IrTchap. 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 illus trated (xi.J_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 cl early" the M essiah manifests Himself, and the more ofteri He 
 convinces some ot Mis hearers of His Messiahship (vii. 40, 41, 46, 50, 
 viii. '^bj'Tx. 30 — 38, x. 21, 42, xi. 45), the more intense becomes thel_ 
 hostility of ' the Jev?s_' and the more determined their intention to kill_ 
 
 msT 
 
 ' 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 narrative ; and 
 the figure and its application run side by side, and are interwoven with 
 one another all through. It is an extended metaplior rather than a 
 
 s. JOHN I^ 
 
2IO S. JOHN, X. [v. r. 
 
 Chap. X. Christ is Love. 
 I — lo. The Allegory of the Door of tJie Fold. 
 10 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the 
 
 parable. If we are to give it an accurate name we should be obliged to 
 fall back upon the wider term ' allegory.' 
 
 This, a nd the parallel passage in chap, xv., are the only instances of 
 allegory in the Gospels^ They take in the Fourth Gospel the plaQc" 
 ' which parables hold with the SynoptistSj The Synoptists have no _ 
 allegories distinct from parables. The fourth Evangelist has no^ 
 parables 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? 
 
 (i) We notice, first, that along with the change oi 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 individually, 
 as these two 'allegories' from S. 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 Samari- 
 tan, &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, &c. 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, xviii. 12, 13) 'I 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 allegory." 
 S. pp. 167 — 169. 
 
 1 — 10. The Allegory of the Door of the Fold. 
 
 1. Verily, venlyl This double affirmation, peculiar to this GospeL. 
 (see on i. 51), 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, 
 
vv. 2, 3-] S. JOHN, X. 211 
 
 door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the 
 same is a thief and a robber. But he that entereth in by 2 
 the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the porter 3 
 
 which should perhaps have been divided at ix. 34 or 38 rather than 
 here. The scene continues uninterrupted from ix..35 to x. 2i^v*'here we 
 have a reference to the heahng of the blind man. Moreover x. 6 seems 
 to point back to ix. 41 ; their not understanding the allegory was 
 evidence of self-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 the Pharisees 
 by theii' 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 improbable in the supposi- 
 tion. 
 
 He that entereth not by the door] T he Orien tal sheepfolds are com- 
 monly walled or palisaded, with one door or gate, Into one of IHese^ 
 enclosures several shepherds drive their flocks, leaving them in charge 
 oTan under-shepherd or porter, who fastens the door securely insidej^ 
 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. 
 
 some other way] Literally, /y-om another quarter : the word occurs 
 here only in N.T. 
 
 the same] Better, he ; literally, that one. It is a pronoun of which 
 S. John is very fond in order to recall with emphasis some person or 
 thing previously mentioned. Comp. i. i8, 33, v. ii. 39, ix. 37, xii. 48, 
 xiv. 21, 26, XV. ■26. In i. 33 (' the same said unto me'), v. 11, and xii. 
 48 it is inaccurately translated, as here, 'the same.' 
 
 a thief and 7-obber] Everywhere in this Gospel (8, 10, xii. 6, xviii. 
 40), as also 2 Cor. xi. 26, these words are given correctly as renderings 
 of the Greek equivalents ; but everywhere else in N.T. (Matt. xxi. 13, 
 xxvi. 55, xxvii. 38, &c., &c.) the word here translated ' robber ' is less 
 well translated 'thief.' The 'robber ' is a brigand, a more formidable ^^^^ 
 criminal than the 'thief;' the one uses violence, the other cunning. 
 
 2. is the shepherd of the sheep] Better, 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 allegory. The allegory indeed is two-fold; in the first part 
 (r — 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 parts. , 
 
 3. To him the porter openeth] The 'porter' is the door-keeper orj*^ 
 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 
 
 14 — 2 
 
212 S. JOHN, X. [vv. 4—6. 
 
 openeth] and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his 
 
 4 own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. And when he 
 putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the 
 
 5 sheep follow him : for they know his voice. And a stranger 
 will they not follow, but will flee from him : for they know 
 
 6 not the voice of strangers. This parable spake Jesus unto 
 
 elect, the shepherds are God's ministers. What does the porter repre-i/ 
 sent? Possibly nothing definite. Much harm is sometimes done by 
 trying to make every detail of an allegory or parable significant. There 
 must be back ground 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, i 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 opportuniix- See on i Cor. xvi. 9. 
 
 the sheep hear his voice\ 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; Isa. xliii. i), 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. 
 
 4. when he putteth forth his own sheep] Better, when he hath put 
 forth all his 07un. Most of the best MSS. have 'all' for 'sheep : ' 'there 
 shall not an hoof be left behind' (Exod, x, 26). The word for 'put 
 
 »^rorth' is remarkable; it is the same as is usedjn ix. 34, 35 of the 
 Pharisees 'casting out' the man born blind_^ This is perhaps not acci- 
 dental: theTalse shepherds put forth sheep to rid themselves of trouble; 
 
 «-^he true shepherds put forth sheep to feed them. But even the true 
 shepherds must sometimes use a certain amount of violence to their 
 
 *^sheep to 'compel them to come' (Luke xiv, 23) to the pastures. But 
 note that there are no 'goats' in the allegory: 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. 
 
 5. And a stranger will they not follow] Better, But a stranger they will 
 assuredly not follow. The form of negative is very strong, as in iv, 14, 
 48, vi. 35, 37, viii. 12, 51, 52: see on viii. 51. By 'a stranger' is 
 meant quite literally anyone whom they do not know, not necessarily a 
 thief or robber. 
 
 6. This parable] Better, Tki s_ allegory. The word which the 
 Synoptists use for ' parable ' {parabole) is never used by S. John ; and 
 the word here used by S. John (paroimia) is never used by the S^mop- 
 tists. This should be brought out in translation; both are rendered 
 
vv. 7, 8.] S. JOHN, X. 213 
 
 them : but they understood not what things they were which 
 he spake unto them. 
 
 Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say ^ 
 unto you, I am the door of the sheep. All that ever came 8 
 before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not 
 
 by our translators sometimes 'parable' and sometimes 'proverb.' Paroi- 
 viia occurs again xvi. 25, 29 and 1 Pet. ii. 2?, and nowhere else in N.T. 
 Everywhere but here it is translated 'proverb.' Paroimia means some- 
 thing beside the way; hence, according to some, a trite 'way side 
 saying;' according to others, a figurative ''out-of-the-way sz.ying.' On 
 paraboli see on Mark iv. 2. 
 
 understood not ] Did not recognise the meaning. 
 
 7. Then said fesiis unto them again] Better, Therefore said yestis 
 again. They did not understand ; therefore He went through the allegory 
 again more explicitly, interpreting the main features. 'Unto them' is 
 of doubtful authority. 
 
 Verily, verily] This is the important point, to recognise that the one V^ 
 door of the fold, through which the sheep and the shepherds enter, is / 
 Christ. / (with great emphasis) (2/^i /,^£^o£r. Comp. 'I am the Way' / 
 (xiv. 6). " '-~— 
 
 the door of the sheep] Better, 'the Door to the sheep' (w. r, 2), and 
 also 'the 'Door for ihQ sheep' [v. 9). Sheep and shepherds alike have *-^ 
 one and the same door. The elect enter the Church through Christ ; the 
 ministers who would visit the flocks must receive their commission 
 from Christ. Note that Christ does not say, 'the Door of the fold,' but 
 'the Door of the sheep.' The fold has no meaning apart from the 
 sheep. 
 
 8.~ ^11 that ever came before me are thieves and robbers] These words 
 are difficult, and some copyists seem to have tried to avoid the difficulty 
 by omitting either 'all' or 'before Me.' But the balance of authority 
 leaves no doubt that both are genuine. Some commentators would 
 translate ' instead of Me' for 'before Me.' But this meaning of the Greek 
 preposition is not common, and perhaps occurs nowhere in N.T. More- 
 over 'instead of Me' ought to include the idea of 'for My advantage;' 
 and that is impossible here. We must retain the natural and ordinary 
 meaning of 'before Me:' and as 'before Me in dignity' would be 
 obviously inappropriate, 'before Me in ti7ne' must be the meaning. Butw' 
 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 I 
 nation, who 'devoured widow's houses,' who were ' full of ravening and I 
 wickedness,' who had 'taken away the key of knowledge,' and were in 1 
 
214 S. JOHN, X. [vv. 9, lo. 
 
 9 hear them. I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he 
 shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture. 
 
 10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and 
 to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that 
 they might have // more abundantly. 
 
 very truth 'thieves and robbers' (Matt. vii. 15, xxiii. 14; Luke xi. 39, \ 
 52). Some of them were now present, thirsting to add bloodshed to I 
 robbery, and this denunciation of them is no stronger than several I 
 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 \ire thieves 
 and robbers.' 
 
 but the sheep did not hear them] For they spoke with no authority • 
 (Matt. vii. 29); there was no living voice in their teaching. They had 
 their hearers, but these were not 'the sheep,' but blind adherents, led 
 by the blind. 
 
 9. by me] 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 directness, 
 the particularity, the emphasis of S. 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 persistency which secures attention." Westcott, Introduc- 
 tion to the Study of the Gospels, p. 250. 
 
 he shall be saved] These words and 'shall find pasture' 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. 
 
 With the verse as a whole should be compared 'the strait gate and 
 narrow way which leadeth unto life' (Matt. vii. 14). In the Clementine 
 Homilies (ill. lii.) we have 'He, being a true prophet, said, I am the 
 gate of life ; he that entereth in through Me entereth into life. ' See on 
 ix. 3. 
 
 10. and to kill] To slaughter as if for sacrifice. 
 
 I am come] Better, I came, j I ' is emphatic , in marked contrast to 
 the thief. 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; but this intermediate clause will apply to either 
 figure, inclining towards the second one. In order to make the strong- 
 est possible antithesis to the thief, Christ introduces, not a shepherd, but 
 Himself, the Chief Shepherd. The thief takes life; the shepherds //-o- (^ 
 tect life; the Good Shepherd gives it. 
 
 that they might have] Rather, in both clauses, that they may 
 have. 
 
 have it tnore abundantly] Omit 'more;' it is not in the Greek, and 
 
 .J 
 
vv. II, 12.] S. JOHN, X. 215 
 
 II — 18. The Allegory of the Good Shepherd. 
 
 I am the good shepherd : the good shepherd giveth his Hfe " 
 for the sheep. But he that is a hireUng, and not the shepherd, " 
 whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and 
 leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and 
 
 somewhat spoils the sense. More abundantly than what ? Translate, 
 that they may have abundance. 
 
 11 — 18. The Allegory of the Good Shepherd. 
 
 11. lam the Good Shepherd^ The word translated 'good' cannot 
 be adequately translated: it means 'beautiful, noble, good,' as opposed 
 to 'foul, mean, wicked.' It sums up the chief attributes of ideal perfec- 
 tion. Christ is the Perfect Shepherd, as opposed to His own imperfect 1/ 
 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 yy 
 of O.T. Ps. xxiii. ; Isa. xl. 11; Jer. xxiii. ; Ezek. xxxiv., xxxvii. 24; ' 
 Zech. xi. 7. 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. 
 
 giveth his life'] Better, layeth down His life. The phrase is a 
 remarkable one and peculiar to S. John, whereas 'to give His life' 
 occurs in the Synoptists (Matt. xx. 20; Mark x. 45). 'To lay down' 
 perhaps includes the notion of 'to pay down,' a common meaning of the , \ 
 words in classical Greek; if so, it is exactly equivalent to the Synoptic/; 
 phrase 'to give as a ransom.^ It occurs again, w. 15, 17, xiii. 37, 38, ' 
 XV. 13; I John iii. 16. In this country the statement 'the good shep- 
 herd lays down his life for his sheep' seems extravagant when taken 
 apart from the application to Christ. It is otherwise in the East, where 
 dangers from wild beasts and armed bands of robbers are serious and 
 constant. Comp. Gen. xiii. 5, xiv. 12, xxxi. 39, 40, xxxii. 7, 8, xxxvii.. 
 33; Job i. 17; I Sam. xvii. 34, 35. ' 
 
 12. an hireling'] 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 advantages of their position, and retire when the position becomes 
 irksome or dangerous. 
 
 and not the shepherd'] Better, and not a shepherd, as in v. 2 
 the 'wolf\ Any power opposed to Christ. See on v. 28. 
 
2i6 S. JOHN, X. [vv. 13—16. 
 
 13 scattereth the sheep. The hireling fleeth, because he is a 
 
 14 hirehng, and careth not for the sheep. I am the good shep- 
 
 15 herd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine. As the 
 Father knoweth mQ,even so know I the Father: and I lay down 
 
 16 my life for the sheep. And other sheep I have, which are 
 not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear 
 my voice ; and there shall be one fold, aftd one shepherd. 
 
 and scattereth the sheep] The best authorities omit 'the sheep;' but 
 the words might easily be omitted as apparently awkward and super- 
 fluous after the preceding 'them.' But in any case the meaning is 
 'snatcheth certain sheep and scattereth the flock.' 
 
 13. 7he hireling fleeth] These words are of still more doubtful 
 authority. Omitting both the doubtful portions the sentence will run 
 (The hireling) leaveth the sheep and fleeth; and the wolf snatcheth them 
 and scattereth {them); because he is an hireling and careth }tot, SiC. 
 
 14 — 18. Further description of the True Shepherd, (i) His inti- 
 mate 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. 
 
 14. and know my sheep, and am known of mine] Better, and I know 
 Mine, and Mine know Me. 
 
 15. As the Father knoweth me, even so, &c.] This rendering entirely 
 obscures the true meaning. There should be no full stop at the end of 
 V. 14, and the sentence should run; 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 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. 
 
 16. other sheep I have] Not the Jews in heathen lands, but Gentiles,K/ 
 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. 32). Of that most heathen of heathen cities, 
 Corinth, He declared to S. Paul in a vision, 'I have much people inj*^ 
 this city' (Acts xviii. 10), • 
 
 not of this fold] Emphasis on 'fold,' not on 'this;' the Gentiles y/^ 
 were in no fold at all, but 'scattered abroad' (xi. 52). 
 
 them also I must bring] Better, them also I must lead. No need 
 for them to be removed; Christ can lead them in their own lands. 
 'Neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem' (iv. 21) is the ap- 
 pointed place. Note the 'must;' it is the Messiah's bounden duty, 
 decreed for Him by the Father: comp. iii. 14, ix. 4, xii. 34, xx. q. 
 
 there shall be one fold, and one shepherd] Rather, they shall become 
 one flock, one shepherd. The distinction between ' be ' and ' become ' is 
 worth preserving (see on ix. 27, 39), and that between 'flock' and 
 
vv. 17, 18.] S. JOHN, X. 217 
 
 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my 17 
 life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, 18 
 
 'fold' still more so. 'There shall become 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 
 predecessors: Tyndale and Coverdale have 'flock,' not 'fold;' the 
 Geneva Version has 'be made,' not 'be.' One point in the Greek can- 
 not be preserved in English. The words for 'flock' and 'shepherd' are 
 cognate and very similar, /(?zw«if and /^m,f«." 'one herd, one herdsman' 
 would be the nearest approach we could make, and to change 'flock' 
 for 'herd' would be more loss than gain. The change from 'flock' to 
 'fold' has been all loss, leading to calamitous misunderstanding. 
 
 "The universalism of v. 16, which is so often quoted against the 
 Gospel, seems rather to be exactly of the kind of which we have abt'.n- 
 dant evidence in the Synoptists: e.g. in Matt. viii. 11, xiii. 24 — 30, 
 xxviii. 19; Luke xiii. 29. A certain precedence is assigned to Israel, 
 but the inclusion of the Gentiles is distinctly contemplated." And if ' 
 S. Matthew could appreciate this side of his Master's teaching, how 
 much more S. John, who had lived to see the success of missions to the 
 heathen and the destruction of Jerusalem. "On the other hand, the 
 nature of S. John's universalism must not be mistaken. It implies a 
 privileged position on the part of the Jews." S. pp. 172, 173. More- 
 over, even O. T. prophets seem to have had a presentiment that otheri/ 
 nations would share in the blessings of the Messiah. Mic. iv. 2 ; Isa. 
 lii. 15. 
 
 17. Therefore^ Better, C«M?Va:f(r^?<«^, or. For this cause (xii. 18, 27). 
 See on vii. 22 and viii. 47, and comp. v. 16, 18, vi. 65. The Father's ] 
 love for the incarnate Son is intensified by the seif-sacrifice of the Son. y'^ 
 
 that I might take it agaiit] Literally, in order that I may take it 
 again. This clause is closely connected with the preceding one : 'tliat' 
 depends upon 'because.' 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' (i Cor. xv. 17). Morever, in that case He would have ceased 
 to be the Good Shepherd : He would have become like the hireling, 
 casting aside his duty before it was completed. The ofiice of the True 
 Shepherd is not finished until all mankind become His flock ; and this 
 work continues from the Resurrection to the Day of Judgment. 
 
 18. No ?>tan taketh it from me] Better, JVo one taketh it from. Me; » 
 not even God. See on v. 28. Two points are insisted on; (i) that the I 
 Death is entirely voluntary; (2) that both Death and Resurrection are / 
 in accordance with a commission received from the Father. Comp. ' 
 'Father, into Thy hands I commend My spirit' (Luke xxiii. 46). Thej 
 precise words used by the two Apostles of Christ's death bring this out ' 
 very clearly; 'yielded up (literally 'let go') the ghost' (Matt, xxvii. 50) ; 
 'gave up the ghost' (John xix. 30; see note there). The word used by| 
 
2i8 S. JOHN, X. [w. 19—21. 
 
 but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, 
 and I have power to take it again. This commandment 
 have I received of my Father. 
 
 19 — 21. Opposite Results of the Teaching. 
 
 19 There was a division therefore again among the Jews for 
 
 20 these sayings. And many of them said. He hath a devil, 
 
 21 and is mad ; why hear ye him ? Others said. These are not 
 the words of him that hath a devil. Can a devil open the 
 eyes of the blind ? 
 
 S. Mark and S. Luke ('breathed His last,' or 'expired') is less strong. 
 Here there is an emphasis on the pronoun; 'but /lay it down of My- 
 self.* 
 
 / have power] i.e. right, authority, liberty: same word as in i. 12, 
 V. 27, xvii. 1, xix. 10. This authority is the commandment of the 
 Father: and hence this passage in no way contradicts the usual N.T. 
 doctrine that Christ was raised to life again by the Father. Acts ii. 
 
 ^*- 
 
 This commandment have I received] Better, This commandment 
 
 received I, viz., at the Incarnation : the commandment to die and rise 
 
 again. Comp. iv. 34, v. 30, vi. 38. 
 
 19 — 21. Opposite Results of the Teaching. 
 
 19. again] As about the man bom blind (ix. 6) among the Phari- 
 sees, and at the Feast of Tabernacles (vii. 43), among the multitude. 
 ' Therefore ' should be omitted here as wanting authority; and 'there 
 arose' would be more accurate than 'there was' (see on i. 6); there 
 arose a division again. See on vii. 43. 
 
 among the Jews] Some even among the hostile party are impressed, 
 and doubt the correctness of their position: comp. xi. 45. 
 
 20. He hath a devil] See last note on viii. 48, and comp. vii. 10. 
 
 21. of him that hath a devil] Better, of one possessed witli a 
 demon: the expression differs from that in v. 20. 
 
 Can a devil] Or, Surely a demon cannot. See on ix. 40. It was 
 too great and too beneficent a miracle for a demon. But here they stop 
 short : they state what He cannot be ; they do not see, or will not ad- 
 mit, what He must be. 
 
 22 — 38. The Discourse at the Feast of the Dedication. 
 
 Again we seem to have a gap in the narrative. Between w. 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. i — 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 
 
vv. 22, 23.] S. JOHN, X. 219 
 
 22 — 38. The Discourse at the Feast of the Dedication. 
 
 And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and 2a 
 it was winter. And Jesus walked in the temple in Solo- 23 
 
 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 
 so on. 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 a strongly attested reading in v. 22, 
 Then iAere took place the Feast of the Dedication, would connect chap. 
 ix. and x. i — 21 with this later feast rather than with the Feast of 
 Tabernacles. In this case the interval of two months must be placed 
 between chaps, viii. and ix. 
 
 22. And it was at yeriisalem the feast of the dedication"] More 
 literally, Now there took place at Jemsalem the Feast of the Dedication. 
 This feast might be celebrated anywhere, and the pointed insertion of 
 'at Jerusalem' seems to suggest that in the interval between j'. 21 and v. 
 22 Christ had been away from the city. It was kept in honour of the 
 purification and restoration of the Temple (B.C. 164) after its desecra- 
 tion by Antiochus Epiphanes; i Mace. i. 20 — 60, iv. 36 — 59 (note esp. 
 w. 36 and 59); 2 Mace. x. i — 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. 
 
 "The feast was of comparatively recent institution.... It is not a feast 
 the name of which would be likely to occur to any but a Jew ; still less 
 the accurate note of place in v. 2^ ('in the temple in Solomon's porch'). 
 Both these verses proclaim the eye-witness. So does the admirable 
 question in the verse following. Attracted by His teachings and His 
 miracles, but repelled by His persistent refusal to assume the Messianic 
 character as they understood it, the Jews ask Jesus directly, 'How long, 
 &c.' It is such a question as at this period of the ministry was inevit- 
 able, and the language in which it is expressed exactly represents the 
 real difficulties and hesitation that the Jews would feel." S. pp. 174, 
 
 '75- 
 
 and it was winter] Omit 'and,' which is wanting in authority, and 
 join 'it was winter' to the next verse. The words explain why Jesus 
 was walking under cover. 
 
 23. in Solomon's porch] 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 destruc- 
 tions and rebuildings. 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. 1 1 (where 
 see note) and v. 12. Foundations still remaining probably belong to it. 
 
220 S. JOHN, X. [vv. 24—26. 
 
 24 mon's porch. Then came the Jews round about him, 
 and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? 
 
 25 If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. Jesus answered 
 them, I told you, and ye believe not : the works that I do 
 
 26 in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. But ye 
 beheve not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said 
 
 24. Then came the Je^vs round about, &c.] Better, The Jews there- 
 fore compassed Him about (Luke xxi. 20; Hebr. xi. 30; Rev. xx. 9) 
 and kept saying to Him. They encircled Him in an urgent and ob- 
 trusive manner, indicating that they were determined to have an 
 answer. 
 
 How long dost thou make us to doubtT\ The margin is better with hold 
 US in suspense. The literal meaning is Hffiv long dost Thou excite our 
 mind? If Thou art the Christ tell us with openness (see on vii. 4). 
 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. 
 
 26. / told you, and ye beliez'ed not"] The best authorities have, and 
 ye believe not: their unbelief still continues. To some 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. 
 
 the worhs] in the widest sense, not miracles alone; His Messianic 
 work generally. See on v. 36. The pronouns are emphatically op- 
 posed; 'the works which / do. ..they — But ye believe not. 
 
 26. as I said unto yoii\ These words are omitted by some of the 
 best authorities, including the Vatican and Sinaitic MSS. But they 
 may possibly have been left out to avoid a difficulty. If they are 
 genuine they are best joined, as in our version, with what precedes. 
 Nowhere in the Gospels does Christ make such a quotation from a 
 previous discourse as we should have if we read, 'As I said unto you. 
 My sheep hear My voice, &c.' The arrangement 'Ye are not of My 
 sheep, as I said unto you,' is better, and the reference is to the general 
 sense of the allegory of the sheep-fold, especially w. 14, 15. He and 
 His sheep have most intimate knowledge of one another; therefore 
 these Jews asking who He is prove that they are not His sheep. Comp. 
 vi. 36, where there seems to be a similar reference to the general mean- 
 ing of a previous discourse. It is strange that an objection should have 
 been made to His referring to the allegory after a lapse of two months. 
 There is nothing improbable in His doing so, especially if He had been 
 absent from the city in the interval (see on v. 11). Might not a speaker 
 
vv. 27—31.] S. JOHN, X. 221 
 
 unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, 27 
 and they follow me: and I give unto them eternal life; and 28 
 they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them 
 out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater 29 
 than all; and no man is able to pluck the}n out of my 
 Father's hand. I and my Father are one. Then the Jews 3° 
 
 at the present time refer to a speech made two months before, especially 
 if he had not spoken in public since then? 
 
 27. 28. Note the simple but very impressive coupling of the clauses 
 by a simple 'and' throughout and comp. w. 3 and 12: note also the 
 climax. 
 
 28. I give unto them\ Not 'witt give.' 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 retentiott of which depends upon our- 
 selves. 
 
 they shall never perish] This is parallel to viii. 51 (see note there) ; 
 shall certainly not perish for ever, being the literal meaning. But the 
 negative belongs to the verb, not to 'for ever;' and the meaning is, not 
 ' they may die, but shall not die for ever,' but ' they shall never die for 
 all eternity.' Comp. xi. 26. 
 
 neither shall any matt pluck them\ Better, and no one sball snatcb 
 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 in the Greek 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 indefectibiiity 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. 
 
 out of my hand] " His hand protects, bears, cherishes, leads them." 
 Meyer. 
 
 29. which gave them] Better, which hath given them. Comp. xvii. 
 6, 24. This enforces the previous assertion. ' To snatch them out of 
 My hand, he must snatch them out of My Father's hand ; and My Father 
 is greater than all:' even than the Son (xiv. 28). But the reading is 
 not certain. The most probable text gives, that which the Father 
 hath given Me is greater than all. The unity of the Church is strength 
 invincible. 
 
 out of my Father's hand] The better reading is, out ofVaa Father's 
 hand. ' Out of His hand ' would have sufficed ; but ' Father ' is repeated 
 for emphasis. 
 
 30. / and my Father are one] ' One ' is neuter in the Greek ; not 
 one Person, but one Substance. There is no 'My' in the Greek; I and 
 the Father are one. 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 
 
222 S. JOHN, X. [vv. 32—35. 
 
 32 took up stores again to stone him. Jesus answered them, 
 Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for 
 
 33 which of those works do ye stone me? The Jews answered 
 him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for 
 blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest 
 
 34 thyself God. Jesus answered them. Is it not written in 
 
 35 your law, I said. Ye are gods? If he called them gods, 
 
 action : this at the very least the words must mean ; the Arian interpre- 
 tation of mere moral agreement is inadequate. Whether or no Unity 
 of Essence is actually stated here, it is certainly implied, as the Jews see. 
 They would stone Him for making Himself God, which they 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. Rev. xx. 6, xxii. 3. 
 
 31. Then the Jews] Better, Therefore the Jews : their picking up 
 stones was a direct consequence of His words. But ' therefore ' should 
 perhaps be omitted. They prepare to act on Lev. xxiv. 16 (Comp. 
 I Kin. xxi. 10). 'Again' refers us back to viii. 59. The word for 
 ' took up ' is not the same in each case ; the word used here is stronger, 
 implying more eifort; 'lifted up, bore.' But 'again' shews that it 
 refers to raising up from the ground rather than carrying from a distance. 
 
 32. A/a ti_y good works] It is the same word as is used v. 14 of the 
 Cw^ Shepherd: many beautiful, noble, excellent works. Comp. 'He 
 hath done all things we//' (Mark vii. 37) and 'God saw that it was good' 
 (Gen. i. 8, 10, 12, &c.). These excellent works proceed from the 
 Father and are manifested by the Son. 
 
 /or which of those] 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 {v. 21, 
 vii. 26). Comp. Matt. xxii. 36, where the literal meaning is, 'what/^j'W 
 of a commandment is great in the law?' and i Cor. xv. 35, 'with what 
 ^/«if of body do they come?' See on xii. 33, xviii. 32, xxi. 19. 
 
 33. For a good work] The preposition is changed in the Greek ; 
 concerning a good work. ' That is not the subject-matter of our charge?' 
 
 and because] ' And ' is explanatory, shewing wherein the blasphemy 
 consisted : it does not introduce a separate charge. 
 
 34 — 38. Christ answers the formal charge of blasphemy by a formal 
 argument on the other side. 
 
 34. in your /aw] ' Law ' is here used in its widest sense for the 
 whole of the Old Testament; so also in xii. 34 and xv. 25; in all three 
 places the passage referred to is in the Psalms. Comp. vii. 19, i Cor. 
 xiv. 21. The force of the pronoun is, 'for which you profess to have 
 such a regard :' comp. viii. 1 7. On the Greek for ' is it written ' see on 
 ii. 17. 
 
 / said, Ye are gods} The argument is both d fortiori and adhominem. 
 
vv. 36, 37.] S. JOHN, X. 223 
 
 unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture 
 cannot be broken; say ye of him, whom the Father hath 36 
 sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; 
 because I said, I am the Son of God ? If I do not the works 37 
 
 In the Scriptures (Ps. Ixxxii. 6) even unjust rulers are called ' gods ' on 
 the principle of the theocracy, that rulers are the delegates and repre- 
 sentatives of God (comp. Ex. xxii. 28). If this is admissible without 
 blasphemy, how much more may He call Himself ' Son of God.' 
 
 35. If he called them gods\ More 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 it in this brief way ! These 
 last eight verses alone are sufficient to discredit the theory that this 
 Gospel is the work of Greek Gnostic in the second century. 
 
 the %i<ord of God^ Practically the same as 'the Scripture;' i.e. the 
 word of God in these passages of Scripture. The Word in the theolo- 
 gical sense for the Son is not meant : this term appears nowhere in the 
 narrative part of S. John's Gospel. But of course it was through the 
 Word, not yet incarnate, that God revealed His will to His people. 
 
 cannot be broTceit] Literally, ' cannot be undone ' or ' unloosed.' The 
 same word is rendered 'unloose' (i. 27), 'destroy ' (ii. 19), 'break' (v. 18 
 and vii. 23), 'loose' (xi. 44). i. 27 and xi. 44 are literal, of actual un- 
 binding ; the others are figurative, of dissolution or unbinding as a form 
 of destruction. Here either metaphor, dissolution or unbinding, would 
 
 depends upon 'if, and is not parent 
 'if the Scripture cannot be broken.' As in ii. 22, xvii. 12, xx. 9, 'the 
 Scripture ' (singular) probably means a definite passage. Comp. vii. 38, 
 42, xiii. 18, xvii. 12, xix. 24, 28, 36, 37. Scripture as a whole is called 
 ' the Scriptures ' (plural) ; v. 39. 
 
 36. Say ye] ' Ye ' with great emphasis, ^Tto ye, in opposition to 
 the Scripture, say?' 
 
 ofhiJH, whom the Father hath sanctified] Omit 'hath;' both verbs 
 are aorists. This also is emphatic, in 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) vnthout 
 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 Jere- 
 miah before his birth for the work of a Prophet (Jer. i. 5). WTien 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). In 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 S. John's 
 writings where the word occurs. 
 
224 S. JOHN, X. [vv. 38, 39. 
 
 38 of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye 
 believe not me, believe the works : that ye may know, and 
 believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him. 
 
 39 — 42. Opposite Results of the Discourse. 
 
 39 Therefore they sought again to take him : but he escaped 
 
 37, 38. Having met their technical charge in a technical manner He 
 now proceeds to justify the assertion of His unity with the Father by an 
 appeal to His works. 
 
 37. believe me not\ A literal command. If His works are not those 
 which His Father works, they ought not (not merely have no need) to 
 believe what He says. Comp. v. 24, 46; vi. 30; viii. 31, 45. His 
 works are His Father's (ix. 3, xiv. 10). 
 
 38. believe the Tvorhs] ' 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. 
 
 that ye may know, and believe'\ The better reading probably is, that 
 ye may come to Imow and continually know; 'attain to knowledge 
 and advance in knowledge in contrast to your state of suspense ' {v. 24). 
 In the Greek it is the aorist and present of the same verb ' to come to 
 know, perceive, recognise :' the aorist denotes the single act, the pre- 
 sent the permanent growth. The apparent awkwardness of having the 
 same verb twice in the same clause has probably caused a large number 
 of authorities to substitute another verb 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, viii. 30, x. 42, xi. 45); very few of 
 them went beyond a transitory conviction (ii. 24, vi. 66, viii. 31). 
 
 the Father is in me, and I in himi For 'in Him' read with the 
 best authorities in the Father. An instance of the solemnity and 
 emphasis derived from repetition, so frequent in this Gospel. 
 
 39—42. Opposite Results of the Discourse. 
 
 39. Therefore they sought again"] 'Therefore' is of rather doubtful 
 authenticity; some important witnesses omit 'again' also. 'Again' 
 refers us back to vii. 30, 32, 44, and shews that 'to take Him' means, 
 not, take Him and stone Him (v. 31), but, arrest Him for the San- 
 hedrin. 
 
 he escaped] Literally, went forth. There being nothing in the 
 text to shew that His departure was miraculous, it is safest (as in viii. 
 59, where the same word is used for 'went forth') 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. 
 
vv. 40-42.] S. JOHN, X. 225 
 
 out of their hand, and went away again beyond Jordan into 40 
 the place where John at first baptized; and there he abode. 
 And many resorted unto him, and said, John did no miracle: 41 
 but all things that John spake of this man were true. And 4a 
 many believed on him there. 
 
 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 Bap- 
 tist's teaching, and were hesitating whether they should attach them- 
 selves to Jesus, this is precisely the sort of comment that would be 
 heard." S. p. 179. 
 
 40. again beyond yordan\ Referring back to i. 28. The hostility 
 of the hierarchy being invincible and becoming more and more dan- 
 gerous 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. 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. 
 
 atfirst\ John afterwards baptized at Aenon near Salim (iii. 23). 
 baptize d\ was baptizing. 
 
 41. many resorted unto hitn\ There is no reason why the usual 
 translation 'came' should be changed to 'resorted.' 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. 
 
 and said] Or, kept saying or used to say: it was a common remark. 
 
 yoAn did no miracle] Or sign. 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 Pro- 
 phet appearing after a weary interval of 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 miracle'; and there is no 
 rival tradition to the contrary. All traditions concur in attributing 
 miracles to Jesus. 
 
 42. many believed on him there] 'There' is emphatic. ^ There, 
 
 S. JOHN 15 
 
226 S. JOHN, XI. 
 
 Chap. XI. Christ is Love illustrated by a Sign. 
 
 in contrast to Jerusalem which had rejected Him, ' many believed on 
 Him'. Note the full expression ' believed oti' (see on i. 12) as distinct 
 from merely believing His statements (w. 37, 38). 
 
 Chap. XI. Christ is Love illustrated by a Sign. 
 
 Christ's love for His friends brings about His own death. Expressions 
 of affection and tenderness abound in the chapter; comp. vv. 3, 5, 11, 
 
 IS. 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 pnncipal objections require notice. They are based (i) 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 and condemnation 
 of Jesus. 
 
 (i) The extraordinary character of the miracle "has been exagge- 
 rated by looking at it in the light of modern ideas. To us the raising 
 of the dead stands apart from other miracles in a class by itself as 
 peculiarly unexampled and incredible. But it was not so regarded at 
 the time when the Gospel was written... In the Synoptists the answer 
 that Jesus gives to the disciples of John groups together every class of 
 miracle, the raising of the dead amongst them, without distinction. 
 Similar narratives in the Synoptists, in the Acts, and in the Old Tes- 
 tament, are given without any special relief or emphasis." S. p. 186. 
 
 And surely this ancient view is both more reverent and more philo- 
 sophical 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 S. 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, transcending 
 as it does all other miracles which the Lord wrought,... should have 
 been passed over by the three earlier Evangelists". Two considera- 
 tions go a long way towards explaining the mystery, (i) "We are 
 accustomed to regard the Synoptic Gospels as three ; but in the out- 
 line and by far the greater part of their narrative they are virtually 
 one. The groundwork of them all is supplied by a single document, 
 that document itself a compilation, and (as there is ample evidence to 
 show) a very fragmentary one." S. p. 185. That a fragmentary 
 document or tradition should omit important facts is not surprising: 
 that three writers, making use of this defective evidence, should not 
 
V. I.] S. JOHN, XL 227 
 
 I — 33. The Prelude to the Sign. 
 Now a certain man was sick, named Lazarus, of Bethany, 11 
 
 even in this very important instance supply the deficiency, is not more 
 tlian surprising. And the second consideration greatly diminishes our 
 surprise, (ii) The Synoptists, until they reach the last Passover, 
 omit almost all events in or about Jerusalem : the ministry in Galilee 
 is their province. Therefore "w^e cannot be surprised that they 
 should omit an event which is placed at Bethany." S. p. 186. The 
 ojtiission of this raising by the Synoptists 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, n), on Lazarus and his 
 sisters, whereas when S. John wrote they were dead (just as S. John 
 alone records that it was S. 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, still less 
 when S. Luke wrote. And if they were alive, were the chief priests 
 alive, and their animosity still alive also? The explanation is less 
 easy than the difficulty. 
 
 (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 amount of evidence can render a miracle credible. This miracle is 
 therefore dismissed, and we are to believe either (i) Lazarus was only 
 apparently dead, i.e. that Christ was an impostor and S. 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 is a myth, or (4) an 
 allegory, (i) 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 constniction 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, I cannot but think, more difficult to accept than the 
 miracle." S. p. 188. 
 
 1 — 33. The Prelude to the Sign. 
 
 1. A'o^v a certain man was sick^ Note once more the touching 
 
 15—2 
 
228 S. JOHN, XI. [vv. 2, 3. 
 
 3 the town of Mary and her sister Martha. (It was that Mary 
 which anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet 
 
 3 with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was sick.) Therefore 
 his sisters sent unto him, saying, Lord, behold, he whom 
 
 simplicity of the narrative. 'Now ' should perhaps be 'but,' though the 
 Greek particle may mean either. Here it introduces a contrast to what 
 precedes. Christ went into Peraea for retirement, tout the sickness of 
 Lazarus interrupted it. 
 
 named Lazarus'] The theory that this narrative is a parable trans- 
 formed into a miracle possibly represents something like the reverse of 
 the fact. The parable of Dives and Lazarus was apparently snoken 
 about this time, i. e. between the Feast of Dedication and the last Pass- 
 over, 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 
 without much evidence that he was younger than his sisters : S. Luke's 
 silence about him (x. 38, 39) agrees well with this. 
 
 Bethany] A small village on the S.E. slope of the Mount of Olives, 
 about two miles from Jerusalem (see on Matt. xxi. 9). 
 
 the town of Mary] Better, of the village of Mary. The same word 
 is used of Bethlehem (vii. 42) and in conjunction with 'tovras' or 'cities' 
 (Luke xiii. 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 mentioned in the next verse had made her better known. 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 \w. 
 31, 45), the feast, the family burying-place (v. 38), and Mary's costly 
 offering (xii. 2, 3), point in the same direction. 
 
 2. It was that Mary which anointed] This of course does not 
 necessarily imply that the anointing had already taken place, as those 
 who identify Mary vkdth the 'sinner' of Luke vii. 37 would insist: it 
 merely implies that when S. John wrote, this fact was well known 
 about her, as Christ had promised should be the case (Matt. xxvi. 13). 
 S. John tells two facts omitted in the earlier Gospels; (i) that the vil- 
 lage of Martha and Mary was Bethany, (2) that the anointing at 
 Bethany was Mary's act. The identification of Mary of Bethany with 
 the prostitute of Luke vii. is altogether at variance with what S. Luke 
 and S. 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. 
 
 3. Therefore his sisters sent} This shews that v, 1 ought not to be 
 
v\'. 4— 6.] S. JOHN, XI. 229 
 
 thou lovest is sick. When Jesus heard that, he said, This < 
 sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that 
 the Son of God might be glorified thereby. Now Jesus 5 
 loved Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus. When he had 6 
 
 made a parenthesis : 'therefore' refers to the previous statement. Be- 
 cause 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? 
 
 he whofn thou lovest is sick] Exquisite in its tender simplicity. The 
 message implies a belief that Christ could, and probably would, heal a 
 dangerous sickness. See on v. 5. 
 
 4. is not unto death] i.e. is not to have death as its final result. 
 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. 
 
 might be glorified] In two ways; because the miracle (i) would lead 
 many to believe that He was the Messiah; (2) would bring about His 
 death. 'Being glorified' is a frequent expression in 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). 
 
 thereby] Both in the English and in the Greek this is ambiguous : it 
 may refer either to the sickness or the glory. The former is correct. 
 
 5. Now Jesiis loved Martha] The English Version loses much here, 
 and still more in xxi. 15 — 17, by using the same word 'love' to translate 
 two different Greek words : nor can the loss be remedied satisfactorily. 
 The word used in v. 3, philein (Lat. arnare), denotes a passionate, emo- 
 tional warmth, which loves and cares not to ask why ; the affection of 
 lovers, parents, and the like. The word used here agapdn, (Lat. 
 diligere), denotes a calm, discriminating attachment, which loves because 
 of the excellence of the loved object ; the affection of friends. Philein 
 is the stronger, but less reasoning; agapdn the more earnest, but less 
 intense. The sisters naturally use the more emotional word, 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. 
 
 Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus] The names are probably in 
 
230 S. JOHN, XI. [w. 7— lo. 
 
 heard therefore that he was sick, he abode two days still 
 
 7 in the same place where he was. Then after that saith he 
 
 8 to his disciples, Let us go into Judea again. His disciples 
 say unto him, Master, the Jews of late sought to stone thee; 
 
 9 and goest thou thither again? Jesus answered, Are there 
 not twelve hours in the day? If any man walk in the day, he 
 stumbleth not, because he seeth the light of this world. 
 
 to But if a man walk in the night, he stumbleth, because there 
 
 order of age. This and v. 19 confirm what is almost certain from Luke 
 X. 38, that Martha is the elder sister. 
 
 6. When he had heard therefore] Omit 'had.' The connexion is a 
 little difficult. 'Therefore' after the statement in v. 5 prepares us for 
 'He set out immediately,' but instead of that we have the reverse. 
 'Therefore,' however, really leads on to v. 7, and consequently there 
 should be only a semicolon at the end of v. 6. When, therefore, He 
 heard that he is sick, then Indeed He abode two days m the place 
 where He was ; then after this He saith, &c. The question tuhy 
 Christ remained the two days is futile : such was the Divine Will with 
 regard to the mode of working this miracle and to His Messianic work 
 generally. His life was a perfect fulfilment of the Preacher's rule; 'To 
 everj'thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven' 
 (Eccl. iii. I ; comp. v. 9, ii. 4). There was a Divine plan, in conformity 
 with which He worked. 
 
 7. Let us go into jfudea again] The again refers us back to x. 40. 
 His using the general term, Judsea, instead of Bethany leads to the 
 disciples' reply. Judaea was associated with hostility, Bethany with 
 love and friendship. 
 
 8. Master, the fe^us of late sought to stone thee] Better, Bahbl (see on 
 iv. 31) just now the Jnus were seeking to stone Thee (x. 31) and art 
 Thou going thither again ? ' Again' is emphatic. 
 
 9. Are there not twelve hours in the day] As so often, Christ gives 
 no direct answer to the question asked, but a general principle, involv- 
 ing the answer to the question. Comp. ii. 6, 19, iii. 5, 10, iv. 13, i\, 
 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 I came to do. 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 safe 
 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. The expression throws no light on S. John's 
 method of reckoning time. See on xix. 14. 
 
 the light of this xvorld] The sun. 
 
 10. he stumbleth] Christ's night came when His hour came (xvii. i). 
 Then the powers of darkness prevailed (Luke xxii. 53) and His enemies 
 
vv. II— 13.] S. JOHN, XI. 231 
 
 is no light in him. These things said he : and after that he n 
 saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth ; but I go, that 
 I may awake him out of sleep. Then said his disciples, k 
 Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. Howbeit Jesus spake of 13 
 
 became a stumblingblock in His path, bringing His work to a close 
 (xix. 30). The word for 'stumble' means literally to ' knock the foot 
 against something. 
 
 there is no light in him^ Rather, the light is not in him. This shews 
 that the meaning has slid from the literal to the figurative. ' The light ' 
 in V, 9 is the physical light in the heavens ; here it is the spiritual light 
 in the heart. 
 
 H. and after that'\ and after this. These words indicate a pause 
 in the narrative. 
 
 Our friend Lazarus sleepeth'] Better, Lazarus our friend is fallen 
 asleep, or, is gone to rest. 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. Comp. Matt, xxvii. 52; Acts vii. 50, xiii. 36; i Cor. 
 vii. 39, xi. 30, XV. 6, 18; I 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 Greek 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. 
 
 that I may azvake him] This shews that no messenger has come to 
 announce the death. Christ sees the death as He foresees the resurrec- 
 tion : comp. V. 4. 
 
 12. Then said his disciples] Better, Therefore said the disciples to 
 Him. They catch at any chance of escape from the dreaded journey. 
 
 if he sleep, he shall do well] Better, if he toe fallen asleep, he shall be 
 saved, will be cured. Probably they thought that Christ meant to go 
 and cure Lazarus (v. 37, comp. ix. 3) ; and here they infer from his 
 sleeping that he will recover without Christ's aid : consequently Christ 
 need not go. They are too full of anxiety to notice Christ's significant 
 words 'I go, that I may awake him,' whereas the rendering in our Bible 
 reads like an expostulation against waking him, as if it meant ' a sick 
 man should not be disturbed.' For other instances in which the disci- 
 ples grossly misunderstand Christ, see iv. 33, xiv. 5, 8, 22; Matt. xvi. 7; 
 and comp. iii. 4, 9, iv. 11, 15, vi. 34, 52, vii. 35, viii. 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 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 misappre- 
 hensions become possible. 
 
 13. Howbeit Jesus spake] Or, Now Jesus had spoken. 
 
232 S. JOHN, XI. [vv. 14—16. 
 
 his death : but they thought that he had spoken of taking of 
 
 14 rest in sleep. Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus 
 
 15 is dead. And I am glad for your sakes that I was not 
 there, to the intent ye may believe; nevertheless let us go 
 
 16 unto him. Then said Thomas, which is called Didymus, 
 
 had spoken\ spake. 
 
 taking of rest in sleep] The word here translated * taking of rest ' 
 corresponds to ' sleepeth ' or ' is gone to rest ' m v. 11, and ' to sleep ' in 
 V. 12. The word translated ' awake him out of sleep ' in z/. 1 1 is a com- 
 pound of the word here rendered, 'sleep.' 
 
 14. Then said Jesus'] 'Then' here, as in Rom. vi. ii, is made to 
 cover two Greek words, 'then 'of time, and 'then' of consequence: 
 translate, Thett therefore said Jesus. 
 
 plainly] Without metaphor : see on vii. 4 and x. 24. 
 
 16. I am glad] 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. 
 
 to the intent ye may believe] S. John's favourite construction, indicat- 
 ing the Divine purpose : see on ix. 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 be- 
 lieve ? 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, 
 
 nevertheless let us go] He breaks off suddenly. 
 
 16. Then said] Therefore said. 
 
 Thomas, which is called Didymus] S. John thrice (xx. 24, xxi. 2) 
 reminds his readers that Thomas is the same as he whom Gentile 
 Christians called Didymus. 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 S. Philip. That S. Thomas received his name 
 from Christ (as Simon was called Peter, and the sons of Zebedee Boa- 
 nerges) 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 con- 
 tending with one another for mastery, as Esau and Jacob in Rebecca's 
 womb " (Trench). It is from S. John that we know his character : in 
 the Synoptists and the Acts he is a mere name (see on i. 41). He seems 
 to have combined devotion to Christ with a tendency to see the dark 
 side of everything. S. 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). 
 
w. 17, i8.] S. JOHN, XI. • 233 
 
 unto his fellow-disciples, Let us also go, that we may die 
 with him. 
 
 Then when Jesus came, he found that he had lien in the 17 
 grave four days already. Now Bethany was nigh unto 18 
 
 fellow-disciples] The word occurs here only. It has been remarked that 
 S. Thomas would scarcely have taken the lead in this way had S. Peter 
 been present, and that had S. 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 S. Mark's Gospel, 
 the Gospel of S. Peter, and undoubtedly the representative of the oldest 
 form of the Synoptic narrative. 
 
 die with him] 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 S. Thomas knew this (v. 14). 
 
 17. Then xvhen yesus came] Better, When therefore yesus came, 
 not to the house, nor to Bethany, but to the vicinity {vv. 20, 30). In 
 V. 16 also ' then ' should be therefore, S. John's favourite particle to 
 express a sequence in fact. 
 
 he found] i.e. on enquiry. 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 {v. 34). Comp. 
 i. 48, iv. 18. Similarly, Peter's prison-gate opens 'of its own accord;' 
 Mary's house-door does not (Acts xii. 10 — 16). 
 
 in the grave] Or, in the sepulchre. Our translators use three dif- 
 ferent English words for the same Greek word ; ' grave ' in this chapter, 
 V. 28; Matt, xxvii. 52, &c. ; 'tomb' Matt. viii. 28; Mark v. 1, vi. 29, 
 &c. ; 'sepulchre' of Christ's resting-place. 'Sepulchre' would be best 
 in all cases. Another Greek word for 'tomb ' used by S. Matthew only 
 is rendered ' tomb ' xxiii. 29, and 'sepulchre' xxiii. 27, xxvii. 61, 64, 66, 
 xxviii. I. 
 
 four days] 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, ro). 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. 
 
 18. Now Bethany was nigh unto yerusalem] The ' was ' 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 
 
234 S. JOHN, XI. [vv. 19, 20. 
 
 19 Jerusalem, about fifteen furlongs off: and many of the Jews 
 came to Martha and Mary, to comfort them concerning 
 
 30 their brother. Then Martha, as soon as she heard that 
 Jesus was coming, went and met him: but Mary sat still 
 
 places in the past tense, and S. John does not always do so. The infer- 
 ence is that he wrote after 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. i), Joseph's garden (xix. 41) 
 what was not destroyed, in the present tense ; e.g. Bethesda (z". 1, where 
 see note). 
 
 about Jifteen furlongs] Literally, about fifteen stades. A Greek stade 
 is 18 yards less than an English furlong; but the translation is suffi- 
 ciently accurate, like 'firkin' (ii. 6). This distance, therefore, was under 
 two miles, and is mentioned to account for the many Jews who came to 
 condole with the sisters. 
 
 19. 7nany of the yews came to Martha and Mary] Better, many 
 from among the yews had come, &c. The received text with some 
 good authorities has 'had come to Martha and Mary and their friends,' 
 but this is not the best-attested reading. 'The Jews' here, as usual, 
 means Christ's opponents ; they would come mostly, if not entirely, from 
 Jerusalem. 
 
 to comfort them] It was part of the Jewish ceremonial of mourning 
 that many (ten at least) should come and condole. Gen. xxvii. 35 ; 
 comp. 1 Sam. xii. 17; Job ii. 11. It is said that the usual period of 
 mourning was thirty days; three of weeping, seven of lamentation, 
 twenty of sorrow. But the instances in Scripture vary : Jacob, seventy 
 days with an additional seven (Gen. I. 3, 10) ; Aaron and Moses, thirty 
 days (Numb. xx. 29; Deut. xxxiv. 8); Saul and Judith, seven days 
 (i 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.y. il. i. i ; ill. ix. 5). The Mishna 
 prescribes seven days for near relations. 
 
 20. Then Martha] Or, Martha, therefore. Information would be 
 brought to her as the elder sister and (apparently) mistress of the house 
 (Luke X. 38). She as usual takes the lead in entertaining, and Mary 
 shrinks from it. "One most remarkable feature in the history is the 
 coincidence between the characters of Mary and Martha as depicted here 
 and in S. Luke." S. p. 185. It is incredible that this coincidence 
 should be either fortuitous or designed. It is much easier to believe 
 that both Gospels give us facts about real persons. Christ is unwilling 
 to mingle at once in the crowd of mourners, and halts outside the 
 village. 
 
 yesus was coming] Rather, yesus is coming, probably the very words 
 of the message. Perhaps they were still on the look-out for His 
 arrival, although they supposed that it was too late for His coming 
 to avail anything. 
 
 Mary sat still in the house] Or, was sitting in the house : the atti- 
 
w, 21—25.] S. JOHN, XI. 235 
 
 in the house. Then said Martha unto Jesus, Lord, if thou n 
 hadst been here, my brother had not died. But I know, 12 
 that even now, whatsoever thou wilt ask of God, God will 
 give /'/ thee. Jesus saith unto her, Thy brother shall rise 23 
 again. Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise 24 
 again in the resurrection at the last day. Jesus said unto 25 
 
 tude of sorrow and meditation (Job ii. 13). She does not know of 
 Christ's approach (w. 28, 29) : Martha, in discharging the duties of 
 hospitaHty to fresh arrivals, would be more likely to hear of it. 
 
 21. t/ thou hadsi been here'] Not a reproach, 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. 32). 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) and the man bom blind (ix. 11), though she starts 
 at a more advanced stage than they do. If all these three narratives 
 are late fictions, we have three 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. But I know, that even noni] ' But ' must be omitted on critical 
 grounds; and the text should run, and now (that he is dead) / knoTt/ 
 that, &c. 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 on- 
 wards to higher truth. 
 
 whatsoever thou wilt asJi\ She uses a word more appropriate to human 
 prayer, 'to 2.^ for oneself (comp. xiv. 13, 14, xv. 7, 16, xvi. 23, 26), 
 not used by Christ of His own prayers or by the Evangelists of Christ's 
 prayers (contrast xiv. 16, xvi. 26, xvii. 9, 15, 20; Matt. xxvi. 36, 39, 
 42, 44; Luke xxii. 32). She thus incidentally shews her imperfect idea 
 of His relation to God. 
 
 23. shall rise again] 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) under- 
 stands them rightly. More probably Christ includes the immediate 
 restoration of Lazarus, but she does not venture to do so, and rejects the 
 allusion to the final Resurrection as poor consolation. 
 
 24. 7 hnow that he shall rise again] This conviction was probably 
 in advance of average Jewish belief on the subject. The O.T. declara- 
 tions as to 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. S). 
 
236 S. JOHN, XI. [vv. 26—30. 
 
 her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in 
 
 26 me, though he were dead, yet shall he Hve : and whosoever 
 liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou 
 
 27 this? She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art 
 the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the 
 
 23 world. And when she had so said, she went her way, and 
 called Mary her sister secretly, saying, The Master is come, 
 
 29 and calleth for thee. As soon as she heard that, she arose 
 
 30 quickly, and came unto him. Now Jesus was not yet come 
 
 the last day] See on vi. 39. 
 
 26. / am the resurrection, and the life'] He draws her from her self- 
 ish 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 
 Resurrection 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 (physically), shall live (eternally). And every one that liveth 
 (physically) and believeth in Me, shall never die (eternally).' 
 
 26. shall never die] See on viii. 5 1 ; the form of expression is the 
 same; 'shall assuredly never die.' 
 
 Believest thou this?] A searching question, suddenly put. She 
 answers with confidence, and gives the ground of her confidence. 
 
 27. / believe] Literally, I bave believed, i. e. / have convinced my- 
 self and do believe. 
 
 that thou art the Christ] She cannot have known the full import of 
 her confession. With the Apostles she shared her countrymen's im- 
 perfect views of the character and office of the Messiah. See on ix. 
 38. 
 
 which should come] Literally, that cometh. Comp. vi. 14; Matt, 
 xi. 3; Luke vii. 19; Deut. xviii. 15. She believes that He has the 
 powers mentioned in w. 25, 26, because He is the Messiah. How these 
 powers will affect her o^vn case she does not know, but with a vague 
 hope of comfort in store for them all she returns to the house. See on 
 i. 9 and xviii. 37. 
 
 28. secretly] Because she knew that some of Christ's enemies were 
 among the guests {;yv. 19, 31). 'Secretly' belongs to 'saying,' not to 
 'called.' 
 
 The Master is come] Or, The Teacher is come. It is not the Hebrew 
 word 'Rabbi' that is here used, as in i. 50, iii. 2, 26, iv. 31, vi. 25, ix. 
 2 ; but the Greek word given in i. 39 as the translation of 'Rabbi,' and 
 in XX. 16 as the translation of 'Rabboni,' and used by Christ (iii. 10) of 
 Nicodemus. Comp. xiii. 13, 14; Mark xiv. 14. Martha avoids using 
 His name for fear of being overheard. 
 
 29. she arose quickly] As was natural in one so fond of sitting at 
 Jesus' feet. 
 
vv. 3I-33-] S. JOHN, XI. 237 
 
 into the town, but was in that place where Martha met him. 
 The Jews then which were with her in the house, and 31 
 comforted her, when they saw Mary, that she rose up hastily 
 and went out, followed her, saying, She goeth unto the 
 grave to weep there. Then when Mary was come where 32 
 Jesus was, and saw him, she fell down at his feet, saying 
 unto him. Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not 
 died. 
 
 33—44- The Sign. 
 When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews 33 
 also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit, 
 
 30. into the town] Or, into the village ; see on z/. i . By remaining 
 outside He would be able to say what He wished to say to the sisters 
 without fear of interruption. 
 
 ■was in that place] was still in that place. 
 
 31. followed her, saying] For 'saying' read with the best authori- 
 ties, thinking. Their following interferes with the privacy at which 
 Martha had aimed. 
 
 to weep there] The word rendered 'weep' here and in v. 33, as dis- 
 tinct from the one used in v. 35, indicates a loud expression of grief; 
 wailing and crying, not merely shedding of tears. 
 
 32. Then when Mary] Mary therefore when. 
 
 she fell dawn at his feet] Nothing of the kind is reported of Martha, 
 V. ^i. Here again the difference of character between the two sisters 
 appears. 
 
 Lord, if thou hadst been here] The same words as those of Martha, 
 V. ^i. 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 pre- 
 vent further conversation. For the construction comp. iv. 10, xiv. 28. 
 
 33—44. The Sign. 
 
 33. weeping... weeping] The repetition is for emphasis, and to point 
 a contrast which is the key to the passage. 
 
 he groaned in the spirit] Better, He was angered in the spirit. 
 The word translated 'groaned' 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 (i) literally, of animals, 'to snort, 
 growl;' then metaphorically (2) 'to be very angry or indignant;' (3) 'to 
 command sternly, under threat of displeasure.' What was He afigered 
 at? Some translate ^ at His spirit,' and explain (a) that He was in- 
 dignant 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 Hn His spirit,' explain (jS) that He was indignant 'at 
 
238 S . JOHN, XI. [vY. 34-37. 
 
 34 and was troubled, and said, Where have ye laid him? They 
 
 36 say unto him, Lord, come and see. Jesus wept. Then 
 
 37 said the Jews, Behold, how he loved him. And some of 
 them said. Could not this man, which opened the eyes of 
 
 the unbelief of the Jews and perhaps of the sisters :' but of this there is 
 no hint in the context. Others again, (7) that it was ' at the siglit 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 indig- 
 nant 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. 
 
 ■was troubled~\ The margin is better; He troubled Himself, i.e. agi- 
 tated Himself, allowed His emotion to become evident by external 
 movement such as a shudder. 
 
 34. Where have ye laid him .?] This question is against the supposi- 
 tion, based on 7^. 31, that the place where Jesus halted outside the vil- 
 lage was close to the grave. 
 
 They say unto hi?n} ' I'hey ' are the two sisters : on both sides "grief 
 speaks in the fewest possible words." 
 
 35. yesus wepiX Or, shed tears. The word occurs nowhere else 
 in N.T.; it expresses less loud lamentation than the word used in 
 w, 3I) 33. He sheds tears on His way to their brother's grave, not 
 because He is ignorant or doubtful of what is coming, but because He 
 cannot but sympathize with the intensity of His friends' grief. " The 
 intense humanity attributed to Jesus, His affection, His visible suffer- 
 ing, the effort with which He collects Himself, are all strong marks of 
 authenticity, and the more so because they might be thought to con- 
 flict with the doctrine of the prologue. But this is but one more 
 proof how little that doctrine has disturbed the Evangelist's true his- 
 toric recollection." S. pp. 186, 7. 
 
 36. Then said, loved him'\ Here, as in vv. 12, 14, 16, 17, 20, 
 
 2i> 31, 32, 41, 45, 47, 53, 56, 'then' should rather be therefore, 
 as rightly given '\\iw. 3, 33, 38, 54: it is S. John's favourite particle 
 in all these verses. Both the verbs here are imperfects ; ' kept saying, ' 
 ' used to love.' What follows shews that this remark was not made by 
 all the Jews. The word for ' love ' is the more passionate word used 
 in V. 3 by the sisters, not the higher word used in v. 5 by the Evan- 
 gelist. 
 
 37. And some of them'] Better, 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?' They 
 use the death of Lazarus as an argument to throw fresh doubt on the 
 miracle which had so baffled them at Jerusalem. Their reference to 
 
vv. 38— 4I-] S. JOHN, XL 239 
 
 the blind, have caused that even this mail should not have 
 died? Jesus therefore again groaning in himself cometh to 38 
 the grave. It was a cave, and a stone lay upon it. Jesus 39 
 said, Take ye away the stone. Martha, the sister of him 
 that was dead, saith unto him. Lord, by this time he stinketh : 
 for he hath been dead four days. Jesus saith unto her, Said 40 
 I not unto thee, that, if thou wouldest believe, thou shouldest 
 see the glory of God? Then they took away the siont from 41 
 the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lift up his 
 
 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 inventor 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. 
 
 should not have died'\ Rather, should not die. 
 
 38. groaning in hitnself^ See on v. 33. This shews that '/« His 
 spirit' not ^at His spirit' is the right translation there. Their sneering 
 scepticism rouses His indignation afresh. 
 
 to the grave'] See on v. 17. Insert now before *it was a cave.' 
 The having a private burying-place indicates that the family was well 
 off. The large attendance of mourners and the very precious ointment 
 (xii. 3) point to the same fact. 
 
 upon it] The Greek may mean ' against it,' so that an excavation 
 in the side of a rock or mound is not excluded. What is now shewn 
 as the sepulchre of Lazarus is an excavation in the ground with steps 
 down to it. The stone would keep out beasts of prey. 
 
 39. the sister of him that was dead] 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 mis- 
 taken; though some would have it that the miracle had begun from 
 Lazarus' death, and that the corpse had been preserved from decom- 
 position, 
 
 he hath been dead four days] Literally, he is of the fourth day. 
 
 40. Said I not] Apparently a reference to vv. 25, 26, and to the 
 reply to the messenger, z/. 4 : on both occasions more perhaps was said 
 than is recorded. See notes on v. 4. 
 
 41. from the place where the dead was laid] These words are 
 omitted by an overwhelming number of authorities. They are a need- 
 less explanation added by a later hand. 
 
 And yesus lift] The verb is identical with that translated 'took 
 
240 S. JOHN, XI. [vv. 42—44. 
 
 eyes, and said. Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard 
 
 42 me. And I knew that thou hearest me always : but 
 because of the people which stand by I said it, that they 
 
 43 may believe that thou hast sent me. And when he thus had 
 spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth. 
 
 44 And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot 
 with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a 
 napkin. Jesus saith unto them. Loose him, and let him go. 
 
 away' in the preceding clause. Both should be translated alike; more- 
 over, 'and' should be 'but.' They lifted therefore the stone. But 
 Jesus lifted His eyes upwards. 
 
 Father, 1 thank thee'] Jesus thanks the Father as a public acknow- 
 ledgment that the Son can do ' nothing of Himself,' but that the power 
 which He is about to exhibit is from the Father (v. 19 — 26). 
 
 that thou hast heard] Better, that Thou didst hear. The prayer 
 to which this refers is not recorded. 
 
 42. And I knew] Better, But / kneiv, 'I' being very emphatic. 
 This verse is added to prevent misunderstanding: no one must suppose 
 from this act of thanksgiving that there are any prayers of the Son 
 which the Father does not hear. 
 
 I said it] i.e. I said the words 'I thank Thee, &c.' 
 that thou hast sent me] Or, didst send il/<;. 'Thou' is emphatic; 
 'Thou and no one else.' 
 
 43. cried] The Greek 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, xviii. 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 would have it that ' I thank Thee ' implies that Lazarus is 
 already alive and needs only to be called forth. 
 
 44. came forth] 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 mum- 
 mies sometimes every finger is kept distinct. 
 
 graveclothes] The Greek 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 embalming. If Lazarus died of a malignant disease he would be 
 buried as quickly as possible. 
 
 face] The Greek word occurs in N.T. only here, vii. 24, and Rev. 
 i. 16 : one of the small indications of a common authorship (see on xv. 
 20 and xix. 37). 
 
 napkin] A Latin word is used meaning literally 'a sweat-cloth.' It 
 occurs XX. 7; Luke xix. 20; Acts xix. 12. Here the cloth bound 
 
w. 45—48.] S. JOHN, XI. 241 
 
 45 — 57. Opposite Results of the Sign. 
 
 Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had 45 
 seen the things which Jesus did, beheved on him. But some 46 
 of them went their ways to the Pharisees, and told them what 
 things Jesus had done. Then gathered the chief priests and 47 
 the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man 
 doeth many miracles. If we let him thus alone, all men will 48 
 
 under the chin to keep the lower jaw from falling is probably meant. 
 These details shew the eyewitness. 
 
 let him g6\ The expression is identical with 'let these go their way' 
 (xviii. 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. 
 
 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. Opposite Results of the Sign. 
 
 45. Then 77iany of the J^u's\ The English Version is here mislead- 
 ing, owing to inaccuracy and bad punctuation. It should run thus : — 
 Many therefore of the Jews, even they that came to Mary and beheld 
 that which He did (see on vi. 14). The Jews who witnessed the miracle 
 all believed : ' of the Jews ' means of the Jews generally. 
 
 But some of them tvent'\ Some of the Jews generally, not of those 
 who saw and believed, went and told the Pharisees ; with what intention 
 is not clear, but probably not out of malignity. Perhaps to convince 
 the Pharisees, or to seek an authoritative solution of their own per- 
 plexity, or as feeling that the recognised leaders of the people ought to 
 know the whole case. The bad result of their mission has made some 
 too hastily conclude that their intention was bad, and that therefore 
 they could not be included in those who believed. 
 
 47. a coiituil\ 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. 3-2, 45, xviii. 3). 
 
 What do we .'] Implying that something must be done. 
 
 this man] Contemptuous, as in ix. 16, 24 ; comp. vii. 49. 
 
 doeth many miracles] It is no longer possible to deny the fact of the 
 signs. Instead of asking themselves what these 'signs' must mean, 
 
 s. JOHN 16 
 
242 S. JOHN, XI. [v. 49. 
 
 believe on him : and the Romans shall come and take away 
 
 49 both our place and nation. And one of them, named 
 
 Caiaphas, being the high priest that satne year, said unto 
 
 their only thought is how to prevent others from drawing the obvious 
 conclusion. 
 
 48. the Romans will cornel They do not inquire whether He is or 
 is not the Messiah ; they look solely to the consequences of admitting 
 that He is. " The Sanhedrin, especially the Pharisaic section of it, was 
 a national and patriotic body. It was the inheritor and guardian of the 
 Rabbinical theories as to the Messiah. There can have been no class in 
 the nation in which these were so inveterately ingrained, and therefore 
 none that was so little accessible to the teaching of Jesus. It was from 
 first to last unintelligible to them. It seemed to abandon all the national 
 hopes and privileges, and to make it a sin to defend them. If it were 
 
 successful, it seemed as if it must leave the field open to the Romans 
 
 It is rarely in ancient literature that we find a highly complicated situa- 
 tion so well understood and described." S. pp. 188, 189. This last 
 remark is eminently true of the whole narrative portion of the Fourth 
 Gospel. 
 
 our place and nation] ' Our ' is very emphatic ; dotA our place and 
 our nation. 'Place' is perhaps best understood of Jerusalem, the seat of 
 the Sanhedrin, and the abode of the bulk of the hierarchy. Other inter- 
 pretations are (i) the Temple, comp. ■z Mac. 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 d'etre.'' 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. 
 
 49. Caiaphas'] This was a surname ; ' who was called Caiaphas ' 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, ac- 
 cording to another derivation, means 'depression.' The highpriest- 
 hood had long since ceased to descend from father to son. Pilate's pre- 
 decessor, Valerius Gratus, had deposed Annas and set up in succession 
 Ismael, Eleazar (son of Annas), Simon, and Joseph Caiaphas (son-in-law 
 of Annas); Caiaphas held the office from a.d. 18 to 36, when he was de- 
 posed 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. i, ix. i, 2, xxii. 5, 
 xxiii. 2, 4, xxiv. i). Caiaphas is not president here, or he would not be 
 spoken of merely as ' one of them.' 
 
 that same year] This has been urged as an objection, as if the 
 Evangelist ignorantly supposed that the highpriesthood was an annual 
 office, — a mistake which would go far to prove that the Evangelist was 
 not a Jew, and therefore not S. John. But there is no ' same ' in the 
 Greek (comp. i. 33, iv. 53, v. 9, 11), and 'that year' means 'that nota- 
 ble and fatal year.' The same expression recurs w. 51 and xviii. 13. 
 
vv. 50-53.] S. JOHN, XI. 243 
 
 them, Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is 50 
 expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, 
 and that the whole nation perish not. And this spake he 51 
 not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied 
 that Jesus should die for that nation; And not for that s^^^ 
 nation only, but that also he should gather together in one 
 the children of God that were scattered abroad. Then 53 
 from that day forth they took counsel together for to put 
 
 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 annttal change being implied. There had been 
 some twenty or thirty high-priests in S. John's lifetime. 
 
 Ye know nothing at air\ An inference from their asking ' What do 
 we?' It was quite obvious what they must do. The 'ye' is contemp- 
 tuously emphatic. The resolute but unscrupulous character of the man 
 is evident. 
 
 50. expedient for tis\ For us members of the Sanhedrin. But the 
 better reading gives, for you half-hearted Pharisees. 
 
 that one man] Literally, in order that one man ; S. John's favourite 
 particle pointing to the Divine purpose : comp. iv. 34, 36, vi. ap, 50, 
 ix. 2, 3, 39, xii. 23, and especially xvi. 7. 
 
 the people] The Jews as a theocratic community {laos). 
 
 the whole nation] The Jews as one of the nations of the earth {ethnos). 
 Comp. Luke vii. 5; Acts x. 22. The same word in the plural, 'the 
 nations,' means the Gentiles. 
 
 51. not of himself] Like Saul, Caiaphas is a prophet in spite of 
 himself. 
 
 being high priest] 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 mouth-piece 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 quite 
 extinct (Hos. iii. 4) ; and ' in that fatal year ' S. John might well believe 
 that the gift would be restored. 
 
 52. not for that nation only] S. John purposely uses the word which 
 describes the Jews merely as one of the nations of the earth distinct from 
 the Gentiles. Of course we are not to understand that Caiaphas 
 had any thought of the gracious meaning contained in his infamous 
 advice. 
 
 gather together in one] Comp. xvii. 21: for 'in one' read into one.- 
 
 53. Then from that day] Therefore for ' then' is the more important 
 here to bring out the meaning that it was in consequence of Caiaphas' 
 suggestion that the Sanhedrin practically if not formally pronounced 
 sentence of death. The question remained how to get the sentence 
 executed. 
 
 16 2 
 
244 S. JOHN, XI. [vv. 54-57- 
 
 54 him to death. Jesus therefore walked no more openly 
 among the Jews; but went thence unto a country near to the 
 wilderness, into a city called Ephraim, and there continued 
 
 55 with his disciples. And the Jews' passover was nigh at hand : 
 and many went out of the country up to Jerusalem before 
 
 56 the passover, to purify themselves. Then sought they for 
 Jesus, and spake among themselves, as they stood in the 
 temple, What think ye, that he will not come to the feast? 
 
 57 -Now both the chief priests and the Pharisees had given a 
 commandment, that, if any man knew where he were, he 
 should shew //, that they might take him. 
 
 64. therefore^ The decree of the Sanhedrin for His apprehension 
 had been pubhshed (z/. 57) ; the sentence of death was probably a secret 
 among themselves. 
 
 openlyX Comp. vii. 10. He withdraws from all intercourse with His 
 adversaries. 
 
 went thence unto a coicntry\ Departed thence into tlie country. 
 
 the wilderness] The desert of Judsea, which extended to the confines 
 of Jericho, would naturally be meant by 'the wilderness.' 
 
 Ephraim] This place 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. \(^ and 
 Josephus {B. J. IV. ix. 9) be meant, the wilderness would be that of 
 Bethaven. 
 
 55. And the Jews^ passover] Now the passover of the Jews. See 
 ■ notes on ii. 13 and vi. 4. 
 
 '^ to purify themselves] (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. sought... spake] Both verbs are in the imperfect of what went on 
 continually. There are two questions in their words ; ' What think ye? 
 that He certainly will not come to the Feast.' 
 
 57. Now both the chief priests, &c.] Omit ' both.' The word is 
 wanting in authority, and even if it were genuine it would not mean 
 ' both ' but ' moreover.' The verse explains why the people doubted 
 His coming to the feast. Note that once more the Sadducaean hierarchy 
 takes the lead. Comp. v. 47, xii. 10, xviii. 3, 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. 
 
 a commandment] The better reading is, commands, which has been 
 made singular because only one command is mentioned. Comp. our 
 phrase 'to give orders.' 
 
 that] Literally, in order that (see on v. 50). 
 
V. I.] S. JOHN, XII. 245 
 
 Chap. XIL The Judgment. 
 I — 36. The Judgment of Men. 
 Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, 12 
 
 " We are not told how long our Lord stayed at Ephraim. If we are 
 to put faith in the tradition in the Talmud, and in the inferences which 
 Dr Caspari draws from it, an actual verdict of death was passed at the 
 recent meeting of the Sanhedrin, and was only waiting for its execution 
 until an opportunity offered, and the legal period for the production of 
 witnesses in the defence had expired. This would make the interval be- 
 tween the retreat to Ephraim and the Passover coincide more or less 
 nearly with the forty days allowed. The data, however, are not such as 
 we can build on confidently." S. p. 191. So that once more we have 
 an interval of uncertain amount. See the introductory note to chapter 
 vi. and the note on vi. i. 
 
 Chap. XII. The Judgment. 
 
 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 
 Prologue, i. i — 18; The Ministry, i. 19 — xii. 50, thus divided — 
 (i) The Testimony, i. 19— ii. 11; (2) The Work, ii. 13— xi. 57; (3) 
 The Judgment, xii. This third section, which now lies before us, may 
 be subdivided thus— (o) the Judgment of men, 1—36 ; (/3) the Judgment 
 of the Evangelist, 37 — 43; [r^) the Judgment of Christ, 44 — 50. 
 
 We must be content to leave the precise method of harmonizing this 
 later portion of S. John's narrative with that of the Synoptists in un- 
 certainty. "It is best to hold fast to the general scheme given by S. 
 John, and to treat the Synoptic sections, especially those in S. Luke 
 (ix. 51 — xviii. 35), as fragments of a great picture v.-hich are more or less 
 fortuitously thrown together, and are no longer capable of an exact re- 
 construction," S. p. 191. 
 
 1 — 36. The Judgment of Men. 
 
 Note the dramatic contrast between the different sections of this 
 division ; the devotion of Mary and the enmity of the hierarchy, Christ's 
 triumph and the Pharisees' discomfiture, &c. 
 
 1. The7i Jesus'\ The 'then' or therefore simply resumes the narra- 
 tive 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 appointed scene of His sufferings. 
 
 six days before the passover^ The Passover began at sunset on Nfsan 
 14 : six days before this would bring us to Nisan 8. Assuming the year 
 to be A. D. 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 
 
246 S. JOHN, XII. [vv. 2, 3. 
 
 where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised 
 from the dead. 
 
 2 — 8. The Devotion of Mary. 
 
 2 There they made hhii a supper; and Martha served: 
 but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with 
 
 3 him. Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, 
 very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his 
 
 journey being over before the day of rest began. But it must be remem- 
 bered that this chronology is tentative, not certain. 
 
 which had been dead] These words are omitted by a large number of 
 the best authorities, which give where Lazarus was, whom Jesus raised 
 from the dead. They made Him therefore, &c. 
 
 2 — 8. The Dkvotion of Mary. 
 
 2. they made hijn a supper] 'They' is indefinite: if we had only this 
 account we should suppose that the supper was in the house of Martha, 
 Mary, and Lazarus; but S. 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 the accounts of S. Matthew and S. Mark). 
 
 Lazarus was one of them] This is probably introduced to prove the 
 reality and completeness of his restoration to life : but it also confirms 
 the Synoptic accounts by indicating that Lazarus was a guest rather than 
 a host. 
 
 sat at the table] Literally, reclined, as was the custom. 
 
 3. took Mary a pound] S. John alone gives her name and the 
 amount of ointment. The pound of 12 ounces is meant. So large a 
 quantity of a substance so costly is evidence of her over-flowing love. 
 Comp. xix. 39. 
 
 ointment of spikenard] The Greek expression is a rare one, and 
 occurs elsewhere only Mark xiv. 3, which S. John very likely had seen : 
 his account has all the independence of that of an eye-witness, but may 
 have been influenced by the .Synoptic narratives. The meaning of the 
 Greek is not certain : it may mean (i) 'genuine nard,' and spikenard was 
 often adulterated; or (2) 'drinkable, liquid nard,' 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. 
 
 very costly] Horace offers to give a cask of wine for a very small box 
 of it; 'Nardi parvus onyx eliciet cadum.' Odes iv. xii. 17. 
 
 anointed the feet] The two Synoptists mention only the usual (Ps. 
 xxiii. 5) 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. 
 
vv. 4—8.] S. JOHN, XII. 247 
 
 feet with her hair: and the house was filled \vith the odour 
 of the ointment. Then saith one of his disciples, Judas 4 
 Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray him, Why was 5 
 not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given 
 to the poor? This he said, not that he cared for the 6 
 poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and 
 bare what was put therein. Then said Jesus, Let her alone : 7 
 against the day of my burying hath she kept this. For 8 
 
 4. Then saith, &c.] Rather, But yudas Iscariot, &c. The best 
 authorities omit 'Simon's son.' 
 
 one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot^ S. Mark says quite indefinitely, 
 'some,' S. Matthew, 'his disciples.' Each probably states just what he 
 knew; S. Mark that the remark was made; S. Matthew that it came 
 from the group of disciples; S. John that Judas made it, and why he 
 made it. S. John was perhaps anxious that the unworthy grumbling 
 should be assigned to the right person. 
 
 which should betray] Comp. vi. 71. 
 
 6. three hundred pence'] Here, as in vi. 7, the translation 'pence' is 
 very inadequate and misleading; 'three hundred shillings' would be 
 nearer the mark (see on vi. 7). S. Mark adds that some were very in- 
 dignant at her. 
 
 to the poor] More accurately, to poor people; there is no article 
 (comp. Luke xviii. 22). 
 
 6. the bag] Better, the box, the cash-box in which the funds of the 
 small company were kept. The word means literally 'a case for mouth- 
 pieces' of musical instruments, and hence any portable chest. It occurs 
 in the LXX. of 2 Chron. xxiv. 8, 11, but nowhere in N.T. excepting 
 here and xiii. 29. 
 
 and bare] The Greek word may mean either 'used to carry' or 'used 
 to carry away, ' i.e. steal: comp. xx. 15. S. Augustine, commenting 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 i. 3. "O good! Convey? — Conveyers are 
 you all." Richard II. iv. i. 
 
 what was put therein] Literally, the thijtgs that were being cast into 
 it from time to time ; the gifts of friends and followers. 
 
 7. hath she kept] The large majority of authorities, including the 
 best, read that she may keep, and the whole will run : Let her alone that 
 she may preserve it for the day of My burial. The simplest interpre- 
 tation of this is 'Let her preserve what remains of it; not, however, to 
 be sold for the poor, but to be used for My burial, which is near at 
 hand.' The text has probably been altered to bring it more into 
 harmony with the Synoptists, with whom the present anointing appears 
 as anointing for the burial by anticipation. The word for 'burial' or 
 'entombment' occurs only here and Mark xiv. 8. 
 
248 S. JOHN, XII. [vv. 9-II. 
 
 the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not 
 always. 
 
 9 — II. The Hostility of the Priests. 
 
 9 Much people of the Jews therefore knew that he was 
 there : and they came not for Jesus' sake only, but that 
 they might see Lazarus also, whom he had raised from the 
 
 10 dead. But the chief priests consulted that they might put 
 
 11 Lazarus also to death ; because that by reason of him many 
 of the Jews went away, and believed on Jesus. 
 
 8. For the poor, &c.] Comp. Deut. xv. ii. 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. 
 
 9 — 11. The Hostility of the Priests. 
 
 9. Mitch people] Large caravans would be coming up for the Pass- 
 over, and the news would spread quickly through the shifting crowds, 
 who were already on the alert (xi. 55) about Jesus, and were now 
 anxious to see Lazarus. Note that it is a 'large multitude of the yeii's' 
 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. 
 
 10. Bui the chief priests] 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 z'. 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). See on xi. 57. 
 
 put Lazarus also to death] 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. 
 
 These repeated references to the raising of Lazarus (xi. 45, 47, xii. 
 r, 9, 10, 17) greatly strengthen the historical evidence for the miracle. 
 They are quite inconsistent with the theory either of a misunderstand- 
 ing or of deliberate fraud. 
 
 11. wetit aivay, and believed] Better, were going away and be- 
 lieving. It is best to leave 'going away' quite indefinite: the notion 
 of falling away from the hierarchy lies in the context but not in the 
 word. The imperfects denote a continual process. 
 
 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 hier- 
 archy meant to put both to death. Their folly consisted in failing to 
 
vv. 12—15.] S. JOHN, XII. 249 
 
 12 — 18. The Entkusiasfft of the People. 
 
 On the next day much people that were come to the 12 
 feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, 
 took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, 13 
 and cried, Hosanna : Blessed is the King of Israel that 
 Cometh in the name of the Lord. And Jesus, when he had 14 
 found a young ass, sat thereon ; as it is written, Fear not, 15 
 
 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, 
 
 12 — 18. The Enthusiasm of the People. 
 
 12. On the next day] From the date given v. i, consequently 
 Nisan 9, from Saturday evening to Sunday evening, if the chronology 
 given on v. i is correct. S. John seems distinctly to assert that the 
 Triumphal Entry followed the supper at Bethany: S. Matthew and 
 S. Mark both place the supper after the entry, S. Matthew^ without 
 any date and probably neglecting (as often) the chronological order, 
 S. Mark also without date, yet apparently implying (xiv. i) that the 
 supper took place two days before the Passover. ]3ut the date in 
 Mark xiv. i covers only two verses and must not be carried further in 
 contradiction to S. John's precise and consistent arrangement. S. John 
 omits all details respecting the procuring of the young ass. 
 
 much people] Not 'Jews ', as in v. 9, but pilgrims without any bias 
 against Christ. Here and in v. 9 the true reading perhaps is, the common 
 people. 
 
 13. branches of palm trees] More literally, the palm-branches of 
 the palm-trees ; i.e. those which grew there, or which were commonly 
 used at festivals. Comp. Simon's triumphal entry into Jerusalem 
 (i Mace. xiii. 51). The palm-tree was regarded by the ancients as 
 characteristic of Palestine. 'Phoenicia' (Acts xi. 19, xv. 3) is pro- 
 bably derived from phcenix = ' palm. ' 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. 
 
 Hosanna] This is evidence that the writer of this Gospel knows 
 Hebrew. In the LXX. at Ps. cxvii. 25 we have a translation of the 
 Hebrew, ' save we pray,' not a transliteration as here. (Comp. ' Alle- 
 luia' in Rev. xix. i, 6.) This Psalm is said by some to have been 
 written for the Feast of Tabernacles after the return from captivity, by 
 others for the founding or dedicating of the second Temple. In what 
 follows the better reading is 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 differ- 
 ent forms of it. 
 
 14. It is written] See on ii. 17. 
 
 IB. Fear not, &c. The quotation is freely made ; ' fear not ' is sub- 
 
250 S. JOHN, XII. [vv. 16—19. 
 
 daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting 
 
 16 on an ass's colt. These things understood not his disci- 
 ples at the first : but when Jesus was glorified, then re- 
 membered they that these things were written of him, and 
 
 17 that they had done these things unto him. The people 
 therefore that was with him when he called Lazarus out of 
 
 18 his grave, and raised him from the dead, bare record. For 
 this cause the people also met him, for that they heard that 
 he had done this miracle. 
 
 19. The Discomfiture of the Pharisees. 
 
 19 The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Perceive 
 ye how ye prevail nothing ? behold, the world is gone after 
 him. 
 
 stituted for 'rejoice greatly,' and the whole is abbreviated, Zech. ix. 9. 
 In adding ' thy ' to ' king ' and in writing ' an ass's colt ' the Evangelist 
 seems to be translating direct from the Hebrew. The best editions of 
 the LXX. omit 'thy' and all have 'a young colt' for the words here 
 rendered 'an ass's colt.' Comp. i. 29, vi. 45, xix. 37. If the writer of 
 this Gospel knew the O.T. in the original Hebrew he almost certainly 
 was a Jew. 
 
 16. understood not'] A mark of candour (see on xi. 12): comp. ii. 21 
 (where see note) and xx. 9. Would a Christian of the second century 
 have invented this dulness of apprehension in Apostles? After Pentecost, 
 however, much that had passed unnoticed or had been obscure before 
 was brought to their remembrance and made clear (xiv. 26). Note 
 'these things' thrice repeated; zw. 14, 15 shew that the placing Him 
 on the young ass is primarily meant. 
 
 was glorified] Comp. vii. 39 and xi. 4, where see notes. 
 
 17. when he called Lazarus] See on v. 10. There is another 
 reading, well supported, which gives Hhat He called Lazarus,' and the 
 whole will then run ; — The multitude, therefore, which was with Him, 
 kept bearing "vMim^^ (i. 7) that He called Lazarus out of the sepulchre 
 and raised him from the dead. But 'when' is to be preferred; so that 
 there are two multitudes, one coming with Jesus from Bethany and one 
 {^vv. 13, 18) meeting Him from Jerusalem. See on z/. 41. 
 
 18. this miracle] 'This' is emphatic: other miracles had made 
 comparatively little impression, but this sign had convinced even His 
 adversaries. 
 
 19. The Discomfiture of the Pharisees. 
 
 19. Perceive ye] Rather, Behold ye. The Greek may also mean 
 'Behold' (imperat.) or ye behold: the last is perhaps best; 'Ye see 
 what a mistake we have made ; we ought to have adopted the plan of 
 Caiaphas long ago.' 
 
 the world] The exaggerated expression of their chagrin, which in 
 
vv. 20—22.] S. JOHN, XII. 251 
 
 20 — 33. The Desire of the Gentiles and the Voice from 
 Heaven. 
 
 And there were certain Greeks among them that came up 20 
 to worship at the feast : the same came therefore to Philip, 21 
 which was of Bethsaida of GaHlee, and desired him, saying, 
 Sir, we would see Jesus, Philip cometh and telleth An- 22 
 
 this Divine epic is brought into strong contrast with the triumph of 
 Jesus. Comp. a similar exaggeration from a similar cause iii. id ; ' all 
 men come to Him.' 
 
 is gone after him^ Literally, is gone away after Him. The Greek 
 word is not the same but is similar in meaning to that used in v. 1 1. 
 After this confession of helplessness the Pharisees appear no more 
 alone ; the reckless hierarchy help them on to the catastrophe. 
 
 20 — 33. The Desirk of the Gentiles and the Voice 
 FROM Heaven. 
 
 20. Greeks^ The same word is translated 'Gentiles' vii. 35, where 
 see note. Care must be taken to distinguish in the N.T. between Hel- 
 lenes or ' Greeks,' i.e. bom Gentiles, who may or may not have become 
 either Jewish proselytes or Christian converts, and Hellenistae or ' Gre- 
 cians,' as our Bible renders the word, i.e. Jews who spoke Greek and 
 not Aramaic. Neither word occurs in the Synoptists. Hellenes are 
 mentioned here, vii. 35, and frequently in the Acts and in S. Paul's 
 Epistles. Hellenistae are mentioned only in the Acts, vi. i and ix. 29 : 
 in Acts xi. 20 the right reading is probably Hellenes. 
 
 that came up to worships Better, that were wont to go up to wor- 
 ship. This shews that they were 'proselytes of the gate,' like the 
 1 Ethiopian eunuch (Acts viii. 27): see on Matt, xxiii. 15. In this inci- 
 ' dent we have an indication of the salvation rejected by the Jews pass- 
 ing to the Gentiles : the scene of it was probably the Court of the Gen- 
 tiles; it is peculiar to S. John. 
 
 21. to Philip'] Their coming to S. Philip was the result either (i) 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 on i. 45, vi. 5, xiv. 8. 
 
 Sir] Indicating respect for the disciple of such a Master : comp. iv, 
 II, 15, 19. 
 
 ■we would see fesus] This desire to 'come and see' for themselves 
 would at once win the sympathy of the practical Philip. See on i. 46 
 and xiv. 8. 
 
 22. telleth Andrew] Another Apostle with a Greek name. They 
 were both of Bethsaida (i. 44), and possibly these Greeks may have 
 come from the same district. S. Philip seems to shrink from the respon- 
 sibility of introducing Gentiles to the Messiah, and applies in his diffi- 
 culty to the Apcstle who had already distinguished himself by bringing 
 others to Christ (i. 41, vi. 8, 9). 
 
252 S. JOHN, XII. [vv. 23—26. 
 
 23 drew : and again Andrew and Philip tell Jesus. And Jesus 
 answered them, saying. The hour is come, that the Son of 
 
 24 man should be glorified. Verily, verily, I say unto you, 
 Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it 
 abideth alone : but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit. 
 
 25 He that loveth his life shall lose it ; and he that hateth his 
 a6 life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal. If any man 
 
 and again] The tnie reading is Andrew cometli, and Philip, and 
 they (ell Jesus. 
 
 23. And Jesus answered] Better, But Jesus answereth. He an- 
 ticipates 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 particular, 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. ' 
 
 The hour is come] The verb first for emphasis in the Greek as in 
 iv. 21, 23: 'it hath come — the fated hour.' Comp. xiii. i. 
 
 that tJie Son of man] Literally, in order that, of the Divine purpose, 
 as in xi. 50 and juii. i, where see notes. See also the last note on 
 
 i- 51- . . 
 
 glorified] By His Passion and Death through which He must pass 
 to return to glory. See on vii. 39 and xi. 4. 
 
 24. Verily, verily] Strange as it may seem to you that the Mes- 
 siah 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. See on 
 
 ^•51- . . . . , . 
 
 25. loveth his life... hateth hts life., dife eternaF] 'Life is here used 
 in two senses, and in the Greek two different words are used. In the 
 first two cases 'life' means the life of the individual, in the last, life in 
 the abstract. By sacrificing life in the one sense, we may win life in 
 the other. See notes on Matt. x. 39, xvi. 25 ; Mark viii. 35; Luke ix. 
 24, xvii. 33. A comparison of the texts will shew that most of them 
 refer to different occasions, so that this solemn warning must have 
 been often on His lips. The present utterance is distinct from all the 
 rest. 
 
 shall lose it] Better, loseth it ; the Greek may mean destroyeth it. 
 
 hateth his life] i. e. is ready to act towards it as if he hated it, if need 
 so require. Neither here nor in Luke xiv. 26 must 'hate' be watered 
 down to mean 'be not too fond of;' it means that and a great deal 
 more. The word rendered 'life' in 'loveth his life' and 'hateth Ixis 
 
V. 27.] S. JOHN, XII. 253 
 
 serve me, let him follow me ; and where I am, there shall 
 also my servant be : if any man serve me, him will my 
 Father honour. Now is my soul troubled ; and what shall 27 
 I say ? Father, save me from this hour : but for this cause 
 
 life' might also mean 'soul,' and some would translate it so : but would 
 Christ have spoken of hating one's soul as the way to eternal life? 
 
 26. let him follow nie\ 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 count the 
 cost first. 'Me' is emphatic in both clauses. 
 
 ■where I ata] i. e. where I shall be then, in My kingdom. Comp. 
 xiv. 3, xvii. 24. Some would include in the 'where' the road to the 
 kingdom, viz. death. 'I' and 'My' are emphatic. 
 
 serve... honour'] Here the verbs are emphatic (not 'Me'), and balance 
 one another. This verse is closely parallel to f . 35 : 'let him follow 
 Me' corresponds to 'hateth his life in this world;' 'him will the Father 
 honour,' to 'shall keep it unto life eternal.' 
 
 27. This is a verse of well-known difficulty, and the meaning can- 
 not be determined with certainty, several meanings being admissible. 
 The doubtful points are (1) the position of the interrogation, whether it 
 should come after 'I say' or 'from this hour;' (2) the meaning of 'for 
 this cause.' 
 
 Now is my soul troubled"] The word rendered 'soul' is the same as 
 that rendered 'life' in 'loveth his life' and 'hateth his life.' To bring 
 out this and the sequence of thought, 'life' would perhaps be better 
 here. ' 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 emotion 
 and sorrow. ' ' Is troubled ' = has been and still is troubled; a. frequent 
 meaning of the Greek perfect. 
 
 what shall I say 1] Or, what must / say ? This appears to be the 
 best punctuation ; 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 the 
 Greek means 'save me out 0/' (soson ek), i.e. 'bring Me safe out of;' 
 rather than 'save Meyro/n' {s$son apo), i.e. 'keep Me altogether away 
 from,' as in 'deliver usfro7n the evil' (Matt. vi. 13). S. 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. Others place the ques- 
 tion at 'from this hour,' 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.' 
 
254 S. JOHN, XII. [vv. 28— 3T. 
 
 a8 came I unto this hour. Father, glorify thy name, i'hen 
 came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glori- 
 
 ag fied it, and will glorify it again. The people therefore, that 
 stood by, and heard //, said that it thundered : others said, 
 
 30 An angel spake to him. Jesus answered and said, This 
 
 31 voice came not because of me, but for your sakes. Now is 
 the judgment of this world : now shall the prince of this 
 
 for this cause] These words are taken in two opposite senses; (i) 
 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. Then came there] Better, lliere 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 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 explanation 
 for the Evangelist's plain meaning. For similar voices comp. that heard 
 by Elijah (r Kings xix. 12, 13); by Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. iv. 31); at 
 Christ's Baptism (Mark i. 11) and Transfiguration (Mark ix. 7) ; and at 
 S. Paul's Conversion (Acts ix. 4, 7, xxii. 9), where it would seem that 
 S. Paul alone could distinguish the words, while his companions merely 
 heard a sound (see on Acts ix. 4). One of the conditions on which 
 power to distinguish what is said depends is sympathy with the 
 speaker. 
 
 have glorified it] in all God's works from the Creation onwards, 
 especially in the life of Christ. 
 
 will glorify it] in the death of Christ and its results. 
 
 29. The people... thwtdered... spake] Better, Tht multitude... had 
 thtmdered...la3Xh. spoken. 
 
 30. yesics answered] He answered their discussions about the sound, 
 and by calling it a voice He decides conclusively against those who sup- 
 posed it to be thunder. But those who recognised that it was a voice 
 were scarcely less seriously mistaken ; their error consisted in not recog- 
 nising 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. Now... now] With prophetic certainty Christ speaks of the 
 victory as already won. 
 
 the judgment of this world] The sentence passed on this world (see 
 on iii. 17 and v. 29) for refusing to believe. The Cross is the condemna- 
 tion of all who reject it. 
 
 the prince of this world] Literally, the ruler of this world. This is 
 one of the apparently Gnostic phrases which may have contributed to 
 render this Gospel suspicious in the eyes of the Alogi (see Introduction, 
 Chap. II. i.): it occurs again xiv. 30, xvi. 11, and nowhere else. It 
 
vv. 32—34.] S. JOHN, XTI. 255 
 
 world be cast out. And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, 32 
 will draw all men unto me. This he said, signifying what 33 
 death he should die. 
 
 34 — 36. The Perplexity of the Multitude. 
 
 The people answered him, We have heard out of the 34 
 law that Christ abideth for ever : and how sayest thou, 
 
 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 op- 
 position to God, the Head of the Jewish theocracy. But 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. 
 shall... be cast otU'\ By the gradual conversion of unbelievers. This 
 is a process which will continue until the last day. 
 
 32. And r\ 'I ' is very emphatic in opposition to 'the ruler of this 
 world.' The glorified Christ will rule men's hearts in place of the 
 devil. 
 
 be lifted up\ Raised up to heaven by means of the Cross: we need 
 not, as in iii. 14 and viii. 28, confine the meaning to the Crucifixion, 
 although the lifting up on the Cross may be specially indicated. The 
 words 'from the earth' (literally, out of the earth) seem 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 form '//"I be lifted up,' comp. ^if\ go,' 
 xiv. 3. In both cases Christ is concerned not with the time of the act, 
 but with the consequences of it; hence He does not say 'when,' but 'if.' 
 
 will draw] There are two Greek words for 'draw' in the N.T., one 
 of which necessarily implies violence, the other does not : it is the latter 
 that is used here and in vi. 44; the former is used Acts xiv. 19 and xvii. 
 6. Man's will is free; he can refuse to be drawn: and there is no vio- 
 lence; the attraction is moral. We see from vi. 44 that before the 
 'lifting up' it is the Father who draws men to the Son. 
 
 all men] Not only the Jews represented by the Twelve, but the 
 Gentiles represented by these Greeks. 
 
 unto me] Better, unto Myself, up from the earth. 
 
 33. what death] Literally, by what manner of death: comp. x. 32, 
 xviii. 32, xxi. 9. 
 
 should die] The word translated ' should ' is the same as that used of 
 the traitor, v. 4 and vi. 71. It is used (i) of what is about to happen, 
 (2) of what (seeing that it has happened) may be regarded as necessary 
 and fore-ordained. 
 
 34 — 36. The Perplexity of the Multitude. 
 
 34. The people answered] The miiltitude therefore answered. 
 
 out of the law] In its widest sense, including the Psalms and the 
 Prophets. Comp. Ps. Ixxxix. 29, 36, ex. 4; Is. ix. 7; Ezek. xxxvii. 
 
2S6 S. JOHN, XII. [vv. 35, 36. 
 
 The Son of man must be lift up? who is this Son of 
 
 35 man ? Then Jesus said unto them. Yet a httle while 
 is the light with you. Walk while ye have the light, lest 
 darkness come upon you : for he that walketh in darkness 
 
 36 knoweth not whither he goeth. While ye have light, believe 
 in the light, that ye may be the children of light. These 
 
 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) \vill abide for ever. You claim to be 
 the Christ, and yet you say that you vi^ill be lifted up and therefore 7iot 
 abide.' 
 
 who is this Son of man?'\ 'This' is contemptuous: 'a strange Mes- 
 siah this, with no power to abide!' (on 'Son of Man' see i. 51). 
 "Here we have the secret, unexplained by the Synoptists, why even 
 when the scale is seeming to turn for a moment in favour of belief, it is 
 continually swayed down again by the discovery of some new particular 
 in which the current ideas respecting the Messiah are disappointed and 
 contradicted." S. p. 199. 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. Theft yesus said] Better, Jesus therefore said: instead of an- 
 swering their contemptuous question He gives them a solemn warning. 
 
 while ye have] The better reading is, as ji? /iaz'if.' 'walk in a manner 
 suitable to the fact of there being the Light among you: make use of 
 the Light and work. ' 
 
 darkness] that darkness ' in which no man can work.' 
 
 co7ne upon you] like a bird of prey. The same Greek verb is used 
 of the last day ; i Thess. v. 4 ; and in the LXX. of sin overtaking the 
 sinner; Num. xxxii. 23. 
 
 for he that walketh in darkness] And he that walketh in the dark- 
 ness, 
 
 whither he goeth] Or, goeth away ; knows not to what end he is 
 departing: comp. i John ii. 11. 
 
 36. While ye have] Here again the better reading is as ye have ; 
 and ' light ' should be ' the Light. ' Note the emphatic repetition eo 
 common in S. John. 
 
 that ye may be] Rather, that ye may toecome. Faith is only the 
 beginning; it does not at once make us children. 
 
 children of light] No article : but in all the four preceding cases 
 'light' has the article and means Christ, the Light, as in i. 5, 7, 8, 9. 
 The expression ' child of or ' son of is frequent in Hebrew poetry to 
 indicate very close connexion as between product and producer (see on 
 xvii. 12). Thus, 'son of peace,' Luke x. 6; 'children of this world,' 
 xvi. 8; 'sons of thunder,' Mark iii. 17. Such expressions are very 
 frequent in the most Hebraistic of the Gospels: comp. Matt. v. 9, 
 viii. 12, ix. 15, xiii. 38, xxiii. 15. 
 
vv. 37—39-] S. JOHN, XII. 257 
 
 things spake Jesus, and departed, and did hide himself from 
 them. 
 
 37 — 43. The Judgment of the Evufigelist. 
 
 But though he had done so many miracles before them, 37 
 yet they believed not on him : that the saying of Esaias the 38 
 prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake. Lord, who hath 
 believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of 
 the Lord been revealed? Therefore they could not 39 
 
 a7td departed'^ Probably to Bethany, to spend the last few days 
 before His hour came in retirement. Comp. Matt. xxi. 17; Mark xi. 
 II ; Luke xxi. 37. 
 
 did hide himself^ Rather, was hidden. 
 
 37 — 43. The Judgment of the Evangelist. 
 
 S. John here sums up the results of the ministry which has just 
 come to a close. 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 on i. 5. 
 
 37. so many mirades\ The Jews admitted His miracles, vii. 31; 
 xi. 47. They are assumed by S. John as notorious, although he him- 
 self records only seven of them. Comp. ii. 23, iv, 45, vii, 31, xi. 47. 
 
 before theni\ i.e. before their very eyes. 
 
 38. Tkai\ Or, in order that, indicating the Divine purpose. 
 Comp. xiii, 18, xv. 25, xvii. 12, xviii. 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, 
 ii. 15, 17, iv. 14, viii. 17, xii. 17, xiii. 35, xxi. 4, xxvi. 54, 56, xxvii. 9. 
 See on Matt. i. 22. 
 
 Lord, who hath believed"] The quotation closely follows the LXX. 
 
 ottr report] Literally, that which they hear from us; comp. Rom. 
 X. 16. 
 
 the arm of the Lord] His power. There seems to be no sufficient 
 authority for interpreting this expression of the Messiah, although it is 
 the power of God as manifested in the Messiah that is here specially 
 meant. Comp. Luke i. 51; Acts xiii. 17. 
 
 39. Therefore] Or, For this cause {w. 18, 27); see on vii. 21, 22. 
 It refers to what precedes, and the 'because' which follows gives the 
 reason more explicitly. This use is common in S. John : comp. v. iS, 
 viii. 47, X. 17. 
 
 Ikey could not] It had become morally impossible. Grace may be 
 refused so persistently as to destroy the power of accepting it. 'I will 
 not' leads to 'I cannot.' Pharaoh first hardened his heart and then 
 God hardened it. Comp. Rom. ix. 6 to xi. 32. 
 
 S. JOHN 1 7 
 
258 S. JOHN, XII. [w. 40— 43. 
 
 40 believe, because that Esaias said again, He hath blinded 
 their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they 
 should not see with their eyes, nor understand 
 with their heart, and be converted, and I should 
 
 41 heal them. These things said Esaias, when he saw his 
 
 42 glory, and spake of him. Nevertheless among the chief 
 rulers also many believed on him ; but because of the 
 Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put 
 
 43 out of the synagogue : for they loved the praise of men more 
 than the praise of God. 
 
 40. He hath blinded^ Not Christ, nor the devil, but God. The 
 quotation is free, following neither the Hebrew nor the LXX. very 
 closely. 
 
 / should heal] * I ' = Christ. God has hardened their hearts so that 
 they could not be converted, and therefore Christ could not heal them. 
 Comp. Matt. xiii. 14, 15, where Christ quotes this text to explain why 
 He teaches in parables ; and Acts xxviii. 26, where S. Paul quotes it to 
 explain the rejection of his preaching by the Jews in Rome. 
 
 41. when he saw] The better reading is, because he saw. We 
 had a similar double reading in v. 17, where ' when' is to be prefeiTed. 
 In the Greek the difference is only a single letter, Sre and firt. 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 ' in the 
 form of God' (Phil. ii. 6), is to be understood. 
 
 42. Nevertheless] In spite of the judicial blindness with which God 
 had visited them many even of the Sanhedrin believed. We know of 
 Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus. 
 
 because of the Pharisees] The recognised champions of orthodoxy 
 both in and outside the Sanhedrin. Comp. vii. 13, ix. 22. 
 
 did not confess] Imperfect tense ; they were perpetually omitting to 
 do so. 
 
 43. the praise of men &c.] Better, the glory (that cometh) from 
 men rather than the glory {that cometh) from God (see on v. 41, 44). 
 The word rendered 'praise' is the same as that rendered 'glory' in 
 V. 41. Moreover 'more than' is not strong enough; it should be 
 rather than. Joseph and Nicodemus confessed their belief after the 
 crisis of the Crucifixion. GamaHel 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 z.%v. 36 seems to give us the close of the ministry, we are 
 probably to understand that what follows was uttered on some occasion 
 or occasions previous to v. 36. Perhaps it is given us as an epitome of 
 what Christ often taught. 
 
w. 44— 49-] S. JOHN, XII. 259 
 
 44 — 50. The Judg7nent of Christ. 
 
 Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth 44 
 not on me, but on him that sent me. And he that seeth me 45 
 seeth him that sent me. I am come a Hght into the world, 46 
 that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in dark- 
 ness. And if any rnan hear my words, and believe not, I 47 
 judge him not : for I came not to judge the world, but to 
 save the world. He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not 48 
 my words, hath o?ie that judgeth him : the word that I have 
 spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. For I 49 
 
 44. cried\ Comp. vii. 28, 37- The expression implies public 
 teaching. 
 
 believeth not on me\ His belief does not end there ; it must include 
 more. This saying does not occur in the previous discourses; but in 
 V. 36 and viii. 19 we have a similar thought. Jesus came as His Fa- 
 ther'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 hitn 
 in his own personality but the prince whom he personates. These 
 words are, therefore, to be taken quite literally. 
 
 45. seeth'\ Or, beholdeth, cotttemplateth. The same verb is used 
 vi. 40, 62, vii. 3 and frequently in S. John. 
 
 46. J am come'\ Emphatic; ' I and none other.' Comp. z'z'. 35, 36, 
 viii. 12, ix. 5. 
 
 abide in darkness] Till the Light comes, all are in darkness; the 
 question remains whether they will remain so a/ter the Light has 
 come. 
 
 47. hear my words] 'Hear* is a neutral word, implying neither 
 belief nor unbelief. Matt. vii. 24,26; Mark iv. 15, 16. For 'words' 
 read sayings (see on v. 47) both here and in v. 48. 
 
 and believe not] The true reading is and keep them not, i.e. fulfil 
 them (comp. Luke xi. 28, xviii. 21). One important MS. omits the 
 'not,' perhaps to avoid a supposed inconsistency between v. 47 and 
 z;. 48. 
 
 48. my words'] Better, My sayings (see on v. 47) : ' word ' in the 
 next clause is right. 
 
 hath one that judgeth him] Hath his judge already, without My 
 sentencing him. Comp. iii. 18, v. 45. The hearer may refuse the 
 word, but he cannot refuse the responsibility of having heard it. 
 
 in the last day] Peculiar to tliis Gospel: comp. vi. 39, 40, 44, 54, 
 xi. 24. This verse is conclusive as to the doctrine of the last judgment 
 being contained in this Gospel. 
 
 49. For] Or, Because: it introduces the reason why one who 
 rejects Christ's word will be judged by His word; — because that word 
 is manifestly Divine and proceeds from the Father. 
 
 17 2 
 
26o S. JOHN, XII. [v. 50. 
 
 have not spoken of myself ; but the Father which sent me, 
 he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what 
 > I should speak. And I know that his commandment is 
 life everlasting : whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the 
 Father said unto me, so I speak. 
 
 xiii. — xvii. The ifiner Glorification of Christ iti His 
 last Discourses. 
 
 of myself] Literally, cut of Myself [ek) without commission from the 
 Father. Qora.^. from Myself (apo) v. 30, vii. 16, 28, viii. 28. 
 
 he gave me] Himself (and none other) hatli given Me. See on 
 X. 18. 
 
 say. ..speak] 'Say* probably refers to the doctrine, 'speak' to the 
 form in which it is expressed. See on viii. 43. 
 
 50. And I kttozv] The Son's testimony to the Father. ' The com- 
 mission which He hath given Me is eternal life.' (See on iii. 16.) 
 His commission is to save the world. 
 
 as the Father sai'tf] The same distinction as in the previous verse : 
 the matter of the revelation comes from the Father, the external ex- 
 pression of it from the Son. 
 
 With this the first main division of the Gospel ends. Christ's 
 
 REVELATION OF HiMSELF TO THE WORLD IN HiS MINISTRY is Con- 
 cluded. The Evangelist has set before us the Testimony to the 
 Christ, the Work of the Christ, and the Judgment respecting the 
 work, which has ended in a conflict, and the conflict has reached a 
 climax. We have reached the beginning of the end. 
 
 Chap. XIII. 
 
 We now enter upon the second main division of the Gospel. The 
 Evangelist has given us thus far a narrative of Christ's Ministry pre- 
 sented to us in a series of typical scenes (i. 18 — xii. 50). He goes on 
 to set forth the Issues of Christ's Ministry (xiii — xx). The last 
 chapter (xxi.) forms the Epilogue, balancing the first eighteen verses 
 (i. I — 18), which form the Prologue. 
 
 The second main division of the Gospel, like the first, falls into three 
 parts: i. the inner Glorification of Christ in His last 
 Discourses (xiii. — xvii.); 2. the outer Glorification of Christ 
 in His Passion (xviii, xix.) ; 3. the Victory completed in the 
 Resurrection (xx.). These parts will be subdivided as we reach 
 them. 
 
 xiii. — xvii. The inner Glorification of Christ in His 
 LAST Discourses. 
 
 r. His Love in Humiliation (xiii. i — 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.). 
 
vv. 1,2.] S. JOHN, XIII. 261 
 
 Chap. XIII. i — 30. Love in Humiliation. 
 
 Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew 13 
 that his hour was come that he should depart out of this 
 world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in 
 the world, he loved them unto the end. And supper being 2 
 ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas 
 
 Chap. XIII. 1 — 30. Love in Humiliation. 
 
 This section has two parts in strong and dramatic contrast ; i. the 
 washing of the disciples' feet (i — 20); 2. the self-excommunication of 
 the traitor (21 — 30). 
 
 1. Now before the feast of the passover'\ These words give a date not 
 to any one word in the verse, whether ' knew ' or ' having loved ' or 
 'loved,' but to the narrative which follows. Their most natural mean- 
 ing is that some evening before the Passover Jesus was at supper with 
 His disciples. This was probably Thursday evening, the beginning of 
 Nisan 14: but thedifficult question of the Day of the Crucifixion is too 
 long for a note and is discussed in Appendix A. 
 
 ■when Jesus kneiu] Or, Jesus knowing {v. 3). The Greek may mean 
 either 'although He knew or 'because He knew.' The latter is better: 
 it was precisely because He knew that He would soon return to glory 
 that He gave this last token of self-humiliating love. 
 
 his hour was come] See on ii. 4, vii. 6, xi. 9. Till His hour had 
 come His enemies could do nothing but plot (vii. 30, viii. 20). 
 
 that he should] Literally, in order that He should, of the Divine 
 purpose. See on xii. 23. 
 
 depart out of] Or, pass over out of: it is the same verb and prepo- 
 sition as in v. 24 ; ' hath passed over out of death into life.' 
 
 his own] Those whom God had given Him, i. 11, 12, xvii. 11; 
 Acts iv. 23, xxiv. 23. 
 
 unto the end] The end of His life is the common interpretation, 
 which may be right. Comp. Matt. x. 22 and xxiv. 13, where the same 
 Greek expression is translated as it is here ; and i Thess. ii. 16, where 
 it is translated 'to the uttermost.' In Luke xviii. 5 'continual coming' 
 is literally ' coming to the end.' In all these passages the meaning may 
 either be 'at the last, finally,' or, 'to the uttermost, utterly.' To tlie 
 uttermost is perhaps to be preferred here. Comp. the LXX. of Amos 
 ix. 8 ; Ps. xii. i. 
 
 2. supper being ended] There are two readings here, but neither of 
 them means 'being ended,' moreover the supper is not ended (z/. .26). 
 The common reading would mean 'supper having begun,' and the better 
 reading, 'when supper was at hand,' or, 'when supper was beginning.' 
 "It was the custom for slaves to wash the feet of the guests before 
 sitting down to meat; and we are tempted to suppose that the symboli- 
 cal act, which our Evangelist relates here, took the olace of this custom." 
 S. p. 214. 
 
262 S. JOHN, XIII. [vv. 3—5. 
 
 3 Tscariot, Simon's son, to betray him; Jesus knowing that the 
 Father had given all thirigs into his hands, and that he was 
 
 4 come from God, and went to God ; he riseth from supper, 
 and laid aside his garments ; and took a towel, and girded 
 
 5 himself. After that, he poureth water into a bason, and 
 
 the devil to betray him] The true reading gives us, The devil hav- 
 ing now put it into the heart, that Judas, Simon's son, Iscariot, should 
 betray Him. Whose heart ? Only two answers are possible grammati- 
 cally; (i) the heart of Judas, (2) the devil's own heart. The latter is 
 incredible, if only for the reason that S.John himself has shewTi that the 
 devil had long been at work with Judas. The meaning is that of the 
 received reading, but more awkwardly expressed. ' To betray' is 
 literally S. John's favourite foiTn ' in order that he should betray.' The 
 traitor's name is given in full for greater solemnity, and in the true text 
 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. yesus hno7uing] The Greek is the same as of 'when Jesus knew' 
 in w. I, and may have either of the two meanings given there. Here 
 also * because He knew ' is better. 
 
 given all things] Comp. Eph. i. 22; Phil. ii. 9 — 11. 
 and went to God] Better, and is going to God. 
 
 4. J/e riseth from sttpper, &c.] Or, from the supper: the article 
 perhaps marks the supper as no ordinary one. "This is the realism of 
 
 history indeed The carefulness with which here, as in the account 
 
 of the cleansing of the temple, the successive stages in the action are 
 described, proclaim the eye-witness." S. p. 216. One is un\villing 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 di- 
 rectly 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. That S. Luke places the strife after the 
 supper is not fatal to this view ; he gives no note of time, and the strife 
 is singularly out of place there, immediately after their Master's self- 
 humiliation 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. "One thing is clear, that S. John, if he had read S. Luke's 
 Gospel at this point, has not copied or followed it. He proceeds with 
 the same peculiar independence which we have noticed in him all 
 through." S. p. 215. 
 
 his garments] Or, His upper garments, which would impede His 
 movements. 
 
 5. into a bason] Better, into the bason, which stood there for such 
 purposes, the large copper bason commonly found in oriental houses. 
 
w. 6—8.] S. JOHN, XIII. 263 
 
 began to wash the disciples' feet, and to wipe ihe7n with the 
 towel wherewith he was girded. Then cometh he to Simon 6 
 Peter : and Peter saith unto him. Lord, dost thou wash my 
 feet ? Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou 7 
 knowest not now ; but thou shalt know hereafter. Peter 8 
 saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus 
 answered him. If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with 
 
 began to ■wash'\ Began is not a mere amplification as in the other 
 Gospels (Matt. xi. 7, xxvi. 22, 37, 74; Mark iv. i, vi. 2, 7, 34, 55; 
 Luke vii. 15, 24, 38, 49 ; &c. &c.), and in the Acts (i. i, ii. 4, xviii, 26, 
 &c.). The word occurs nowhere else in S. John, and here is no mere 
 periphrasis for ' washed.' He began to wash, but was interrupted by 
 the incident with S. Peter. With whom He began is not mentioned : 
 from very early times some have conjectured Judas. 
 
 Contrast the mad insolence of Caligula — quosdam summis honoribus 
 functos...ad pedes stare succindos linteo passus est. Suet. Calig. xxvi. 
 Linteum in a Greek form is the very word here used for towel. 
 
 6. Then cometh he\ Better, 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 a supremacy, which cannot be 
 proved at all. 
 
 dost thou wash my feet?'] There is a strong emphasis on 'Thou.' 
 Comp. ' Comest Thoic to me?' (Matt. iii. 14.) 
 
 7. What I do thou knowest not] Here both pronouns are emphatic 
 and are opposed. Peter's question implied that he knew, while Christ 
 did not know, what He was doing : Christ tells him that the very re- 
 verse of this is the fact. On ' now ' see note on xvi. 31. 
 
 hereafter] L,itera.Uy, after these thing^s (iii. 22, v. i, 14, vi. r, vii. r, 
 xix. 38). ' Hereafter' conveys a wrong impression, as if it referred to 
 the remote future. Had this been intended the words used for ' now ' 
 and ' afterwards ' in v. 36 would probably have been employed here. 
 The reference probably is to the explanation of this symbolical action 
 given in vv. 12 — 17. This seems clear from the opening words (v. 12), 
 '■ Knoiv ye what I have done to you?' — all the more so, because it is the 
 same word for 'know' as here for 'thou shalt know ' [ginSskem); where- 
 as the Greek for ' thou knowest ' in this verse is a different and more 
 general word {oidas) : ' what / am doing, thoti knowest not just now, 
 but thou shalt recognise presently.' See notes on vii. 26 and viii. 55. 
 
 8. Thou shalt never wash my feet] The negative is the strongest 
 form possible ; 'thou shalt certainly not wash my feet forever.'. See on 
 viii. 51, and comp. Matt. xvi. 22. 
 
 no part with me] The Greek is the same as in Matt. xxiv. 51 and 
 Luke xii. 46. The expression is of Hebrew origin ; comp. Deut. x. 9, 
 xii. 12, xiv. 27. To reject Christ's self-humiliating love, because it 
 humiliates Him (a well-meaning but false principle), is to cut oneself off 
 
264 S. JOHN, XIII. [vv. 9— 12. 
 
 9 me. Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only, 
 
 10 but also my hands and 7}iy head. Jesus saith to him, He 
 that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is 
 
 11 clean every whit : and ye are clean, but not all. For he 
 knew who should betray him ; therefore said he. Ye are not 
 all clean. 
 
 12 So after he had washed their feet, and had taken his 
 garments, and was set down again, he said unto them, 
 
 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. not my feet only\ The impetuosity which is so marked a charac- 
 teristic of S. 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 deliberate invention ; and if not, 
 the independent authority of this narrative is manifest. 
 
 10. He that is washed'] Rather, He that is bathed (comp. Heb. x. 22 
 and 2 Pet. ii. 22). In the Greek we have quite a different word from the 
 one rendered ' wash ' elsewhere in these verses : the latter means to 
 wash part of the body, this 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 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.' S. Peter excellently illustrates Christ's saying. His love for his 
 Master proves that he had bathed ; his boastfulness {v. 37), his attack 
 on Malchus (xviii, 10), his denials (25, 27) his dissimulation at Antioch 
 (Gal. ii.), all shew how often he had need to wash his feet. 
 
 but not ait] This is the second indication of the presence of a traitor 
 among them (comp. vi. 70). Apparently it did not attract much atten- 
 tion: each, conscious of his own faults, thought the remark only too 
 true. The disclosure is made gradually but rapidly now {w. 18, 21, 
 26). 
 
 11. who should betray him] Or, him that was betraying Him. The 
 Greek construction is exactly equivalent to that of 'He that should 
 come' (Matt. xi. 3; Luke vii. ig); in both cases it is the present parti- 
 ciple with the definite article — 'the betraying one,' 'the coming one.' 
 
 therefore] Or, for this cause: see on xii. 39. 
 
 12. was set doivn] The Greek verb occurs frequently in the Gospels 
 (and nowhere else in N.T.) of reclining at meals. It always implies a 
 change of position (see on v. 25, and comp. vi, 10, xxi. 20; Matt. xv. 
 35; Mark vi. ao : Luke xi. ^7). 
 
vv. 13—18.] S. JOHN, XIII. 265 
 
 Know ye what I have done to you ? Ye call me Master 13 
 and Lord : and ye say well ; for so I am. If I then, your 14 
 Lord and Master, have washed your feet ; ye also ought to 
 wash one another's feet. For I have given you an example, 15 
 that ye should do as I have done to you. Verily, verily, I i6 
 say unto you. The servant is not greater than his lord; 
 neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him. If ye 17 
 know these things, happy are ye if ye do them. I speak 18 
 
 ICnotv ye\ 'Do ye recognise the meaning of it?' (see on v. 7). The 
 question directs their attention to the explanation to be given. 
 
 13. Master and Lord] Or, Tlie Master [Teacher) and the Lord. 
 These are the ordinary titles of respect paid to a Rabbi: 'Lord' is the 
 correlative of 'servant,' so that 'Master' might be a synonym for that 
 also ; but the disciples would no doubt use the word with deeper mean- 
 ing as their knowledge of their Master increased. In the next verse the 
 order of the titles is reversed, to give emphasis to the one with this 
 deeper meaning. 
 
 14. yo7ir Lord and Master, have washed] Rather, the Lord and the 
 Master, washed. For the construction comp. xv. 20 and xviii. 2 3. 
 
 ye also ought to wash one another's feet] The custom of ' the feet- 
 washing ' on Maundy Thursday in literal fulfilment of this typical com- 
 mandment is not older than the fourth century. The Lord High 
 Almoner washed the feet of the recipients of the royal 'maundy' as late 
 as 1 73 1. James II. was the last English sovereign who went through 
 the ceremony. In i 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. 
 
 15. as I have dotte to you] Not, *wkat 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 obligation of Christ's 
 disciples. Comp. James v. 16, 
 
 16. The servant is not greater than his lord] This saying occurs 
 four times in the Gospels, each time in a different connexion: (i) to 
 shew that the disciples must expect no better treatment than their 
 Master (Matt. x. 24) ; (2) to impress the Apostles with their responsi- 
 bilities as teachers, for their disciples will be as they are (Luke vi. 40) ; 
 (3) here; (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 'verily' as of special importance 
 
 (i. 50- . 
 
 he that is sent] An Apostle [apostolos). 
 
 17. happy are ye if ye do them] Better, blessed are ye, &c. It is 
 the same Greek word as is used in xx. 29 and in the Beatitudes both in 
 S. Matthew and in S. Luke. Comp. Luke xi. 28, xii. 43; Matt. vii. 
 31 J Rev. i. 3. 
 
266 S. JOHN, XIII. [v. 19. 
 
 not of you all : I know whom I have chosen : but that the 
 
 scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with 
 
 19 me hath lift up his heel against me. Now I tell you 
 
 before it come, that, when it is come to pass, ye may 
 
 18. / speak not of you aH] There is one who knows these things, 
 and does not do them, and is the very reverse of blessed. 
 
 I know whom I have chosen\ The first 'I' is emphatic: '/know the 
 character of the Twelve whom I chose ; the treachery of one has been 
 foretold; it is no surprise to Me.' Comp. vi. 70. 
 
 but ihat'\ This elliptical use of 'but that' (='but this was done in 
 order that') is frequent in S. John: i. 8, ix. 3, xiv. 31, xv. 25; i John 
 ii. 19. Here another way of filling up the ellipsis is possible; 'But I 
 chose them in order that. ' 
 
 may be fulfilled^ See on xii. 38. The quotation is taken, but with 
 freedom, from the Hebrew of Ps. xli. 9 ; for 'lifted up his heel' both the 
 Hebrew and the LXX. have 'magnified his heel.' (See on vi. 45.) The 
 metaphor here is of one raising his foot before kicking, but the blow is 
 not yet given. This was the attitude of Judas at this moment. It has 
 been remarked that Christ omits the words ' Mine own familiar friend 
 whom I trusted:' He had not trusted Judas, and had not been de- 
 ceived, as the Psalmist had been: 'He knew what was in man' (ii. 
 
 25)- 
 
 He that eateth bread with me] Or, I/e that eateth the bread with Me. 
 The more probable reading gives. My bread for 'the bread with Me.' 
 The variations from the LXX. are remarkable, (i) The word for 'eat' 
 is changed from the common verb (^(T0/w)used in Ps. xli. 10 to the much 
 less common verb (rpui^w) used of eating Christ's Flesh and the Bread 
 from Heaven (vi. 54, 56, 57, 58, where see notes), and nowhere else in 
 the N. T., excepting Matt. xxiv. 38. (2) 'Bread' or 'loaves' {aprovs) 
 has been altered to 'the bread' (rbv dprov). (3) ' My ' has possibly been 
 strengthened to ' wth Me:' to eat bread with a man is more than to eat 
 his bread, which a servant might do. These changes 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. 
 
 S. 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. JVoiv] Better, as the margin. From henceforth (comp. i. 51, 
 xiv. 7; Rev. xiv. 13). Hitherto Christ had been reserved about the 
 presence of a traitor ; to point him out would have been to make him 
 desperate and deprive him of a chance of recovery. But every good 
 influence has failed, even the Eucharist and the washing of his feet; 
 a.nd from this tif/ie omaard Christ tells the other Apostles. 
 
 b^ore it come] Add to pass, as in the next clause. Comp. xiv. 29. 
 
w. 20— 23.J S. JOHN, XIII. 267 
 
 believe that I am he. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He 20 
 that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me ; and he 
 that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me. 
 
 21 — 30. The self-excomniiinication of the traitor. 
 
 When Jesus had thus said, he was troubled in spirit, and 21 
 testified, and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one 
 of you shall betray me. Then the disciples looked one on 22 
 another, doubting of whom he spake. Now there was 23 
 leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus 
 
 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. 
 may believe that I am he'\ See on viii. 24, ■28, 58. 
 
 20. He that receiveth, &c.] 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 sup- 
 posing 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. he was troubled in spirit^ Once more the reality of Christ's 
 human nature is brought before us (comp. 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 
 life-like details which follow are almost irresistible evidences of truth- 
 fulness. 
 
 22. looked one on another'\ 'Began to enquire among themselves' 
 (Luke xxii. 23). The other two Evangelists say that all began to say to 
 Him 'Isit I?' They neither doubt the statement, nor ask 'Is it heV 
 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 was known (Matt. 
 xxvi. 25). 
 
 23. there zuas leaning on Jesus' bosom] Better, there was reclining 
 on Jesus' lap. It is important to mark the distinction between this and 
 the words rendered 'lying on Jesus' breast' in v. 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 
 
268 S. JOHN, XIII. [vv. 24-26. 
 
 24 loved. Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he 
 
 25 should ask who it should be of whom he spake. He then 
 lying on Jesus' breast saith unto him. Lord, who is it? 
 
 26 Jesus answered, He it is, to whom I shall give a sop, when 
 I have dipped it. And when he had dipped the sop, he 
 
 disciple indicated here, which continued throughout the meal: in v. 25 
 we have a momentary change of posture. 
 
 whom yesus loved\ This explains how S. John came to be nearest 
 (see Introduction II. iii. 3 b), and "out of the recollection of that sacred, 
 never-to-be-forgotten moment, there breaks from him for the first time 
 this nameless, yet so expressive designation of himself " (Meyer). Comp. 
 xix. ■26, xxi. 7, 20; not xx. 2. S. John was on our Lord's right. Who 
 was next to Him on the left? Some think Judas, who must have 
 been very close for Christ to answer him without the others hearing. 
 
 24. that he should ask... spake] The better reading gives, and saith 
 to him, Say who it is of whom He speaketh. S. Peter thinks that the 
 beloved disciple is sure to know. The received reading, besides being 
 wanting in authority, contains an optative mood, which S. John never 
 uses. 
 
 25. lying on Jesus' breast] Our version does well in using different 
 words from those used in v. 23, but the distinction used is inadequate. 
 Moreover the same preposition, 'on,' is used in both cases; in the Greek 
 the prepositions differ also. In v. 23 we have the permanent posture; 
 here a change, the same verb being used as in w. 12 (see note). The 
 meaning is leaning hack on to Jesus' breast. Comp. xxi. 20, where 
 our translators give a similarly inadequate rendering. "This is among 
 the most striking of those vivid descriptive traits which distinguish the 
 narrative of the Fourth Gospel generally, and which are especially re- 
 markable in these last scenes of Jesus' life, where the beloved disciple 
 was himself an eye-witness and an actor. It is therefore to be regretted 
 that these fine touches of the picture should be blurred in our English 
 Bibles." Lightfoot, On Revision, p. 73. 
 
 Some good MSS. insert 'thus' before 'on to Jesus' breast' (comp. iv. 
 6). 
 
 26. to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped it] The text 
 here is uncertain, but there is no doubt as to the meaning. Perhaps the 
 better reading is, for whom I shall dip the morsel and give it to him. 
 Copyists have possibly tried to correct the awkwardness of 'for 
 whom' and 'to him.' In any case 'sop' or 'morsel' must have the 
 article. The Greek word is derived from 'rub' or 'break,' and means 
 ' a 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 analogous to taking ■vvine with a person in modern times. 
 Christ, therefore, as a forlorn hope, gives the traitor one more mark of 
 affection before dismissing him. It is the last such mark : ' Friend, 
 wherefore art thou come?' (Matt. xxvi. 50) should rather be 'Comrade, 
 (do that) for which thou art come,' and is a sorrowful rebuke ratlier than 
 
vv. 27— 30.] S. JOHN, XIII. 269 
 
 gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon. And after the 27 
 sop Satan entered into him. Then said Jesus unto him, 
 That thou doest, do quickly. Now no man at the table 28 
 knew for what intent he spake this unto him. For some of^^ 
 them thought, because Judas had the bag, that Jesus had 
 said unto him, Buy those things that we have need of against 
 the feast; or that he should give something to the poor. 
 He then having received the sop went immediately out : 3° 
 and it was night. 
 
 an affectionate greeting. Whether the morsel was a piece of the un- 
 leavened bread dipped in the broth of bitter herbs depends upon whether 
 this supper is regarded as the Paschal meal or not. 
 
 And when, &c.] The true reading is, Therefore, when He had dipped 
 the morsel He taketh and giveth it. The name of Judas is once more 
 given with solemn fulness as in vi. 71, Judas the son ^ Simon Iscariot. 
 Comp. V. 2. 
 
 27. Satan entered into him] Literally, at that moment Satan 
 entered into him. At first Satan made suggestions to him {v. 2) 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 en- 
 gendered death (James i. 15). Satan is mentioned here only in S. 
 John. 
 
 Then said] Once more we must substitute therefore for 'then.' 
 Jesus knew that Satan had claimed his ovni, and therefore bad him do 
 his work. 
 
 do quickly] Literally, do more quickly ; carry it out at once, even 
 sooner than has been planned. Now that the winning back of Judas 
 has become hopeless, delay was worse than useless : it merely kept Him 
 from His hour of victory. Comp. Matt, xxiii. 32. 
 
 28. noman...knew] Even S. John, who now knew that Judas was the 
 traitor, did not know that he would act at once, and that it was to this 
 Jesus alluded. 
 
 29. For some of them] Shewing that they could not have under- 
 stood. 
 
 had the bag] See on xii. 6. 
 
 against the feast] This agrees with v. i, that this meal precedes the 
 Passover. 
 
 to the poor] Comp. xii. 5; Neh. viii. 10, 12; Gal. ii. 10. 
 
 30. He then having received the sop] Better, He therefore having 
 received the morsel. The pronoun here and ivlv. 27 {ekeinos) indicates 
 that Judas is an alien. Comp. vii. 11, ix. 12, 28. The last two verses 
 are a parenthetical remark of the Evangelist; he now returns to the 
 narrative, repeating with solemnity the incident which formed the last 
 crisis in the career of Judas. 
 
 went immediately out] This is no evidence as to the meal not being 
 a Paschal one. The rule that 'none should go out at the door of his 
 
270 S. JOHN, XIII. [w. 31,32. 
 
 XIII. 31 — XV. 27. Chrisfs Love in keeping His own. 
 
 31 Therefore, when he was gone out, Jesus said, Now is the 
 
 32 Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him. If God 
 
 house until the morning' (Exod. xii. 22) had, like standing at the Pass- 
 over, long since been abrogated. " When Satan entered into him, he 
 went out from the presence of Christ, as Cain went out from the presence 
 of the Lord." 
 
 and it was nighty The tragic brevity of this has often been remarked, 
 and will never cease to lay hold of the imagination. 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 — 9, iii. 19 — 21, viii. 12, ix. 5, xii. 35, 36, 
 46), and in which darkness almost invariably means moral darkness (i. 
 5, viii. 12, xii. 35, 46) a use peculiar to S. John (i 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). Thus also 
 Christ Himself said some two hours later, 'This is your hour, and the 
 power of darkness' (Luke xxii. 53). For other remarks of telling brevity 
 and abruptness comp. 'Jesus wept' (xi. 35); 'He saith to them, I am 
 He' (xviii. 5); 'Now Barabbas was a robber' (x\dii. 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. Christ's Love in keeping His own. 
 
 31 — 35. Jesus, freed from the oppressive presence of the traitor, 
 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, i8, 29, 30. Then 
 follows Christ's prayer, after which they go forth to the garden of Geth- 
 semane (xviii. i). 
 
 31. Therefore, when he was gone out] 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). 
 
 JVow] With solemn exultation : the beginning of the end has come. 
 
 the Son of man] See on i. 51. 
 
 glorified] In finishing the work which the Father gave Him to do 
 (xvii. 4) ; and thus God is glorified in Him. 
 
vv. 33, 34] S. JOHN, XIII. 271 
 
 be glorified in him, God shall also glorify him in himself, 
 and shall straightway glorify him. Little children, yet a 33 
 little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me : and as I 
 said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come ; so now 
 I say to you, A new commandment I give unto you. That 34 
 ye love one another ; as I have loved you, that ye also love 
 
 32. If God be glorified in hint] These words are omitted in the best 
 MSS., and though they might easily be left out accidentally owing to 
 the repetition, yet they spoil the balance and rhythm of the clauses. 
 
 God shall also glorify kirn] Better, And God shall glorify Him. 
 This refers to the heavenly glory which He had with the Father before 
 the world was. Hence the future tense : the glory of completing the 
 work of redemption has already begun ; that of departing to the Father 
 as the Son of Man and returning to the Father as the Son of God will 
 straightway follow. 
 
 in himself \ i.e. 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. — Between this verse and the next 
 some would insert the institution of the Eucharist. 
 
 33. Little children\ Nowhere else in the Gospels does Christ use 
 this expression of tender affection (teknia), which springs from the 
 thought of His orphaned disciples. S. John appears never to have for- 
 gotten it. It occurs frequently in his First Epistle (ii. i, 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, 'Children' in xxi, 5 is a different word 
 (paidia). 
 
 a little whiW] See on vii. 33, 34, viii. 21. 
 
 Ye shall seek me] 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 'the Jews' is rare in Christ's discourses; comp. iv. 22, xviii. 
 10, 36. 
 
 34. A new commandment] 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 be- 
 cause Christ has loved us. We have only to read the ' most excellent 
 way' of love set forth in i Cor. xiii., and compare it vrith the measured 
 benevolence of the Pentateuch, to see how new the commandment 
 had become by having this motive added. There are two words for 
 'new' in Greek; one looks forward, 'young, 'as opposed to 'aged;' the 
 other looks back, 'fresh,' as opposed to 'worn out.' It is the latter 
 that is used here and in xix. 41. Both are used in Matt. ix. 17, but our 
 version ignores the difference — ' They put new wine into fresh wine- 
 skins.' The phrase 'to give a commandment' is peculiar to S. John; 
 comp. xii. 49; I John iii. 23. 
 
 as I have loved you] These words are rightly placed in the second 
 
272 S. JOHN, XIII. [vv. 35—38. 
 
 35 one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my 
 disciples, if ye have love one to another. 
 
 36 Simon Peter said unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? 
 Jesus answered him, Whither I go, thou canst not follow 
 
 37 me now ; but thou shalt follow me afterwards. Peter said 
 unto him, Lord, why cannot I follow thee now ? I will lay 
 
 38 down my life for thy sake. Jesus answered him. Wilt thou 
 lay down thy life for my sake ? Verily, verily, I say unto 
 
 half of the verse. They do not mean ' love one another in the same way 
 as I have loved you ; ' but they give the reason for the fresh command- 
 ment — 'even as I have loved you.' S. John states the same principle 
 in the First Epistle (iv. 11) 'If God so loved us, we ought also to 
 love one another.' Comp. xv. 13. 
 
 35. By this shall all tiien ktiow that ye are my disciples'] This is the 
 true ' Note of the Church ; ' not miracles, not formularies, not numbers, 
 but love. "The working of such love puts a brand lipon us; for see, 
 say the heathen, how they love another," TertuUian, Apol. xxxix. 
 Comp. I John iii. 10, 14. 'My disciples' is literally, disciples to Me. 
 
 36. Lord, whither goest thou .?] The affectionate Apostle is absorbed 
 by the declaration ' Whither I go, ye cannot come,' and he lets all the 
 rest pass. His Master is going away out of his reach; he must know 
 the meaning of that. 
 
 thou shalt follo^v me afteriuards'] Alluding 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. / will lay down my life'] St Peter seems to see that Christ's 
 going away means death. With his usual impulsiveness (see on v. 9) he 
 declares that he is ready to follow at once even thither. He mistakes 
 strong feeling for moral strength. On the phrase ' lay dovra my life ' 
 see last note on x. 11. 
 
 38. / say unto thee] In the parallel passage in S. Luke (xxii. 34) 
 Christ for the first and only time addresses the Apostle by the name 
 which He had given him, — 'I tell thee, Peter -^ as if He would remind 
 him that the rock-like strength of character 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 
 denial in the supper-room : St Matt. (xxvi. 30 — 35) and S. Mark (xiv. 
 26 — 30) place it on the way from the room to Gethsemane. It is possi- 
 ble but not probable that the prediction was repeated ; though some 
 would even make three predictions recorded by (i) S. Luke, (2) S.John, 
 (3) S. Matt, and S. Mark. See introductory note to Chapter xii. and 
 Appendix B. 
 
V. I.] S. JOHN, XIII. XIV. 273 
 
 thee, The cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied me 
 thrice. 
 
 Chap. XIV. Chrisfs love in keeping His own {continued). 
 Let not your heart be troubled : ye believe in God, 14 
 
 thrice] All four accounts agree in this. S. Mark adds two details: 
 (i) that the cock should crow twice, {i) that the prediction so far from 
 checking S. Peter made him speak only the more vehemently, a par- 
 ticular which S. Peter's Gospel more naturally contains than the other 
 three. S. Matthew and S. Mark both add that all the disciples joined 
 in S. Peter's protestations. 
 
 It has been objected that fowls were not allowed in the Holy City. 
 The statement is wanting in authority, and of course the Romans would 
 pay no attention to any such rule, even if it existed among the Jews. 
 
 Chap. XIV. 
 
 •^' We come now to the last great discourse (xiv. — xvii.), which con- 
 stitutes a striking and peculiar element in the Fourth Gospel we 
 
 cannot but recognise a change from the compact lucid addresses and 
 
 exposition of the Synoptists This appears not so much in single 
 
 verses as when we look at the discourse as a whole. In all the Synop- 
 tic Gospels, imperfectly as they are put together, there is not a single 
 discourse that could be called involved in structure, and yet I do not see 
 how it is possible to refuse this epithet to the discourse before us as 
 given by S. John. The different subjects are not kept apart, but are 
 continually crossing and entangling one another. The later subjects are 
 anticipated in the course of the earlier ; the earlier return in the later." 
 Comp. the spiral movement noticed in the Prologue, i. 18. 
 
 " For instance, the description of the functions of the Paraclete is 
 
 broken up into five fragments (xiv. 16, 17; 25, 26; xv. 26 ; xvi. 8 — 
 
 15 ; 23 — 25) The relation of the Church and the world is intersected 
 
 just in the same way (xiv. 22 — 24, xv. 18 — 25, xvi. i — 3), besides scat- 
 tered references in single verses We may consider the discourse 
 
 perhaps under these heads: (i) the departure and the return, (2) the 
 Paraclete, (3) the vine and its branches, (4) the disciples and the world." 
 S. pp. 221 — 232. On the discourses in this Gospel generally see the 
 introductory note to chapter iii. 
 
 Chap. XIV. Christ's love in keeping His own (continued). 
 
 1. Let not your heart be troubled] 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 ' let not your heart be troubled ' refers primarily to 
 ' whither I go, ye cannot come ' (xiii. 33). 
 
 ye believe in God, believe also] The Greek for 'ye believe ' and ' be- 
 lieve ' is the same, and there is nothing to indicate that one is indicative 
 
 S.JOHN 18 
 
274 S. JOHN, XIV. [vv. 2—4. 
 
 2 believe also in me. In my Father's house are many man- 
 sions : if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to 
 
 3 prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place 
 for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; 
 
 4 that where I am, there ye may be also. And whither I go 
 
 and the other imperative. Both may be indicative ; but probably both 
 are imperative : believe in God, and believe in Me ; or perhaps, trust in 
 God, and trust in Me. It impUes the belief which moves towards and 
 reposes on its object (see last note on i. 12). In any case a genuine 
 belief in God leads to a belief in His Son. 
 
 2. In my Father's house'] Heaven. Comp. ' The Lord's throne is 
 in heaven,' Ps. xi. 4 ; 'Our Father, Which art in heaven ' (Matt. vi. 9), 
 &c. 
 
 are many mansions'] Nothing is said about mansions differing in 
 dignity and beauty. There may be degrees of happiness hereafter, but 
 such are neither expressed nor implied here. What is said is that there 
 are ' many mansions ;' there is room enough for all. The word for 
 
 * mansions,' common in classical Greek, occurs in the N. T. only here 
 and V. 23. It is a substantive from the verb of which S. John is so fond, 
 'to abide, dwell, remain' (see note on i. 33), which occurs z^. 10, 16, 17, 
 25, and twelve times in the next chapter. This substantive, therefore, 
 means 'an abode, dwelling, place to remain in.' 'Mansion,' Scotch 
 ' manse,' and French 'maison,' are all from the Latin form of the same 
 root. 
 
 if it were not so, I would have told you] The Greek may have more 
 than one meaning, but our version is best. Christ appeals to His fair- 
 ness : would He have invited them to a place in which there was not 
 room for all ? Others connect this with the next verse ; ' should I have 
 said to you, I go to prepare a place for you?' or, 'I would have said to 
 you, I go, &c.' The latter cannot be right. Christ had already said, 
 and says again, that He is going to shew them the way and to prepare 
 for them (xiii. 36, xiv. 3). 
 
 I go to prepare] We must insert 'for' on overwhelming authority; 
 ' for I go to prepare.' This proves that there will be room for all. 
 
 3. And tf J go] The 'if does not here imply doubt any more than 
 
 * when ' would have done : but we have ' if ' and not ' when ' because it 
 is the result of the departure and not the date of it that is emphasized 
 (see on xii. 32). 
 
 / will come again, and receive] Literally, / am commg again and 
 I will receive (see on i. 11 and xix. 16). There is no doubt about the 
 meaning of the going away ; but the coming again may have various 
 meanings, and apparently not always the same one throughout this dis- 
 course ; either the Resurrection, or the gift of the Paraclete, or the 
 death of individuals, or the presence of Christ in his Church, or the 
 Second Advent at the last day. The last seems to be the meaning here 
 (comp. vi. 39, 40). 
 
vv. 5-7.] S. JOHN, XIV. 275 
 
 ye know, and the way ye know. Thomas saith unto him, $ 
 Lord, we know not whither thou goest ; and how can we 
 know the way ? Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the 6 
 truth, and the Hfe : no ma/i cometh unto the Father, but by 
 me. If ye had known me, ye should have known my 7 
 
 4. whither I go ye know, and the way ye know\ The true text seems 
 once more to have been altered to avoid awkvs'ardness of expression (see 
 on xiii. 26). Here we should read, Whither I go, ye know the way. 
 This is half a rebuke, implying that they ought to know more than 
 they did know : they had heard but had not heeded (x. 7, 9, xi. 25). 
 Thus we say 'you know, you see, ' meaning 'you might' know, you might 
 see, if you would but take the trouble.' 
 
 5. Thomas\ Nothing is to be inferred from the omission of ' Didy- 
 mus' 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 king- 
 dom to Israel (see on Acts i. 6) ; and will not that be Jerusalem ? How 
 then can He go away ? 
 
 and how can we hnow] The true reading is, How know we. 
 
 6. /am the way'\ 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.) 
 
 the truth] Better, and the Truth, being from all eternity in the form 
 of God, Who cannot lie (Phil. ii. 6; Heb. vi. 18), and being the repre- 
 sentative 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 ; i John v. 20. 
 
 and the life] Comp. xi. 25. He is the Life, being one with the 
 living Father and being sent by Him (vi. 57, x. 30). See on i. 4, 
 vi. 50, 51, and comp. i John v. 12; Gal. ii. 20. Here again to know 
 the Life is to know the Way to God. 
 
 no man cometh unto the Father, but by me] Christ continues to insist 
 that the Way is of the first importance to know. ' Through Him we 
 have access unto the Father ' (Eph. ii. 18). Comp. Hebr. x. 19 — 22; 
 I Pet. iii. 18. 
 
 7. //ye had known me] In the better MSS. we have here again 
 
 18—2 
 
276 S. JOHN, XIV. [vv. 8, 9. 
 
 Father also : and from henceforth ye know him, and have 
 
 8 seen him. PhiUp saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, 
 
 9 and it sufiSceth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so 
 long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip ? 
 
 two different words for 'know' (see on vii. 26, viii. 55, xiii. 7), and the 
 emphasis in the first clause is on 'known' in the second on ' Father.' 
 Beware of the common mistake of putting an emphasis on 'Me.' The 
 meaning is : 'If ye had recognised Me, ye would have known My 
 Father also.' The veil of Jewish prejudice was still on their hearts, 
 hiding from them the true meaning both of Messianic prophecy and of 
 the Messiah's acts. 
 
 from henceforth'] The same expression as is mistranslated 'now' 
 in xiii. 19: it is to be understood literally, not proleptically. 
 
 ye ktiow him] Or, 7-ecognise Him. From this time onwards, after 
 the plain declaration of Himself in v. 6, they begin to recognise the 
 Father in Him. Philip's request leads to a fuller statement of v. 6. 
 
 8. Philip] For the fourth and last time S. Philip appears in this 
 Gospel (see notes on i. 44 — 49, vi. 5 — 7, xii. 22). Thrice he is mentioned 
 in close connexion with S. 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 difficulty about the 5000 
 (vi. 7) is quite in harmony with this practical turn of mind. Like 
 S. 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. 
 
 Lord, shew us the Father] 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 awak- 
 ened 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 by Moses. 
 And a greater than Moses was here — "that Prophet whom Moses had 
 foretold. He looked, like all the Jews of his time, to see the wonders 
 of the old dispensation repeated. Hence his question." S. p. 225. 
 9. so long time] Philip had been called among the first (i. 43). 
 hast thou not known me] Or, hast not recognised Me, as in v. "j. 
 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 
 
w. IO-I2.] S. JOHN, XIV. 277 
 
 he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest 
 thou then, Shew us the Father? BeHevest thou not that 10 
 I am in the Father, and the Father in me ? the words that 
 I speak unto you, I speak not of myself: but the Father 
 that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Beheve me that " 
 I am in the Father, and the Father in me : or else believe 
 me for the very works' sake. Verily, verily, I say unto you, 12 
 He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do 
 
 Pentecost 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; Hebr. v. 12. Christ's question is asked in sorrowful but 
 affectionate surprise ; hence the tender repetition of the name. Had 
 S. 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 S. Philip had not yet been told; Matt, 
 xvii. 9. 
 
 and how sayest thou then] The 'and' is of doubtful authority; 
 'then' is an insertion of our translators. 
 
 10. BeHevest thou not] S. 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 My- 
 self; 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 argimient as d /ortzort, 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 viii. 28. 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. 
 
 the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the worhs] The better read- 
 ing gives us, the Father abiding in Me doeth His works (in Me). 
 And thus the saying 'Ye have seen the Father' (v. 7) is justified: the 
 Father is seen in the Son. 
 
 11. Believe me] The English obliterates the fact that Christ now 
 turns from S. Philip and addresses all the eleven : 'believe' is plural not 
 singular. 'You have been with Me long enough to believe what I say; 
 but if not, at any rate believe what I do. My words need no creden- 
 tials : but if credentials are demanded, there are My works.' He. had 
 said the same, somewhat more severely, to the Jews (x. 37, 38); and 
 he repeats it much more severely in reference to the Jews (xv. 22, 24). 
 Note the progress from 'believe Me' here to 'believe on Me' in the 
 next verse ; the one grows out of the other. 
 
 12. Verily, verily] See notes on i. 51. 
 
 the works that I do shall he do also] i. e. like Me, he shall do the 
 
278 S. JOHN, XIV. [w. 13—16. 
 
 also ; and greater works than these shall he do ; because I 
 13 go unto my Father. And whatsoever ye shall ask in my 
 
 name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the 
 H Son. If ye shall ask any thi7ig in my name, I will do //. 
 j6 If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will 
 
 works of the Father, the Father dwelling in Him through the Son 
 {v. 23). 
 
 and greater works than t/iese] There is no reference to healing by 
 means of S. Peter's shadow (Acts v. 15) or of handkerchiefs that had 
 touched S. Paul (Acts xix. 12). Even from a human point of view no 
 miracle wrought by an Apostle is greater than the raising of Lazarus. 
 But from a spiritual point of view no such comparisons are admissible ; 
 to Omnipotence 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. 53). Christ's work was confined to Palestine and 
 had but small success; the Apostles went everywhere, and converted 
 thousands. 
 
 because I go unto my Father\ For ' My' read 'the' with all the best 
 MSS. The reason is twofold: (i) He will have left the earth and be' 
 
 i 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 continue these works 
 and surpass them. 
 
 It is doubtful whether there should be a comma or a full stop at the 
 end of this verse. Perhaps our punctuation is better ; but to make 
 the 'because' run on into the next verse makes little difference to the 
 sense. 
 
 13. whatsoever ye shall ask in my name] Conip. 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 representatives 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. Comp. 2 Cor. xii. 8, 9. 
 
 that the Father may be glorified] See notes on xi. 4, xii. 28, xiii. 31. 
 
 14. / will do it] ' I ' is emphatic. In both verses the prayer is 
 regarded as addressed to the Father, but granted by the Son, who is 
 one with the Father. But the most ancient authorities here add 'Me;' 
 if ye shall ask Me anything. In xv. 16 and xvi. 23 with equal truth 
 the Father grants the prayer; but in xv. 16 the Greek may mean either 
 ' He may give' or ' I may give.' 
 
 15. If ye love me] 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 
 
V. 1 6.] S. JOHN, XIV. 279 
 
 pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, 
 
 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; not those of 
 the Law but of the Gospel. 
 
 keep'] The better reading is ye will keep. Only in these last dis- 
 courses does Christ speak of His commandments : comp. v. 21, xiii. 34, 
 XV. 10, 12. See on z'. 27. 
 
 16. And I will pray the Father] ' I ' is emphatic : ' you do your 
 part on earth, and I will do mine in Heaven.' Our translators have 
 once more rightly made a distinction but an inadequate one (see on 
 xiii. 23, 25). The word for ' pray' here is different from that for 'ask* 
 vv. 13, 14; but of the two the one rendered 'pray' (erdtdn) is (so far 
 as there is a distinction) the less suppliant. It is the word always 
 used by S. John when Christ speaks of His prayers to the Father (xvi. 
 26, xvii. 9, 15, 20); never the word rendered 'ask' [aitein), which 
 however Martha, less careful than the Evangelist, uses of Christ's prayers 
 (xi. 22). But the distinction must not be pressed as if aitein were 
 always used of inferiors (against which Deut, x. 12; Acts xvi. 29; 
 I Pet. iii. 15 are conclusive), or erdtdn 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 
 I John V. 16 both words are used. In classical Greek erdtdn 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.) 
 
 another Cojuforter] Better, attother Advocate. The Greek word, 
 Paraclete (napd/cXjjros) is employed five times in the N.T. — four times 
 in this Gospel by Christ of the Holy Spirit (xiv. 16, 26, xv. 26, xvi. 7), 
 once in the First Epistle by S. John of Christ (ii. i). 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 com- 
 monly signifies 'one who is summoned to the side of another' to aid 
 him in a court of justice, especially the 'counsel for the defenceJ' 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 (k^Xt7t6s=' called;' Matt. xx. 16, xxii. 14; Rom. i. i, 6, 7; 
 I Cor. i. I, 2, &c. ) and the other compounds, of which only one occurs 
 in the N. T. (c«'^7KX?;ros = * unaccused;' i Cor. i. 8; Col. i. 22, &c:), or 
 a reference to the general rule about adjectives similarly formed from 
 transitive verbs, vrill shew that ' Paraclete ' must have a passive sense. 
 The rendering ' Comforter ' has arisen from giving the word an active 
 sense, which it cannot have. Moreover, 'Advocate ' is the sense which 
 the context suggests, wherever the word is used in the Gospel: the 
 idea of pleading, arguing, convincing, instructing, is prominent in every 
 
28o S. JOHN, XIV. [vv. 17, 18. 
 
 17 that he may abide with you for ever ; Even the Spirit of 
 truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth 
 him not, neither knoweth him : but ye know him ; for he 
 
 18 dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave 
 
 instance. Here the Paraclete is the ' Spirit oi tnith,^ whose reasonings 
 fall dead on the ear of the world, and are taken in only by the faithful. 
 In V. 26 He is to ieacA and remind them. In xv. 26 He is to bear 
 witness to Christ. In xvi. 7 — 1 1 He is to convince or cofivict 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. In the Te 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 co- 
 incidence 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 Lightfoot, On Revision, pp. 50 — 
 56, from which nearly the whole of this note is taken. 
 
 It is worth noting that although S. Paul does not use the word 
 Paraclete, yet he has the doctrine : in Rom. viii. 27, 34 the same 
 language, 'maketh intercession for,' is used both of the Spirit and of 
 Christ. 
 
 that he may abide with you for ever"] 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. the Spij-it of truth'] This expression confirms the rendering 'Ad- 
 vocate.' Truth is much more closely connected with the idea of advo- 
 cating a cause than with that of comforting. Comp. xv. 26, xvi. 13; 
 I John V. 6. The Paraclete is the Spirit of Truth as being the Bearer 
 of the Divine revelation, bringing truth home to the hearts of men. 
 In I John iv. 6 it is opposed to the 'spirit of error.' Comp. i Cor. 
 ii. 12. 
 
 the world] See notes on i, 9, 10. 
 
 ii seeth him not] Because the Spirit and ' the things of the Spirit ' 
 must be ' spiritually discerned ' (i Cor. ii. 14). The world may have 
 intelligence, scientific investigation, criticism, learning ; but not by these 
 means is the Spirit of Truth contemplated and recognised ; rather by 
 humility, self-investigation, faith, and love. 
 
 /or he dwelleth] Because I/e abideth : it is the same Greek word as 
 in the previous clause. Comp. v. 28. 
 
 and shall be in you] A reading of higher authority gives ns, 'and ia 
 
w. 19—21.] S. JOHN, XIV. 281 
 
 you comfortless : I will come to you. Yet a little while, 19 
 and the world seeth me no more ; but ye see me : because 
 I live, ye shall live also. At that day ye shall know that 1 20 
 am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you. He that 21 
 hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that 
 loveth me : and he that loveth me shall be loved of my 
 Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to 
 
 in you.^ All the verbs are in the present tense. The Spirit was in the 
 Apostles already, though not in the fulness of Pentecost. 
 
 Note throughout these two verses (16, 17) the definite personality of 
 the Spirit, distinct both from the Father Who gives Him and from the 
 Son Who promises Him. Note also the three prepositions (in w. i6, 
 17): the Advocate is with us for fellowship {nieta); He abides by our 
 side to defend us (para) ; He is in us as a source of power to each indi- 
 vidually [en). 
 
 18. cotnfortless\ Rather (with Wiclif) fatherless, as the word is 
 translated James i. 27, the only other place in the N. T. where it occurs; 
 or (with the margin) orphans, the very word used in the Greek. The 
 inaccurate rendering ' comfortless ' gives unreal support to the inaccu- 
 rate rendering ' Comforter.' In the Greek there is no connexion 
 between orphans and Paraclete. We must connect this rather with 
 the tender address in xiii. 33 ; He will not leave His ' little children ' 
 fatherless. 
 
 I will come to yott] Or, /am coming to you, in the Holy 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. 
 
 19. a little while"] Comp. xiii. 33, xvi. 16. 
 
 but ye see me] In the Paraclete, ever present with you. 
 
 because I live, ye shall live also] i. e. that higher and eternal life over 
 which death has no power either in Christ or His followers. Christ has 
 this life in Himself (v. 26) ; His followers derive it from Him (v. 21). 
 
 20. At that day] Comp. xvi. 23, 26. Pentecost, and thenceforth 
 to the end of the world. They will come to know, for experience will 
 teach them, that the presence of the Spirit is the presence of Christ, and 
 through Him of the Father. 
 
 ye in me, and I in you] Comp, xv. 4, 5, xvii. 21, 23; i John iii. 24, 
 iv. 13, X5, 16. 
 
 21. hath my commandments, and keepeth them] Bears them in- his 
 mind and observes them in his life. 
 
 he it is] With great emphasis ; he and no one else. 
 
 will manifest myself to him] Once more willing obedience is set forth 
 as the road to spiritual enlightenment (see on vii. 17). The word for 
 ' manifest ' is not S. John's favourite word [phaneroun) but one which 
 he uses only in these two verses [emphanizein). 
 
282 S. JOHN, XIV. [vv. 22, 23. 
 
 22 him. Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it 
 that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the 
 
 23 world? Jesus answered and said unto him. If a man love 
 me, he will keep my words : and my Father will love him, 
 and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. 
 
 22. yudas\ Excluding the genealogies of Christ we have six persons / 
 of this name in the N. T. / 
 
 r. This Judas, who was the son of a certain James (Luke vi. 16;/ 
 Acts i. 13): he is commonly identified with Lebbaeus or Thaddaeusi 
 (see on Matt. x. 3). 2. Judas Iscariot. 3. The brother of Jesus ChristA 
 and of James, Joses, and Simon (Matt. xiii. 55; Mark vi. 3). 4. Judas, \ 
 surnamed Barsabas (Acts xv. 22, 27, 32). 5. Judas of Galilee (Acts I 
 V* 3 7)- 6- Judas of Damascus (Acts ix. 11). Of these six the third 1 
 is probably the author of the Epistle; so that this remark is the only I 
 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 j 
 sources. I 
 
 kow is if] Literally, What hath come to pass ; ' what has happened 
 to determine Thee?' 
 
 manifest thyself 1 The word 'manifest' rouses S. Judas just as the 
 word 'see' roused S. Philip [v. 7). 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 kingdom. 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 Gentiles and restore the kingdom to the Jews. Once more 
 we have the Jewish point of view given with convincing precision. 
 Comp. vii. 4. 
 
 23. jfestis ans^uered] The answer is given, as so often in our 
 Lord's replies, not directly, but by repeating and developing the state- 
 ment which elicited the question. Comp. iii. 5 — 8, iv. 14, vi. 44 — 51, 
 53 — 58, &c. The condition of receiving the revelation is loving obe- 
 dience ; those who have it not cannot receive it. This shews that 
 the revelation cannot be universal, cannot be shared by those who 
 hate and disobey (xv. 18). 
 
 my words'] Rather, My word ; the Gospel in its entirety. 
 
 we will come] For the use of the plural comp. x. 30. 
 
 abode] See on v. a. The thought of God dwelling among His peo- 
 ple was familiar to every Jew (Ex. xxv. 8, xxix. 45 ; Zech. ii. 10; &c.). 
 This 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. 
 
 In these two verses (23, 24) the changes 'words' 'sayings' 
 
 'word' give a wrong impression: they should run — 'word'. ...'words* 
 
w. 24—27.] S. JOHN, XIV. 283 
 
 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings : and the 24 
 word which you hear is not mine, but the Father's which 
 sent me. 
 
 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present 25 
 with you. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, 26 
 whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you 
 all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, what- 
 soever I have said unto you. Peace I leave with you, my ^^ 
 
 ...'word.' In the Greek we have the same substantive, twice n the 
 singular and once in the plural. 
 
 24. is not i7iine\ To be understood literally : see on xii. 44. 
 
 25. being yet present'] Better, Tvliile abiding; it is S.John's favourite 
 verb (see on i. 33). With this verse the discourse takes a fresh start 
 returning to the subject of the Paraclete. Perhaps there is a pause 
 after v. 24. 
 
 26. But the Comforter] Better, But the Advocate (see on v, 16). 
 which is the Holy Ghost] Even the Holy Spirit. The epithet 
 
 'holy' is given to the Spirit thrice in this Gospel; i. 33, xx. 22, and 
 here (in vii. 39 the 'holy' is very doubtful). It is not frequent in any 
 Gospel but the third ; five times in S. Matthew, four in S. Mark, 
 twelve in S. Luke. S. Luke seems fond of the expression, which he 
 uses about forty times in the Acts ; and he rarely speaks of the Spirit 
 without prefixing the 'holy.' Here only does S. John give the full 
 phrase, both substantive and epithet having the article : in i. 33 and 
 XX. 2.2 there is no article. 
 
 in tny name] As My representative, taking My place and continuing 
 
 My work (see on v. 13). ' He shall not speak of Himself He shall 
 
 receive of Mine and shew it unto you ' (xvi. 13, 14). The mission of 
 the Paraclete in reference to the glorified Redeemer, is analogous to the 
 mission of the Messiah in reference to the Father. 
 
 shall teach you all things] i. e. ' guide you into all the truth' (xvi. 13). 
 He shall teach them the Divine truth in its fulness; all those things 
 which they 'cannot bear now,' and also ' things to come.' 
 
 bring all things to yotir remembrance] Not merely the words of 
 Christ, a particular in which this Gospel is a striking fulfilment of this 
 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 suffi- 
 ciency as Witnesses of all that the Lord did and taught, and conse- 
 quently the authenticity of the Gospel narrative, is grounded " (Alford). 
 
 27. Peace I leave with you] "Finally the discourse returns to the 
 point from which it started. Its object had been to reassure the sor- 
 rowful disciples against their Lord's departure, and with words of reas- 
 surance and consolation it concludes. These are thrown into the form of 
 a leave-taking or farewell." S. p. 226. 'Peace I leave with you' is 
 probably a solemn adaptation of the conventional form of taking leave 
 
284 S. JOHN, XIV. [w. 28, 29. 
 
 peace I give unto you : not as the world giveth, give I unto 
 you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be 
 
 28 afraid. Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, 
 and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would 
 rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father 
 
 29 is greater than I. And now I have told you before it come 
 
 in the East : comp. ' Go in peace,' Judg. xviii. 6; i Sam. i. 17, xx. 42, 
 xxix. 7 ; 2 Kings v. 19 ; Mark v. 34, &c. See notes on James ii. 16 
 and I Pet. v. 14. The Apostle of the Gentiles perhaps purposely 
 substitutes in his Epistles ' Grace be with you all ' for the traditional 
 Jewish ' Peace.' 
 
 my peace I give unto yoti\ 'My ' is emphatic ; this is no mere conven- 
 tional wish. Comp. xvi. 33, xx. 19, 21, 26. The form of expression, 
 peace that is mine, is common in this Gospel. Comp. the joy that is 
 mine (iii. 29, xv. 11, xvii. 13); the judgment that is mine (v. 30, viii. 
 16) ; the command7nents that are mine (xiv. 15) ; the love that is mine 
 (xv. 10). 
 
 not as the world giveth^ 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. 
 
 Let not your heart be troubled^ See on z/. i. Was He not right in 
 giving them this charge? If He sends them another Advocate, through 
 whom both the Father and He will ever abide with them, if He leaves 
 them His peace, what room is there left for trouble and fear ? 
 
 The word for 'be afraid ' is frequent in the LXX. but occurs nowhere 
 else in the N. T. ' Be fearful ' is the literal meaning. 
 
 28. Ye have heard, &c.] Literally, Ye heard that / said to you, 
 /am going away and I am coming unto you: comp. w. i, 2, 18. 
 
 because I said, I go, &c.] Omit 'I said,' which is wanting in all 
 the best authorities : If ye had loved Me, ye would have rejoiced that 
 I am going unto the Father. The construction is the same as in iv. 10, 
 xi. 21, 32, xiv. 28. Their affection is not free from selfishness: they 
 ought to rejoice at His gain rather than mourn over their own loss. 
 
 for my Father is greater than /] Because the Father is greater 
 than I. Therefore Christ's going to Him is 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 
 
vv. 30, 3I-] S. JOHN, XIV. 285 
 
 to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe. 
 Hereafter I will not talk much with you : for the prince of 30 
 this world cometh, and hath nothing in me. But that the 3> 
 world may know that I love the Father ; and as the Father 
 gave me commandment, eveii so I do. Arise, let us go 
 hence. 
 
 being the Agent by whom the Father works in the creation and preser- 
 vation 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 i Cor. xv. 
 27, 28 ; Mark xiii. 32, [xvi. 19]. 
 
 29. ye might believe] Better, ye may believe. The brevity of the 
 expression makes it ambiguous. It may mean either, ' ye may believe 
 that I am He^ (as in xiii. 19), in which case 'I have told you' probably 
 refers to the sending of the Paraclete ; or, ' ye may believe Me ' (as in 
 V. 1 1), in which case ' I have told you ' probably refers to Christ's going 
 to the Father. The former seems better. 
 
 30. Hereaftei- 1 will not talk much'] Literally, No longer shall I 
 speak many things : comp. xv. 15. 
 
 the p7'ince of this world cometh] Better, the ruler of the world is 
 coming'. The powers of darkness are at work in Judas and his employ- 
 ers. See on xii. 31. 
 
 and hath nothing in me] Quite literal : there is nothing in Jesus over 
 which Satan has control. ' Let no one think that My yielding to his 
 attack implies that he has power over Me. The yielding is voluntary 
 in loving obedience to the Father.' This declaration, in me he hath 
 nothing, could only be tnie if Jesus were sinless. On the import of 
 this confident appeal to His own sinlessness see notes on viii. 29, 46 
 and XV. 10. 
 
 31. But that] Once more we have an instance of S. John's ellipti- 
 cal use of these words (see on xiii. 18), ' But (this is done, i. e. Satan 
 cometh) in order that, &c.' Some, however, would omit the full stop 
 at 'I do' and make 'that' depend upon 'Arise:' ' 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 S. John's style, especially in these discourses. The 
 more simple construction is the more probable. 
 
 let us go hence] ' 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 
 
286 S. JOHN, XV. [vv. I, 2. 
 
 Chap. XV. i — ii. The Union of the Disciples with Christ. 
 The Allegory of the Vifie. 
 
 15 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. 
 2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away : 
 
 before they leave the room (comp. xviii. i). 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. 
 
 Chap. XV. 
 
 The general subject still continues from xiii. 31 — Christ's love in 
 KEEPING His own. This is still further set forth in this chapter in 
 three main aspects : i. Their union with Him, illustrated by the allegory 
 of the Vine (i — 11) ; 2. Their union with one another in Him {12 — 17); 
 3. The haired of the world to both Him and them (18 — 25). 
 
 1 — 11. The Union of the Disciples with Christ. 
 
 The 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. 
 
 1. / am the true vine] We have here the same word for ' true ' as 
 in i. 9, vi. 32 ; Rev. iii. 14. Christ is the true, the genuine, the ideal, 
 the perfect Vine, as He is the perfect Light, the perfect Bread, and the 
 perfect Witness (see on i. 9). " The material creations of God are only 
 inferior examples of that finer spiritual life and organism in which the 
 creature is raised up to partake of the Divine nature " ( Alford). 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 win- 
 dow, 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. associations (Ps. Ixxx. 
 8—19 ; Is. V. I — 7; Jer. ii. 21 ; &c.) without any suggestion from with- 
 out. The vine was a national emblem under the Maccabees and appears 
 on their coins. 
 
 the husbandtnan\ 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. i ) or that of the 
 Fruitless Fig-tree (Luke xiii. 6). The word ' husbandman ' occurs no- 
 where else in the Gospels except of the wicked husbandmen in the 
 parable of the Vineyard. 
 
 2. Every branck] The word for ' branch ' in these six verses occurs 
 here only in N. T., and in classical Greek is specially used of the vine. 
 
vv. 3-5.] S. JOHN, XV. 287 
 
 and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it 
 may bring forth more fruit. Now ye are clean through the 3 
 word which I have spoken unto you. Abide in me, and 1 4 
 in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it 
 abide in the vine ; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. 
 I am the vine, ye are the branches : He that abideth in s 
 me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit : for 
 
 The word used in the other Gospels (Matt. xiii. 32, xxi. 8, xxiv. 32 ; 
 Mark iv. 32, xiii. 28; J^uke xiii. 9), and in Rom. xi. 16 — 21, is of the 
 same origin (from 'to break') but of more general meaning, — the 
 smaller branch of any tree. So that the very word used, independently 
 of the context, fixes the meaning of the allegory. It is every z//«(f-branch, 
 i. e. every one who is by origin a Christian, If they continue such by 
 origin only, and give forth no fruit, they are cut off. The allegory takes 
 no account of the branches of other trees : neither Jews nor heathen are 
 included. Christ would not have called them branches ' in Me.' 
 
 he ta keth aw ay'] Literally, He taketh it away ; in both clauses we 
 have a no/mnativtts pendens. 
 
 he purgeth it] Better, I/e cleanseth it, in order to bring out the con- 
 nexion with ' ye are clean ' (z'.~3Ji The Greek words rendered ' purg- 
 eth ' and ' clean are from the same root. There is also a similarity of 
 jw^W between the Greek words for 'taketh away' and 'cleanseth,' like 
 'bear and forbear' in English {airei and kathairei). This may be in- 
 tentional, but it cannot be reproduced in translation. By cleansing is 
 meant freeing from excrescences and useless shoots which are a drain 
 on the branch for nothing. The eleven were now to be cleansed by 
 suffering. 
 
 bring forth] Better, as before, bear. 
 
 3. Now ye are clean] Already are ye clean. 'Ye' is emphatic; 
 many more will be made clean hereafter. 
 
 through the word] Better, on account of the word. This is a fre- 
 quent error in our version, dio. with the accusative being translated as if 
 it had the genitive. Comp. Matt. xv. 3, 6, where 'by your tradition' 
 should be 'for the sake <?/" your tradition.' 'The word' (xvi. 23) here 
 means the whole teaching of Christ, not any particular utterance ; but 
 there may be special reference to the present discourses, through which 
 Peter, Thomas, Philip, and Judas I/cbbaeus have been cleansed from 
 self-confidence and ignorance. 
 
 4. Abide in me, and I in yon] See on vi. 56. ' And I in you ' 
 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 seems to be better. 
 
 except ye abide] There is this mysterious property in the branches 
 of the spiritual Vine, that they can cut themselves off, as Judas had done. 
 Nature does something, and grace does more; but grace may be rejected. 
 
 Q. ye are the branches] This has been implied, but not stated yet. 
 
288 S. JOHN, XV. [vv.6— 9. 
 
 6 without me ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me, 
 he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered ; and mm 
 gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are 
 
 7 burned. If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, 
 ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you. 
 
 8 Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit ; so 
 
 9 shall ye be my disciples. As the Father hath loved me, so 
 
 for without me] Better, because apart from Me, or (as the margin) 
 severed from Me. Comp. i. 3; Eph. ii. 12. 
 
 ye can do nothing] Christians cannot live as Christians apart from 
 Christ. Nothing is said here about those who are not Christians, al- 
 though there is a sense in which the words are true of them also. 
 
 6. he is cast forth] The verbjs in a past tense ; he is already cast 
 forth by the very fact of not abiding in Christ. This consequence follows 
 so inevitably that to state the one is to state the other. The same re- 
 mark applies to 'is withered.' But 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). The rest of the picture looks forward to the day of judg- 
 ment. ' Men gather ' should be quite indefinitely, they gather (see on 
 Luke xii. 20). 
 
 they are burned] Or, they burn. 
 
 7. my words] Better, My sayings : see on v. 3 and v. 47. 
 
 ye shall ask tvhat ye will] The better reading gives, ask whatsoever 
 ye will, in the imperative. The promise is similar to that in xiv. 13, 14 
 both in its comprehensiveness and in its limitation. One who abides 
 in Christ and has His words abiding in him cannot ask amiss. 
 
 8. Herein is tny Father glorified] As in v. 6, the verb is the aorist 
 passive; not 'is being glorified' but 'is glorified,' i.e. whenever the 
 occasion arises. The aorist is used of an act regarded in itself as ac- 
 complished at any conceivable moment : comp. xvii. 26. ' When ye pray 
 and obtain your prayers through abiding in Me, My Father is glorified 
 already.' It is best to understand ' herein ' as referring to what precedes 
 (comp. iv. 37 and xvi. 30), in order to give the proper meaning to 
 ' that.' 
 
 that ye bear] Literally, in order that ye may bear: it is S. John's 
 favourite particle once more, expressing the Divine purpose (comp. 
 viii. 56, ix. 2, 3, xi. 15, 50, xii. 23, xiii. i, 2, &c.). 'Herein' cannot 
 refer to ' in order that ' without awkwardness. 
 
 so shall ye be my disciples] Rather, and may become My disciples. 
 The construction introduced by ' in order that ' continues to the end of 
 the verse; moreover the difference between 'to be' and 'to become' 
 should be preserved (see on x. 19, i. 6). The sense of the whole will 
 therefore be; 'In granting your prayers My Father is glorified, in order 
 that ye may be fruitful and become My disciples.' 
 
 9. As the Father, &c.] The Greek construction is ambiguous. It 
 would be quite possible to translate. Even as the Father loved Me and 
 
vv. lo, 11.] S. JOHN, XV. 289 
 
 have I loved you : continue ye in my love. If ye keep my 10 
 commandments, ye shall abide in my love ; even as I have 
 kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love. 
 
 These f/ii?igs have I spoken unto you, that my joy might n 
 remain in you, and i/iai( your joy might be full. 
 
 I loved fou, abide in My love. But our version 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 tlie Son. In any case 
 'abide' is better than 'continue;' the same Greelc word is used through- 
 out these verses (4 — 16), a fact which our translators obscure by giving 
 three English words, ' abide, '' continue,' and 'remain,' and that in three 
 consecutive verses {9 — 11). Throughout the Gospel ' abide ' should be 
 maintained as the rendering of S. John's favourite verb nivej-v (see on 
 i- 33)- The whole should run, Even as the Father lo\ed^2le, I also 
 lovedyoti (comp. xvii. 18, xx. 21) ; abide m Jl /y lov e. The verbs are 
 aorists. not perfects, and Christ's work is regarded as a completed 
 whole, already perfect in itself. But perhaps this is just one of those 
 cases where the English perfect may be allowed to translate the Greek 
 aorist : see on viii. 29. 
 
 in my love] The Greek might mean ' the love of Me,' but ' My 
 love ' for you is more natural and suits the context better, which speaks 
 of His love towards them as similar to the Father's towards Him. 
 The other, however, need not be altogether excluded. See on xiv. 
 
 27. 
 
 10. If ye keep] See on xiv. 15, 11, 24. To keep His command- 
 ments not only proves our love for Him but secures His love for 
 us. 
 
 / have kept my Father's commandments] This being in a subordinate 
 sentence the tremendous import of it is liable to pass unnoticed. Look- 
 ing 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 make such a statement? See on xiv. 30. 
 
 11. These things have I spoken] The verse forms a conclusion to 
 the allegory of the Vine. Comp. v. 17, xvi. 25, 33. 
 
 might rei?tain] Better, may abide : but the reading is doubtful, and 
 perhaps ought to be simply 'may be;' that My joy (see on xiv. 27) 
 may be in yon. This does not mean ' that I may have pleasure in you ;' 
 but that the joy which Christ experienced through consciousness of Hi? 
 fellowship with the Father, and which supported Him in His sufferings, 
 might be in His disciples and support them in theirs. Here first, on 
 the eve of His sufferings, does Christ speak of His joy. 
 
 might be full] Or, may be fulfilled. This expression of joy being 
 fulfilled is peculiar to S. John (comp. iii. 29, xvi. 24, xvii. 13; i John 
 i. 4; 2 John 12). The active occurs Phil. ii. 2; 'make my joy full;' 
 but nowhere else. 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. 
 
 S.JOHN 19 
 
290 S. JOHN, XV. [vv. 12—15. 
 
 12 — 17. The Union of the Disciples with one another in 
 Christ. 
 
 12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I 
 tz have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that 
 
 14 a man lay down his life for his friends. Ye are my friends, 
 
 15 if ye do whatsoever I command you. Henceforth I call you 
 
 12—17. The Union of the Disciples with one another in 
 Christ. 
 
 12. This is my commandment] Literally, This is the commandment 
 that is Mine (see on xiv. 27). In v. 10 He said that to lieep His com- 
 mandments was the way to abide in His love. He now reminds 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). 
 S. John teaches us that the second really implies the first (i John 
 iv. 20). 
 
 That ye love one another] Literally, in order that ye love one another : 
 this is the purpose of the commandment. See next verse and on 
 V. 8, vi. 29, and xvii. 3. 
 
 as I have loroed] Even as I loved j comp. v. 9. Christ looks back 
 from a point still further. 
 
 13. that a man lay do^Mn] Literally, in order that a man lay down : 
 the greatest love is that of which the purpose is dying for those loved. 
 On 'lay down his life' see note on x. 11. 
 
 for his friends] Needless difficulty has been made about this, as if 
 it were at variance with Romans v. 6 — 8. Christ here says that the 
 greatest love that any one can shew towards his friends is to die for 
 them. S. 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. Ye are my friends] ' Ye ' is emphatic : * and when I say 
 "friends," I mean you.' This shews that 'friends' was used simply be- 
 cause He was spealcing to the Apostles. 
 
 whatsoever I command yon] Better, the tilings which I am com- 
 manding you. 
 
 15. Henceforth I call yon not servants] Better, No longer do I call 
 you servants (comp. xiv. 30 and see on viii. 34). He had implied that 
 they were servants before (xii. 26, xiii. 13 — 16). Perhaps the gentler 
 word 'servant' is better here, although ' bond -servant ' would bring 
 
vv. i6, 17.] S. JOHN, XV. 291 
 
 not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord 
 doeth : but I have called you friends ; for all things that 
 I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you. 
 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and or- 16 
 dained you, that you should go and bring forth fruit, and 
 that your fruit should remain : that whatsoever ye shall ask 
 of the Father in my name, he may give it you. These 17 
 thi7igs I command you, that ye love one another. 
 
 out the contrast more strongly. Where the Apostles and others use it 
 of themselves the gentler rendering is certainly to be preferred (Rom. 
 i. i; Gal. i. 10; Jas. i. i; 2 Pet. i. i; &c. &c.). 
 
 %vhat his lord doeth'] To be taken literally. The slave or servant 
 may see what his master is doing, but does not know the meaning or 
 purpose of it. ' Doeth' need not be made equal to a future. 
 
 / have called you friends] Or, you have I called friends ; 'you ' is 
 emphatic. He who wills to do His will as a servant, shall know of the 
 doctrine as a friend (vii. 17). 
 
 I have made known unto yon] As they were able to bear it (xvi. 12). 
 After Pentecost they would be able to bear much more. Both verbs are 
 aorists; — I heard — I made known : comp. vv. 9 and 12. 
 
 16. Ye have not, &c.] Better, Ye chose Me not, hit I chose you : 
 ' Ye ' and ' I ' are emphatic ; there is no emphasis on ' Me.' The refer- 
 ence is to their election to be Apostles, as the very word used seems to 
 imply (comp. vi. 70, xiii. 18; Acts i. 2); therefore the aorist as re- 
 ferring to a definite act in the past should be preserved in translation. 
 
 ordained you] Better, appointed jw/ (as 2 Tim. i. 11 and Heb. i. 2), 
 in order to avoid an unreal connexion with ordination in the ecclesias- 
 tical sense. The same word used in the same sense as here is rendered 
 'set' in Acts xiii. 47 and i Cor. xii. 28, 'ordained' i Tim. ii. 7, and 
 'made ' Acts xx. 28. 
 
 £-0 and bring forth fruit] ' Go ' 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 ; Mat. xiii. 44, xviii. 15, xix. 21), and per- 
 haps also separation from their Master (Matt. xx. 4, 7). The mission- 
 ary 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. ' Bring forth ' should be bear as in v. 5. 
 
 should remain] Better, should a^aidQ (see on v. 9). Comp. iv. 36. 
 
 ivhatsoever ye shall ask] See on v. 7 and xiv. 13. 
 
 he may give it] The Greek may also mean '/may give it' (comp. 
 xiv. 13), the first and third persons being alike in this tense; and several 
 ancient commentators take it as the first. 
 
 17. These things I command you, &c.] More literally, These things I 
 am commanding you, in order that ye may love one another. 'These 
 things ' does not refer to ' that ye love one another, ' but to what has 
 
292 S. JOHN, XV. [vv. 18—20. 
 
 18 — 25. The Hatred of the World to both Hwi a?id them. 
 
 18 If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before // 
 
 19 hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love 
 his own : but because ye are not of the world, but I have 
 chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. 
 
 20 Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not 
 greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will 
 
 already been said about being one with Him and with each other. 
 Comp. V. II, xiv. 25, xvi. 25, 33. 
 
 18 — 25. The Hatred 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, (i) 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. ye know that it hated me] Better, know that it hath hated me 
 (comp. V. 20). As in xiv. i the principal verb may be either indicative 
 or imperative, and the imperative is preferable : the second verb is the 
 perfect indicative, of that which has been and still is the case. 
 
 before it hated yoii] ' It hated ' is an insertion by our translators, 
 and ' before you ' is literally ' first of you,' like ' before me ' in i. 15 (see 
 note there) and 30 ; excepting that here we have the adverb and there 
 the adjective. 
 
 19. the world would love his 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 (comp. 
 I John iv. 5). ' His own,' or its o-un, is neuter singular not masculine 
 plural. 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 advantage ; and 
 hence the lower word for ' love ' is used {philein), not the higher one 
 {a^ap&n) as in v. 17. It is mere natural liking. Note the solemn repe- 
 tition of ' world ' in this verse. For the construction comp. v. 46, viii. 
 19, 42, ix. 41, xviii. 36 and contrast iv. 10, xi. 21, xiv. 28. 
 
 / have chosen] I chose : see on v. 16. 
 
 therefore the world hateth yon] Or, for this cause (see on viii. 47 and 
 xii. 39) &c. Comp. i John iii. 13. 
 
 20. Remember] 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. i Pet. iv. 12, 13. 
 
vv. 21-24.] S. JOHN, XV. 293 
 
 also persecute you ; if they have kept my saying, they will 
 keep yours also. But all these things v;ill they do unto you 21 
 for my name's sake, because they know not him that sent me. 
 If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not 22 
 had sin : but now they have no cloke for their sin. He 23 
 that hateth me hateth my Father also. If I had not done 24 
 among them the works which none other man did, they had 
 
 if they have kept my saying, they will keep"] Better, If they kept 
 (comp. xiil. 14, xviii. 23) My word, they will keep. 'Keep' must not 
 be exchanged for ' watch, lay wait for, ' in a hostile sense ; as if both 
 halves of the verse were alike instead of being opposed. The phrase 
 'keep the word (or words)' of any one is frequent in this Gospel (viii. 
 5I1 52» 55> xiv. 23, 24, xvii. 6); always in the sense of the parallel 
 phrase 'keep my commandments' (xiv. 15, 21, xv. 10). Both phrases 
 form a link not only between the Gospel and the First Epistle (ii. 3, 
 4, 5, iii. 22, 24, V. 2, 3), but also between these two and the Apocalypse 
 (iii. 8, 10, xii. 17, xiv. 12, xxii. 7, 9). Comp. John ix. i6 ; Rev. i. 3, 
 ii. 26, iii. 3. (See on xi. 44, xix. 37, xx. 16). All these passages 
 shew that it is impossible to take ' keep ' in a hostile sense. The phrase 
 ' to keep the word' of any one occurs in S. John's writings only. ' To 
 keep the commandments (or commandment)' occurs elsewhere only 
 Matt. xix. 17 (comp. xxviii. 20) and i Tim. vi. 14. The meaning 
 of the verse as a whole is that both in failure and in success they will 
 share His lot. For the construction comp. xiii. 14, xviii. 23. 
 
 21. for my name's sake] This thought is to turn their suffering into 
 joy. Comp. Acts v. 41, xxi. 13; 2 Cor. xii. 10; Gal. vi. 14; Phil. ii. 
 17, 18 ; I Pet. iv. 14. 
 
 they know not him that sent me] 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. 
 
 22. If I had not come and spoken unto them] He had spoken as 
 man had never spoken before (vii. 46), and His words sufficed to tell 
 unprejudiced minds Who He was. Their hatred was a sin against 
 light; if there had been no light, there would have been iio sin. 
 •To have sin' is a phrase peculiar to S. John (v. 24, ix. 41, xix. 11; 
 I John i. 8). 
 
 no cloke] Better (with the margin), no excuse : not only have they 
 sin, but they have sin without excuse. The same word is rendered 
 ' cloke,' I Thess. ii. 5. But the notion is not that of hiding, but of ex- 
 cusing what cannot be hid : 'colour ' (Acts xxvii. 30) is a better render- 
 ing than ' cloke.' Comp. Ps. cxl. 4. 
 
 for their sitt] Literally, concerning their sin : comp. xvi. 8. 
 
 23. hateth 7ny Father also] Comp. v. 23, xiv. 9. 
 
 24. the ivorks] If they did not see that His words were Divine 
 they might at least have seen that His works were such. Comp. x. 
 38, xiv. II, v. 36. Here again their sin was against light; for they 
 admitted the works (xi. 47). 
 
294 S. JOHN, XV. [vv. 25, 26. 
 
 not had sin : but now have they both seen and hated both 
 
 25 me and my Father. But this comefh to pass, that the word 
 might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated 
 
 26 me without a cause. But when the Comforter is come, 
 whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit 
 of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify 
 
 which none other man did] Comp. ix. 32. 
 seen...my Fathet-\ Comp. xiv. 9, 10. 
 
 25. in their laiv\ ' Law ' is used in the wide sense for the O. T. 
 generally. Comp. x. 34, xii. 34, xv. 25; Rom. iii. 19. 
 
 without a cause] The passage may be from either Ps. Ixix. 4 or 
 XXXV. 19: there are similar passages cix. 3 and cxix. 161. 'Without a 
 cause,' gratuitously ; so that here again they are without excuse. 
 
 26. the Comforter] Better, the Advocate (see on xiv. 16). 
 
 whom I will send] * I ' is emphatic. Here it is the Son Who sends 
 the Paraclete from the Father. 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 expressing that the mission of the Paraclete 
 is the act both of the Father and of the Son, Who are one, 
 
 fro7n the Father] See note on ' from God' i. 6 : the preposition and 
 case are here the same ; Trapd with the genitive. 
 
 the Spirit of truth] See on xiv. 17. 
 
 which proceedeth from the Father] It seems best to take this much 
 discussed clause as simply yet another way of expressing the fact of the 
 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 Filioque 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. viii. ; Reujtioji Conference at Bonn, 1875, 
 pp. 9 — 85, Rivingtons; Pusey On the Clause ^^ and the 6(7«," a Letter 
 to Dr Liddon, Parker, 1876. The word rendered 'proceedeth' occurs 
 in this Gospel only here and v. 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 preposition used here {para — ' from the side of ') is 
 strongly in favour of the reference being to the mission. Comp. xvi. 27, 
 xvii. 8. 
 
vv. 27; I.] S. JOHN, XV. XVI. 295 
 
 of me : and ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been 27 
 with me from the beginning. 
 
 Chap. XVT. 
 The Promise of the Paraclete mid of Chrisfs Return. 
 I — II. The World and the Paraclete. 
 These things have I spoken unto you, that ye should not 16 
 
 he shall testify of ine\ Better, He shall \>Q%T witness. It is the same 
 word as is used in the next verse and is one of the words characteristic 
 of this Gospel (see on i. 7). 'He' is emphatic, in opposition to the 
 world which hates and rejects Christ. Christ has the witness of the 
 Spirit of truth, which has the authority of the Father : it is impossible 
 to have higher testimony than this. 
 
 27. And ye also shall bea7- ivitness'\ Better, Nay, ye also bear wit- 
 ness : the verb is present, not future. It is also possible to take the verb 
 as an imperative (comp. v. 18 and xiv. i), but the conjunctions used 
 are against this. The testimony of the disciples is partly one and the 
 same with the testimony of the Spirit, partly not. It is partly 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 partly not the 
 same, so far as it depends upon the Apostles' own personal experience 
 of Christ and His work. This is the case at once ; the experience is 
 already there ; and hence the present tense. Comp. Acts v. 32, where 
 the Apostles clearly set forth the twofold nature of their testimony, and 
 Acts XV. iS, where there is a parallel distinction of the two factors. 
 
 have been tuith me] Literally, are with Me; i. e. have been and 
 still are. 
 
 from the iegiimvig] As usual the context decides the meaning of 
 'beginning' (see on i. i). Here plainly the meaning is from the be- 
 ginning of Christ's ministiy. They could bear witness as to what they 
 themselves had seen and heard. Comp, Acts i. 22 ^ Luke i. 2. 
 
 Chap. XVI. 
 We are still in the first part of the second main division of the 
 
 Gospel, THE INNER GLORIFICATION OF CHRIST IN HiS LAST DIS- 
 COURSES (xiii. — xvii. ). We now enter upon the third division of this 
 first part (see introductory note to chap. xiii. ). 
 
 The Promise of the Paraclete and of Christ's Retujrn. 
 
 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; i. The World and the Paraclete 
 (i — 11); 2. The Disciples and the Paraclete (12 — 15); The Sorrow of 
 Christ's Departure turned into Joy by His Return (16 — 24); 4. Simi' 
 viary and Conclusion of the Discourses (25 — 33). 
 
296 S. JOHN, XVI. [vv. 2— 4. 
 
 2 be offended. They shall put you out of the synagogues : 
 yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think 
 
 3 that he doeth God service. And these tJwigs will they do 
 unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me. 
 
 4 But these things have I told you, that when the time shall 
 come, ye may remember that I told you of them. And 
 these things I said not unto you at the beginning, because 
 
 1 — 11. The World and the Paraclete. 
 
 1. These things] These discourses generally, especially the last 
 section about the world's hatred of Him and them (xv. 18 — 27). 
 
 should not be offended] Literally, should not be made to stumble: 
 comp. vi. 61 ; i John ii. 10. The metaphor is frequent in S. Matt, and 
 S. Mark, occurs thrice in S. Luke (vii. 23, xvii, i, 2), and twice in 
 S. John. The fanatical hatred of the Jews might make Jewish Apostles 
 stumble at the truth. 
 
 2. out of the synagogues] Or, out of the B3Tiagogrue, i. e. excommu- 
 nicate you. Comp. ix. 22 ; xii. 42. 
 
 yea, the time cometh] Better, nay, there cometh an hour. Comp. 
 V. 25. 'You might think excommunication an extreme measure; but 
 (dWa) they will go far greater lengths than this.' 
 
 that whosoever] Literally, in order that every one who. The Divine 
 purpose is again clearly indicated (see on xii. 23). Every one, Jew and 
 Gentile alike, will put down the Christians as blasphemers and atheists 
 and the perpetrators of every crime. The history of religious persecu- 
 tion is the fulfilment of this prophecy. 
 
 doeth God seroice] Better, offereth service to God. The verb ex- 
 presses the offering of sacrifice (comp. Heb. v. i, viii. 3, ix. 7); tlie 
 substantive expresses a religious service (Rom. ix. 4; Hcb. ix. i. 6). 
 
 3. unto you] These words are of doubtful authority. 
 
 they have not known] Better, they did not recognise. The verb im- 
 plies that they had the opportunity of knowing ; but they had failed to 
 see that God is Love, and that Jesus came not to shut out, but to bring 
 in, not to destroy, but to save. The veiy names ' Father ' (here used 
 with special point) and 'Jesus' might have taught them better things. 
 
 4. But] flaking a fresh start ; But, to return (to v. i). 
 have I told] See on v. 6. 
 
 when the time] Rather, when their hour, according to the belter 
 reading; i. e. the hour appointed for these things [v. 1). 
 
 ye may of them] Better, yemay remember them, that I told you. 
 
 ' I' is emphatic, 'I Myself, the object of your faith.' 
 
 And these things beginning] Better, But these things /told you 
 
 not from the beginning. Not exactly the same phrase as in xv. 27 (dTr 
 dpx^s)) but ^f a'px^s (here and vi. 64 only) : the one expresses simple 
 departure, the other consequence and continuity. There is no inconsis- 
 tency between this statement and passages like Matt. x. 16 — 39, xxiv. 9; 
 Luke vi. 22, iSrc. 'These things ' will cover a great deal more than the 
 
w. S— 8.] S. JOHN, XVI. 297 
 
 I was with you. But now I go my way to him that sent s 
 me; and none of you asketh me, Whither goest thou? 
 But because I have said these things unto you, sorrow hath 6 
 filled your heart. Nevertheless I tell you the truth ; It is 7 
 expedient for you that I go away : for if I go not away, 
 the Comforter will not come unto you ; but if I depart, 
 I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he a 
 
 prediction of persecutions, e. g. the explanation of the persecutions, the 
 promise of the Paraclete, &c. 
 
 because I was with yoti\ See notes on Matt, ix. 15. 
 
 5. I go my way to] Or, I go away unto ; the notion is that of with- 
 drawal (see on v. 7). Hitherto He has been with them to protect them 
 and to be the main object of attack : soon t/iey will have to bear the 
 brunt without Him. This is all that they feel at present, — how His de- 
 parture 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. 
 
 none of you asketh] As far as words go S. Peter had asked this 
 very question (xiii. ,^6) 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. 
 
 6. / have said] Better, / have spoken as in v. i. A similar cor- 
 rection is needed in v. 4 for ' have I told :' it is the same Greek word in 
 all three cases, and means 'to speak,' not ' to say ' or ' to tell.' 
 
 sorrow hath filled] So that there is no room for thoughts of My glory 
 and your future consolation. 
 
 7. / tell you the truth] ' I ' is again emphatic ; ' I who know, and 
 who have never misled you.' Comp. xiv. 2. 
 
 It is expedient] So Caiaphas had said (xi. 50) with more truth than 
 he knew; so also the taunt at the crucifixion, 'Himself He cannot save.' 
 ' That ' here = ' in order that ' (S. John's favourite particle, ha). Comp. 
 V. 2 and xii. 43. 
 
 / go away] There are three different Greek verbs in w. 5, 7, and 
 10, and our translators have not been happy in distinguishing them. 
 The verb in w. 5 and 10 should be I go away: here for ' I go away' 
 we should have I depart, and for ' I depart ' we should have I go My 
 way. In the first the primary idea is withdrawal ; in the second, sepa- 
 ration ; in the third, going on to a goal. 
 
 the Comforter] The Advocate (see on xiv. 16). The Spirit could not 
 come until God and man had been made once more at one. In virtue 
 of His glorified and ascended Manhood Christ sends the Paraclete. 
 ' Humanity was to ascend to heaven before the Spirit could be sent to 
 humanity on earth. ' 
 
 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 con- 
 vict the world concerning sin, and concerning righteousness, and cqtx- 
 cennms judgment. 
 
298 S. JOHN, XVI. [vv. 9, 10. 
 
 will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and 
 of judgment : of sin, because they believe not on me ; of 
 righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me 
 
 he will reprove] ' Convince ' (as the margin) or convict is to be 
 prefeiTed (see on iii. 20). This rendering 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 interests involved. The word occurs 
 once in S. Matthew (xviii. 15) and once in S. Luke (iii. 19) ; but is 
 somewhat frequent in the Epistles. Comp. i. Cor. xiv. 24 ; Titus i. 9, 
 I3> ii- 15; James ii. 9; Jude 15, [22], &c. 
 
 The conviction wi^ought by the Advocate may bring either salvation 
 or condemnation, but it must bring one of the two. It is given to men 
 'for their wealth ;' but it may 'be unto them an occasion of falling,' if 
 it is wantonly set aside. 
 
 9. Of sitt] Or, Concerning sin. This naturally comes first : the 
 work of the Spirit begins with convincing man that he is a fallen, sinful 
 creature in rebellion against God. 
 
 because they believe not on me] This is the source of sin — unbelief ; 
 formerly, unbelief in God, now unbelief in His Ambassador. Not that 
 the sin is limited to unbelief, but this is the beginning 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 M'hat the nature of sin is. 
 
 10. righteousness] The word occurs here only in this Gospel ; but 
 comp. I 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 'righteousness' 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. 
 
 I go to my Father] Better, / go away (see on v. 7) to the Father; 
 ' My' is wanting in the best texts. Once more ' because ' explains ' will 
 convict,' not ' righteousness.' The life of Christ on earth as the pattern 
 for all mankind being completed, and the reconciliation of man to God 
 being completed also, 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. 
 
 ye see me no more] ' Contemplate ' or behold would be better than 
 'see' (comp. v. 16, vi. 40, 62, vii. 3, xiv. 19, &c.). He shews His 
 disciples that He has sympathy for them ; in speaking of His return to 
 glory He does riot forget the sorrow which they feel and expect (erro- 
 neously, as Acts ii. 46 shews) always to feel. 
 
vv. II— 13.] S. JOHN, XVI. 299 
 
 no more ; of judgment, because the prince of this world is n 
 judged. 
 
 12 — 15. The Disciples and the Paraclete. 
 
 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot 12 
 bear the>n now. Howbeit Avhen he, the Spirit of truth, is 13 
 come, he will guide you into all truth : for he shall not 
 speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he 
 
 11. Of judgment .judged^ Better, Conc&Tcning Judgtnent, because 
 
 the ruler of this world hath "bQBn Judged (see on xii. 31 and xiv. 30). 
 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 Cal- 
 vary, but the Resurrection and Ascension proved that what looked like 
 victory was most signal defeat: instead of conquering he was judged. 
 This result is so certain that from the point of view of the Spirit's com- 
 ing it is spoken of as already accomplished. 
 
 12—15. The Disciples 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 the truth of Christ revealed by the Spirit. 
 
 12. many things to say] 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. ' Now ' is emphatic (see on v. 31) : at Pentecost they will 
 receive both understanding and strength. The word here used for 
 'bear' appears again in xix. 17 of Christ bearing the Cross. 
 
 13. the Spirit of truth'] See on xiv. 17. 
 
 he luill guide you] ' He and no other will be your guide. ' Christ is 
 the Way and the Truth. The Spirit leads men into the Way and thus 
 to the Truth. But He does no more than guide : He does not compel, 
 He does not carry. They may refuse to follow, and if they follow they 
 must exert themselves. Contrast Matt. xv. 14 ; Luke vi. 39 ; Acts 
 viii. 31. 
 
 into all truth] Better, into all the truth, i. e. the truth in its entirety : 
 this is very clearly expressed in the Greek. 
 
 he shall not speak of himself ] This does not mean * shall not speak 
 about Himself but ^from Himself.' The Spirit, like the Son, cannot 
 speak what proceeds from Himself as distinct from what proceeds from 
 the Father: He is the Source of Divine energy and truth. Comp. v. 19 
 and vii. 18. This expression 'from himself, from itself (aTro) is peculiar 
 to S. John : comp. xi. 51, xv. 4. 
 
300 S. JOHN, XVI. [vv. 14—16. 
 
 14 speak : and he will shew you things to come. He shall 
 glorify me : for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew // 
 
 15 unto you. All things that the Father hath are mine: there- 
 fore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew // 
 unto you. 
 
 16 — 24. The sorrow of Christ's departure turned into joy 
 by His return. 
 
 16 A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a 
 little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father. 
 
 he will sheiu you things to come] Better, He shall declare to you 
 the things that are coining. The Greek verb means 'to announce, 
 proclaim, declare' rather than 'shew.' Note the thrice repeated 'He 
 shall declare to you.' The phrase ' the things that are coming ' is iden- 
 tical in form with 'He that cometh' (Luke vii. 19) : among these things 
 we may place the constitution of the Church and the revelation re- 
 specting the Last Judgment and its results. 
 
 14. He shall glorify me] Both pronouns are emphatic ; ' Me shall 
 that Spirit of truth 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. 
 
 for he shall receive unto you] Better, because I/e shall take of 
 
 Mine and shall declare it to you. The verb rendered 'receive' is the 
 same as that rendered ' take ' in v. 15, and 'take ' is better, as implying 
 that the recipient is not wholly passive {lavibanein, not dechesthai). 
 Comp. X. 17, xii. 48, xx. 22. 
 
 15. All things] Literally, All things ivhatsoever : comp. xvii. 10. 
 therefore said I] For this cause (xii. 18, 27) said I: see on v. 16, 18. 
 shall take] Better, taketh : the Spirit is already revealing the Truth 
 
 which is both of the Father and of the Son. 
 
 16 — 24. The sorrow of Christ's departure turned into joy 
 
 BY His RETURN. 
 
 16. ye shall not see me] Better, .yi? behold Me no more (comp. v. 10) : 
 the verb for ' see ' in the second half of the verse is a more general 
 term. When His bodily presence was withdra\vn their view of Him was 
 enlarged ; no longer known after the flesh, He is seen and known by 
 faith. 
 
 ye shall see me] In the spiritual revelation of Christ by the Para- 
 clete from Pentecost onwards : Matt, xxviii. 20. 
 
 because I go to the Father] These words have probably been in- 
 serted to suit the next verse ; the best MSS. omit them. 
 
w. 17—20.] S. JOHN, XVI. 301 
 
 Then said sojjie of his disciples among themselves, What 17 
 is this that he saith unto us, A little while, and ye shall not 
 see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me; and, 
 Because I go to the Father? They said therefore, What is 18 
 this that he saith, A little while? we cannot tell what he 
 saith. Now Jesus knew that they were desirous to ask him, 19 
 and said unto them, Do ye inquire among yourselves of that 
 I said, A little while, and ye shall not see me : and again, a 
 little while, and ye shall see me? Verily, verily, I say unto 20 
 you. That ye shall weep and lament, but the world shall 
 rejoice: and ye shall be sorrowful, but your sorrow shall be 
 
 17. Then disciples\ Better, Some of His disciples therefore 
 
 said. 
 
 a7nong themselves'] Better, as in iv. 33, one to another ; so also in 
 xix. 24. The Greek for 'among themselves' (xii. 19) is different. 
 
 ye shall not see] Ye behold Me not. As in the previous verse we 
 have two different verbs for ' see. ' 
 
 and, Because I go] They refer to what was said in v. lo. The 
 Apostles are perplexed both about the apparent contradiction of not 
 beholding and yet seeing and also the departure to the Father. 'Be- 
 cause ' (Sri) should probably be ' that, ' to introduce the sa)ang ' I go 
 to the Father.' As already indicated, the reason, ^because I go, &c.' in 
 V. 16 is not genuine. 
 
 18. we cannot tell what he saith] More literally, we know not what 
 He speaketh. 
 
 19. Now Jesus knew] More literally, Jesus recognised or perceived 
 (see on viii. 55). We have here an indication that His supernatural 
 power of reading the thoughts did not supersede His natural powers of 
 observation, and perhaps was not used when the latter were sufficient : 
 comp. V. 6, vi. 15. A different verb is used for His supernatural know- 
 ledge (vi. 61, 64, xiii. I, 3, ri, 18, xviii. 4, xix. 28). But this distinc- 
 tion between gindskein and eidenai is not always observed : comp. ii. 
 24, 25, where ginSskein is used of supernatural knowledge. Omit 
 'now ' at the beginning of the verse. 
 
 among yourselves] Or, with one another. This is a third expression, 
 differing from 'among yourselves' (xii. 19) and from ' one to another 
 (iv. 33). See on z/. 17. The whole should run. Concerning this do ye 
 enquire with one another, that I said. 
 
 ye shall not see me] As in vv. 16, 17, ye behold Me not. 
 
 20. ye shall weep and lament] In the Greek ' ye ' comes last jn em- 
 phatic contrast to the world. The verbs express the outward manifesta- 
 tion of grief. Comp. xx. 1 1 ; Luke xxiii. 27. The world rejoiced 
 at being rid of One whose life was a reproach to it and whose teaching 
 condemned it. 
 
 and ye shall he sorrowful] Here we have the feeling as distinct from 
 the manifestation of grief. Omit 'and.' 
 
302 S. JOHN, XVI. [vv. 21— 24. 
 
 21 turned into joy. A woman when she is in travail hath 
 sorrow, because her hour is come : but as soon as she is 
 dehvered of the child, she remembereth no more the anguish, 
 
 22 for joy that a man is born into the world. And ye now 
 therefore have sorrow: but I will see you again, and your 
 heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you. 
 
 23 And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, 
 I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in 
 
 24 my name, he will give it you. Hitherto have ye asked 
 
 sorrow shall be turned into joy] Not merely sorrow shall be succeeded 
 by joy, but shall become joy. The withdrawal of the bodily presence 
 of Christ shall be first a sorrow and then a joy. We have the same 
 Greek construction 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 (i Cor. 
 XV. 45). 
 
 21. A woman] Or, The woman, like 'the servant' {xv. 15) : in each 
 case the article is generic, expressing the general law. The figure is 
 frequent in O. T.; Isai. Ixvi. 7; Hos. xiii. 13; Mic. iv. 9. See on 
 Mark xiii. 8. 
 
 for joy] Better, T^r \i\!bjoy, the joy peculiar to the case. 
 a man] A human being, one of the noblest of God's creatures. 
 
 22. And ye noiv therefore] Or, Ye also therefore now. As in the 
 case of childbirth, the suffering of the disciples was the necessary condi- 
 tion of the joy. This suffering was to repeat itself in a new form in the 
 work of converting souls (Gal. iv. 19). 
 
 / will see you] In vv. 16, 17, 19 we had ' ye shall see Me :' here we 
 have the other side of the same truth ; and the same verb for ' see ' is 
 used in all four cases. In Gal. iv. 9 we have both sides of the truth 
 stated (see on i Cor. viii. 3). 
 
 no man taketh] Or, according to some good authorities, no one sliall 
 take. Their sorrow shall depart, their joy shall remain. 
 
 23. in that day] Not the forty days of His bodily presence between 
 the Resurrection and the Ascension, but the many days of His spiritual 
 presence from Pentecost onwards. Comp. v. 26 and xiv. 20. 
 
 ye shall ask me nothing] The Greek is as ambiguous as the English. 
 It is the same verb {erotdn) as is used in v. 19, and may mean either, as 
 there, 'ask no question,' 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 (i) perfect knowledge. 
 
 Verily, verily] See on i. 51. 
 
 Whatsoever .give it you] The better reading gives. If ye shall ask 
 
 anything of the Father, He will give it you in My name. The word 
 
w. 25, 26.] S. JOHN, XVI. 303 
 
 nothing in my name: ask, and ye shall receive, that your joy 
 may be full. 
 
 25 — 33. Summary and conclusion of these discourses. 
 These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: 25 
 but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto 
 you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the 
 Father. At that day ye shall ask in my name : and I say not 26 
 
 for ' ask ' here and in the next verse is aitein not erotdn. Note that the 
 answer 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 prayfer. 
 
 24. 7tothing in my name] Because Jesus was not yet glorified, was 
 not yet fully known to the Apostles. 
 
 ask] The full meaning of the Greek is go on asking; it is the present 
 not aorist imperative. Comp. v. 14, [viii. 11,] xx. 17, and contrast 
 Matt. vii. 7 with Mark vi. 22. 
 
 may be full] Or, may be fulfilled, so as to be complete and remain so. 
 His return to the Father will gain for them (3) perfect joy. See on xv. 
 II and comp. xvii. 13; i John i. 4; 2 John 12. 
 
 25—33. Summary and conclusion of these discourses. 
 
 25. These things] As in v. i there is some uncertainty as to how 
 much is included. Some refer 'these things' to v. 19 — 24; others to 
 XV. I — xvi. 24. Perhaps even the latter is too narrow a limit. 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. 
 
 in proverbs] Better, in allegories (see on x. 6). 
 
 but the time cometh] Better, there cometh an hour (iv. 21, 23, v. 25, 
 xvi. 2, 32). Omit ' but ' with the best authorities. 
 
 shav] Or, declare, as in vv. 13, 14, 15. The best MSS. give a 
 different compound of the same verb as is used in vv. 13, 14, 15, but 
 the difference cannot well be marked in English. 
 
 plainly] Frankly, without reserve (see on vii. 4 and comp. vii. 13, 
 26, x. 24, xi. 14, 54, xviii. 20). 
 
 26. kt that day] As in v. 23 and xiv. 20 from Pentecost onwards. 
 ye shall ask in my name] With the perfect knowledge just promised 
 
 they will discern what may be asked in His name (see on xiv. 13): 
 ' cognitio pa7-it grationem.' 
 
 I say not tinto you] This does not mean 'I need not say unto you; 
 for of course I shall do so ;' 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 (i John ii. 
 i; Rom. viii. 34). 
 
304 S. JOHN. XVI. [vv. 27—30. 
 
 S7 unto you, that I will pray the Father for you : for the Father 
 h:mself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have 
 
 28 believed that I came out from God. I came forth from the 
 Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the 
 world, and go to the Father. 
 
 29 His disciples said unto him, Lo, now speakest thou 
 
 30 plainly, and speakest no proverb. Now are we sure that 
 
 that I will pray] The pronoun is emphatic. On the word here ren- 
 dered ' pray ' {erotdn) see on xiv. 1 6. 
 for you] More literally, concerning you. 
 
 27. himself] Without My intercession. 
 
 loveth you] On the difference between the two Greek verbs for 'love' 
 see on xi. 5. It is the more emotional word that is used here in both 
 cases. At first sight it appears the less appropriate to express God's 
 love for the disciples : but the point is that it is a Fathet's love, it flows 
 spontaneously from a natural relationship as distinct from discriminating 
 friendship. 
 
 because ye have loved me] Both pronouns are emphatic and are next 
 one another in the Greek, pointing to the closeness of the relationship ; 
 because ye Me have loved. Note the 'because ;' it is their love for Christ 
 which wins the Father's love (xiv. 21, 23). 
 
 have loved have believed] Both perfects signify what has been 
 
 and still continues. No argument can be drawn from the order of the 
 verbs as to love preceding faith: 'have loved' naturally comes first on 
 account of ' loveth ' immediately 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. 
 
 front God] The better reading is, from the Father (see on i. 6, xv. 
 26). It was specially because they recognised Him as the Son sent 
 from the Father, and not merely as a Prophet sent from God (i. 6), that 
 they won the Father's love. 
 
 28. I came forth from] Our translators are again right in marking a 
 difference but not quite right in their way of doing so (see on v. 7). 
 The Greek rendered 'I c&vcit forth from' here differs in the preposition 
 used (ek) from that rendered 'I came out from' in z/. 27 (para). It 
 would be better to transpose the translations. In z/. 27 it is the temporal 
 mission of Christ firom the Father that is meant (comp. xvii. 8) ; in v. 
 28 the Eternal Generation of the Son is also included (comp. viii. 42). 
 The 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. said] Rather, say. 
 
 plainly] Literally, in plainness or openness. As in vii. 4, the word 
 here has a preposition (see on vii. 26). 
 
 30. are we sure] Better, we know; it is the same verb as 'thou 
 knowest,' and the capricious change of rendering is regrettable. There 
 is a similarly capricious change 2 Cor, xii. 2, 3. Christ had spoken in 
 
vv. 3T;5^] S. JOHN, XVr. 30$ 
 
 thou knowest all things, and needest not that any man 
 should ask thee : by this wc believe that thou earnest forth 
 from God. Jesus answered them, Do ye now believe? 31 
 Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be 32 
 scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: 
 and yef I am not alone, because the Father is with me. 
 
 the future tense (v. 23); they emphatically speak in the present ; 'nmv 
 WQ. know.' They feel that His gracious promise is already being ful- • 
 filled. 
 
 t/zoii htoivest all things\ He had shewn them that He had read their 
 hearts (z'. 19); like the Samaritan woman (iv. 29, 39) they conclude that 
 He knows all. 
 
 by t hi si Or, Herein (see on iv. 37); literally 'in this.' His all-em- 
 bracing knowledge is that in which their faith has root. 
 
 we believe i ha tl The Greek might mean, 'we believe, because, &Ci' 
 But the A. V. is more in accordance with the context and with S. John's 
 usage. 
 
 forth from Goil] They refer to Christ's mission only {v. 27), not to 
 the Eternal Generation of the Son {v. 28). 
 
 31. Do ye nozu bdiez'e?} The words are only half a question (comp. 
 XX. 29). The belief of which they are conscious is no illusion, but it 
 is not yet as perfect as they in their momentary enthusiasm suppose. 
 'Now' means 'at this stage of your course;' it is not the word used 
 by the Apostles {vv. 29, 30), but another of which S. John makes much 
 use. The one {ml?!) regards the present moment only, 'now' abso- 
 lutely; the other {arti) regards the present in relation to the past and 
 future, 'at this crisis.' Comp. v. 11, xiii. 7, 19, 33, 37, &c. 
 
 32. the hour cometh^ Better (as in v. 25), there cometh an hour. 
 yea, is now come^ Omit 'now;' the expression is not the same as 
 
 iv. 23. 
 
 that ye shall be scattered] 'R.slher, that ye XOKy be scattered, 'That' = 
 '/« order that' expressing the Divine purpose (comp. v. 2). This part 
 of the allegory of the sheep-fold is to be illustrated even in the shepherds 
 themselves (x. 12). 
 
 to his oivti] 'To his own home,' as the margin has it here and the 
 text of xix. 27; or more generally 'to his own property and pursuits,' 
 his belongings and surroundings. Comp. i. 11. The Greek in all 
 three passages is the same, 'his own' being neuter plural. 
 
 shall leave'] Rather, may leave, depending upon 'in order that.' 
 
 and yet] The 'yet' is not expressed in the Greek, but implied, as 
 often in S. John, in the collocation of the sentences. Comp. i. 10, if, 
 iii. 19, 32, vi. 70, vii. 4, 26, viii. 20, ix. 30. Our translators have 
 as a rule wisely omitted the 'yet,' leaving S. John's simple constructions 
 to tell their own meaning. Here the 'yet' is almost necessary. 
 
 the Father is with me] 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 in Matt, xxvii. 46. 
 
 s. JOHN 20 
 
3o6 S. JOHN, XVI. [v. 33. 
 
 33 These tilings I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might 
 have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be 
 of good cheer; I have overcome the world. 
 
 33. These things] These farewell discourses. 
 
 might have peace] Better, may have peace. Christ's ministry ends, 
 as His life began, with a message of peace (Luke ii. 14). 
 
 ye shall have] Rather, ye have ; the tribulation has ah-eady begun. 
 
 I have overcome] The pronoun is very emphatic. At the veiy moment 
 when He is face to face with treachery, and disgi-ace, and death, Christ 
 triumphantly claims the victory. Comp. i John ii. 13, 14, v. 4. In 
 His victory His followers conquer also. 
 
 Chap. XVH. The Prayer of the Great High Priest, 
 
 "The prayer which follows the last discourse as its fit crown and 
 conclusion has been designated by an old tradition the Prayer of the 
 High Priest, now about to take upon Him His office, and to offer 
 atonement for the sins of the people." S. p. 235. It 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 mentions 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 im- 
 plies previous prayer. There is an approach to the first portion of this 
 prayer in the thanksgiving in Matt. xi. 25, 26. 
 
 This Oratio Summi Sacerdotis falls naturally into three portions; 
 1. for Himself {\ — z); 2. for thedisciples (6 — 19); 3. forthewhole 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 prayer was spoken aloud {v. i), and thus was not only a prayer, 
 but a source of comfort to those who heard it (p. 13), and by its preser- 
 vation a means of faith and life to all (xx. 31). 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 preserves 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 be- 
 lieving that on the one hand it quite transcends even the beloved dis- 
 ciple'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. "It is urged that 
 the triumphant elevation of this prayer is inconsistent with the Synoptic 
 account of the Agony. But the liability to fluctuations of feeling and 
 emotion is inherent in humanity, and was assumed with His manhood 
 by Him Who was perfect man." S. p. 238. "All human experience 
 bears witness in common life to the naturalness of abrupt transitions 
 from joy to sadness in the contemplation of a supreme trial. The 
 absolute insight and foresight of Christ makes such an alternation even 
 
vv. I, 2.] S. JOHN, XVII. 307 
 
 Chap. XVI I. The Prayer of the Great High Priest. 
 
 I — 5. The Prayer for Himself. 
 
 These ivords spake Jesus, and lift up his eyes to heaven, 17 
 and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy 
 Son also may glorify thee : as thou hast given him power over 2 
 
 more intelligible. He could see, as man cannot do, both the complete- 
 ness of His triumph and the suffering through which it was to be 
 gained." W. p. 237. The three characteristics of the Gospel, sim- 
 plicity, subtlety, and sublimity, reach a climax here. Bengel calls this 
 chapter the simplest in language, the profoundest in meaning, in the 
 whole Bible. 
 
 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. i). 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. i — 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 at- 
 tractive suggestion, that surroundings so rich in meaning would prob- 
 ably have been pointed out by a writer so full of feeling for dramatic 
 contrasts and harmonies as the writer of this Divine Epic (comp. iii. 2, 
 iv. 6, xiii. 30, xviii. 3, 5, 28, 40, xix. 23—27, 31—42). 
 
 1 — 5. The Prayer for Himself. 
 
 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. Theseivords\ More exactly, these things, as in xvi. i, 4, 6, 25, 33. 
 
 lifted up his eyes\ in calm confidence and in the assurance of victory 
 (xvi. 33). The attitude is in marked contrast to His falling on His 
 face in the garden (Matt. xxvi. 39). ' To heaven ' does not prove that 
 He was in the open air: comp. Acts. vii. 55; Luke xviii. 13. 
 
 Fathei'l This is His claim to be heard. Comp. 'Abba, Father' in 
 Mark xiv. 36, and see Lightfoot on Gal. iv. 6. 
 
 the how-\ See on ii. 4 and xii. 27. S. John loves to mark each 
 great crisis in Christ's life; this is the last. 
 
 glorify thy Soii\ By His return to gloiy (z/. 5) through suffering and 
 death. Comp. Phil. ii. 9 — 11. 
 
 that thy Son also may glorifyl By making known the glory of God, 
 through the Son. To make God known is to glorify Him. 'Also' 
 must be omitted, and for * Thy Son ' we ought perhaps to read ' the 
 Son.' 
 
3oS S. JOHN, XVII. [vv. 3,4. 
 
 all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou 
 
 3 hast given him. And this is life eternal, that they might 
 know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou 
 
 4 hast sent. I have glorified thee on the earth : I have finished 
 
 2. As i/tou hast given him power'] Better, Even as TIiou gavest 
 Jlim authority. The authority was given once for all, and is the 
 reason for the petition in. v. i. Comp. v. 27. 
 
 all flcsli] 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 meant; but the Second Adam has do- 
 minion 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 fol- 
 lowing texts 'all flesh' includes the brute creation; Gen. vi. 19, vii. 15, 
 16, 21, viii. 17, ix. II, 15, 16, 17; Ps. cxxxvi. 25; Jer. xxxii. 27, xlv. 5. 
 Once more, therefore, Jewish enclusiveness is condemned. The Mes- 
 siah is King of 'all flesh,' not of the Jews only. 
 
 that he should give, &c.] Literally, in order that all that Thou hast 
 given Him, He should give to them eternal life. 'AH that ' is neuter 
 singidar; 'to them' is masculine plural. Believers are given to Christ 
 as a united whole ; they _eaxn eternal life as individuals. Comp. i. ii, 
 vi. 37. rj'-/<v 
 
 3. And this is life eternal] l\rore exactly. But the life eternal is 
 this. ' The life eternal' means that which has just been mentioned; 
 and 'is this' means ' this is what it consists in:' comp. iii. 19, xv. 12. 
 
 that they might kncnu] Literally, in order that they may recognise; 
 comp. vi. 29, XV. 12; I John iii. ii, 23, v. 3; 2 John 6. The eternal 
 life is spoken of as already present (see on iii. 36, v. 24, vi. 47, 54); 
 hence 'may,' not 'might.' Moreover it is the appropriation of the 
 knowledge that is specially emphasized; hence 'recognise' rather than 
 simply 'know.' Comp. Wisdom xv. 3. 
 
 thee the only true God] i.e. 'Thee as the only true God.' For 
 'true' see note on i. 9 and comp. iv. 23, vi. 32, xv. i : ' the only tnie 
 God ' is directed against the many false, spurious gods of the heathen. 
 This portion of the truth was what the Gentiles so signally failed to 
 recognise. 
 
 Jesns Christ, whom thou hast sent] Better, Him whom Thou didst 
 send — Jesus Christ; or, Jesns as Christ. This portion of the truth 
 the jfezvs 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 expres- 
 sion 'the true God ' is not used elsewhere by Christ and is used by S. 
 John (i John v. 20). We conclude, therefore, that the wording here is 
 the Evangelist's, perhaps abbreviated from the actual words. 
 
vv. 5—7.] S. JOHN, XVII. 309 
 
 the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, 5 
 glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I 
 had with thee before the world was. 
 
 6 — 19. The Prayer for His Disciples. 
 
 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou 6 
 gavest me out of the world : thine they were, and thou gavest 
 them me; and they have kept thy word. Now they have 7 
 
 4. / have glorified^ Better, I glorified. In confident anticipation 
 Christ looks backs from the point when all shall be accomplished, and 
 speaks of the whole work of redemption as one act. Our translators 
 have been very capricious throughout this chapter, rendering aorists as 
 perfects and perfects as aorists. Comp. vv. 6, 8, 18, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26. 
 
 I have finishei{\ According to the right reading, "hdcnn^ Jiiiished ox 
 perfected. This is the way in which God is glorified, the completion 
 of the work of revelation. 
 
 gavest me] Better, liast given Jl/e. Christ did not choose for Him- 
 self. 
 
 to do] Literally, in order that I may do it: this was God's purpose in 
 giving it. It is S. John's favourite particle; comp. v. 36 and see on 
 2'- 3- 
 
 5. And no2v\ When the ministry is completed. 
 
 glorify thou me] The pronouns are placed side by side for emphasis, 
 as in V. 4, where the Greek runs, 'I Thee glorified.' The two verses 
 are parallels; 'I Thee glorified on earth; glorify Me Thou in heaven.' 
 
 zuith thine own self] In fellowship with Thee. The following great 
 truths are contained in these two verses; (i) 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. 
 
 I had] Imperfect tense, implying continual possession. 
 
 6 — 19. The Prayer for His Disciples. 
 
 6 — 8. The basis of the intercession ; — they have received the revela- 
 tion given to them. The intercession itself begins v. 9. 
 
 6. / have manifested] Better, I manifested : see on v. 4 and 
 i. 31.. 
 
 ■which thou gavest] Better, whom Than hast given : in the next 
 clause 'gavest' is right. 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). 
 
 kept thy word] S. John's favourite phrase (see on viii. 51): the 
 notion is that of intent watching. Christ's revelation of Himself and of 
 
3IO S. JOHN, XVII. [vv. 8— II. 
 
 known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of 
 
 8 thee. For I have given unto them the words which thou 
 gavest me; and they have received them, and have known 
 surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed 
 
 9 that thou didst send me. I pray for them : I pray not for 
 the world, but for them which thou hast given me ; for they 
 
 lo are thine. And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and 
 XI I am glorified in them. And now I am no more in the 
 
 the Father is the Father's word (vii. i6, xii. 49); His doctrine as a 
 whole. 
 
 7. they have knoivn'\ Rather, they know: literally, 'they have 
 recognised, come to know.' Comp. v. 42, vi. 69, viii. 52, 55, xiv. 9. 
 
 whatsoever thoji hast given] Both His doctrine and His mission, as 
 the next verse explains. The whole of Christ's work of redemption in 
 word and act was in its origin and still is (present tense) of God. 
 
 8. the zi/ords] Or, the sayings (see on v. 47). This is not the plural 
 of 'word' {logos) inv. 6; but the other noun {rhejnata), the singular of 
 which is not used by S. John. It means the separate utterances as dis- 
 tinct from the doctrine as a whole. 
 
 they have received. . Jiave known . . .have believed^ Better, they received 
 ...recognised. ..believed. See on v. 4. 
 
 came out from] Better, came forth, from (see on xvi. 28). They 
 recognised that His mission was Divine : they believed that He was sent 
 as the Messiah. They had proof of the first point ; the second was a 
 matter of faith. 
 
 9 — 19. The intercession for the disciples based on their need. 
 
 9. I pray for them, &c.] 'L\\.QXz\\y, I am fraying concei-ning them; 
 concerning the world I am not fraying, but concerning them whom, &c. 
 'I,' 'them,' and 'the world' are emphatic. 'For them who have be- 
 lieved I in turn am praying; for the world I am not praying.' On the 
 word here used for 'pray' see on xiv. 16. Of course this verse does not 
 mean that Christ never prays for unbelievers; z^. 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. 
 
 they are thine] Although they have been given to the Son. 
 
 10. all mine are thine] Better, all things that are Mine are Thine. 
 The statement does not refer to persons only, but continues and ampli- 
 fies the reason with which v. 9 concludes; 'Because they are Thine, and 
 all My things are Thine.' There should be no full stop at the end of 
 V. 9. 
 
 thi7ie are mine] Or, the things that are Thine are Mine. The 
 statement is made conversely to insist on the perfect union between the 
 Father and the Son. 
 
 I am glorified] Better, I have been glorified; have been and still 
 am. 
 
 in them] As the vine is glorified in its branches and fruit. They are 
 the vehicles and monuments of the glory. Comp. i Thess. ii. 20. 
 
V. 12.] S. JOHN, XVII. 311 
 
 world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy 
 Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast 
 given me, that they may be one, as we are. White I was u 
 with them in the world, I kept them in thy name : those that 
 thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but 
 the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled. 
 
 11 — 16. In w. 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. 
 
 11. iiii these] Rather, and these. The coupling of the sentences is 
 solemnly simple; 'And now. ..and these. ..and I.' 
 
 Holy Father] The expression occurs nowhere else; but comp. Rev. 
 vi. 10; I John ii. 20; and 'Righteous Father,' v. 25. The epithet 
 agrees with the prayer that God would preserve the disciples from the 
 unholiness of the world (v. 15) in the holiness which Christ had revealed 
 to them and prays the Father to give them {v. 17). 
 
 keep... given] The true reading gives us, keep them in Thy name 
 whicli Thou hast given Me. In any case the Greek here rendered 
 ^through Thy name,' and in v. 12 '/« Thy name,' is the same, and 
 should be translated in the same manner in both verses. Comp. Rev. ii. 
 17, xix. 12, xxii. 4. God has given His name to Christ to reveal to the 
 disciples; and Christ prays that they may be kept true to that revela- 
 tion. On the meaning of 'name' see on i. 12. 
 
 may be one] They had just received a new bond of union. For long 
 there had been oneness of belief. Now they had been made one by 
 union with Jesus; they were one bread and one body, for they had all 
 partaken of the one Bread (i Cor. x. 17). 
 
 as we are] Or, even as we are (comp. v. 2) : in perfect spiritual 
 union conforming to the essential union between the Father and the 
 Son. 
 
 12. in the world] These words are omitted by the best authorities. 
 / kept] Literally, / was keeping: Christ's continual watching over 
 
 His disciples is expressed. 'I' is emphatic, implying 'now that I am 
 leaving them, do Thou keep them. ' 
 
 , 2 have kept] Rather, I guarded : both verb and tense are changed. 
 '< his expresses the protection which is the result of the watching. More- 
 
 !>ver the reading must be changed as in z*. 11; / kept than in Thy name 
 yhich Thou hast given Me ; and I guarded them. 
 ' none of them is lost] Better, not one of them perished. 
 
 the son of perdition] The phrase is used twice only in N. T. ; here of 
 Judas, in 2 Thess. ii. 3 of the 'man of sin.' Comp. 'children of light,' 
 'children of darkness.' Such expressions are common in Hebrew (see on 
 xii. 36). 'Children of perdition' occurs Is. Ivii. 4, 'people of perdition' 
 Ecclus. xvi. 9, and 'son of death' 2 Sam. xii. 5. We cannot here pre- 
 serve the full force of the original, in which 'perish' and 'perdition' are 
 represented by cognate words; 'none perished but the son of perishing.' 
 
312 S. JOHN, XVII. [vv. 13—18. 
 
 13 And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the 
 world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves. 
 
 14 1 have given them thy word ; and the world hath hated them, 
 because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the 
 
 15 world. I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the 
 world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. 
 
 16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. 
 '7 Sanctify them through thy truth : thy word is truth. As thou 
 
 that the scripture] Ps. xli. 9: see onx. 35 and xiii. 18 andcomp. xii. 38. 
 
 13. Attd now come /] Better, But 7iow I come. The conjunction 
 introduces a contrast. Hitherto Christ has been with them watching 
 over them; 'but now' it is so no longer. 
 
 that they might] Better, tliat they may. Christ is praying aloud in 
 order that His words may comfort them when they remember that He 
 Himself consigned them to His Father's keeping. Comp. xi. 4-2. 
 
 my joy] Literally, the joy that is Mine: see on xiv. 27 and xv. 11. 
 
 14. I have given] 'I' in emphatic opposition to the world. 
 
 thy word] The revelation of God as a whole (see on v. 16 and 
 V. 47). 
 
 hath hated] Rather, hated; the aorist expresses the single act of 
 hate in contrast to the perfect, 'I have given' a gift which they continue 
 to possess. These are the two results of discipleship ; on the one side, 
 Christ's protection [v. 12) and the gift of God's word; on the other, the 
 hatred of the world. 
 
 15. I pray not] See on xiv. 16. The nature of the protection is 
 made clear to the listening disciples; not exemption from attack and 
 temptation, but freedom from the permanent influence of the enemy. 
 
 from the evil] Rather, /;w« ^// 6' evil one ; comp. i John ii. 13, iii. 12, 
 and especially v. 18. 'From'= 'out of:' just as Christ is that in which 
 His disciples live and move, so the evil one, 'the ruler of this world' 
 (xii. 31, xvi. 11), is that out ^ which He prays that they may be kept. 
 Thus "the relation of man to good and evil is 0. personal relation;" 
 comp. I John iv. 4. 
 
 16. They are not... world] What was stated in v. 14 as the reason 
 for the world's hatred is repeated here as the introduction to a new and 
 more definite petition; not merely protection, but sanctification. There 
 is a slight change from the order of the words in v. 14; 'Of the world 
 they are not, even as I am not of the world.' In both verses 'I' is 
 emphatic. 
 
 17. Sanctify] Or, consecrate. The word expresses God's destina- 
 tion of them for their work and His endowment of them with the 
 powers necessary for their work. The word is used of God's consecra- 
 tion of Jeremiah, Moses, and the chosen people (Jer. i. 5; Ecclus. xlix. 
 7, xiv. 4; 2 Mac. i. 25). This prayer has been called "the Prayer of 
 Consecration." 
 
 through thy triitJi] Rather, in the truth. 'Thy' is a gloss, rightly 
 explaining the text, but wantinj^in all the best MSS. The Truth is the 
 
vv. 19—21.] S. JOHN, XVII. 313 
 
 hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them 
 into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that 19 
 they also might be sanctified through the truth. 
 
 20 — 26, T/ie Prayer for the 7v/iok Church. 
 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which 20 
 shall believe on me through their word; that they all may be 21 
 
 whole Christian revelation, the new environment in which believers are 
 placed, and which helps to work their sanctification; just as a sickly 
 wild plant is strengthened and changed by transplanting it to a garden. 
 thy zaord] Literally, //le tuord that is Thine, a mode of expression 
 which gives prominence to the adjective. Comp. 'My doctrine is not 
 Mine, but His that sent Me,' vii. 16, The Greek for 'word' is logos, 
 God's revelation as a whole, not any single utterance or collection of 
 utterances. See on v. 47. 
 
 18. As thou hast sent'\ Better, Even as Thou didst send. Comp. x. 
 36. 
 
 eve7t so have I also sent] Better, I also did send. Comp. xx. 2r, 
 XV. 9. The Apostles had already received their commission (Matt. x. 
 5 — 15; Mark vi. 7; Luke ix. 2 — 5), which is about to be renewed. 
 
 19. sanctify] Or, consecrate, as in j/. 17. 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 the word is frequently connected with ' purify ' (2 Cor. vii, 
 I ; Eph. y. 16; 1 Tim. ii. 21; Heb. ix. 13). The radical meaning of the 
 word is not separation, as is sometimes stated, but holiness, which in- 
 volves separation, viz. the being set apart /or God. 
 
 might be sanctified through the truth] Rather, may be sanctified or 
 consecrated in truth. 'In truth ' = in reality and not merely in name 
 or appearance ; the expression is quite distinct from ' in the truth ' in v. 
 I'j. As a Priest consecrated by the Father (x. 36) He consecrates 
 Himself as a Sacrifice (Eph. v. 2), and thereby obtains a real internal 
 consecration for them through the Paraclete (xvi. 7). 
 
 20 — 26. The Prayer for the whole Church. 
 
 20. Neither pray I for these alone] More accurately, But tiot con- 
 cerning these only do I pray (see on xiv. 16). The limitation stated in 
 V. 9 is at an end : through the Church He prays for the world [v. 21). 
 
 ■which shall believe] The true reading gives, who believe. The future 
 body of believers is regarded by anticipation as already in existence : 
 the Apostles are a guarantee and earnest of the Church that is to be. 
 
 on me through their word] Perhaps through their ivord on Me would 
 be better. The order of the Greek insists on the fact that those who 
 believe believe through the Apostles' word. 
 
 21. That they all may be one] This is the purpose rather than the 
 
314 S. JOHN, XVII. [vv. 22, 23. 
 
 one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also 
 may be one in us : that the world may believe that thou hast 
 33 sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given 
 33 them ; that they may be one, even as we are one : I in them, 
 and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and 
 that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast 
 
 purport of the prayer : Christ prays for blessings for His Church with 
 this end in view, — that all may be one. 
 
 as\ Or, even as. The unity of believers is like the unity of the 
 Father witli the Son (x. 30), not a merely moral unity of disposition 
 and purpose, but a vital unity, in which the members share the life of 
 one and the same organism (see on Rom. xii. 4, 5). A mere agreement 
 in opinion and aim would not convince the world. See ox\.v. 11. Omit 
 'art,' which is an insertion of our translators. 
 
 may be one in us\ The balance of authority is against 'one,' which 
 may be an explanatory gloss. In vi. 56 and xv. 4, 5 Christ's followers 
 are said to abide in Him : this is to abide in His Father also. 
 
 hast sent'\ Better, diJst send {comp. v. 18). The eternal unity of be- 
 lievers with one another will produce such external results { ' see how 
 these Christians love one another '), that the world will be induced to 
 believe. Christian unity and love (Matt. vii. 12 ; Luke vi. 31 ; i 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 nature. Hence the divisions and animosities of Christians 
 are a perpetual stumbling-block to the world. 
 
 22. Having prayed for them with a view to their unity. He states 
 what He Himself has done for them ^vith the same end in view. 
 
 gavest\ Better, hast given (see on v. 4). The meaning of this gift 
 of 'glory' seems evident from v. 24; the glory of the ascended and 
 glorified Christ in which believers are 'joint-heirs' with Him (see on 
 Rom. viii. 17). Looking forward with confidence to the issue of the 
 conflict, Christ speaks of this glory as already given back to him {v. 5) 
 and shared with His followers. Comp. xvi, 33. 
 
 23. / in Hum, and thou in me\ And therefore, ' Thou in them and 
 they in Thee.' 
 
 made perfect in one\ Literally, perfected into one; i. e. completed and 
 made one. In the unity the completeness consists. The expression 
 'into one ' occurs elsewhere only xi. 52 (comp. i John v. 8). For 'per- 
 fected' comp. I John ii. 5; iv. 12, 17, 18. 
 
 may knoui] Or, 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. 'Hast sent' and 'hast loved' in both places are literally 
 didst send and didst love; but in the case of the second of the two 
 verbs the English perfect is perhaps the best representative of the 
 
w. 24, 25-] S. JOHN, XVII. 315 
 
 loved them, as thou hast loved me. Father, I will that 24 
 they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where 
 
 1 am; that they may behold ray glory, which thou hast 
 given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of 
 the world. 
 
 25, 26. Summary. 
 
 O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but 35 
 
 Greek aorist. The second 'Thou' in the verse and the last 'Me' 
 are emphatic. 
 
 24. Father\ Comp. vv. r, 5, 11, xi. 41, xii. ■27. The relationship 
 is the ground of the appeal; He knows that His 'will' is one with His 
 Father's. 
 
 I will] Comp. xxi. 22; Matt. viil. 3, xxiii. 37, xxvi. 39; Luke xii. 
 49. He has already granted this by anticipation {v. 22); He wills that 
 this anticipation may be realised. 
 
 theywhoni\ Literally, tbat which; the faithful as a body. See on 
 V. 2. 
 
 'ivhere I ani\ Comp. xiv. 3. 
 
 beholdl In the sense of sharing and enjoying it ; for the faithful 'shall 
 also reign with Him.' 2 Tim. ii. 12. This glory they behold with 
 unveiled face, on which it is reflected as on the face of Moses. See on 
 
 2 Cor. iii. 18 and comp. i John iii. 2. 
 
 my glory\ Literally, the glory which is Mine, a stronger expression 
 than that in z/. 22 : see on xiv. 27. 
 
 which thoii hast given me] Not the gloiy of the Word, the Eternal 
 Son, which was His in His equality with the Father, but the glory of 
 Christ, the Incarnate 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 gloiy that He has given. 
 
 for] Better, because. 
 
 the fojindation of the world] Our Lord thrice uses this expression, 
 here, Luke xi. 50, and Matt. xxv. 34. Two of those who heard it 
 reproduce it (i Pet. i. 20; Rev. xiii. 8, xvii. 8): comp. Eph. i. 4; Heb. 
 iv. 3, ix. 26, xi. II. 
 
 25, 26. Summary. 
 
 25. righteous Father] 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 ? ' 
 
 hath not ktiown] Better, knew not. So also ' have known ' should 
 in both cases be knew, and ' hast sent * should be didst send. The 
 verbs are all aorists. The conjunction kai before ' the world ' may be 
 
3i6 S. JOHN, XVII. [v. 26. 
 
 I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast 
 26 sent me. And I have declared unto them thy name, and 
 will declare //.• that the love where7<y//'// thou hast loved 
 me may be in them, and I in them. 
 
 rendered 'indeed,' meaning 'it is true the world knew Thee not, but 
 yet &c.' Translate; tlie world indeed knew Thee not, but I knew 
 Thee. 
 
 26. have declared... will declare} Better, made known...w2V/inake 
 known. The verb is cognate with that rendered ' know ' in v. 25, and 
 here as there the aorist is used, not the perfect. 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 accom- 
 plished 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 Para- 
 clete has been given, — 'I will make known ' (comp. xiv. 26, xvi. 13). 
 
 ivhere^viih thoii hast loved ine\ In the Greek we have a double accu- 
 sative, as in Eph. ii. 4. ' Hast loved ' should be didst love (see on v. 4) : 
 but possibly this is a case where the English present might be admitted 
 as the best equivalent of the Greek aorist (see on xv. 8). 
 
 viay be in than'] May rule in their hearts as a guiding principle, 
 without which they cannot receive the knowledge here promised ; for 
 *he that loveth not, knoweth not God' (i John iv. 8). 
 
 / in them'] These last words of Christ's Mediatorial Prayer sum up 
 its purpose. They 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). 
 
 Chap. XVIII, 
 
 We enter now upon the second part of the second main division of the 
 Gospel. The Evangelist having given us the inner Glorification 
 OF Christ in His last Discourses (xiii. — xvii.), now sets forth 
 His outer Glorification in His Passion and Death (xviii., xix.). 
 This part, like the former (see introduction to chap, xiii.), may be 
 divided into four. i. The Betrayal (xviii. i — 11); 2. The Jeiuisli, 
 Trial (12 — 27); 3. The Roman Trial (xviii. 28 — xix. 16); 4. The 
 Death and Bnrial (17 — 42). 
 
 " We return once more from discourse to narrative, which preponde- 
 rates in the whole of the remaining portion of the (.jospel. Accordingly 
 as we have found hitherto that in the narrative portions the marks of an 
 eye-witness at once begin to multiply, so here especially they occur 
 in such large amount and in such rapid succession that it appears impos- 
 sible to resist the conviction that from an eye-witness and no one else the 
 account proceeds." S. p. 239. 
 
S. JOHN, XVIII. 317 
 
 Dr Westcott (Spca/.-cr's Commentary, N.T., Vol. il. p. 249) observes; 
 " I. It is a superficial and inadequate treatment of liis narrative to 
 regard it as a historical supplement of tlie other narratives, or of the 
 current oral narrative on which they are based Tlie record is inde- 
 pendent 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 : 
 
 (i) The voluntariness of Christ'' s sufferiiigs ; xviii. 4, 8, 11, 36; 
 xix. 28, 30. 
 
 (2) The fidfilment of a divine plan in Chrisf s sufferings ; xviii. 
 
 4, 9, 11; xix. ii. 24, 28, 36, 37. 
 
 (3) The majesty luhich shines thivitgh Christ'' s siiffei-ings; xviii. 6, 
 
 20 — 23 (comp. Luke xxii. 53), 37; xix. 11, 26, 27, 30. 
 The narrative in this sense becomes a commentary on earlier words 
 which point to the end; (i) x. 17, 18; (2) xiii. i; (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 synoptists. 
 His narrative assumes facts fottnd in them: e.g. xviii. il, 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 centu- 
 rion ; (by S. Matthew atid S. Mark) the desertion by all, examination 
 before the Sanhedrin at night, false witness, adjuration, gr^at Con- 
 fession, mockery after condemnation, cry from Ps. xxii, rending of the 
 veil. 
 
 Other incidents omitted by S. John are recorded by single Evange- 
 lists : [S. Matthew) power over the hosts of heaven, Pilate's wife's mes- 
 sage, Pilate's hand-washing, self-condemnation of the Jews, earthquake; 
 {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), repentance 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. yohn con- 
 stantly adds details, often minute and yet most significant : e. g. xviii. i, 
 2, 10, ir, 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. yohn offer many impressive resemblances as to the spirit and character 
 of the proceedings : e.g. (i) 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, personal influ- 
 ence ; (3) the silence of the Lord in His public accusations, with the 
 
3i8 S. JOHN, XVIII; [vv. i, 2. 
 
 I— II. The Betrayal. 
 
 18 When Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with 
 
 his disciples over the brook Ce .dron, where was a garden, 
 
 2 into the which he entered, and his disciples. Andjjudas 
 
 also, which betrayed him, knew the place : for Jesus ofttini es 
 
 significant exception, Matt. xxvi. 64; (4) the tone of mockery; (5) the 
 character of Pilate." 
 
 1—11. The Betrayal. 
 
 1. he went forth] From the upper room. The same word is used 
 of leaving the room, Matt. xxvi. 30; Mark xiv. 26; Luke xxii. 39. Those 
 Avho suppose that the room is left at xiv. 31 (perhaps for the Temple), 
 interpret this of the departure from the city, which of course it may 
 mean in any case. 
 
 the brook Cedron] Literally, the ravine of the Kedron, or of the 
 cedars, according to the reading, the differences of which are here ex- 
 ceedingly interesting. Of the cedars {tuv Yii^puv) is the reading of the 
 great majority of the authorities ; but of the Kedron {rov KfdpoO or toO 
 Kcdpuip) is well supported. Of the cedars is the reading of the LXX. in 
 
 1 K. XV. 13 and occurs as a various reading 2 S. xv. 23; i K. ii. 37; 
 
 2 K. xxiii. 6, 12. The inference is that both names were current, the 
 Hebrew having given birth to a Greek name of different meaning but 
 very similar sound. Kedron or Kidron= 'black,' and is commonly sup- 
 posed to refer to the dark colour of the water or the gloom of the ravine. 
 But it might possibly refer to the black green of cedar trees, and thus the 
 two names would be united. This detail of their crossing the ' Wady ' 
 of the Kidron is given by S. John alone ; but he gives no indication of 
 a "reference to the history of the flight of David from Absalom and 
 Ahitophel " (2 S. xv. 23). 'Brook' is misleading; the Greek word 
 means 'winter-torrent,' but even in winter there is little water in the 
 Kidron. Neither this word nor the name Kedron occurs elsewhere in 
 N. T. 
 
 a garden"] Or, orchard. S. Matthew and S. Mark give us the name 
 of the enclosure or 'parcel of ground' (John iv. 5) rather than 'place,' 
 of which this 'garden' formed the whole or part. Gethsemane = oil- 
 press, and no doubt olives 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. 
 
 and his disciples'] Literally, Himself atid His disciples, Judas ex- 
 cepted. 
 
 2. which betrayed] Better, who was betraying : he was at that 
 moment at work. Comp. v. 5. 
 
 kneio the place] Therefore Christ did not go thither to hide or escape, 
 
V. 3-1 S. JOHN, XVIII. . 3t9 
 
 resorted thither with hi s^ disciples. Judas then, having 3 
 received a band of men, and officers from the chief priests 
 and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and 
 
 as Celsus scoffingly asserted. Origen {Cels. II. 10) appeals to w. 4 and 
 5 as proving that Jesus deliberately surrendered Himself. 
 
 ofttitnes] Comp. viii. i, and see on Luke xxi. 37, xxii. 39. The 
 owner must have known of these gatherings, and may himself have been 
 a disciple. 
 
 resorted ihitlier'\ Literally, assembled there ; as if these gatherings 
 were for teaching of a more private kind than was given to the 
 multitude. 
 
 3. Jtidas theni Better, Jitdas therefore ; S. John's favourite parti- 
 cle, as '\n.vv. 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 16, 17, 19, 24, 27, 28, 29, 31, 33, 37, 
 40. It was because Judas knew that Jesus often went thither that he 
 came thither to take Him. "Our English version gives little idea of the 
 exactness of the description which-follows." S. p. 241. 
 
 a band of men'] Rather, the band of soldiers. This is one part of 
 the company ; Roman soldiers sent to prevent ' an uproar ' among the 
 thousands of pilgrims assembled to keep the Passover (see on Matt. 
 xxvi. 5). The word for band, speira, seems elsewhere in N. T. to mean 
 'cohort,' the tenth of a legion (Matt, xxvii. 27; Mark xv. 16; Acts x. i, 
 xxi. 31, xxvii. i), and with this Polybius (xi. xxi. i; [xxiii. 1]) agrees. 
 But Polybius sometimes (vi. xxiv. 5, xv. ix. 7, iii. cxiii. 3) appears 
 to use speira for 'maniple,' the third part of a cohort and about 200 
 men. In any case only a portion of the cohort which formed the garri- 
 son 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 oi^c&x 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. 
 
 officers from the chief priests and Pharisees'^ i. e. from the Sanhedrin. 
 These may have been either officers of justice appointed by the Sanhe- 
 drin, 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 (i) Roman soldiers, 
 (2) Jewish officials, (3) chief priests. 
 
 with lanterns and torches^ The ordinary equipment for night duty, 
 which the Paschal full-moon would not render useless. It was possible 
 that dark woods or buildings would have to be searched. The word for 
 ' lantern, '//^3«i?j, occurs here only in N. T. ; and here only is lampas 
 rendered 'torch;' elsewhere either 'light' (Acts xx. 8) or 'lamp' (Matt. 
 XXV. I — 8 ; Rev. iv. 5, viii. 10). ' Torch ' would perhaps be best in all 
 cases, even in Matt. xxv. i — 8, leaving 'lamp' free as the translation of 
 liichnos (v. 35; Matt. v. 15, vi. 22; Mark iv. 21; Luke viii. 16, xi. 33, 
 34, 36, &c.) for which 'light' and 'candle' are either inadequate or 
 misleading. Torches were fed with oil carried in a vessel (Matt, xxv, 4) 
 for the purpose. 
 
S. JOHN, XVIII. [vv. 4—6. 
 
 4 weapons. [Jesus therefore, knowing all iJiings that should 
 come upon him, went forth, and said unto them. Whom 
 
 s seek ye.^ They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus 
 saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed 
 
 6 him, stood with them. As soon then as he had said unto 
 
 4. all things that should come] Better, all the tilings that were 
 coming, 
 
 went forth'] From what? (i) 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 sug- 
 gestions is right; the last is not contradicted by ^'. 26. The kiss of 
 Judas is by some placed here, by others after 7'. 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. 
 
 said] The better reading gives saith. His question perhaps had 
 two objects; to withdraw attention from the disciples [v. 8), and to 
 make His captors realise what they were doing. 
 
 5. Jesus of Nazareth] Or, Jesus the Nazarene (Matt. ii. 23), a 
 rather more contemptuous expression than 'Jesus of Nazareth' (:. 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). 
 
 I am he] The 'he' is not expressed in the Greek: and 'I am' to 
 Jewish ears was the name of Jehovah. We have had the same expres- 
 sion several times in this Gospel (iv. 26), vi. 20, viii. 24, 28, 58, xiii. 13 
 (see notes in each place). 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 miraculously 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. 
 
 which betrayed him, stood] Literally, who was betrajring Him (v. 1), 
 was standing. This tragic detail is impressed on S. John's memor}'. 
 In this as in the lanterns and torches, which he alone mentions, we 
 have the vividness of the eye-witness. S. Luke (xxii. 47) tells us that 
 'Judas, one of the twelve, went before them, and drew near unto Jesus 
 to kiss Him.' Apparently, after having done this, he fell back and 
 rejoined Christ's enemies, standing in the foreground. 
 
 6. As soon the7t as he had said] Better, when therefore (see onp. 3) 
 He said. The Evangelist intimates that what followed was the imme- 
 diate consequence of Christ's words. 
 
 went backward, and fell] Whether this was the natural effect of 
 guilt meeting with absolute innocence, or a supernatural effect wrought 
 
vv. 7— lo.] S. JOHN, XVITI. 321 
 
 them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground. 
 Then asked he them again, Whom seek ye? And they said, 7 
 Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus answered, I have told you that I 8 
 am he: if therefore ye seek me, let these go their way: that 9 
 the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them which 
 thou gavest me have I lost nonej Then Simon Peter 10 
 
 by Christ's will, is a question which we have not the means of deter- 
 mining. 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 Ilis 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. 5 J, where the expression ^legions of angels' may have 
 reference to the fragment of a legion that had come to superintend His 
 capture. 
 
 7. The^t asked he them again] Again therefore (v. 3) //e asked 
 them. Their first onset had been baffled; He Himself therefore gives 
 them another opening. They repeat the terms of their warrant; they 
 have been sent to arrest Jesus the Nazarene. 
 
 8. I have told] Rather, I told. 
 
 let these] At first Jesus had gone forward {v. 4) from His company, 
 as Judas from his. Judas had fallen back on his followers while the 
 disciples followed up and gathered round Christ. Thus the two bands 
 confronted one another. 
 
 9. thott gavest me have I lost] Better, Thou hast given me I lost 
 (see on xvii. 4). The reference is to xvii. 12, and is a strong confirma- 
 tion of the historical truth of chap. xvii. If the prayer were the compo- 
 sition 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 unnatural. The change from ' not one of them perished ' to ' I 
 lost of them not one' brings out more clearly the protective intervention 
 of Christ. 
 
 It does not follow, because S. John gives this interpretation of 
 Christ's words, that therefore they have no other. This was a first ful- 
 filment, 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 (at least for a 
 time) might have been the result, as was actually the case with S. 
 Peter. 
 
 10. Then Simon Peter] Simon Peter therefore (v. 3), because he 
 'saw what would follow ' (Luke xxii. 49). All four Evangelists men- 
 tion this act of violence; S. John alone gives the names. While S. 
 Peter was alive it was only prudent not to mention his name; and prob- 
 ably S. John was the only one who knew (v. 15) the servant's name. 
 S. Peter's impetuous boldness now illustrates his impetuous words 
 xiii. 37 and Mark viii. 32. 
 
 s. JOHN 2 T 
 
322 S. JOHN, XVIII. [vv. II— 13. 
 
 having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, 
 and cut off his right ear. The servant's name_ _ffias_Malchus. 
 ti Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the 
 sheath: t he cup which my Father hath given me, sha ll I 
 not dri nklt F " " 
 
 12 — 27. The Jetvish or Ecclesiastical Trial. 
 
 12 Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews 
 
 13 took Jesus, and bound him, [and led him away to Annas 
 
 haviitg a STvord] Probably one of the two produced in misunder- 
 standing of Christ's words at the end of the supper (Luke xxii. 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. 
 
 Mif high priesfs servant] No doubt he had been prominent in the 
 attack on Jesus, and S. Peter had aimed at his head. S. Luke also 
 mentions that it was the ri^-ht ear that was cut, and he alone mentions 
 the healing, under cover of which S. Peter probably escaped. 
 
 11. TAen said yesus] yesus therefore (v. 3) said. 
 
 the cup] S. John alone gives these words. On the other hand, the 
 Synoptists alone give Christ's prayer in the garden (Matt. xxvi. 39, &c.) 
 to which they obviously refer. Thus the two accounts confirm one 
 another. See on ii. 19. For the metaphor comp. Ps. Ixxv. 8, Ix. 3; 
 Job xxi. 20; Jer. xxv. 15; Rev. xiv, 10, xvi. 19, &c. S. Matthew gives 
 another reason for putting up the sword into its place; 'all they that 
 take the sword shall perish with the sword ' (xxvi, 52). 
 
 12 — 27. The Jewish or Ecclesiastical Trial. 
 
 12. Then the band, and the captain] Therefore (v. 3) the band &c., 
 because of this violent attempt at resistance. The captain or chiliarch 
 is the tribune or chief officer of the Roman cohort. The representa- 
 tions of the hierarchy to the Romans are confirmed by S. Peter's act: 
 Jesus the Nazarene is a dangerous character who stirs up His followers 
 to rebellion ; He must be properly secured and bound. Perhaps also 
 their falling to the ground on meeting Him impressed them with the 
 necessity of using the utmost caution, as with a powerful magician. 
 The whole force is required to secure Him. 
 
 13. to Annas first] Whether Annas was 'chief of the priests 
 (2 K. xxv. r8), or president, or vice-president, of the Sanhedrin, we 
 have no information. Certainly he was one of the most influential 
 members of the hierarchy, as is shewn by his securing the high-priest- 
 hood 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. D. 
 7 — 14, his son Eleazar A. D. 16, Joseph Caiaphas a.d. 18 — 36; after 
 him four sons of Annas held the office, the last of whom, another 
 Annas (a.d. 62), put to death S. James, the first bishop of Jerusalem. 
 The high-priests at this time were often mere non.inees of the civil 
 
vv. 14—16.] S. JOHN, XVIII. 323 
 
 first; for he was father in law to Caiaphas, which was the! 
 high priest that same year. Now Caiaphas was he, which 
 gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one| 
 man should die for the people. 
 
 And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did anotherlis 
 disciple: that disciple was known unto the high priest, and 
 went in with Jesus into the palace of the high priest. But U 
 
 power, and were changed with a rapidity which must have scandalised 
 serious Jews. There were probably five or six deposed high-priests in 
 the Sanhedrin which tried our Lord (see on Luke iii. 2). Other forms 
 of the name Annas are Ananias, Ananus, and Hanan. 
 
 for he was father-in-law'] 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, and the father-in-law having taken the lead which they 
 wanted the high-priest would be compelled to follow. This examina- 
 tion before Annas is given us by S. John only, who tacitly corrects the 
 impression that the examination before Caiaphas was the only one. 
 
 that same year] Omit 'same' and see on xi. 49. Comp. xx. 19 and 
 Mark iv. 35, where ' same ' is improperly inserted, as here. 
 
 14. New Caiaphas was he] See on xi. 50 — 52. The remark is 
 made here to recall the prophecy now so near fulfilment, and perhaps 
 to intimate that with Caiaphas and his father-in-law to direct the trial 
 it could have but one issue. 
 
 16, followed] Or, was following; the descriptive imperfect. 
 
 another disciple] Some good authorities read 'the other disciple,' but 
 the balance is very decidedly in favour of ' awother. ' There is no reason 
 for doubting the almost universal opinion that this 'other' was S. John 
 himself; an opinion which agrees with the Evangelist's habitual reserve 
 about himself (i. 40, xiii. 23 — 25, xix. 26, xx. 2 — 8, xxi. 20 — 24); and 
 also with the fact that S. John frequently accompanies S. Peter (Luke 
 xxii. 8; Acts iii. i, iv. 13, viii. 14). But it must be allowed that the 
 opinion is short of certain ; although the fact that S. John elsewhere 
 designates himself as 'the disciple whom Jesus loved' is in no degree 
 against the identification. Here the description, 'the disciple whom 
 Jesus loved,' would explain nothing and would therefore be out of 
 place (see Introduction, chap. 11. iii. (3) b). S. Augustine, Calvin and 
 others suppose some person otherwise unknown to be meant. Other 
 conjectures are, S. James, the Evangelist's brother, and (strangely 
 enough) Judas Lscariot. 
 
 was known] The nature of this 'acquaintance' (Luke ii. 44, xxiij. 
 49) is nowhere explained. 
 
 the high priest] Caiaphas is probably meant (tjv. 13, 24); but as de- 
 posed high priests still kept the title sometimes (Luke iii. 2 ; Acts iv. 6), 
 it is possible that Annas is intended. 
 
 the palace] Rather, the court or open space in the centre or in front 
 of the house (Luke xxii. 55). The ."iame word is used for the 'sheep- 
 
324 S. JOHN, XVIII. [vv. 17—19- 
 
 1 Peter stood at the door without. Then went out that other 
 
 disciple, which was known unto the high priest, and spake 
 
 17) unto her that kept the door, and brought in Peter. Then 
 
 saith the damsel that kept the door unto Peter, Art not thou 
 
 iSi also one of this man's disciples ? He saith, I am not. And 
 
 Ithe servants and officers stood there, who had made a fire of 
 
 coals; for it was cold: and they warmed themselves: and 
 
 Peter stood with them, and warmed himself. 
 
 19I The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of 
 
 fold' (x. I, 16). It is not improbable that Annas lived in a portion of 
 the official residence of his son-in-law ; but even if this was not the case, 
 it is no violent supposition that Annas conducted a preliminary examina- 
 tion in the house of Caiaphas (see on v. 13). 
 
 16. stooti'\ Or, was standing; the descriptive imperfect again. 
 Comp. w. 5, 15. The details here also indicate the report of an eye- 
 witness. 'At the door tvithout^ seems to indicate that the 'court' was 
 inside rather than in front of the building. 
 
 her that kept the door] Comp. Rhoda, Acts xii. 13. 
 
 17. Then saith the damsel] The damsel therefore {v. 3) saith. 
 
 Art not thou also] Rather, Art thou also (as well as thy companion) 
 or, surely thoii art not: S. Peter's denial is thus, as it were, put into his 
 mouth. See on iv. 29 and comp. iv. 33, vi. 67, vii. 47, ix. 40. In all 
 these passages the form of the question anticipates a negative answer. 
 
 one of this Juan's disciples] Or, one of the disciples of this man. 'This 
 man' and the turn of the sentence are contemptuous. Comp. ix. 16, 24, 
 xi. 47. S. 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. S. Peter, who 'followed afar off' (Lukexxii. 
 54) and that rather out of curiosity 'to seethe end' (Matt. xxvi. 58) than 
 out of love, encountered temptation and fell. 
 
 18. And the servants, &c.] Better, Now the servants and the officers, 
 having made. ..were standing and wanning themselves. The tribune 
 {v. 12) having deposited his prisoner in safety, has withdrawn with his 
 men. Only the Jewish officials remain, joined now by the household 
 servants of the high priests. 
 
 a fire of coals] Charcoal in a brazier, 'to the light' of which (Luke 
 xxii. 56) S. Peter turned. Comp. xxi. 9; Ecclus. xi. 32. 
 
 for it was cold ] Cold nights are exceptional but not uncommon in 
 Palestine in April. Jerusalem stands high. 
 
 and Peter, &c.] Rather, And Peter also was with them, standing 
 and wanning himself, pretending to be indifferent, but restlessly 
 changing his posture. S. Luke says he ^sat to the light.' 
 
 19. The high priest then] Rather, therefore [v. 3), connecting what 
 follows with w. 13, 14. Again we are in doubt as to who is meant by 
 the high-priest (see on v. 15), but it will be safest to consider that 
 Caiaphas is meant throughout. Neither hypothesis is free from difficulty. 
 
vv. 20— 23-] S. JOHN, XVI 1 1. 325 
 
 his doctrine. Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the' 20 
 world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, 
 whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said 
 nothing. Why askest thou me? ask them which heard me, 21 
 what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said. 
 And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which 22 
 stood by stroke Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, 
 Answerest thou the high priest so? Jesus answered him, 23 
 If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well. 
 
 If the high priest here is Caiaphas, the difficully 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. 
 
 of his disciples, &c.] It was hoped that some evidence might be 
 obtained which would be of service in the formal trial that was to 
 follow. 
 
 20. / spake\ The true reading gives, I have spoken. There is a 
 strong emphasis on 'I.' Christ answers no questions about His disciples; 
 He bears the brunt Himself alone. Moreover He seems to contrast the 
 openness of His proceedings with the secrecy of His enemies. 
 
 openly\ See on vii. 4, 26. 
 
 to the world^ Not to a secret society. Comp. viii. ■26. 
 
 in the syiiagogue\ All the best MSS. omit the article; in synagogue, 
 as we say 'in church.' See on vi. 59. 
 
 whither the yews always resort'\ The better reading gives, where all 
 the yews come together. The word rendered 'resort' is not the same 
 as that rendered 'resort' in v. 2. 'I always taught in public places, 
 where all the Jews meet.' Nothing could be more open than His 
 teaching. Comp. Matt. x. 27. 
 
 have /said] Rather, I spake, the aorist of the verb in the first clause, 
 which is in the perfect. See next verse. 
 
 21. which heard] Better, who have heard ; and ' I have said ' should 
 again be I spake. 
 
 they know] Or, these know, as if implying that they were present and 
 ought to be examined. According to Jewish rule witnesses for the de- 
 fence were heard first. 'These' cannot refer to S. Peter and S. John. 
 S. Peter is still outside by the fire. 
 
 22. struck yesiis with the palm of his hand] Literally, gave a blow, 
 and the word for 'blow' (elsewhere xix. 3, Mark xiv. 65 only) etymo- 
 logically means a 'blow with a rod,' but is also used for a 'blow with 
 the open hand.' The word used for 'smite' in v. 23 is slightly in 
 favour of the former : but Matt. v. 39 and Acts xxiii, 2 are in favour' of 
 the latter. 
 
 23. If I have spoken] Rather (as at the end of w. 20, 21), If I 
 spake (comp. xiii. 14, xv. 20). This seems to shew that Christ does not 
 refer, as our version would lead us to suppose, to His answer to the 
 high-priest, but to the teaching about which He is being examined. 
 
326 S. JOHN, XVIII. [vv. 24—26. 
 
 2! why smitest ihou me? Now Annas had sent him bound unto 
 1 Caiaphas the high priest.^ 
 
 25 And Simon Peter stood and warmed himself. They 
 said therefore unto him, Art not thou also one of his 
 
 26 disciples? He denied //, and said, I am not. One of the 
 servants of the high priest, being_^?'j kinsman _whose ear 
 
 He here gives His own illustration of His own precept (Matt. v. 39); 
 to exclude personal retaliation does not exclude calm protest and re- 
 buke. 
 
 24. Now Annas had sent him Sound] The received text, following 
 important authorities, has no conjunction. The Sinaitic MS. and some 
 minor authorities insert 'now' or 'but' (5^). But an overwhelming 
 amount of evidence, including the Vatican MS., gives S. John's favourite 
 particle, therefore (oTiv). Moreover the verb is aorist, not pluperfect. 
 Annas therefore sent Him. It is not necessary to enquire whether the 
 aorist may not virtually be pluperfect in meaning. Even if 'now' were 
 genuine and the remark were an after-thought which ought to have pre- 
 ceded V. 19, the aorist might still be rendered literally, as in Matt. xxvi. 
 48 ('gave them,' not 'had given them a sign'). Comp. Matt. xiv. 
 
 3. 4- . 
 
 But 'therefore shews that the remark is not an after-thought. Be- 
 cause the results of the preliminary investigation before Annas were 
 such (there was a primA facie case, but nothing conclusive), 'Annas 
 therefore sent Him' iox formal trial to Caiaphas, who had apparently 
 been present (see on v. 19) during the previous interrogation and had 
 taken part in it. 
 
 bound'\ He had been bound by the Roman soldiers and Jewish 
 officials when He was arrested (v. 12). This was to prevent escape or 
 rescue. During the examination he would be set free as possibly in- 
 nocent. After the examination He was bound again as presumably 
 guilty, or as before to prevent escape. 
 
 25. And Simon Peter stood and -warmed himself] Better, Now Simon 
 Peter was standing and warming: himself (v. 18). 
 
 They said therefore] The movement in taking Jesus from Annas to 
 Caiaphas once more attracted attention to the stranger by the fire. 
 
 Art not thou also] Rather, Art thou also (see on v. 17). A look of 
 sympathy and distress on S. Peter's face, as His Master appears bound 
 as a criminal, and perhaps with the mark of the blow {v. ■^^) on His 
 face, provokes the exclamation, Surely thou also art not one of His 
 disciples ? 
 
 26. his kins7nan] A kinsman of him. How natural that an 
 acquaintance of the high-priest (v. 15) and 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 S. Luke 
 tells 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 
 
V. 27.] S. JOHN, XVIII. 327 
 
 Peter ciit jjfF, saith, Did not I see thee in the garden with 
 him? Peter then denied again: and immediately ///<? cock 2; 
 crew. 
 
 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. 
 
 Did not I see thee\ 'I' is emphatic ; 'with my own eyes.' 
 
 27. Peter then denied again\ Again therefore (z/. 3) Petef denied ; 
 because he had denied before. S. John, like S. 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 aggrava- 
 tion of his guilt in the current tradition. 
 
 the cock cre^v] Rather, 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 
 (i) 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 S. 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 
 principle to be developed in the future history of the Church, or of 
 S. Peter's Church." Rather, it is part of S. 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 S. 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 
 which the life of the great Exemplar Himself cou/d not afford), is given 
 us with fourfold emphasis, that none may presume and none despair. 
 
 On the difficulties connected with the four accounts of S. Peter's 
 denials see Appendix B. 
 
 28— XIX. 16. The Roman or Civil Trial, 
 
 As already stated, S. 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 
 
328 S. JOHN, XVIII. [v. 28. 
 
 28— XIX. 16. The Roman or Civil Trial. 
 Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of 
 judgment : and it was early; and they themselves went not 
 
 formal meeting of the Sanhedrin after daybreak in the proper place 
 (Matt, xxvii. i; Mark xv. i; 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 [yv. 33 — 38 and xix. 8 — 11). 
 Here also we seem to have the evidence of an eyewitness. We know 
 that S. John foUowed 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 Him into the Procurator's court. 
 
 28. Then led ///ej'] Better, They led therefore {v. 3). S. 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. 
 
 iJie hall of judgment] The margin is better, Pilate'' s house, i.e. the 
 palace. In the original it is praitorion, the Greek form of praetorium. 
 Our translators have varied their rendering of it capriciously: Matt, 
 xxvii. 27, '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 
 praetorium varies according to the context. The word is of military 
 origin; (i) '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 
 I. 75): at Rome. (4) 'the praetorian guard,' the probable meaning in 
 Phil. i. 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. 
 
 S. 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— II. 
 
 28 — 32. Outside the Praetorium ; the Jews claim the execution of 
 the Sanhedrin's sentence of death, and Pilate refuses it. 
 
 early\ The same word, prc'i, is rendered 'morning' Matt. xvi. 3; 
 Mark i. 35, xi. 20, xiii. 35, xv. i ; 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 
 
V. 29.] S. JOHN, XVIII. 329 
 
 into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that 
 they might eat the passover. Pilate then went out unto 
 
 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 a.m. The hierarchy 
 were in a difficulty. Jesus could not safely be arrested by daylight, and 
 the Sanhedrin could not legally pronounce 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 a whole, 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. For a tentative arrangement of the chief events of 
 ihe Passion see Appendix C. 
 
 they themselves\ In contrast with their Victim, whom they sent in 
 under a Roman guard. 
 
 lest they shotdd\ Better, that they might not, omitting 'that they' 
 in the next clause. 
 
 be defiled\ by entering a house not properly cleansed of leaven (Ex. 
 xii. 15). 
 
 eat the passover] It is quite evident that S. John does not regard the 
 Last Supper as a Paschal meal. Comp. xiii. i, 29. It is equally 
 evident that the synoptic narratives convey the impression that the Last 
 Supper was the ordinary Jewish Passover (Matt. xxvi. 17, i8, 19; Mark 
 xiv. 14, 16; Luke xxii. 7, 8, 11, 13, 15). Whatever be the right 
 solution of the difficulty, 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 S. 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. S. John's narrative is too precise and 
 consistent to be explained away. On the difficulty as regards the 
 Synoptists see Appendix A; also Excursus V at the end of Dr Farrar's 
 6". Luke. 
 
 29. Pilate theii\ Pilate therefore (v. 3). Because they would not 
 enter, he went out to them. The Evangelist assumes that his readers 
 know who Pilate is, just as he assumes that they know the Twelve 
 (vi. 67) and Mary Magdalene (xix. 25) ; all are introduced without ex- 
 planation. 
 
 went out] The verb stands first in the Greek for emphasis. The 
 best MS. add 'outside' to make it still more emphatic; we7it out there- 
 
330 S. JOHN, XVIII. [vv. 30—32. 
 
 them, and said. What accusation bring you against this man? 
 
 They answered and said unto him. If he were not a 
 
 malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee. 
 3ilThen said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him 
 
 according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, 
 32! It is not lawful for us to put any man to death: that the 
 
 fore Pilate outside unto them ; as if attention were specialy called to this 
 Roman concession to Jewish religiousness. 
 
 What accusation'] Not that he does not know, but in accordance with 
 strict procedure he demands a formal indictment? 
 
 30. a malefactor] Literally, 'doing evil' or an evil-doer; not the 
 same expression as 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; (i) seditious 
 agitation, (2) forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, (3) assuming the title, 
 'King of the Jews' (Luke xxiii. 3). 
 
 31. Then said Pilate] Pilate therefore (v. 3) said. If they will 
 not make a specific charge, he will not deal with the case. Pilate, im- 
 pressed probably by his wife's dream (Matt, xxvii. 19) tries in various 
 ways to avoid sentencing Jesus to death, (i) He would have the Jews 
 deal with the case themselves; (2) he sends Jesus to Herod ; (3) he pro- 
 poses 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 {z>. 39, xix. 4, 6). 
 
 Take ye, &c. ] Literally, Take him yourselves, and according to your 
 law Judge Him. 'Yourselves' and 'your' are emphatic and slightly 
 contemptuous. The ' therefore ' which follows is wanting in most of 
 the best MSS. 
 
 It is not lawful, &c.] These words are to be taken quite literally, 
 and without 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 ( r) 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. i ; comp. xviil. i. i; 
 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 II.) ; (i) that the Jews quibbled in order to cause Jesus to be 
 crucified at the Feast instead of stoned after all the people had dispersed; 
 
V. 33-] S. JOHN, XVIll. 331 
 
 saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signi- 
 fying what death he should die. Then Pilate entered into 
 the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said vmto , 
 
 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 dominion began 60 years before the 
 destruction of Jerusalem; (3) that Josephus (xx. ix. i) shews that the 
 Jews had this power : Ananus is 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 Stephen, those 
 for whose death S. Paul voted (Acts xxvi. 10), and the Apostles, whom 
 the Sanhedrin wished to put to death (Acts v. 33); and Gamaliel in dis- 
 suading the council never hints that to inflict death will bring trouble 
 upon themselves. To this it may be replied again; (i) 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 plain- 
 tiffs ; (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. Stephen's death (if judicial 
 at all) and the other cases (comp. John v. 18, vii. i, 25, viii. 37, 59; 
 Acts xxi. 31) only prove that the Jews sometimes ventured on acts of 
 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. 
 
 32. the saying\ Or word, xii. 32 ; Matt. xx. 19. 
 
 what death] Rather, by what maimer of death, as in xii. 33 and 
 xxi. 19. So in x. 32 the Greek means 'for what kind of a work,' not 
 merely 'for which work.' Comp. Matt. xxi. 23; xxii. 36; Luke vi. 32, 
 xxiv. 19. Had the Sanhedrin executed Him as a blasphemer or a false 
 prophet. He would have been stoned. The Jews had other forms of 
 capital punishment, but crucifixion was not among them. 
 
 33 — 37. Inside the Praetorium; Jesus is privately examined by Pilate 
 and makes 'a good confession ' (i Tim. vi. 13). 
 
 33. Then Pilate'] Pilate therefore {v. 3). Because of the impor- 
 tunity of the Jews Pilate is obliged to investigate further ; and being 
 only Procurator, although cum potestate, has no Quaestor, but conducts 
 the examination himself 
 
 called Jesus] Probably the Roman guards had already brought Him 
 inside the Praetorium : Pilate now calls Him before the judgment-seat. 
 
332 S. JOHN, XVIII. [vv. 34—37. 
 
 {34 him, Art thou the King of the Jews ? Jesus answered him, 
 i Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell // thee of 
 '33 me? Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and 
 I the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast 
 1 36 thou done ? Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this 
 I world : if my kingdom were of this world, then would my 
 servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: 
 j7 but now is my kingdom not from hence.JI Pilate therefore 
 
 The conversation implies that Jesus had not heard the previous conver- 
 sation with the Jews. 
 
 Art thoii the King of the yews?] In all four Gospels these are the 
 first words of Pilate to Jesus, and in all four there is an empliasis on 
 'Thou.' The pitiable appearance of Jesus was in such contrast to the 
 royal title that Pilate speaks with a tone of surprise (comp. iv. 12). The 
 question may mean either 'Dost Thou claim to be King?' or, 'Art 
 Thou the so-called King?' The royal title first appears in the mouth 
 of the wise men, Matt. ii. i, next in the mouth of Pilate. 
 
 34. answered him] Omit 'him:' the introductions to vv. 34, 35, 
 36 are alike in form and are solemn in their brevity. The Synoptists 
 give merely a portion of the reply in v. 37. 
 
 teit it thee] ' It ' is not in the original and need not be supplied. Jesus 
 claims a right to know the author of the charge. Moreover the mean- 
 ing of the title, and therefore the truth of it, would depend on the 
 person who used it. In Pilate's sense He was not King; in another 
 sense He was. 
 
 35. Am la Jeivl] 'Is it likely that I, a Roman governor, have any 
 interest in these Jewish questions? ' 
 
 have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?] Better, delivered 
 Thee unto me : what didst Thou do to make Thine own people turn 
 against Thee? 
 
 36. My kingdom] There is a strong emphasis on 'My' throughout 
 the verse; 'the kingdom that is Mine, the servants that are Mine;' 
 i.e. those that are truly such (see on xiv. i-j). The word for 'servants' 
 here is the same as is rendered 'officers' in w. 3, \i, 18, 22, vii. 
 32, 45, 46 (comp. Matt. v. 25), and no doubt contains an allusion to 
 the officials of the Jewish hierarchy. In Luke i. 2, the only other place 
 in the Gospels where the word is used of Christians, it is rendered 
 'ministers,' as also in i Cor. iv. i, the only place where the word occurs 
 in the Epistles. Comp. Acts xiii. 5. 
 
 is not of this world] Has not its origin or root there so as to draw its 
 power from thence. Comp. viii. 23, xv. 19, xvii. 14, 16. 
 
 if my kingdom] In the original the order is impressively reversed ; if 
 of this world were My kingdom. For the construction comp. v. 46. 
 
 fight] Better, be striving (comp. Luke xiii. 24; i Cor. ix. 25). For 
 the construction comp. v. 46, viii. 19, 42, ix. 41, xv. 19. 
 
 but now] The meaning of 'now' is clear from the context and also 
 
V. 37-] S. JOHN, XVIII. 333 
 
 said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou 
 sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for 
 this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness 
 unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my 
 
 from viii. 40, ix. 41, xv. 23, 24, 'as it is/ 'as the case really stands.' 
 It does not mean ' My kingdom is not of this world now, but shall be so 
 hereafter ; ' as if Christ were promising a millenium. 
 
 37. Ari thou a king thett] The Greek for 'then' [oukotm) occurs here 
 only in N. T. The 'Thou' is even more emphatic than in v. 33. The 
 two together give a tone of scorn to the question, which is half an ex- 
 clamation. 'So then, 7%^?< art a king ! ' Comp. i. ■21. 
 
 Thozt sayest that, &c.] This may be rendered, Thou sayest (truly); 
 because, &c. But the A. V. is better : Christ leaves the title and ex- 
 plains the nature of His kingdom — the realm of truth. 
 
 To this eftd... for this cause] The Greek for both is the same, and 
 should be rendered in the same way in EngUsh ; to this end. Both 
 refer to what precedes; not one to what precedes and one to what 
 follows. To be a king, He became incarnate ; to be a king, He entered 
 the world. 
 
 was I bom... came /] Better, have I been born... am I come. Both 
 verbs are perfects and express not merely a past event but one which 
 continues in its effects ; Christ has come and remains in the world. The 
 pronoun is very emphatic; in this respect Christ stands alone among 
 men. The verbs point to His previous existence with the Father, al- 
 though Pilate would not see this. The expression 'come into the world' 
 is frequent in S. John (i. 9, ix. 39, xi. 27, xvi. 28) : as applied to Christ 
 it includes the notion of His mission (iii. 17, x. 36, xii. 47, 49, xvii. 18). 
 that I should] This is the Divine purpose of His royal power. 
 bear witness unto the truth] Not merely 'witness the truth,' i. e. give 
 a testimony that is true, but bear witness to the objective reahty 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,' i.e. in 
 support and defence of the Truth (v. 33). Both these expressions, 'wit- 
 ness' and 'truth,' have been seen to be very frequent in S. John (see 
 especially chaps, i. iii. v. viii. 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 Epistles (James i, 
 18; I Pet. i. 22; 2 Pet. ii. 2) and in S. Paul (2 Thess. ii. 12; 2 Cor. 
 xiii. 8 ; Eph. i. 13, &c). It is specially characteristic of the Gospel and 
 Epistles of S. John." Westcott, Introduction to S. John, p. xUv. " 
 
 that is of the truth] That has his root in it, so as to draw the power 
 of his Hfe from it. Comp. v. 36, iii. 31, viii. 47, and especially i John 
 ii. 21, iii. 19. 
 
 " It is of great interest to compare this confession before Pilate with 
 the corresponding confession before the high priest (Matt, xxvi. 64). 
 
334 • S. JOHN, XVIII. [w. 38, 39- 
 
 38 voice. Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when 
 he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and 
 
 39 saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all. But ye 
 have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the 
 
 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 manifestation of glory, the other of a present 
 
 manifestation of truth It is obvious how completely they answer 
 
 severally to the circumstances of the two occasions." Westcott, in loco. 
 
 38. What is truth?'] 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 of 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 brings the investigation to a close 
 with a question, which to his mind cuts at the root of the Prisoner's 
 aspirations. Here probably we must insert the sending to Herod Anti- 
 pas, 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 in honour of the feast : the Jews prefer 
 Barabbas. 
 
 38. unto the Jews] 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 
 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, 1 1 ) 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. 
 
 I find in him no fault at aW] Rather, I find no grround of accusa- 
 tion in him. As in xix. 6, ihe pronoun is emphatic; 'I, the Roman 
 judge, in contrast to you Jewish fanatics.' The word here and xix. 4, 6 
 rendered 'fault' (aitia) is rendered 'accusation' Matt, xxvii. 37 and 
 Mark xv. 26, and 'cause' Acts xiii. 28, xxviii. 18. In all these pas- 
 sages it seems to mean 'legal ground for prosecution.' 
 
 39. ;ye have a custom] Nothing is known of this custom beyond 
 what is told us in the Gospels. Prisoners were sometimes released at 
 Rome at certain festivals, and it would be quite in harmony with the 
 
w. 40.] S. JOHN, XVIII. 335 
 
 passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King 
 of the Jews? Then cried they all again, saying, Not this 40 
 man. but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber. 
 
 conciliatory 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 ; ' of necessity he must ;' but the verse is of very doubtful 
 genuineness. 
 
 that I should\ lAiexzWy, in order that I should. See on xv. 12. 
 
 the King of the jfews] Expressive of scornful contempt. Comp. 
 xix. 15. 
 
 40. Then cried they all again'] Better, They cried out therefore 
 (v. 3) again all of them. S. John has not mentioned any previous shout 
 of the multitude; he once more assumes that his readers know the chief 
 facts. See on xix. 6. 
 
 Barabbas'] Or, Bar-Abbas, son of Abba (father). The innocent Son 
 of the Father is rejected for the blood-stained son of a father. In 
 Matt, xxvii. r6 and 17 some inferior authorities read 'yesus Barabbas' 
 as his name, and Pilate asks ' Which do ye wish that I release to 
 you, Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus Who is called Christ?' The reading is 
 remarkable, but it is supported by no good MS. 
 
 Now Barabbas was a robber] There is a tragic impressiveness in this 
 brief remark. Comp. 'Jesus wept' (xi. 35), and 'And it was night' 
 (xiii. 30). It is to be regretted that 'robber' has not always been given 
 as the translation of the Greek word used here (Xr^ffTiys not K\iirTr)s). 
 Thus we should have 'den of robbers' or ' robbers' cave' (Matt. xxi. 13) ; 'as 
 against a robber' (Matt. xxvi. 55) ; ' two robbers' (Matt, xxvii. 38, 44). The 
 'robber ' is the bandit or brigand, who is more dangerous to persons than 
 to property, and sometimes combines something of chivalry with his vio- 
 lence. In the case of Barabbas we know from S. 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 sym- 
 pathy 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 dangerous character ; their 
 real complaint against Him was precisely this, that He was not danger- 
 ous. 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. 
 
336 S. JOHN, XIX. [vv. 1—3. 
 
 Chap. XIX. 
 19 Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged hi77i. (^And 
 ! the soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put // on his head, 
 j and they put on him a purple robe, and said, Hail, King of 
 
 Chap. XIX. 
 1 — 3. Inside the Praetorhun ; the scourging and mockery by the 
 soldiers. 
 
 1. Then Pilate therefore'] Because the attempt to release Him in 
 honour of the Feast had failed, Pilate now 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 improb- 
 able. 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 have survived a Roman 
 scourging twice in one day. One infliction was sometimes fatal; ille 
 flagellis ad mortem caesus, Hor. S. I. ii. 41. Comp. ' horribile flagdlum' 
 S. I. iii. 119. 
 
 2. And the soldiers] 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 satisfying 
 Jewish hatred with something less than death. The soldiers had in- 
 flicted the scourging; for Pilate, being only Procurator, would have no 
 lictors. 
 
 a craivn of thorns'] The context seems to shew that this was in 
 mockery of a royal crown rather than of a victor's wreath. The plant 
 is supposed to be the thorny 7idbk, with flexible branches, and leaves 
 like ivy, abundant in the Jordan valley and round about Jerusalem. 
 
 a piirple robe] S. Mark has 'purple,' S. Matthew 'scarlet,' S. Luke 
 is silent. ' Purple' with the ancients was a vague term for bright rich 
 colour and would be used of crimson as well as of violet. The robe was 
 a military chlamys, or pahtdamentum, perhaps one of Pilate's cast-off 
 cloaks. The garment in which Herod had mocked Jesus was probably 
 white. Comp. i Mace. viii. 14, x. 20, 62. The scourging and 
 mockery were very possibly visible to the Jews outside. 
 
 3. And said] The best authorities add a graphic touch not given 
 by the Synoptists ; and they kept coming unto Him and sajrlng. We 
 see each soldier coming up in turn to off'er his mock homage. 
 
 Hail, King of the Jews] Like the Procurator, they mock the Jews 
 as well as their Victim. 
 
vv. 4—6.] S. JOHN, XIX. ss7 
 
 the Jews : and they smote him with their hands. Pilate 
 therefore went forth again, and saith unto them, Behold, I 
 bring him forth to you, that ye may know that I find no 
 fault in him. Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of sj 
 thorns, and the purple robejl And Pilate saith unto them. 
 Behold the man. When the chief priests therefore and 6 
 officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify 
 him. Pilate saith unto them. Take ye him, and crucify 
 
 smote him with their hands] Literally, gave Him blows, but 
 whether with a rod, as the root of the word implies, or with the hand, 
 as is more probable, we are uncertain (see on xviii. 22). The old 
 Latin version adds infaciem. 
 
 4 — 7. Outside the Praetorium ; Pilate's appeal, ' Behold the man ;' 
 the Jews' rejoinder, 'He made Himself Soti of God.^ 
 
 4. Pilate tha-efore\ The true text gives, and Pilate, What follows 
 is a continuance rather than a consequence of what has preceded. 
 
 I fiiid no fault in him'] There is a slight change from xix. 38, the 
 emphasis here being on ' crime ' instead of on ' I' ; ground of accusa- 
 tion I find none in Him. 
 
 5. Then came Jcsus] Better, yesus therefore came. The Evange- 
 list repeats the details of v. 2; they are details of a picture deeply 
 imprinted on his memory. Whether or no he went into the Praetorium, 
 he no doubt witnessed the Ecce Hotno. 
 
 wearing] Not simply 'having' or 'bearing' (fhordn not pherSn). 
 The crown and robe are now His permanent dress. 
 
 Behold the manl] In pity rather than contempt. Pilate appeals to 
 their humanity : surely the most bitter among them will now be satisfied, 
 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 (z/. 14). 
 
 6. and officers] Better (as in xviii. 18), and the officers. 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. 
 
 cried out] The verb (kraugazo) expresses a loud cry, and (excepting 
 Matt. xii. 19; Acts xxii. 23) occurs only in this Gospel in N. T. Comp. 
 xi. 43, xii. 13, xviii. 40, xix. 12, 15. 
 
 Crucify him] Omit the pronoun, which is not in the Greek. The 
 simple imperative better expresses the cry which was to give the cue to 
 the multitude. According to all four Evangelists the demand for cruci-, 
 fixion was not made at first, but after the offer to release Jesus in 
 honour of the Feast. 
 
 Take ye him] Better, 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 he knew that they 
 dare not follow ; but there is nothing so improbable in it as to compel 
 
 S. JOHN 22 
 
338 S. JOHN, XIX, [vv. 7— ii. 
 
 7 him: for 1 find no fault in him. The Jews answered him, 
 We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he 
 made himself the Son of God. 
 
 8 When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he was the 
 i 9 more afraid ;£and went again into the judgment hall, and 
 
 saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou ? But Jesus gave him no 
 10 answer. Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not 
 
 unto me.? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify 
 In thee, and have power to release thee?jjesus answered, Thou 
 
 us to believe that the Jews had the power of inflicting capital punishment 
 (see on xviii. 31). Pilate is goaded into an exhibition of feeling un- 
 worthy of his office. 
 
 for I finc{\ As in xviii. 38, the 'I' is emphatic; 'for / do not find 
 in Him a ground of accusation.' 
 
 7. We have a lmi<\ 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 nationalities. He has challenged them 
 to take the law into their own hands ; let him hear what their law is. 
 
 by our /aw] Rather, according to the law ; 'of us' is not genuine. 
 They refer to Lev. xxiv. 16. 
 
 the Son of God] Omit 'the.' Pilate had said, 'Behold the yJ/aw.'' 
 The Jews retort, ' He made Himself Son of God.'' Comp. v. 18, x. 33. 
 They answer his appeal to their compassion by an appeal to his fears. 
 
 8 — 11. Inside the Praetoriuin ; Christ's origin is asked and not told; 
 the origin of authority is told unasked. 
 
 8. that saying] Better, tliis word {logos), the charge of blasphemy. 
 he was the more afraid] 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. judg?nent-hair] See on xviii. 28. 
 
 Whence art thou?] Pilate tries a vague question which might apply 
 to Christ's dwelling-place, which he already knew (Luke xxiii. 6), 
 hoping for an answer as to His origin. Would the prisoner assert his 
 mysterious claim to him, or explain it ? 
 
 no answer] Pilate could not have understood the answer; and what 
 had it to do with the merits of the case? Comp. Matt, xxvii. 12 — 14 
 and Christ's own precept, Matt. vii. 6. 
 
 10. Then saith, &c. ] Better, Pilate therefore saith to Hint, To me 
 Speakest thou not? Whatever He might do before His Jewish persecu- 
 tors, it was folly to refuse an answer to the Roman governor. 
 
 power] Or, authority. See on i. 12 and comp. v. 27, x. 18, 
 xvii. 2. In the best texts ' to release ' is placed first, ' to crucify ' 
 second. 
 
V. 12.] S. JOHN, XIX. 339 
 
 couldest have no power at all against me, except it were 
 given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto 
 thee hath the greater sin._} Atid from thenceforth Pilate 12 
 sought to release him : but the Jews cried out, saying, If 
 thou let this man go, thou art not Cesar's friend : whoso- 
 
 11. Thou couldesi\ Or, wouldest. This is Christ's last word to 
 Pilate ; a defence of the supremacy of God, and a protest against the 
 claim of any human potentate to be irresponsible. 
 
 from above] i. e. from God. This even Pilate could understand : 
 had Jesus said 'from My Father' 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 
 meaning here. Rather, that the possession and exercise of all authority 
 is the gift of God; iii. 27; Rom. xiii. i — 7 (see notes there). To in- 
 terpret ' from above ' of the higher tribunal of the Sanhedrin is quite 
 inadequate. Comp. iii. 3, 7, 31; James i. 17, iii. 15, 17, where the 
 same adverb, andthen, is used : see notes in each place. 
 
 therefore] Better, for this cause (xii. 18, 27); comp. i. 31, v. 16, 18, 
 vii. 22, viii. 47. 
 
 he that delivered me unto thee] Caiaphas, the representative of the 
 Sanhedrin and of the nation. The expression rendered 'he that de- 
 livered' is used in xiii. 11, xviii. 2, 5 of Judas. But the addition 'to 
 thee' shews that Judas is not meant; Judas had not betrayed Jesus to 
 Pilate but to the Sanhedrin. The same verb is used of the Sanhedrin 
 delivering Him to Pilate, xviii. 35. 
 
 hath the greater sin] Because he had the opportunity of knowing 
 Who Tesus was. Once more we have the expression, peculiar to S. 
 John, 'to have sin' (ix. 41, xv. 22, 24; i John i. 8). 
 
 12 — 16. Outside the Praetoritim; the power from above controlled 
 from below pronounces public sentence against the Innocent. 
 
 12. And from thenceforth] Or (as in vi. 66), Hereupon. Result 
 rather than time seems to be meant ; but the Greek (here and vi. 6() only 
 in N.T.) may mean either. Omit 'and.' 
 
 sought] Imperfect tense, of continued efforts. Indirect means, such 
 as the release in honour of the Feast, the appeal to compassion, and 
 taunts having proved unsuccessful, Pilate now makes more direct efforts 
 to release Jesus. What these were the Evangelist does not tell us. 
 
 If thou let this man go] Better, If thou release this man; it is the 
 same verb as in the first clause. 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. 
 
 Cesar^ s friend] Whether or no there was any such title of honour 
 
340 S. JOHN, XIX. [vv. 13, 14. 
 
 t3 ever maketh himself a king speaketh against Cesar. When 
 Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, 
 and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called 
 
 14 the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha. And it was 
 
 as amicus Cesaris, like our 'Queen's Counsel,' there is no need to sup- 
 pose that any formal official distinction is intended here. The words 
 probably mean no more than ' loyal to Cesar. ' 
 
 wkosoevci-] Literally, every one who. 
 
 maketh himself] Comp. v. 7, x. 33. The phrase perhaps implies 
 action as well as words. 
 
 speaketh against Caesar] ipso facto declares himself a rebel ; and for a 
 Roman governor to countenance and even protect such a person would 
 be high treason (ma/estas). The Jews perhaps scarcely knew how 
 powerful their weapon was. Pilate's patron Sejanus (executed a.d. 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 cha- 
 racter therefore would not stand high with an Emperor who justly 
 prided himself on the good government of the provinces. Above all, 
 the terrible Lex Majcstatis was by this time worked in such a way that 
 prosecution under it was almost certain death. 
 
 13. that sayitig] The better reading gives, these words. Pilate's 
 mind seems to be made up at once. 
 
 brought Jesus forth] 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, f. 
 II. ix. 3, xiv, 8). 
 
 sat down] The Greek verb {kathizo) may be either transitive, as in 
 r Cor. vi. 4; Eph. i. 20, or intransitive, as in Matt. xix. 28; xxv. 31. 
 If it is transitive here, the meaning will be, 'placed him on a seat,' as 
 an illustration of his mocking exclamation, 'IJehold your King!' — i.e. 
 'There He sits enthroned ! But [viii. 2 ;] xii. 14; Rev. iii. 21, xx. 4, 
 the only places where S. John uses the word, and Acts xii. 21, xxv. 6, 
 1 7, where we have the same phrase as here, are against the transitive 
 meaning in this place. 
 
 in the judgment seat] In the true text there is no article,^ which may 
 mean that it was not the usual Bema but a temporary one. Every 
 where else in N. T. 'judgment seat' has the definite article. 
 
 Pavemetit] Literally, stone-paved. 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. 
 
 in the Hebrew, Gabbatha] Omit 'the,' as in v. 10, and see on xx. J 6. 
 It was, we may conclude "from its having a Hebrew name, a fixed 
 spot, and not the portable mosaic work which Roman generals some- 
 times carried about with them." S. p. 250. The fact that there was 
 a fixed pavement supports this view; but Gabbatha { = Gab Baitha) 
 means 'the ridge of the House' i.e. 'the Temple-mound,' and refers to 
 the shape of the ground (like a back), not to the pavement upon it. 
 
V. 14-] S. JOHN, XIX. 341 
 
 the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour : 
 
 14. the preparation] i.e. the day before the Passover, the 'eve.' Sec 
 Appendix A. 
 
 and about the sixth hour'] The best MS S. have 'it was' for 'and;' 
 it was about the sixth hour. In two abrupt sentences S. 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 diflficult to believe that he can be 
 utterly mistaken about both. The question of the day is discussed 
 elsewhere (Appendix A) ; the question as to the hour remains. 
 
 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 S. John reckons the hours of the day as we do, from midnight 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 Romans 
 and Greeks, as well as the yews, counted their hours prom sunrise. Mar- 
 tial, who goes through the day hour by hour (iv. 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. (Comp. Pliny Nat. Hist. 11. 
 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. 1 9) he speaks of 
 the evening of Easter Day as 'the same dzy 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 mid- 
 night. 
 
 But there is some evidence of a custom of reckoning the hours from 
 midnight in Asia Minor. Polycarp was martyred 'at the eighth hour' 
 {Mart. Pol. XXI.), 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 lo.o A.iV. 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 conjunctio^t 
 with the day. To cite the words of St Augustine, but with the correct 
 rendering of Paraskeue, ' 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 
 Friday of the Passover; it was about the Sixth hour.^ Hence in the 
 straightforward sense of the words, the sixth hour that he means is the 
 sixtli hour of the Friday; and so it is rendered in the Thebaic Version. 
 
342 S. JOHN, XIX. [w. 15, 16. 
 
 15 and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King. But they 
 cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. 
 Pilate saith unto them. Shall I crucify your King? The 
 
 .6 chief priests answered. We have no king but Cesar. Then 
 delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified. 
 And they took Jesus, and led him away. 
 
 But Friday in S. John is the name of the whole Roman civil day, and 
 the Roman civil days are reckoned from midnight." N^ew Test. I. 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. If, however, the mode of reckoning in both 
 Gospels be the same, the preference in point of accuracy must be given 
 to the Evangelist who stood by the cross. 
 
 Behold your JCing.'\ Like the title on the cross and unlike the "Ecce 
 Homo,'' 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. 
 
 15. But they'] The true text gives. They therefore, with the pronoun 
 of opposition [ekeinoi) in harmony with their cry. They will have no- 
 thing to do with such a king. 
 
 Shall 7] Or, must /. There is a strong emphasis on ' King, ' which 
 stands first in the original. Pilate begins (xviii. 33) and ends with the 
 same idea, the one dangerous item in the indictment, the claim of Jesus 
 to be King of the Jews. 
 
 The chief priests'] This depth of degradation was 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. 
 
 16. Then delivered he, 8lc.] Better, Then fiiQrefore delivered he, &.C. 
 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 crucified'' by Roman 
 soldiers ; not that they might crucify Him themselves. 
 
 And they took] The best authorities give. They VCL'Steldx^ took. The 
 word for 'took' should rather be rendered received, as in the only other 
 places in which it occurs in this Gospel, i. 11, xiv. 3. It means to 
 'accept what is offered, receive from the hands of another.' A com- 
 parison of the three texts is instructive. The eternal Son is given by 
 the Father, comes to his own inheritance, and His own people received 
 Him not (i. 11). The Incarnate Son is given up by Pilate to His own 
 people, and they received Him to crucify Him (xix. 16). The glorified 
 
vv. 17, 18.] S. JOHN, XIX. 343 
 
 17 — 42. The Death and Burial. 
 17 — 22. The Crucifixion and the Title on the Cross. 
 
 And he bearing his cross went forth into a place called i? 
 the place oi a. skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha: 
 where they crucified him, and two other with him, on either 18 
 
 Son comes again to His own people, to receive them unto Himself 
 (xiv. 3). 
 
 and led him away] These words are of very doubtful authority. 
 
 17 — 42. The Death and Burial. 
 
 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 of which the second and 
 fourth contain a marked dramatic contrast, such as S. John loves to 
 point out : — 
 
 (i) 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) T/ie hostile and the friendly petitions ( 3 1 — 42 ). 
 
 17—22. The Crucifixion and the Title on the Cross. 
 
 17. bearing his cross] The better reading gives, bearing the cross 
 for Himself. S. 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. 
 
 went forth] "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. i). 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 therefore some claim to be considered as that of the Cruci- 
 fixion. 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 mi^ht 
 naturally be selected for a place of public execution." Conder, I/and- 
 book to the Bible, pp. 356, 7. 
 
 of a skull] Probably on account of its shape. It would be contrary 
 to Jewish law to leave skulls unburied ; and if this were the meaning of 
 the name we should expect 'of skulls' rather than 'of a skull.' 
 
 18. two other] Robbers or bandits (not 'thieves'), as S. Matthew 
 
344 S. JOHN, XIX. [vv. 19—21. 
 
 19 side one, and Jesus in the midst. And Pilate wrote 
 a title, and put // on the cross. And the writing was, 
 JESUS Q H NAZARE TH THE KING OF THE JEWS. 
 
 20 This title then read many of the Jews : for the place where 
 Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and ^t ^\vas ygt^eq in 
 
 |2i Hebr^w^ anr ;^ C\r^.e}r ,^^fj^\.^t\n £Then said the chief priests 
 i of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, The King of the Jews ; 
 
 and S. Mark call them, probably guilty of the same crimes as Barabbas 
 (see on xviii. 40). Jesus is crucified with them as being condemned 
 under a similar charge of sedition and treason. 
 
 Jesus in the midst'\ Here also we seem to have a tragic contrast 
 — the Christ between two criminals. It is the place of honour mock- 
 ingly given to Him as King. 
 
 19. a tUle\ Better, a title also. It was common to put on the cross 
 the name and crime of the person executed, after making him carry it 
 round his neck to the place of execution. S. John alone tells us that 
 Pilate wrote the title himself. The meaning of the 'also' is not quite 
 clear; perhaps it looks back to v. 16. S. John uses the Latin term, 
 titulus, in a Greek form, titlos. S. Matthew has 'His indictment' 
 (xxvii. 37); S. Mark, 'the inscription of His indictment' (xv. 26); 
 S. Luke, 'an inscription' (xxiii. 38). 
 
 the ivriting ■was'\ Literally, there was written (see on ii. 17). The 
 other three give the inscription thus; — S. Matthew, 'This is Jesus the 
 King of the Jews ; ' S. Mark, 'The King of the Jews;' S. Luke, 'This 
 is the King of the Jews.' 
 
 20. nigh to the city\ Pictures are often misleading in placing the city 
 a mile or two in the background of the Crucifixion. S. John's exact 
 topographical knowledge comes out again here. 
 
 in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin] The better texts give, In Hebre'M 
 and In Latin and in Greek. The national and the 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.' (See on xx. 16.) 
 
 21. Thett said] Better, said therefore. Now that they have wrung 
 what they wanted out of Pilate they see that in granting it he has in- 
 sulted them publicly before the thousands present at the Passover, and 
 in a way not easy to resent. 
 
 the chief priests of the Je7vs] 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 Hif being called 'the King 
 of the yeivs.' 
 
vv. 22— 24-] S. JOHN, XIX. 345 
 
 but that he said, I am King of the Jews. Pilate answered,! 22 
 What I have written I have written.J 
 
 23 — 27. The four Ene?nies and the four Friends. 
 Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his 73 
 garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part ; and 
 also his coat : now the coat was without seam, woven from 
 the top throughout. They said therefore among themselves, 2^ 
 Let us not rent it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be : 
 that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They 
 parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture 
 
 22. Pilate annvered'] His answer illustrates the mixture of obstinacy 
 and relentlessness, which Philo says was characteristic of him. His 
 own interests are not at stake, so he will have his way : where he had 
 anything to fear or to gain he could be supple enough. A shrewd, 
 practical man of the world, with all a Roman official's contemptuous 
 impartiality and severity, and all the disbelief in truth and disinterested- 
 ness which the age had taught him, he seems to have been one of the 
 many whose self-interest is stronger than their convictions, and who can 
 walk uprightly when to do so is easy, but fail in the presence of danger 
 and difficulty. 
 
 23 — 27. The FOUR Enemies and the four Friends. 
 
 23. Then the soldiers] Better, The soldiers theTefore. The 'there- 
 fore' looks back to z/. 18. 
 
 his garments] The loose, outer garment, or toga, with the girdle and 
 fastenings. This was large enough to be worth dividing, and in some 
 cases was the only garment worn. 
 
 four parts] A mark of accurate knowledge; a quaternion of soldiers 
 has charge of the prisoner, as in Acts xii. 4 ; but there the prisoner has 
 to be guarded and kept alive, so four quaternions mount guard in turn, 
 one for each watch. The clothes of executed criminals were the per- 
 quisite of the soldiers on duty. 
 
 his coat] Better, the coat or shirt : it fitted somewhat close to the 
 body, reaching from the neck to the knees or ancles. 
 
 without seam] Josephus tells us that that of the high-priest was 
 seamless, whereas in other cases this garment was commonly made of 
 two pieces {Ant. ill. vii. 4). 
 
 24. that the scripture] It was in order that the Divine purpose, 
 already declared by the Psalmist, might be accomplished, that this two- 
 fold assignment of Christ's garments took place. S. John quotes the 
 LXX. verbatim, although there the difference, which both he and the 
 original Hebrew mark between the upper and under garment, is obli- 
 terated. It is from this passage that the reference to Ps. xxii. 18 has been 
 inserted in Matt, xxvii. 35 ; none of the Synoptists refer to the Psahn. 
 
 my raiment] A capricious change of translation ; the same word is 
 rendered garments in v. 23. 
 
346 S.JOHN, XIX. [vv. 25— 27. 
 
 they did cast lots. These things therefore the soldiers 
 
 did. 
 kT~ Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and 
 
 his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary 
 i6 Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the 
 i disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his 
 ^7 mother, Woman, behold thy son. Then saith he to the 
 
 26. Now there stood'\ Or, But there were standing. By two small 
 particles (men in v. 23 and de here), scarcely translatable in English, 
 S. John indicates 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 beloved disciple. 
 
 his mother's sister, Alary] The Greek, like the English, leaves us 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 alterna- 
 tive. ( I ) It avoids the very improbable supposition of two sisters having 
 the same name. (^) 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) S. 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) S. John's silence about the name of ' His mother's sister' is explained : 
 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 (wdfe) of Clopas.' 
 
 the wife of Cleophas] Rather, the wife of Clopas. The Greek is 
 simply 'the of Clopas,' and 'the daughter of Clopas' may be right, or 
 'the mother,'' or even 'the sister:' but 'wife' is more probably to be 
 supplied. There is no reason for identifying Clopas here with Cleopas 
 in Luke xxiv. 18: Clopas is Aramaic, Cleopas is Greek. The spelling 
 Cleop/^as 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 Alpliaeus (Matt. x. 3; comp. 
 xxvii. 56). It is said that Clopas and Alpliaeus may be different forms 
 of the same Aramaic name. 
 
 Mary Magdalene] Introduced, like the Twelve (vi. 67) and Pilate 
 (xviii. 29) abruptly and without explanation, as being quite familiar to 
 the readers of the Gospel. See on Matt, xxvii. 56 and Luke viii. 2. 
 
 26. whom he loved] See on xiii. 23. The expression here is not a 
 mere periphrasis to avoid giving the name, still less a boastful insertion: 
 it explains why Jesus committed the two to one another. (See Intro- 
 duction, II. iii. 3 b.) 
 
 Woman] See on ii. 4. 
 
V. 28.] S. JOHN, XIX. 347 
 
 disciple, Behold thy mother. And from that hour thatl 
 disciple took her unto his own home. — » 
 
 28 — 30. The two words frojH the Cross, '/ Thirst,^ '■It is 
 finished.^ 
 
 After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accom-^8 
 plished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, 1 thirst 
 
 behold thy son.^ If, as has just been maintained (2nd note on v. 25), 
 S. John was the Virgin's nephew, and if, as is probable (see on ii. 12), 
 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 sufficiently account for their being set 
 aside; and we have no evidence that they believed until after the 
 Resurrection (Acts i. 14). 
 
 27. from that hour\ Quite literally, as soon as all was over {v, 30) ; 
 or he may have led her away at once and then have returned {v. 35). 
 
 unto kis own home] Although the commendation was double, each 
 being given to the other, yet (as was natural) S. John assumes the care 
 of Mary rather than she of him. This shews the untenability of the 
 view that not only S. John, but in him all the Apostles, were committed 
 by Christ to the guardianship of Mary. We have had the Greek 
 expression for 'his own (home)' twice already in this Gospel: see on 
 i. II and xvi. 32. 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 Thirst,' ' It is 
 
 FINISHED.' 
 
 28. After this] See on v. 38. 
 knowiiig] Comp. xiii. r. 
 
 were now accomplished] Rather, are already finished. The very 
 same word is used here as in v. 30, and this identity must be preserved 
 in translation. 
 
 that the scripture, &c.] Many critics make this depend on 'are 
 already finished,' in order to avoid the apparent contradiction between 
 all things being already finished and something still remaining to be 
 accomplished. But this construction is somewhat awkward. It is 
 
 better to connect 'that fulfilled' with 'saith,' especially when Ps. 
 
 Ixix. 21 speaks so plainly of the thirst. The apparent contradiction 
 almost disappears when we remember that the thirst had been felt 
 sometime before it was expressed. All things were finished, including 
 the thirst ; but Christ alone knew this. In order that the prophecy might 
 be accomplished, it was necessary that He should make known His 
 thirst. 'Brought to its due end' or 'made perfect' is the natural 
 meaning of the very unusual expression translated 'fulfilled.' 
 
348 S. JOHN, XIX. [vv. 29, 30. 
 
 4 Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar : and they filled a 
 I spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put // to 
 30 his mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, 
 
 he said. It is finished : and he bowed his head, and gave up 
 
 the ghost. 
 
 29. Now. . .vinegar\ Omit ' now. ' S. John's precise knowledge appears 
 once more : the other three do not mention the vessel, but he had stood 
 close to it. The 'vinegar' was probably the sour wine or posca in a 
 large jar ' set ' by the soldiers for their own use while on guard. Criminals 
 sometimes lived for many hours, even a day or two, on the cross. 
 
 and they filled, &c.] The true text gives, having placed therefore a 
 sponge fiill of the vinegar upon hyssop they put it to his mouth. The 
 difference between the two verbs rendered 'put' is very graphic; the 
 one expresses the placing of the sponge round the stalk (comp. Matt. 
 xxi. 33, xxvii. 28, 48), the other the offering (xvi. 2) and applying 
 (Mark x. 13) it to his lips. 
 
 hyssops The plant 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 involved 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. S. John 
 alone mentions the hyssop ; another mark of exact knowledge. 
 
 put it to his mouth] The actors and their motive are left doulitful. 
 Probably soldiers, but possibly Jews, and probably in compassion rather 
 than mockery ; or perhaps in compassion under cover of mockery (comp. 
 Mark xv. 36). 
 
 30. received] 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 wilUng surrender of His life. 
 
 // is finished] 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 completed ; 
 His last earthly tie had been severed (v7'. 26, 27); and the end had 
 come. The final 'wages of sin' alone remained to be paid. 
 
 he bowed his head] Another detail peculiar to the Evangelist who 
 witnessed it. 
 
 gave up the ghost] The two apostles mark with special clearness that 
 the Messiah's death was entirely voluntary. S. Matthew says, 'He let 
 go His spirit' (xxvii. 50); S. John, 'He gave up His spirit.' None of 
 the four says 'He died.' The other two have * He breathed out ;' and 
 S. Luke shews clearly that the surrender of life was a wilhng 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 
 
V. 31.] S. JOHN, XIX. 349 
 
 31 — 42. 'The petition of the Jews and the petition of Joseph. 
 
 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that 3' 
 the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbathi 
 day, (for that sabbath day was a high day,) besought Pilate! 
 that their legs might be broken, and that they might be, 
 
 It was the one thing which Christ claimed to do 'of Himself (x. 18). 
 Contrast v. 30, vii. 28, viii. 28, 42. 
 
 On 'the seven words from the cross' see on I.uke xxiii. 34; Mark 
 XV. 34 ; Matt, xxvii. 46. Between the two words recorded in these 
 verses (28 — 30) there is again a contrast. 'I thirst' is an expression of 
 suffering; the only one during the Passion. 'It is finished' is a cry of 
 triumph; and the 'therefore' in v. 30 shews how the expression of 
 suffering led on to the cry of triumph. 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. 
 
 31 — 42. The petition of the Jews and the petition of Joseph. 
 
 31. As in 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. 
 
 77^1? fews lherefore\ The 'therefore,' as in v. 23, probably does not 
 refer to what immediately precedes: it looks back to w. 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. 
 
 the preparation^ The eve of the Sabbath ; and the Sabbath on this 
 occasion coincided with the 15 th 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. 
 
 that... high day\ Literally, the day of that Sabbath was great (comp. 
 vii. 37). 
 
 legs t?iight be brokeii] The 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 night-fall (Deut. xxi. 23); whereas the Roman custom was to 
 leave them to putrefy on the cross, like our obsolete custom of hanging 
 in chains. 
 
350 S. JOHN, XIX. [vv. 32-35. 
 
 I3T taken away. Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of 
 
 the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. 
 
 1 33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead 
 
 34 already, they brake not his legs : but one of the soldiers 
 I with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out 
 
 35 blood and water. And he that saw // bare record, and his 
 
 32. Then came the soldiers] The soldiers therefore came, in conse- 
 quence of the fresh order from Pilate which the Jews would bring. Two 
 probably went to each of the robbers. 
 
 34. pierced] To make quite sure that He was dead. The Greek 
 word is not the same as that used in z/. 37 ; this means either to 'prick' 
 or to 'stab,' that to 'pierce deeply.' 
 
 blood and water] 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 whicli 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 that the 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 from Him ' by any means 
 w^hatever : 'He lays it down of Himself (x. 18). And if we decline to 
 investigate the physical cause of the Lord's death, we need not ask for a 
 physical explanation of what is recorded here. S. John assures us that 
 he saw it wdth 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 two great Sacraments are represented. 
 
 35. And he is true] Rather, He that liath seen liath borne wit- 
 ness and his witness is true (com^. i. 19, 32, 34, viii. 13, 14, xii. 17). 
 Besides the change from ' record ' to witness, for the sake of marking 
 by uniform translation S. John's fondness for this verb and substantive, 
 the correction from ' saw ' to liatli seen must be noted. The use of the 
 perfect 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 parentheti- 
 cal : ^He that hath seen hath borne witness, in order that ye all also may 
 believe.^ The natural sense of this statement is that the narrator is 
 
vv. 36,37-] S. JOHN, XIX. 351 
 
 record is true : and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye 
 might believe. For these things were done, that the scrip- 13(> 
 ture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be 
 broken. And again another scripture saith, They shall 
 look on hhn whom they pierced. 
 
 appealing to his own experience. Thus the Apostolic authorship of the 
 Gospel is again confirmed. (See Westcott, Introductio7i, p. xxvii.) 
 
 is true\ Not simply truthful, but genuine, perfect : it fulfils the con- 
 ditions of sufficient evidence. (See on i. 9 and comp. viii. 16, vii. 28.) 
 
 saith true] Better, saith things that are true. There is no tauto- 
 logy, as in the A. V. S. John first says that his evidence is adequate ; 
 he then adds that the contents of it are true. Testimony may be suffi- 
 cient (e. g. of a competent eyewitness) but false : or it may be insufficient 
 (e.g. of half-witted child) but true. S. John declares that his testimony 
 is both sufficient and true ; both alethinos and alethes. 
 
 that ye might'] Better, that ye also may ; ye as well as the witness 
 who saw for himself. 
 
 Why does S. John attest thus earnestly the trustworthiness of his nar- 
 rative at this particular point? Four reasons may be assigned. This 
 incident proved (i) the reality of Christ's humanity against Docetic 
 views; and these verses therefore are conclusive evidence against the 
 theory that the Fourth Gospel is the work of a Docetic Gnostic (see on iv, 
 22) : (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 Resurrection, against Jewish insinu- 
 ations of trickery (comp. Matt, xxviii. 13 — 15): (4) the clear and un- 
 expected fulfilment of two Messianic prophecies. 
 
 36. were done\ Better, came to pass. Note that S. John uses the 
 aorist (^7^^6x0), where S. Matthew, writing nearer to the events, uses 
 the perfect {yi-^ovsv). ' Hath come to pass' implies that the event is not 
 very remote: Matt. i. 22, xxi. 4, xxvi. 56. The 'for' depends upon 
 'believe.' Belief has the support of Scripture; for the two surprising 
 events, Christ's escaping the crurifragium and yet having His side 
 pierced, were evidently preordained in the Divine counsels. 
 
 shall not be broken] Exod. xii. 46. 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 tnie Paschal Lamb. Once more we have 
 evidence that S. 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 S. Paul's view (see on i Cor. v. 7). 
 
 37. They shall look] All present, especially the Jews. The whole 
 world was represented there. 
 
 pierced] See on v. 34. The word here used occurs nowhere else in 
 N. T. excepting Rev. i. 7, and forms a connexion worth noting between 
 the Gospel and the Apocalypse (see on xi. 44, xv. 20, and xx. 16) ; all 
 the more so because S. John here agrees with the present Masoretic 
 
352 S. JOHN, XIX. [vv. 38, 39. 
 
 And after this Joseph of Arimathea, being a disciple of 
 Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, besought Pilate that 
 he might take away the body of Jesus : and Pilate gave him 
 leave. He came therefore, and took the body of Jesus. 
 Rnd there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to 
 Tesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, 
 
 Hebrew text and in every word differs from the Greek of the LXX. 
 The Greek softens down ' pierced through ' (which seemed a strange 
 expression to use of men's treatment of Jehovah) into 'insulted.' See 
 on vi. 45, xii. 13, 15, where there is further evidence of the Evangelist 
 having independent knowledge of Hebrew, and therefore being a Jew 
 of Palestine. 
 
 38. And after this] More literally, But after these things. The 
 ' but ' marks a contrast between the hostile petition of the Jews and the 
 friendly petition of Joseph. ' These things' as distinct from * this ' will 
 shew that no one event is singled out with which what follows is con- 
 nected : the sequence is indefinite. Comp. iii. 22, vi. 14. 'After this^ 
 m V. 28 is right : there the sequence is direct and definite. Comp. 
 ii. 12, xi. 7, 1 1. 
 
 Joseph of Arimathea] See notes 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 San- 
 hedrin's counsel and crime, one who (like Simon and Anna) waited for 
 the kingdom of God, and had become a disciple of Christ. 
 
 secretly for fear of the Jews'] This forms a coincidence with S. Mark, 
 who says of him (xv. 43) that ^having summoned courage he went in 
 unto Pilate,' implying that Uke 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. 
 
 took the body] As the friends of the Baptist (Matt. xiv. 12) and of 
 S. Stephen (Acts viii. 2) did in each case. 
 
 39. Nicodemus] Another coincidence. Nicodemus also was a mem- 
 ber of the Sanhedrin (iii. i), and his acquaintance with Joseph is thus 
 explained. And it is S. Mark who tells us that Joseph was one of the 
 Sanhedrin, S. John who brings him in contact with Nicodemus. It 
 would seem as if Joseph's unusual courage had inspired Nicodemus also. 
 We are not told whether or no Nicodemus had 'consented to the counsel 
 and deed of them.' 
 
 at the first] Either the first time that he came to Jesus, in contrast 
 to other occasions ; or simply at the beginning of Christ's ministry. 
 Comp. X. 40). 
 
 myrrh and aloes] Myrrh-resin and pounded aloe-wood, both aromatic 
 substances: 'All thy garments are myrrh and aloes' (Ps. xlv. 8). Comp. 
 Matt. ii. II. Aloes are not mentioned elsewhere in N. T. For 'mix- 
 ture ' [tnigma) the two best MSS. read roll (eligma), and the purpose of 
 
vv. 40— 42.] S. JOHN, XIX. 353 
 
 about an hundred pound weight!^ Then took they the body U 
 of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as 
 the manner of the Jews is to bury. Now in the place 41 
 where he was crucified there was a garden ; and in the 
 garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid. 
 There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews' prepa- 42 
 ration day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand. 
 
 this large quantity was probably to cover the Body entirely. Comp. 
 ■2 Chron. xvi. 1 4. 
 
 about an hundred pound'] 1200 ounces. There is nothing incredible 
 in the amount. It is a rich man's proof of devotion, and possibly of re- 
 morse for a timidity in the past which now seemed irremediable : his 
 courage had come too late. 
 
 40. 7 hen took they] They took therefore. 
 
 wound it, &c.] Or, bound // in linen cloths. The ' cloths ' seem to 
 refer to the bandages which kept the whole together rather than the 
 large ' linen sheet ' mentioned by the other Evangelists, which Joseph 
 had bought on purpose (Mark xv. 46). The word here used for ' linen 
 cloths ' occurs also in Luke xxiv. 1 2 : see note there. 
 
 the manner of the Jews\ As distinct from the manner of the Egyp- 
 tians, whose three methods of embalming are elaborately described by 
 Herodotus (11. Ixxxvi. ff.). The Egyptians in all cases removed part 
 of the intestines and steeped the body in nitre. 
 
 to bury] The Greek verb is rare in Scripture; in N. T. only Matt. 
 xxvi. 12. The cognate substantive occurs xii. 7; Mark xiv. 8. In 
 Gen. 1. 2 it is used by the LXX. for the embalming of Jacob. 
 
 41. there was a garden'] Contrast xviii. i. S. John alone tells of 
 the garden, which probably belonged to Joseph, for S. Matthew tells us 
 that the sepulchre was his. 
 
 a new sepulchre] S. Matthew also states that it was new, and S. 
 Luke that no one had ever yet been laid in it. S. John states this fact 
 in both ways with great emphasis. Not even in its contact with the 
 grave did 'His flesh see corruption.' 
 
 S. John omits what all the others note, that the sepulchre was hewn 
 in the rock. 
 
 42. the yews' preparation day] Perhaps another slight indication 
 that the Gospel was written outside Palestine. Or the addition 'of the 
 Jews' may point to the time when there was already a Christian 'prepa- 
 ration-day.' See notes on 'the Passover of the yews'" (ii. 13; xi. 55). 
 
 It would seem as if the burial was hastily and temporarily performed^ 
 They probably intended after the Sabbath to make a more solemn and 
 complete burial elsewhere. 
 
 was nigh at hand] Perhaps this fact suggested to Joseph the thought 
 of going to Pilate. He had a sepulchre of his own close to Golgotha. 
 
 S.JOHN 23 
 
354 S. JOHN, XX. . 
 
 CHAP. XX. 
 
 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 Glori- 
 fication OF Christ in His last Discourses (xiii. — xvii.), and His 
 OUTER Glorification in His Passion and Death (xviii, xix.), now 
 gives us his record of the Resurrection and threefold Manifes- 
 tation OF Christ (xx.). 
 
 The chapter falls naturally into five sections, i. TTie first Evidence 
 of the Resurrection ( i — lo). i. The Manifestation to Mary Magdalene 
 (ij — 18). 3. The Manifestation to the fen and others {ig — 23). 4. 
 The Manifestation to S. Thomas and others (1^ — 29). 5. The Conclu- 
 sion and Purpose of the Gospel (30, 31). 
 
 S. 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 com- 
 plete record ; — it is avowedly the very reverse of complete (z'. 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, S. John, S. Thomas, and the Magdalene in this chapter are both 
 clear in themselves and completely in harmony with what is told of the 
 four elsewhere. 
 
 Of the incidents omitted by S. John a good many are given in the 
 other Gospels or by S. Paul : (S. Matthew and S. Mark) the angel's 
 message to the two Marys and Salome ; {S. Alatthezv and \S. Mark]) 
 the farewell charge and promise; (.S". Luke and \^S. Mark'\) the manifes- 
 tation 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 Gali- 
 lee (comp. I Cor. xv. 6); ([6". Marlz\) the reproach for unbelief ; (.S". 
 Luke) the manifestation to S. Peter (comp. i Cor. xv. 5), conversation 
 on the road to Emmaus, proof that He is not a spirit (xxiv. 38, 39), mani- 
 festation before the Ascension (50, 51; comp. Acts i. 6 — 9); {S. Pattl) 
 manifestations to the Twelve, to S. James, and to S. Paul himself (i 
 Cor. XV. 6, 7, 8). 
 
 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 S. Thomas was present. 
 
 It may be freely admitted that the difficulty of harmonizing the diffe- 
 rent accounts of the Resurrection is very great. As so often in the 
 Gospel narrative, we have not the knowledge required for piecing to- 
 gether 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 sutticient. Impostors would have made the evi- 
 dence more harmonious. The difficulty arises from independent wit- 
 nesses telling their own tale, not caring in their consciousness 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, 
 
w. I, 2.] S. JOHN, XX. 355 
 
 I — lo. The first Evidence of the Resurrection. 
 
 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, 20 
 when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the 
 stone taken away from the sepulchre. Then she runneth, 2 
 and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom 
 Jesus loved, and saith unto them. They have taken away the 
 
 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. 
 
 2. The manifestations were granted to disciples only, but to disci- 
 ples wholly unexpectant of a Resurrection. 
 
 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. The first Evidence of the Resurrection. 
 
 1. The first day\ Better, But on the first day; literally, 'day one.' 
 We have the same expression Luke xxiv. i. 
 
 the stone taken away] All four Gospels note the displacement of the 
 stone; S. Mark alone notes the placing of it and S. Matthew the sealing. 
 The words ' taken away from ' should rather be lifted out of : the Synop- 
 tists all speak of ''rolling away' the stone. 
 
 2. The)i she rujtneth'] She runneth therefore, concluding that the 
 body must be gone. 
 
 Simon Peter] His fall was probably known and his deep repentance 
 also : he is still chief of the Apostles, and as such the one consulted first. 
 
 and to the other] The repetition of 'to' implies that the two Apostles 
 were not lodging together, although v. 3 implies that they were close to 
 one another. 
 
 whoi?t yesus loved] Perhaps the expression is meant to apply to 
 Simon Peter also; 'the other disciple whom Jesus loved.' This becomes 
 probable when we notice that the word for 'loved' is not that used of S. 
 John in xix. 26, xxi. 7, 20 {agapdn), but the more general word {phi- 
 lein). See on xi. 5. 
 
 They have taken] She does not attempt to determine who, whether 
 friends or foes. 
 
 23 2 
 
3S6 S. JOHN, XX. [w. 3—9. 
 
 Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they 
 
 3 have laid him. Peter therefore went forth, and f/iaf other 
 
 4 disciple, and came to the sepulchre. So they ran both 
 together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came 
 
 s first to the sepulchre. And he stooping down, and looking 
 
 6 in, saw the linen clothes lying ; yet went he not in. Then 
 Cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the 
 
 7 sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie, and the napkin, 
 that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, 
 
 8 but wrapped together in a place by itself. Then went in 
 also f/ial other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, 
 
 9 and he saw, and believed. For as yet they knew not the 
 
 we know not\ This possibly implies that other women had been 
 with her, as stated by ihe Synoptists. If so, she may have outstripped 
 them in going to the garden. 
 
 3. and that... sepulchre] Better, and fhA other disciple, and theyvtie 
 coming towards the sepulchre. 
 
 4. .S"^ they ran] More exactly, But they began to run. 
 
 did 02itritn] Literally, ran on more quickly than, as being much the 
 younger man. Would a writer of the second century have thought of 
 this in inventing a narrative ? 
 
 5. stooping down, and looking in] In the Greek this is expressed in 
 a single word, which occurs again v. 11 and Luke xxiv. 12, in a literal 
 sense, of 'bending down to look carefully at;' and in a figurative sense in 
 I Pet. i. 1-2 and James i. 25 (see notes in both places). In Ecclus. xiv. 
 23 it is used of the earnest searcher after wisdom, in xxi. 23 of the rude 
 prying of a fool. 
 
 saw] Better, seeth, at a glance {blepci). 
 
 6. Then cometh, &c.] Better, Simon Peter therefore also cometh; 
 because S. John has remained standing there in awe and meditation. 
 S. Peter with his natural impulsiveness goes in at once. Both Apostles 
 act characteristically. 
 
 seeth] Or, belioldeth {theSrei). He takes a complete survey, and 
 hence sees the 'napkin,' which S. John in his short look had not 
 observed. 
 
 7. the napkin] See on xi. 44 : the same word is used here. 
 
 about his head] Literally, upon His head : there is no need to men- 
 tion His name. The writer is absorbed in his subject. 
 in a place by itself] Literally, apart into one place. 
 
 8. Then that other] Better, Therefore went in also the other. 
 
 He is encouraged by his older companion. Note how all the details 
 tell of the eye-witness : he remembers even that the napkin was folded. 
 Contrast the want of detail in Luke xxiv. 12. 
 
 and believed] More difficulty has perhaps been made about this than is 
 necessary. 'Believed what?' is asked. That Jesus was risen. The 
 
vv. io— 13.] S. JOHN, XX. 357 
 
 scripture, that he must rise again from the dead. Then the 10 
 disciples went away again unto their own home. 
 
 II — 18. The Manifestation to Mary Magdalene. 
 
 But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping : and " 
 as she wept, she stooped down, and looked into the 
 sepulchre, and seeth two angels in white sitting, the one 12 
 at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body 
 of Jesus had lain. And they say unto her, Woman, why 13 
 
 whole context implies it; and comp. v. 25. The careful arrangement 
 of the grave-cloths 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 S. Peter. He is full of the impression which the empty and 
 orderly tomb made upon his own mind. S. Luke (xxiv. 12) speaks only 
 of S. Peter's wonder, neither affirming nor denying his belief 
 
 9. they knew not the scripture} 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 Evan- 
 gelists 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 expound Scripture 
 to them, the prophecies about His Passion and Resurrection had re- 
 mained a sealed book to them (comp. Luke xxiv. 25 — 27). 
 
 he mnsi] Comp. iii. 14, xii. 34; Matt. xvi. 21, xxvi. 54; Mark viii. 
 31; Luke ix. 22, xvii. 25, xxii. 37, xxiv. 7, 26, 44. The Divine deter- 
 mination meets us throughout Christ's life on earth, and is pointed out 
 with increasing frequency towards the close of it. Comp. Eph. iii. 11. 
 
 10. Then the disciples\ The disciples therefore ; because nothing 
 more could be done at the sepulchre. 
 
 11 — 18. The Manifestation to Mary Magdalene. 
 
 11. Btit A/a>y] 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 Magdalene : 
 the details of the meeting are given by S. John alone. 
 
 stood] Or, continaed standing, after the other two had gone. 
 stooped down, and looked] See on v. 5. 
 
 12. seeth\ Or, beholdetli, as in v. 6, a long contemplative gaze. 
 two angels] This is the only place where angels appear in S. John's 
 
 narrative. Comp. i. 51, xii. 29, [v. 4]. 
 
 in white] In the Greek 'white' is plural, 'garments' being under- 
 stood, as in Rev. iii. 4 : in Rev. iii. 5, 18, iv. 4 'garments' is expressed. 
 Omit 'the' before 'one' and for ' the other ' read 'one;' one at the head 
 and one at the feet. 
 
 13. iVoinan] See on ii. 4, xix. 26. 
 
358 S. JOHN, XX. [w. 14—16. 
 
 weepest thou ? She saith unto them, Because they have 
 taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have 
 
 14 laid him. And when she had thus said, she turned her- 
 self back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it 
 
 15 was Jesus. Jesus saith unto her. Woman, why weepest 
 thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the 
 gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, 
 tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. 
 
 i6 Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith 
 
 my Lord, and I know not\ In v. 1 it was ' the Lord and we know 
 not.' 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. We may reasonably suppose that the 
 Evangelist obtained his information from Mary Magdalene herself. 
 "The extreme simplicity of the narrative, it may be added, reflects 
 something of the solemn majesty of the scene. The sentences follow 
 without any connecting particles till v. 19. (Comp. c. xv.)" Westcott 
 in loco. 
 
 14. And w/ien] Omit 'and.' Perhaps she becomes in some way 
 conscious of another Presence. 
 
 sazv] Better, beholdetli, as in vv. 6, i?. 
 
 knew not] 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, xxviii. 17; 
 [Mark xvi. 12]. 
 
 15. the gardener] Because he was there at that early hour. 
 
 if thou have borne him hence] The omission of the name is very life- 
 like : she is so full of her loss that she assumes that others must know 
 all about it. 'Thou' is emphatic; 'Thou and not, as I fear, some 
 enemy.' 
 
 I will take him away] In her loving devotion she does not measure 
 her strength. Note that throughout it is 'the Lord' (v. 2), 'my Lord ' 
 {v. 13), 'Him' thrice {v. 15), never 'His body' or 'the corpse.' His 
 lifeless form is to her still Himself. 
 
 16. Mary] The term of general address, 'Woman,' 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). 
 
 saith unto him] We must add with the best authorities, in Hebrew. 
 The insertion is of importance as indicating the language spoken be- 
 tween Christ and His disciples. S. John thinks it well to remind Greek 
 readers that Greek was not the language used. Comp. Acts xxii. 2, 
 xxvi. 14. The expression here used (Heb7-aisti) occurs only in this Go- 
 spel (v. 2, xix. 13, 17, 20) and in Revelation (ix. 11, xvi. 16). See on 
 xix. 37 
 
vv. 17, i8.] S. JOHN, XX. 359 
 
 unto him, Rabboni ; which is to say, Master. Jesus saith 17 
 unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my 
 Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend 
 unto my Father, and your Father; and fo my God, and your 
 God. Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that 18 
 
 Kabhonil More exactly, Rabbunl. This precise form occurs also in 
 Mark x. 51, but has been obliterated in the 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 detail ? 
 
 Master^ Or, Teacher. Its literal meaning is 'my Master,' but the 
 pronominal portion of the word had lost almost all meaning. S. John's 
 translation shews that as yet her belief is very imperfect : she uses 
 a mere human title. 
 
 17. Touch me not, for, &c.] 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. It is perhaps needless to 
 enquire whether the ' for ' refers to the whole of what follows or only to 
 the first sentence, 'I am not yet ascended to the Father?' In either 
 case the meaning would be, that the Ascension has not yet taken place, 
 altliough it soon will do so, whereas Mary's action assumes that it has 
 taken place. If 'for' refers to the first clause only, then the emphasis 
 is thrown on Mary's mistake; if 'for' 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 im- 
 pression. The vtib {ha ptesthai) 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. i John i. i) : 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 Ale,'' or simply, hold Me not. The old and often in- 
 terrupted earthly intercourse is over ; the new and continuous intercourse 
 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 realize it. (For a large collection of various interpretations see 
 Meyer.) 
 
 to my Father] The better reading gives, to the Father; with this 'My 
 brethren ' immediately following agrees better. The general relation- 
 ship applying both to Him and them, is stated first, and then pointedly 
 distinguished in its application to Him and to them. 
 
 I ascend} Or, I am ascending. The change has already begun. 
 
 my God] The risen and glorified Redeemer is still perfect man. 
 Comp. Rev. iii. 12. Thus also S. Paul and S. Peter speak of 'the God 
 and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.' Comp. Eph. i. 3; 2 Cor. xi. 31 ; 
 I Peter i. 3; and see on Rom. xv. 6; 1 Cor. i. 3, where the expression 
 is blurred in the A. V. 
 
 18. came and told] Better, cometh and telleth; literally, comet h 
 telling instead of the more usual 'having come telleth.' 
 
36o S. JOHN, XX. [v. 19. 
 
 she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things 
 unto her. 
 
 19 — 23. The Manifestation to the Ten and others. 
 
 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the 
 week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were 
 
 Thus as Mary's love seems to have been the first to manifest itself 
 {v. i). 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 S. 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. Then the same day, &c.] Rather, When therefore it was even- 
 ing on that day, the first day of the week. Note the great precision 
 of the expression. 'That day,' that memorable day, the 'day of days.' 
 
 Oh ! day of days ! shall hearts set free 
 
 No minstrel rapture find for thee? 
 
 Thou art the Sun of other days, 
 
 They shine by giving back thy rays. 
 
 Keble, Christian Year, Easter Day. 
 Comp. i. 39, V. 9, xi. 49, xviii. 13, where 'thai' 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 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 S. John's using the 
 modern method in counting the hours : it has a special bearing on the 
 explanation of 'the seventh hour' in iv. 52. See notes there and on 
 xix. 14. 
 
 •when the doors were shut] This is mentioned both here and v. 26 to 
 sliew that the appearance was miraculous. fAfter the Resurrection 
 Christ's human form, though still real and corporeal, is not subject to 
 the ordinary conditions of material bodies^ 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. 3 1 . 
 
 where the disciples were] The best authorities all omit 'assembled.' 
 S. Luke says more definitely, ' the eleven and they that were with them' 
 
vv. 20,21.] S. JOHN, XX. 361 
 
 assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the 
 midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when 20 
 he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. 
 Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord. 
 Then said Jesus to them again. Peace be unto you : as my 21 
 
 (xxiv. 33); 'the eleven' meaning the Apostolic company, although one 
 was absent. It was natural that the small community of believers should 
 be gathered together, not merely for mutual protection and comfort, but 
 to discuss the reported appearances to the women and to S. Peter. 
 
 for fear of the Jeivs] Literally, because of the (prevailing) fear of the 
 Jrdjs (comp. vii. 13). It was not certain that the Sanhedrin would rest 
 content with having put Jesus to death; all the less so as rumours of His 
 being alive again were spreading. 
 
 came Jesusl It is futile to discuss how; that the doors were miracu- 
 lously opened, as in S. Peter's release from prison, is neither stated nor 
 implied. 
 
 Peace be unto you] The ordinary greeting intensified. 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. hh hands and his side] S. Luke (xxiv. 40), who does not men- 
 tion the piercing of the side, says 'His hands and His feet,' and adds 
 that He told them to 'handle' Him, the very word used in i John i. i. 
 
 Then were the disciples] The disciples therefore were. Their sorrow 
 is turned into joy (xvi. -20), joy which at first made them doubt its reality 
 (Luke xxiv. 41). 
 
 ivhen they saw the Lord] Till then they had seen a form, but like 
 Mary of Magdala and the two at Emmaus, knew not whose it was. 
 
 21. Theii said Jesus] Jesus therefore said; because now they were 
 ready to receive it. Their alarm was dispelled and they knew that He 
 was the Lord. He repeats His message of 'Peace.' 
 
 as my Father, &c.] Better, As the Father hath sent Me. Christ's 
 mission is sometimes spoken of in the aorist tense, as having taken place 
 at a definite point in history (iii. 17, 34, v. 38, vi. 29, 57, vii. 29, viii. 
 42, X. 36, xi. 42, xvii. 3, 8, 18, 21, 23, 25), in which case the fact of the 
 Incarnation is the prominent idea. Sometimes, though much less often, 
 it is spoken of, as here, in the perfect tense, as a fact which continues in 
 its results (v. 36; i John iv. 9, 14), in which case the present and 
 permanent effects of the mission are the prominent idea. Christ's 
 mission is henceforth to be carried on by His disciples. 
 
 The Greek for 'send' is not the same in both clauses; in the first, 
 'hath sent,' it is aposiellein ; in the second, 'send,' it is pempein. 
 The latter is the most general word for 'send,' implying no special rela- 
 tion between sender and sent; the former adds the notion of a delegated 
 authority constituting the person sent the envoy or representative of the 
 sender. Both verbs are used both of the mission of Christ and of the 
 
362 S. JOHN, XX. [vv. 22, 23. 
 
 22]|l[ther hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he 
 
 had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, 
 
 23) Receive ye the Holy Ghost : whose soever sins ye remit, 
 
 mission of the disciples. Apostelldn is used of the mission of Christ in 
 all the passages quoted above : it is used of the mission of the disciples, 
 iv. 38, xvii. 18. (Comp. i. 6, 19, 24, iii. 28, v. 33, vii. 32, xi. 3.) Pempein 
 is used of Christ's mission only in the aorist participle (iv. 34, v. 23, 24, 
 3°. 37> vi. 38, 39, 40, 44, vii. 16, 18, 28, 33, viii. 16, 18, 26, 29, ix. 4; 
 and in all the passages in chaps, xii — xvi.); the aorist participle of 
 apostellein is not used by S. John, although the Synoptists use it in this 
 very sense (Matt. x. 40; Mark ix. 37; Luke ix. 48, x. 16). Pempein is 
 used of disciples here and in xiii. 20 (of the Spirit, xiv. 26, xvi. 7). 
 
 "The general result... seems to be, that in this charge the Lord pre- 
 sents His own Mission as the one abiding Mission of the Father; this 
 He fulfils through His Church. His disciples receive no new commis- 
 sion, but carry out His." Westcott in loco. 
 
 send I you] Or, am I s&n6.ins you ; their mission has already begun 
 (comp. V. 17, xvii. 9); and the first and main part of it was to be the 
 proclamation of the truth just brought home to themselves— the Resur- 
 rection (Acts i. 22, ii. 24, iv. 2, 33, &c.). 
 
 22. he breathed on theni] The very same Greek 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. i), 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 imparted 
 to them. 'Receive ye,' combined with the action of breathing, implies 
 this. This is all the more clear in the Greek, because piieuma 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 anticipa- 
 tion of His spiritual return and abiding Presence with them 'even unto 
 the end of the world.' 
 
 Receive ye\ Or, take^r, 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 in- 
 ward spiritual grace. The expression still more plainly implies that 
 some gift was offered and bestowed then and there : "it is an unnatural 
 wresting of plain language to make 'Take ye' a mere promise. There 
 was therefore a Paschal as distinct from a Pentecostal gift of the Holy 
 Spirit, the one preparatory to the other. It should be noticed that 
 'Holy Ghost' is without the definite article in Uip Greek, 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. Whose soever sins, &c.] This puu er accompanies the gift of the 
 
vv. 24, 25.] S. JOHN, XX. 363 
 
 they are remitted unto them ; and whose soever sins yel 
 retain, they are retained. 
 
 24 — 29. The Manifestation to S. Thomas and others. . 
 
 But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not 24 
 with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore] 25 
 
 Spirit just conferred. It must be noticed (i) that it is given to the whole 
 company present; not to the Apostles alone. Of the Apostles one was 
 absent, and there were others who were not Apostles present : no hint is 
 given that this power is confined to the Ten. The commission therefore 
 tn the first instance is to the Christian community as a whole, not to the 
 Ministry alone. 
 
 It follows from this (■2) that the power being conferred on the com- 
 munity and never revoked, the power continues so long as the com- 
 munity 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. (7(7rt' deals with mankind not in the mass but with 
 personal love and knowledge soul by soul. His Church in fulfiUing 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 or ought to be the case, 
 but what generally is. 
 
 are remitted... are retained'\ Both verbs are perfects, though there is 
 some doubt about the reading as regards the former. The force of the 
 perfect is — 'are ipso facto remitted' — 'are ipso facto retained.' When 
 the community under the guidance of the Spirit has spoken, the result is 
 complete. 
 
 retainl i.e. '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,' &c. (ii. 14, 15, 25, iii. 11; comp. 2 Thess. ii. 
 15). 
 
 24—29. The Manifestation to S. Thomas and others. 
 Peculiar to S. John. 
 
 24. IViomas'] See on xi. 16. 
 
 the twelve'] See on vi. 67. 
 
 was not with thet?i\ His melancholy temperament might dispose him 
 to solitude and to put no trust 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 testimony even of eye-witnesses. The 
 test which he selects has various points of contact with the surroundings. 
 
364 S. JOHN, XX. [vv. 26—28. 
 
 i- said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto 
 
 I them. Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, 
 
 and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my 
 
 26 hand into his side, I will not believe. And after eight days 
 
 j again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them : then 
 
 \ came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, 
 
 zf and said. Peace be unto you. Then saith he to Thomas, 
 
 \ Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands ; and reach 
 
 ' hither thy hand, and thrust // into my side : and be not 
 
 28 faithless, but believing. And Thomas answered and said 
 
 The wounds had been the cause of his despair; it is they that must 
 reassure him. The print of thtm 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 S. Thomas. 
 
 25. print... put... print... thriist\ The A.V. preserves the emphatic 
 repetition of 'print' but obliterates the similar repetition of 'put.' The 
 verb (ballein) rendered 'thrust' here and in f. 27 is the same as that 
 rendered 'put.' Its literal meaning is 'throw' or 'cast;' but in late 
 Greek its meaning becomes more vague and general; 'place, lay, put.' 
 Comp. V. 7, xiii. 2, xviii. 11. Here put would be better in all three 
 places. 
 
 / will not believe] Or, / will In no wise believe; the negative is in 
 the strongest form. Comp. iv. 48, vi. 37, &c. 
 
 26. after eight days] 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. 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. 
 
 again... withitt] Implying that the place is the same. No hint is 
 given as to the time of day. 
 
 t/tc'n came Jesiis] Better, in the simplicity of the original, Jesus 
 cometb. 
 
 27. saith, &c.] He at once shews to S. Thomas that He knows the 
 test that he had demanded. 
 
 behold] Better, see; it is the same word as S. Thomas used in 
 V. 25. 
 
 be not] Rather, become not. The demand for this proof did not 
 make S. Thomas faithless, but it placed him in peril of becoming so. 
 ' Faithless' and 'believing' are verbal as well as actual contradictories in 
 the Greek. 'Faithless' and 'faithful,' 'unbelieving and 'believing' 
 would in this respect be better; but it is best to leave it as in the A.V. 
 
 28. And Tho /J I as answered] Omit 'and.' This answer and Christ's 
 
V. 29-] S. JOHN, XX. 365 
 
 unto him, My Lord and my God. Jesus saith unto him,|29 
 Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast beheved : 
 blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have beheved. 
 
 comment, 'because thou hast seen,^ seem to shew that S. Thomas did 
 not use the test which he had demanded. In accordance with his 
 desponding temperament he had underrated the possibilities of being 
 convinced. 
 
 Aly Lord and my God] Most unnatural is the Unitarian view, that 
 these words are an expression of astonishment addressed /o God. Against 
 this are (i) the plain and conclusive 'said tenio //im;' (2) the words 
 'my Lord,' which manifestly are addressed to Christ (comp. v. 13); 
 (3) the fact that this confession of faith forms a climax and conclusion 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 merely that his Risen Lord 
 stood before him, but that this Lord 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 
 'equal with God' (v. 18, 19); on the contrary He accepts and approves 
 this confession of belief in His Divinity. 
 
 29. Thomas, because, &c.] 'Thomas' must be omitted on overwhelm- 
 ing evidence, although the addition of the name seems natural here as in 
 xiv. 9. 'Thou hast believed' is half exclamation, half question (comp. 
 xvi. 31). 
 
 blessed are they that have not seen] Rather, Blessed are they that saw 
 not. There must have been some disciples who believed in the Resur- 
 rection merely on the evidence of others. Jesus had not appeared to 
 every one of His followers. 
 
 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 be- 
 come equal in blessedness to Christ's Mother and brethren by obedience 
 (Matt. xii. 49, 50), so it is possible for them to transcend the blessed- 
 ness of Apostles by faith. All the Apostles, like S. Thomas, had seen 
 before they believed : even S. John's faith did not shew itself until he 
 had had evidence (z/. 8). S. 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 Evan- 
 gelist'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 over one needlessly wary of being influenced by in- 
 sufficient testimony. The result is the instantaneous confession, at once 
 the result of questioning and the victory over it, 'My Lord and my 
 God.' 
 
366 S. JOHN, XX. [vv. 30, 31. 
 
 30, 31. The Conclusion and Purpose of the Gospel. 
 
 30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of 
 
 31 his disciples, which are not written in this book : but 
 these are written, that ye might beheve that Jesus is the 
 Christ, the Son of God ; and that beheving ye might have 
 hfe through his name. 
 
 30, 31. The Conclusion and Purpose of the Gospel. 
 
 30. And many other signs triily'\ The Greek cannot be exactly 
 rendered without awkwardness : Therefore (as might be expected from 
 what has been written here) many and other signs. The context shews 
 that 'signs' must not be limited to proofs of the Resurrection: S. John 
 is glancing back over his whole work — 'this book ;' and the 'signs' here, 
 as elsewhere in this Gospel, are miracles generally. Comp. especially 
 xii. 37. The expression 'many and other' points the same way; many 
 in number and different in kind from those related. The signs of the 
 Resurrection from the nature of the case were all similar in kind. 
 
 31. but these are written'\ On the one hand there were many un- 
 recorded; hut on the other hand some have been recorded. Note 
 in the Greek the men and the de and comp. xix. 23, 25. It was not 
 S. John's purpose to write a complete ' Life of Christ ; ' it was not his 
 purpose to write a 'Life' at all. Rather he would narrate just those 
 facts respecting Jesus which would produce a saving faith in Him as 
 the Messiah and the Son of God. S. John's work is 'a Gospel and not 
 a biography.' 
 
 that ye might believe] That ye may believe. 
 
 that yesus is the Christ, &c.] 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, — (i) that yesus, the well- 
 known Teacher and true man, is the Christ, the long looked for Messiah 
 and Deliverer of Israel, the fulfiUer 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 view s 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. Comp. i John iv. 14, 15. 
 
 ye might have life] Ye may have life. The truth is worth having for 
 its own sake : but in this case to possess the truth is to possess eternal 
 life. Comp. i John v. 13. Note once more that eternal life is not a 
 a prize to be won hereafter; in believing these great truths we have 
 eternal life already (see on v. 24). 
 
 through his name] Rather, in His name (see on i. \7.). Thus the 
 conclusion of the Gospel is an echo of the beginning (i. 4, 12). Comp, 
 Acts iv. 10; I Cor. vi. 11. 
 
V. I.] S. JOHN, XXI. 367 
 
 Chap. XXI. The Epilogue or Appendix. 
 
 I — 14. The Manifestation to the Seven and the Miraculous 
 Draught of Fishes. . 
 
 After these things Jesus shewed himself again to the 21 
 
 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 reach 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 after- 
 thought, 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. 
 
 Sixteen 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 [i]. Besides these points it should be noticed that S. John's cha- 
 racteristic 'therefore' occurs seven times {vv. 5, 6, 7, 9, 15, 21, 23) in 
 twenty-three verses. 
 
 Chap. XXI. The Epilogue or 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, S. John narrates in detail the circumstances 
 which led to its being spoken. 
 
 The whole of the chapter is peculiar to S. John's Gospel. It falls 
 into four parts, i. The Manifestation to the Seven and the Miraculous 
 Draught of Fishes (i — 14). 2. The Commission to S. Peter and Pre- 
 diction as to his Death (15 — 19). 3. The misiijuierstood Saying respectittg 
 the Evangelist (20 — 23). 4. Concluding Notes (24, 25). 
 
 1 — 14. The Manifestation to the Seven and the 
 Miraculous Draught of Fishes. 
 
 1. After these things'] This vague expression (see on v. i, vi. i, 
 xix. 38) suits an afterthought which has no direct connexion with what 
 immediately precedes. 
 
 skewed hi?nself] Better, manifested Himself. The rendering of this 
 verb {phaneroun), which is one of S. John's favourite words [i], should 
 
58 S. JOHN, XXI. [vv. 2—4. 
 
 disciples at the sea of Tibems ; and on this wise shewed he 
 ^himself. There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas 
 called Didymus, and Nathanael of Cana in Gahlee, and the 
 S071S of Zebedee, and two other of his disciples. Simon Peter 
 saith unto them, I go a fishing. They say unto him, We 
 also go with thee. They went forth, and entered into a ship 
 I immediately ; and that night they caught nothing. But 
 
 be kept uniform, especially here, ii. 11, vii. 4, xvii. 6, where the active 
 voice is used. Comp. i. 31, iii. 21, ix. 3, xxi. 14; i John i. 1, ii. 19, 
 28, iii. 2, 5, 8, iv. 9. In the other Gospels the word occurs only Mark 
 iv. 22; [xvi. 12, I4], in all cases in the passive form. 
 
 again\ This (as v. 14 shews) points back to the manifestation to S. 
 Thomas and the rest (xx. 26). 
 
 sea of Tiberias] See on vi. i. S. John alone uses this name [2]. The 
 return of the disciples from Jerusalem to Galilee is commanded Matt. 
 xxviii. 7; Mark xvi. 7. They returned to Jerusalem soon, and remained 
 there from the Ascension to Pentecost (Acts i. 4). S. Matthew notices 
 only the appearances in Galilee, S. Luke [and S. Mark] only those in 
 Jerusalem. S. John gives some of both groups. 
 
 on this wise shewed he] Better, He manifested on this wise. This 
 repetition is S. John's style [3]. 
 
 2. There were together] Probably all seven belonged to the neigh- 
 bourhood; we know this of four of them. 
 
 Thomas] See on xi. 16, xiv. 5, xx. 24. All particulars about him 
 are given by S. John [4]. 
 
 Nathanael] See on i. 45: the descriptive addition 'of Cana of 
 Galilee' occurs here only. S. John alone mentions Nathanael [5]. 
 
 the sons of Zebedee] If one of the sons of Zebedee were not the writer, 
 they would have been placed first after S. Peter, instead of last of those 
 named [6]. The omission of their names also is in harmony with S. 
 John's reserve about all closely connected with himself [7]. 
 
 two other] Some conjecture Andrew and Philip; but if so, why are 
 the names not given? More probably these nameless disciples are not 
 Apostles. 
 
 3. Simon Peter] As so often, he takes the lead. In the interval of 
 waiting for definite instructions the disciples have returned to their usual 
 employment. Once more we have precise and vivid details, as of an 
 eye-witness. 
 
 IVe also go] Rather, we also come. 
 
 ivent forth] From the town or village, probably Capernaum or 
 Dcthsaida. 
 
 into a ship] Better, into the ships. 'Immediately' must be omitted 
 on decisive evidence. 
 
 that night] Better, in that night. 'That' perhaps indicates that 
 failure was exceptional; or it may mean 'that memorable night' (comp. 
 xix. 31 ; XX. tg). Night was the best lime for fishing (Luke v. 5). 
 
 they cmight nothing] Failure at first is the common lot of Christ's 
 
vv. 5—7.] S. JOHN, XXI. 369 
 
 when the morning was now come, Jesus stood on the shore : 
 but the disciples knew not that it was Jesus. Then Jesus 
 saith unto them. Children, have ye any meat? They an- 
 swered him, No. And he said unto them, Cast the net on 
 the right side of the ship, and ye shall find. They cast 
 therefore, and now they were not able to draw it for the 
 multitude of fishes. Therefore that disciple whom Jesus 
 loved saith unto Peter, It is the Lord. Now when Simon 
 Peter heard that it was the Lord, he girt his fisher's coat 
 
 fishers. His Presence again causing success after failure might bring 
 home to them the lesson that apart from Him they could do nothing 
 (xv. 5). 
 
 The word here used for 'catch' does not occur in the Synoptists, but 
 besides v. 10 is found six times in this Gospel (vii. 30, 32, 44, viii. 10, 
 X. 39, xi. 57), and once in Revelation (xix. 20) [8]. Elsewhere only 
 Acts iii. 7, xii. 4; i Cor. xi. 32. 
 
 4. morningwas now come] The better reading gives, dawn was now 
 breaking. 
 
 stood on the shore] Literally, stood on to the beach, i. e. He came and 
 stood on the beach. 
 
 but] Nevertheless, or howbeib [mealoi, a particle rare in N.T. out- 
 side this Gospel) ; implying that this was surprising. Comp. iv. 27, 
 vii. 13, xii. 42, XX. 5. 
 
 knew not] See on xx. 14. 
 
 5. Then yesus] yesus therefore ; because they did not recognise 
 Him. 
 
 Children] Perhaps a mere term of friendly address {paidia) ; not the 
 affectionate term used xiii. 33 (tcknia). Paidia occurs i John ii. 14, 18; 
 teknia occurs i John ii. i, 12, 28, iii. 7, 18, iv. 4, v. 21. 
 
 meat] The Greek word [prosphagion) occurs here only. It appears 
 to mean something eaten with bread, especially fish. Perhaps we should 
 translate, Have ye any fish? 
 
 6. They cast therefore] Perhaps they thought the stranger saw fish 
 on the right side. Fish are at times seen "in dense masses" in the 
 lake. 
 
 7. Therefore that disciple] The characteristics of the two Apostles 
 are again most delicately yet clearly given (comp. xx. 2 — 9). S. John is 
 the first to apprehend; S. Peter the first to act [9]. 
 
 Noiv ivhen Simon Peter heard] Simon Peter therefore having heard. 
 
 fisher's coat] The Greek word [ependiites) occurs here only. It was 
 his upper garment, which he gathered round him "with instinctive 
 reverence for the presence of his Master" (Westcott). 'Naked' need 
 not mean more than 'stripped' of the upper garment. "No one but an 
 eye-witness would have thought of the touch in v. 7, which exactly in- 
 verts the natural action of one about to swim, and yet is quite accounted 
 for by the circumstances." S. p. 267. 
 
 s. JOHN 24 
 
^7o S.JOHN, XXI. [vv. 8— II. 
 
 unto him, (for he was naked,) and did cast himself into the 
 sea. And the other disciples came in a little ship ; (for 
 they were not far from land, but as it were two hundred 
 cubits,) dragging the net with fishes. As soon then as they 
 were come to land, they saw a fire of coals there, and fish 
 laid thereon, and bread. Jesus saith unto them, Bring of 
 iiUhe fish which ye have now caught. Simon Peter went up, 
 
 casi himself\ with his habitual impulsiveness. 
 
 8. in a little ship] Rather, in tli9 boat, whether 'the ship' oi v. 3 
 or a smaller boat attached to it, we cannot determine. 
 
 ttvo hundred cubits] About 100 yards. 
 
 9. As soon as... they saiv] Better, Wlien therefore.. Y/i^/ see. 
 ajire of coals] See on xviii. 18 : the word occurs only there and here 
 
 in N.T. [10]. 'There' is literally laid. 
 
 Jish laid thereon, and bread ] Or possibly, a Jisk laid thereon and a 
 loaf. But the singulars may be collectives as in the A. V. The word 
 for fish {opsarion) is similar in meaning, though not in derivation, to 
 the one used in v. 5. (See on vi. 9.) In z^. ii yet another word is used 
 (ichtkus), which means 'fish' generally, whether for eating or not. 
 
 10. fish] The same word as in v. 9, but in the plural. 
 caught] See on v. 3. 
 
 11. went up] Better, with the best texts, went up therefore : the 
 meaning probably is 'went on board' the vessel, now in shallow water. 
 The details in this verse are strong evidence of the writer having been 
 an eye-witness: he had helped to count these 'great fishes 'and gives the 
 number, not because there is anything mystical in it, but because he re- 
 members it. 
 
 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 Scripture are of three 
 kinds: (i) 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. (3) Legiti- 
 mate 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 intel- 
 lectual power to determine in any given case 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 represent 
 the Church Militant and the Church Triumphant. The one gathers 
 
vv. 12—15.] S. JOHN, XXI. 371 
 
 and drew the net to land full of great fishes, an hundred and 
 fifty artd three : and for all there were so many, yet was not 
 the net broken. Jesus saith unto them. Come and dine. 12 
 And none of the disciples durst ask him, Who art thou ? 
 kno\ving that it was the Lord. Jesus then cometh, andU 
 taketh bread, and giveth them, and fish likewise. This is U 
 now the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his disciples, J 
 after that he was risen from the dead. 
 
 15 — 19. The Commission to S. Peter and Prediction as to 
 his death. 
 
 So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, lis 
 
 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. Come and dine] The meal indicated is not the principal meal 
 of the day {deipnoti) which was taken in the afternoon, but the morning 
 meal {arisioti) or breakfast. See on Luke xi. 37. 
 
 A7td none] Omit 'and.' There is a solemn simplicity in the narra- 
 tive. The sentences from v. 10 to z'. 14 have no connecting particles: 
 comp. chap. xv. and xx. 13 — 19. 
 
 7ione durst ask... knowing] A mixture of perplexity, awe, and convic- 
 tion. They are convinced that He is the Lord, yet feel that He is 
 changed, and reverence restrains them from curious questions. Comp. 
 Matt. ii. 8, x. 11. The writer knows the inmost feelings of Apostles 
 (comp. ii. II, 17, 22, iv. 27, 33, vi. 21, ix. 2, xx. 20) [11]. 
 
 13. yesus then cometh] Omit ' then.' They are afraid to approach, 
 so He comes to them. 'Bread' and 'fish' are in the singular, as in v. 9, 
 but with the definite article, which points back to z'. 9; Uhe bread' and 
 *the fish' which had been mentioned before. Of course this is not the 
 fish that had just been caught, and nothing is told us as to how it was 
 provided. The food is a gift from the Lord to His disciples. 
 
 14. This is now the third time] . We have a similar construction 2 
 Pet. iii. I. The two previous manifestations are probably those related 
 XX. 19 — 23, 26 — 29: but we have not sufficient knowledge to arrange 
 the different appearances in chronological order. See on Luke xxiv. 49. 
 
 shewed himself] Manifested Himself: see ov^ v. 1. 
 
 15 — 19. The Commission to S. Peter and Prediction as to 
 his death. 
 
 15. dined] See on z^. 12. 
 
 saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son ofyonas] For 'Jonas' read Jolm 
 here and in w. 16, 17, as in i. 42. Note that the writer himself calls 
 
 24 — 2 
 
yj2 S. JOHN, XXI. [v. 15. 
 
 1 Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He 
 jsaith unto him, Yea, Lord ; thou knowest that I love thee. 
 
 him Simon Peter, but represents the Lord as calling him 'Simon son of 
 John.' This is not only in harmony with the rest of this Gospel, but with 
 the Gospels as a whole. Although Jesus gave Simon the name of Peter, 
 yet, with one remarkable 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. S. 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 S. John? [12] 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 S. John 
 should add the surname with much greater frequency than the Synop- 
 tists is natural. At the time when S. John Avrote 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. 
 
 lovest thou me] The word for 'love' here and in the question in t*. 16 
 is agapdn (see on xi. 5). S. Peter in all three answers uses philein, 
 and our Lord uses philein in the third question (v. 17). The change is 
 not accidental ; and once more we have evidence of the accuracy of the 
 writer: he preserves distinctions which were actually made. S. Peter's 
 preference for phileifi is doubly intelligible: (i) 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 agapdn; (2) it is the warmer 
 word; there is a calm discrimination implied in <zffl/i« which to him 
 seems cold. In the third question Christ takes him at his own standard ; 
 he adopts S. Peter's own word, and thus presses the question more 
 home. 
 
 7nore than these] 'More than these, thy companions, love Me.' The 
 A. V. is ambiguous, and so also is the Greek, 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 preferred his 
 boat and nets to Himself. S. Peter had professed to be ready to die for 
 His Master (xiii. 37) and had declared that though a// the rest might 
 deny Him, he would never do so (Matt. xxvi. 33). Jesus recalls this 
 boast by asking him whether he noiu professes to have more loyalty and 
 devotion than the rest. 
 
 Yea, Lord; thou knowest] "We have once more an exquisite touch 
 of psychology. It is Peter's modesty that speaks, and his sense of shame 
 at his own short-comings... He has nothing to appeal to, and yet he is 
 conscious that his affection is not unreal or insincere, and He trusts to 
 Him who searches the hearts." S. pp. 268, 9. Not only does he change 
 the word for 'love' from agapdn to philein, but he says nothing about 
 
w. i6, T7.] S. JOHN, XXI. 373 
 
 He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. He saith to him again 
 the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me ? He 
 saith unto him, Yea, Lord ; thou knowest that I love thee. I 
 He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. He saith unto him the 
 third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was 
 grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou 
 me? And he said unto him. Lord, thou knowest all things;] 
 
 'more than these :' he will not venture anymore to compare himself 
 with others. Moreover he makes no professions as to the future ; ex- 
 perience has taught him that the present is all that he can be sure of. 
 The 'Thou' in 'Thou knowest' 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? 
 
 Feed my lambs] 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. And this S. Peter must 
 do. 
 
 16. lovest thou 77te?\ Jesus drops the 'more than these,' which the 
 humbled Apostle had shrunk from answering, but retains His own word 
 for 'love.' S. Peter answers exactly as before. 
 
 Feed my sheep\ Better, Tend, or shepherd. My sheep. The word ren- 
 dered 'feed' in w. 15 and 17 ((^^j/v/w) means 'supply with food.' Comp. 
 Matt. viii. 30, 33; Mark v. 11, 14; Luke viii. 32, 34; xv. 15 (the only 
 other passages where the word occurs in N. T.) of the feeding of the 
 herd of swine. The word used here [poimainein) means rather 'be 
 shepherd to.' It is used literally Luke xvii. 7; i Cor. ix. 7; and 
 figuratively Matt. ii. 6; Acts xx. 28; i Pet. v. 2. Comp. Jude 12; 
 Rev, ii. 27, vii. 17, xii. 5, xix. 15. Tending implies more of guidance 
 and government than feeding does. The lambs, which can go no dis- 
 tance, scarcely require guidance, their chief need is food. The sheep 
 require both. 
 
 17. the third time] 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, philein. 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 with"- 
 out boastful comparison with others, and without rash promises about 
 the future, should seem to be doubted by his Lord. 
 
 thou knowest all things ; tJion hwwest] Once more we have two words 
 for 'know' in the original and only one in the A. V. (Comp. vii. 27, 
 viii. 55, xiii. 7, xiv. 7.) The first 'knowest' (oidas) refers to Christ's 
 supernatural intuition, as in w. 15, 16 : the second 'knowest' (giniiskeis) 
 
374 S. JOHN, XXI. [v. i8. 
 
 \hou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed 
 
 i8 ny sheep. Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast 
 
 roung, thou girdest thyself, and walkedst whither thou 
 
 ■ vouldest : but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch 
 
 jorth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee 
 
 to His experience and discernment; Thou recognisest, perceivest, seest, 
 that I love Thee. See on ii. 24, 25. 
 
 Feed my sheep] It is doubtful whether we have or have not precisely 
 the same word for 'sheep' here as in v. 16. The Greek word here 
 according to the best authorities is undoubtedly a diminutive (probatia, 
 noi probata); in v. i6 the evidence is pretty evenly balanced between 
 probatia a.nd. probata ('little sheep' and 'sheep'). One is tempted to 
 adopt S. Ambrose's order in vv. 15, 16, 17 — 'lambs,' 'little sheep,' 
 'sheep' {agnos, oviculas, oves), which seems also to have been the read- 
 ing of the old Syriac : but the balance of evidence is against it. But 
 without counting the possible difference between 'little sheep' and 
 'sheep,' there are three important distinctions obliterated in the A. V., 
 — the two words rendered 'love,' the two rendered 'feed,' and the two 
 rendered 'know.' 
 
 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 vs'hich he once 
 too rashly claimed (xiii. 37) will after all be granted to him. 
 
 18. Verily, verily] This peculiarity of S. John's Gospel (see on i. 
 55) is preserved in the appendix to it [13]. 
 
 wast young] Literally, wast younger than thou art now. He was 
 now between youth and age. 
 
 stretch forth thy hands] For help. 
 
 shall gird thee] As a criminal. 
 
 whither thou wouldest not] To death. This does not mean thai at 
 the last S. 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 common interpretation that 'stretch forth thy hands' refers to the 
 attitude in crucifixion, and 'gird thee' to binding to the cross, is pre- 
 carious, 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 in the previous group 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 con- 
 nected 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. 
 
vv. 19—21.] S. JOHN, XXI. 375 
 
 whither thou wouldest not. This spake he, signifying byjig 
 what death he should glorify God. And when he had] 
 spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me. j 
 
 20 — 23. The Misunderstood Saying respecting the EvangelistX 
 
 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus Wo 
 loved following ; which also leaned on his breast at supper, 
 and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee ? Peter li 
 seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this ftian 1 
 
 19. This spake he] Now this He spake. 
 
 sipiifying by what death] Signt/yiiig by what manner of death. 
 This comment is quite in S. John's style (comp. xii. 33, xviii. 32) [14]. 
 It will depend on the interpretation of v, 18 whether we understand 
 this to mean crucifixion or simply martyrdom. That S. Peter was 
 crucified at Rome rests on sufficient evidence, beginning with Tertullian 
 (Scorp. XV.), and that he requested to be crucified head downwards is 
 stated by Eusebius (ff. E. in. i. 2) on the authority of Origen. 
 
 }u should glo7-ify\ Literally, he shall glorify. 
 
 Follow me] Perhaps the literal meaning is not altogether to be ex- 
 cluded; and it appears from S. Peter's 'turning about' {v. 20), that he 
 understood the words literally and began to follow. But no doubt this 
 command here, as elsewhere in the Gospels, is to be understood figura- 
 tively, the precise shade of meaning being determined by the context. 
 Comp. i. 43; Matt. viii. 22, ix. 9, xix. 21. In the present case there is 
 probably a reference to xiii. 36, 37; and the 'following' includes follow- 
 ing to a martyr's death, and possibly the precise death of crucifixion. 
 
 20 — 23. The Misunderstood Saying respecting the Evangelist. 
 
 20. Peter, turning about, seeth] Omit 'then.' The graphic details 
 are those of an eyewitness. 
 
 leaned] Better, leaned back. The allusion is to the momentary 
 change of postui-e (xiii. 25) in order to ask who was the traitor, not to 
 the position which he occupied next our Lord throughout the meal (xiii. 
 
 23)- 
 
 21. Peter seeitJg him] Peter therefore seeing him. Once more we 
 see the intimacy between these two Apostles. When S. Peter is told 
 to follow, S. John does so also unbidden ; and S. Peter having received 
 his own commission asks about that of his friend. Comp. xviii. 15, 
 XX. I [15]. 
 
 and what shall this man doT] Literally, but this man, what? Not 
 so much 'what shall he doV as 'what about him?' What is the lot in 
 store for him. The question indicates the natural wish to <now the 
 future of a friend, all the more natural after having been told something 
 about his own future. Hence the 'therefore' at the beginning of the 
 verse. As usual, S. Peter acts on the first impulse. 
 
376 S. JOHN, XXI. [vv. 22, 23. 
 
 do ? Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, 
 what is that to thee? follow thou me. Then went this 
 saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should 
 not die : yet Jesus said not unto him. He shall not die ; 
 but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee ? 
 
 22. If Iwiir^ Christ died and rose again that He might become the 
 Lord and Master both of the dead and the living (Rom. xiv. 9). He 
 speaks here in full consciousness of this sovereignty. For the use of 'I 
 will' by Christ comp. xvii. 24; Matt. viii. 3 and parallels, xxvi. 39. 
 While the 'I will' asserts the Divine authority, the 'if keeps the deci- 
 sion secret. 
 
 that he tarry'] Better, that he a^\6.Q; it is S. John's favourite word 
 which we have had so often (i. 32, 33, 39, 40, ii. 12, iii. 36, iv. 40, &c., 
 and twelve times in chap, xv.) [16]. S. Peter's lot was to suffer, S. 
 John's to wait. For 'abide' in the sense of remain in life comp. xii. 34; 
 Phil. i. 25; I Cor. xv. 6. 
 
 till I come'] Literally, while I am coming. The words express rather 
 the interval of waiting than the endoi'xX.. Comp. ix. 4; Mark vi. 45. 
 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 answer 
 but refusing one. The reply is purposely hypothetical and perhaps pur- 
 posely 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.' 
 
 what is that to thee?] The words are evidently a rebuke. There is a 
 sense in which 'Am I my brother's keeper?' is a safeguard against curi- 
 osity and presumption rather than a shirking of responsibility. 
 
 follow thou me] ' Thou ' is emphatic, contrasting with the preceding 
 'he,' which is emphatic also. 
 
 23. Then went this saying] This saying therefore went. 
 
 abrocui among] 'Litera.Wy, forth utito: comp. Matt. ix. 26; Mark i. 
 28; Rom. X. 18. 
 
 the brethren] This phrase, common in the Acts (ix. 30, xi. i, 29, xv. 
 I, 3, 22, 23, &c.), is not used elsewhere in the Gospels for believers 
 generally; but we see the way prepared for it in the Lord's words to the 
 disciples (Matt, xxiii. 8), to S. Peter (Luke xxii. 32), and to Mary 
 Magdalene (xx. 17). 
 
 sfiould not die] Literally, doth not die; so also 'shall not die' in the 
 next clause. 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 character of the answer given, merely pointing out the hypo- 
 
V. 24 T S. JOHN, XXI. 377 
 
 24, 25. Cofiduding Notes. 
 
 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and 24 
 wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true. 
 
 thetical 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 limits of the first century for the date 
 of this Gospel. 
 
 24, 25, Concluding 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 exterjial evidence, as in the case of the preceding 
 verses, is in favour of their being both by the same hand, and that the 
 writer of the first twenty- three verses, and therefore S. 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 pro- 
 duced 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 possibly 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 remark which the 
 writer may have heard from S. 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 con- 
 fidence 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. 
 
 24. which testifieth\ Better, which bearetli witness. Whether 
 'these things' refers to the whole Gospel, or only to the contents of 
 chap. xxi. cannot be determined. 
 
 wyote\ Note the change from present to aorist. The witness still 
 continues at the present time; the writing took place once for all in the 
 past. 
 
 we knowX Because S. John uses the singular, 'he knoweth,' in xix. 
 35, it does not follow that he would not use the plural here. It would 
 have been out of place in the middle' of his narrative to add the testi- 
 mony 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 fide- 
 liiy with which he has committed to writing this last instalment of 
 
378 S. JOHN, XXI. [v. 25. 
 
 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the 
 which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that 
 even the world itself could not contain the books that 
 should be written. Amen. 
 
 evangelical and apostolic traditions. Comp. i John v. 18, 19, 20, 15, 
 iii. 14, i. I ; 3 John 12. 
 
 25. every one] Literally, one by one. 
 
 I suppose] The Greek word {oimai) occurs nowhere else in N. T. 
 excepting Phil. i. 17; James i. 7. The use of the first person singular 
 is very unlike S. John. 
 
 Tf 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. 
 
 could not contain] The bold hyperbole (which may be S. John's, 
 though added by another hand) expresses the yearnings of Christendom 
 throughout all ages. The attempts which centuiy after century con- 
 tinue 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 manysidedness 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 fragmentary account of scarcely 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? 
 
 Amen] The addition of a copyist. 
 
APPENDICES. 
 
 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. S. 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. 
 
 S. John's gives five distinct intimations of the date. 
 
 1. 'Now de/ore the Feast of the Passover' (xiii. i); a phrase which 
 gives a date to the feet-washing and farewell discourses at the Last 
 Supper. 
 
 2. 'Buy those things that we have need of /or the Feast'' (xiii. 29); 
 which again shews that the Last Supper was not the Passover. 
 
 3. 'They themselves went not into the palace, that they might not 
 be defiled, but might eat the Passover'' (xviii. 28); which proves that 
 'early' on the day of the crucifixion the Jews who delivered our Lord 
 to Pilate had not yet eaten the Passover. 
 
 4. 'It was the preparation of the Passover; it was about the sixth 
 hour. And he saith to the Jews, Behold your King' (xix. I4); which 
 shews that the Jews had not postponed eating the Passover because of 
 urgent business : the Passover had not yet begun. 
 
 5. 'The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the 
 bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath day, (for that 
 Sabbath day was an high day) asked Pilate &c.' (xix. 31). Here 'the 
 preparation ' (paraskeue) may mean either the preparation for the Sab- 
 bath, i.e. Friday, or the preparation for the Passover, i.e. Nisan 14. But 
 the statement that the Sabbath was a 'high day' most naturally means 
 that the Sabbath in that week coincided with the first day of the Feast: 
 so that the day was 'the preparation' for both the Sabbath and the 
 Feast. 
 
 From these passages it is evident that ^. jfohn places the Crucifixion 
 on the preparation or eve of the Passover, i. e. on Nisan 14, on the after- 
 noon of which the Paschal Lamb was slain; and that he makes the Pass- 
 over begin at sunset that same day. Consequently our Lord was in the 
 grave before the Passover began, and the Last Supper cannot have been 
 the Paschal meal. 
 
 Moreover these statements fall in very well with the almost universal 
 view that the Crucifixion took place on a Friday, on the evening of 
 which the Passover as well as the Sabbath began. 
 
 It is from the Synoptists that we inevitably derive the impression that 
 the Last Supper was the Paschal meal (Matt. xxvi. 2, 17, iS, 19; Mark 
 xiv. 14 — 16; Luke xxii. 7, 11, 13, 15). Whatever method of explana- 
 tion be adopted, it is the impression derived from the Synoptists that 
 must be modified, not that derived from S. 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 so?ne sense the character of a Paschal meal ; but it is quite 
 
38o APPENDICES. 
 
 evident from S. John that the Last Supper was not the Passover in the 
 ordinary Jewish sense. When the Sabbath gave place to the Lord's 
 Day the day was deliberately changed in order to mark the change of 
 associations : a similar change for similar reasons may have been adopted 
 when the Eucharist supplanted the Passover. The fact that the whole 
 Church for eight centuries always used leavened bread at the Eucharist, 
 and that the Eastern Church continues to do so to this day, may point 
 to a tradition that the meal at wliich the Eucharist was instituted was 
 not the Paschal meal. Moreover Jews, to whom the Gospel was to be 
 preached first, might have found a serious stumbling-block in the fact 
 that He who was proclaimed 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. xxvi. 1 7 and Excursus V. in Dr Farrar's .S". 
 Luke. ) 
 
 B. S. PETER'S DENIALS. 
 
 The diflSculties 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 S. Matthew 
 and S. Mark, those of S. Luke and S. John are independent both of the 
 first two Gospels and of one anolher. 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 stoiy 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 circumstances. 
 All four Evangelists tell us that three denials were predicted (Matt. xxvi. 
 34; Mark xiv. 30; Luke xxii. 34; John xiii. 38) and all (out 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 S. Luke 
 and S. John place it during the Supper, S. Mark and S. Matthew during 
 
APPENDICES. 381 
 
 the walk to Gethsemane. But the words of the first two Evangelists 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, chro- 
 nology 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 S. Peter and his assailants, it is quite unnecessary to suppose 
 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?" Dc Cons. Ev. II. xxiv. 55. 
 
 C. ORDER OF THE CHIEF EVENTS OF TPIE 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 determined with 
 certainty, and that the precise date of events can in no case be deter- 
 mined with certainty. But for the sake of clearness of view it is well 
 to have a tentative scheme; bearing in mind that, like a 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. 
 
 .0 p. M. 
 
 The Last Supper and Last Discourses. 
 
 The Agony. 
 
 The Detrayah 
 
 Conveyance to the high-priest's house. 
 
 Examination before Annas. 
 
 Examination before Caiaphas at an informal meeting 
 
 of the Sanhedrin. 
 Condemnation to death at a formal meeting of the 
 
 Sanhedrin. 
 First Examination before Pilate. 
 Examination before Herod. 
 Second Examination before Pilate. 
 The scourging and first mockery by Pilate's soldiers. 
 5.30 A.M. Pilate gives sentence of Crucifixion. 
 Second mockery by Pilate's soldiers. 
 9 A. M. The Crucifixion. 
 
 First Word. ' Father, forgive tJiein, &c.' 
 Second — ' Woman, behold thy son' 
 
 ' Behold, thy mother.' 
 IhiiJ ~ ' Today thou shall be, &C.' 
 
 Thursday after 6.0 p. M. 
 
 (Nisan 14) 
 
 II P.M. 
 
 Midnight 
 Friday i a.m. 
 
 2 A.M. 
 
 
 3 A.M. 
 
 
 4.30 A.M. 
 
 
 5 A.M. 
 5.30 A.M. 
 
 6 a.m. 
 
382 APPENDICES. 
 
 Friday Noon to 3 p.m. 
 
 The Darkness. 
 
 
 Fourth Word. ' My God, My God, &c. ' 
 
 
 Fifth — ' I thirst: 
 
 
 Sixth — ' It is finished: 
 
 3 P.M. 
 
 Seventh — ' Father, into Thy hatids, &c.' 
 
 
 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. 
 
 D. ON SOME POINTS OF GEOGRAPHY. 
 
 It seems to be quite certain that the attractive reconciliation of the 
 two readings, ^ridavlq. and BrjOa^apj., derived from Lieutenant Conder's 
 conjectures, and suggested in tlie 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 philologi- 
 cal 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 there- 
 fore 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 Bdthdniya should be represented by t] in '&-r)davia.. 
 Bethania is a compound of Beth, and some place on tlie 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 established, their 
 present view. There is, however, good reason for doubting its cor- 
 rectness. 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's seed, supposed privileges of, 
 67, 187, 189 
 
 adultery, the woman taken in, 176 — 180; 
 the paragraph part of the Gospel narra- 
 tive, but not of the Fourth Gospel, 175 
 
 'Venon, 100 
 
 Ahitophcl, 318 
 
 allegories in S. John, 210, 286 
 
 Alogi, rejection of the Fourth Gospel by 
 the, 20, 21 
 
 analysis of the Gospel, 55 — 58 
 
 Andrew, character of, 79, 140, 251 
 
 angels, 82 
 
 Annas, his office and influence, 322 ; 
 ■examination of Jesus by him peculiar 
 10 S. John, 323 
 
 Apocalypse, relation of the Fourth Gospel 
 to, 30 
 
 Apocryphal Gospels, miracles of the 
 Child Jesus in, 86 
 
 Apostles' defects stated without reserve, 
 91, 114, 115, 250, 263, 276, 357 
 
 Apostolic Fathers, assumed silence of, as 
 to the Fourth Gospel, 18, 19 
 
 appearancesafter the resurrection, 354,367 
 
 Arianism condemned, 127, 222 
 
 Arimathea, Joseph of, coincidence be- 
 tween S. John and S. Mark as to his 
 character and connexion with Nico- 
 demus, 352 
 
 attempts to arrest Jesus, 169, 173, 241, 
 248, 319 
 
 ascension, implied but not narrated by 
 S. John, 156, 359, 97 
 
 Augustine quoted. 125, 146 
 
 authenticity, of the Gospel, by whom dis 
 puted, 18, 21 ; external evidence fo 
 20, 21 ; internal evidence for, 22 — 30, 
 50 ; internal evidence against, 30 — 32 
 47 — 49; of the Appendix, 367, 377 
 
 baptism. Christian, referred to in the dis 
 course with Nicodemus, 25: of Jesus, 
 100, 105 ; of John, 100 
 
 Baptist, his connexion with the Evan 
 gelist, T2, 77 ; argument from the 
 Evanglist's calling him simply 'John " 
 29, 64 ; crisis in his ministry, 71 ; he is 
 a voice crying in the wilderness, 7j 
 
 Barabbas, 335 
 
 Barnabas, epistle of, its evidence to the 
 Fourth Gospel, 19 
 
 Bartholomew, reasons for identifying 
 with Nathanael, 80 
 
 barley loaves, 140 
 
 Basilides, ig, 65 
 
 baskets, different kinds of at the feed- 
 ing of 5000 and the feeding of 4000, 141 
 
 Bcthabara,lalsereading for iSethany, 74 
 
 Bethany, two places of this name, 74, 
 228, 233 
 
 Bethesda, 122 
 
 Bethsaida, two places of this name, 80, 138 
 
 betrayal, 318 
 
 blasphemy, the Lord accused of, 127, 196, 
 222 
 
 blind, man born, healed, 199 ; his pro- 
 gressive faith, 201 ; his confession of 
 faith, 207 
 
 brethren of the Lord, various theories 
 respecting, 87 ; cannot be the sons of 
 Alphaeus, 162 
 
 bridegroom, figure of the Messiah, 102 
 
 Caesar, speak against, 340 
 
 Caesarea, Pilate's residence, 334 
 
 Caiaphas, hisoffice, 242 ; his prophecy, 243 
 
 Calvary or Golgotha, 343 
 
 Cana, two places of this name, 83 ; nature 
 
 of the miracle at Cana of Galilee, 85 
 Capernaum, the modern Tell HAnt. 87, 
 
 156; argument from the mention of a 
 
 visit to, 87 
 capital punishment, whether allowed to 
 
 the Jews by the Romans, 178, 330 
 centurion's servant diili;rent from the 
 
 nobleman's son, 120 
 Cerinthus, the Fourth Gospel attributed 
 
 to, 21 
 characteristics of the Fourth Gospel, 38 
 
 — 46, 63, 64, 65, 155; of S. John, 16, .46 
 chief priests, mostly Sadducees, 169, 241 ; 
 
 their baseness, 342 
 chronology of the Fourth Gospel inde- 
 finite, 47, 137, 160, 218 
 Church, first beginning of the, 77 . powtis 
 
 granted to, 362 
 
384 
 
 INDEX I. 
 
 circumcision prior to the Sabbath, 166 
 
 cleansing of the Temple in S. John dis- 
 tinct from that in the Synoptists, 89 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, 20, 33 
 
 Clementine homilies, 198, 214 
 
 cloths, 353, 356 
 
 Clopas or Alphaeus, 34.6 
 
 codices, the principal, containing the 
 Gospel, 51, S2 
 
 coincidences, between S. Paul and S. 
 John, 66, 280 ; between the Synoptists 
 and S. John. 50 
 
 commandment, Christ's new, 271, 290 
 
 cocks, not excluded from Jerusalem, 327 
 
 cross, size of the, 348 ; title on, 344 
 
 crown of thorns, 336 
 
 cup of suffering, coincidence respecting, 
 322 
 
 date of the Gospel, 33 
 
 darkness, in a metaphorical sense, pecu- 
 liar to S. John, 63 
 
 David, Christ's descent from, 173 
 
 death, punishment of, whether allowed to 
 the Jews, 178, 330 
 
 Dedication, Feast of, 219 
 
 denials, S. Peter's, 326 ; why narrated 
 by S. John, 327 ; difficulties respecting, 
 380 
 
 destruction of Jerusalem, S. John wrote 
 after the, 234 
 
 devil, personal existence of the, 191 ; in- 
 fluence on Judas, 262 
 
 devil, or demon, Christ accused of being 
 possessed by a, 166, 193, 194, 21 S 
 
 disciples' imperfections, 86, 91, 114, 115, 
 156, 250, 357 
 
 discourses in the Fourth Gospel con- 
 trasted with those in the Synoptic 
 Gospels, 48, 91 
 
 discourses of Christ, with Nicodemus, 
 91; on the Source of life, 126; on the 
 Support of life, 146; at the Feast of 
 Tabernacles, 163 ; at the Feast of the 
 Dedication, 219 ; at the last Passover, 
 261 — 316 
 
 Divinity claimed by Jesus, 1S6, 192, 196, 
 222, 285, 289 
 
 Docetism excluded from the Fourth Gos- 
 pel, 144, 351 
 
 door of the fold, allejory of, 210, 213. 
 
 dove visible at the baptism, 75 
 
 Ecce homo quoted, 335 
 
 Elijah, argument from the Baptist's denial 
 
 that he is, 73 
 Ephesus, the abode of S. John, 14 ; the 
 
 place where he wrote his Gospel, 32 ; 
 
 the elders of, 32, 377 
 Ephraim, city called, 244 
 Epilogue, an afterthought, 367 
 Epistle, first of S. John ; relation lo the 
 
 Gospel, 19, so, 280 
 
 eternal life already possessed by be- 
 lievers, 104, 129, 153, 155, 30S 
 
 Eucharist, implied in the discourse on 
 the Bread of Life, 146 ; why omitted 
 by S. John, 266 ; symbolized at tlie 
 crucifixion, 350 
 
 Evangelists, concurrence of all four, 50, 
 I37> 317. 355. 381 
 
 evenings, the two Jewish, 143 
 
 excommunication, Jewish, 174, 203, 206 
 
 faith, the text of a child of God, 66 
 false readings, 67, 74, loi, 159, 196, 335,346 
 feast, the unnamed in v. i, probably not 
 
 a Passover, 122 
 feasts, Jev/ish, S. John groups his narra- 
 tive round, 88 
 five thousand, feeding of the, 137 
 forger of a gospel confronted by insuper- 
 able difficulties, 23 
 fragments, argument from the command 
 
 to gather up, 141 
 funeral customs among the Jews, 234, 353 
 
 Gabbatha, not a mosaic pavement but 
 
 the temple-mound, 340 
 Galileans, characteristics of, 10; ill repute 
 
 of, 81, 173, 175 
 Galilee, mixed population in, 11 ; prophets 
 
 from, 175 ; ministry in, 160 
 gapsinS. John's narrative, 47, 136, 160, 218 
 garments, 262 
 
 Gentiles seek Christ, 251, 252 
 Gerizim, temple on, in 
 Gethsemane, anticipation of the agony 
 
 in, 253 
 Gnostic demonologj', 191, 192 
 Gnostics, the witness of, to the Fourth 
 
 Gospel, 22 
 Gnosticism, excluded from the Fourth 
 
 Gospel, 22, 112, 223, 351 
 Golgotha, 343 
 
 Gospel, not a Life of Christ, 34 
 grace before meat, 140 
 grave, 233, 239 
 
 Greek names among the Apostles, 751 
 Greeks desiring to see Jesus, 251 
 guards at the Cross, 345 
 
 Hebrew, evidence that the author of the 
 Fourth Gospel knew, 152, 249, 266, 352 
 
 Herod Antipas, ii8 
 
 high-priest, supposed to have prophetical 
 gifts, 243 ; doubt as to who is meant by 
 the title, 323, 324 
 
 Holy Ghost, 283 
 
 hyssop, 348 
 
 Ignatian epistles, their evidence to the 
 
 Fourth Gospel, 19, 108 
 interpolations, 123, 175, 196 
 Irenaeus, evidence to the Fourth Gospel, 
 
 20 ; to the duration of the Lord's 
 
 ministry, 47, 196 
 
INDEX I. 
 
 5S5 
 
 Jacob's well, 107, log 
 
 James, brother of S. John, 9; not men- 
 tioned by the Evangelist, 79, 346 
 
 Jerome, on the brethren of the Lord, 87 ; 
 on Sychar, 107 ; on the paragraph of 
 the woman taken in adultery, 175 ; on 
 the Lord's writing on the ground, 179 
 
 Jerusalem, destroyed before S. John 
 wrote, 234 ; his minute knowledge of, 26 
 
 Jesus : 
 
 (i) The Ministry. 
 
 Baptist's testimony to Him, 74 ; dis- 
 ciples' testimony to Him, 77 ; turns 
 water into wine at Cana, S3 ; pays a 
 brief visit to Capernaum, 17 ; cleanses 
 the Temple, 88 ; discourses with 
 Nicodemus, g2 ; converts many 
 Samaritans, 105 ; heals the royal 
 official's son, 118; heals a paralytic 
 at Bethesda, 121 ; reasons with the 
 Jews about the Son as the Source of 
 life, 126; feeds five thousand, 137; 
 who would make Him a king, 142 ; 
 walks on the water, 143 ; reasons with 
 the Jews about the Son as the Sup- 
 port of life, 145 ; with the Twelve 
 about desertion of Him, 158; with 
 His brethren about manifesting Him- 
 self, 160 ; with the Jews at the Feast 
 of Tabernacles, 163 ; is marked for 
 arrest, 173 ; [rescues the woman 
 taken in adultery, 176;] charges the 
 Jews with seeking to kill Him, 188; 
 claims to be God, 196; heals the 
 man born blind, 197 ; delivers the 
 allegories of the Fold and of the 
 Good Shepherd, 210; reasons with 
 the Jews at the Feast of the Dedica- 
 tion, 219 ; retires into Peraea, 225 ; 
 raises Lazarus from the dead, 227 ; 
 is marked for death by Caiaphas, 
 243; is anointed by Mary of Bethany, 
 246; enters Jerusalem in triumph, 
 249 ; is sought for by Gentile prose- 
 lytes, C51 ; retires from public teach- 
 ing. 257 
 (ii) Tlie Issues 0/ the Ministry. 
 washes His disciples' feet, 261 ; points 
 out the traitor, 267; delivers His 
 farewell discourses to the eleven, 
 270 ; foretells Peter's denials, 272 ; 
 answers Thomas, 275 ; Philip, 276 ; 
 Judas not Iscariot, 282 ; delivers the 
 allegory of the Vine, 286; promises to 
 send the Paraclete and to return, 295 ; 
 prays for Himself, His disciples, and 
 His Church, 307 ; is arrested in the 
 garden, 318 ; examined before Annas, 
 322 ; denied by Peter, 326 ; examined 
 by Pilate, 328; mocked, sentenced, 
 and crucified, 336; dies and is buried, 
 347 ; manifests Himself after His 
 resurrection to Mary Magdalene, 
 
 S. JOHN 
 
 337 ; to the ten Apostles, 360; to 
 Thomas, 36^ ; to seven disciples at 
 the sea of Tiberias, 367 ; gives Peter 
 his last commission and foretells his 
 death ; rebukes his curiosity about 
 the Evangelist, 375 
 
 Jewish elements in the Fourth Gospel, 
 25—27 
 
 Jews, hostility of, to Christianity, 49 ; 
 S. John's view of them, 72 
 
 John, the son of Zebedee; his parentage, 
 9; nationality, 10; connexion with the 
 Baptist, 12, 77 ; fiery zeal, 13, 15 ; gives 
 a home to the Blessed Virgin, 14, 347 ; 
 life at Ephesus, 14 ; traditions about 
 him, 15, 16 ; chief characteristics, 16, 17; 
 probably the unnamed disciple in i. 35, 
 77; and in xviii. 15, 323; mode of reck- 
 oning time, 78,107,119, 341 
 
 John, the Baptist; the Evangelist's man- 
 ner of naming him, 29, 64; not the 
 Light but the Lamp, 64, 132; his wit- 
 ness to the Messiah, 68, 74, 75, 77, loi ; 
 the friend of the Bridegroom, 102 ; his 
 baptism, 100, 105 
 
 John, the father of Peter, 79, 371 
 
 Jordan, ford of, at Bethany, 74 ; the coun- 
 try beyond, 225 
 
 Joseph, husband of the Virgin, 83 
 
 Joseph of Arimathea ; his character and 
 connexion with Nicodemus, 352 
 
 Judas Iscariot ; his name and character, 
 159; murmurs at Mary of Bethany, 247 ; 
 receives the sop and is entered by 
 Satan, 269; helps to arrest Jesus, 318 
 
 Judas, not Iscariot, 282 
 
 Judas of Galilee, rising of, 11 
 
 Justin Martyr's evidence to the Fourth 
 Gospel, 19, 73, 94, 197 
 
 Keble quoted, 360 
 
 Kedron, the ravine of the, 318 
 
 kingdom, nature of Christ's, 332 
 
 Last Day, 151 
 
 Last Supper, not a Passover, 379 
 
 Lazarus, raising of, objections to the, 226 ; 
 
 identifications of, 228 
 Levites, argument from the mention of, 72 
 Liddon quoted, 96 
 Life, 63, 27s 
 Light, 63, 64, i8o 
 Lightfoot quoted, 19, 69, 268, 280 
 Lord, 149, 179, 207 
 Love, the Fourth Gospel the Gospel of, 
 
 17, 51, 209, 261, 270, 271, 290 
 
 Magdalene ; see Mary 
 
 Majestas, Pilate's fear of being accused 
 
 of, 340 
 Malchus, 322 
 Manasseh, founder of the rival worship 
 
 on Gerizim, iii 
 Marcion'srejectionof the Fourth Gospel, 20 
 
386 
 
 INDEX I. 
 
 marriage, Christ gives his sanction to, 87 ; 
 symbolical of HisrelationtoHis Church, 
 102 
 
 Martha, probably older than Mary and 
 Lazarus, 229, 234; coincidence between 
 S. John and S. Luke respecting her, 
 234; her progressive faith, 235 
 
 Mary Magdalene, introduced as a person 
 well known, 346; visits the sepulchre, 
 355 ; manifestation to her, 357 ; nature 
 of the rebuke to her, 359 
 
 Mary, the wife of Clopas, probably iden- 
 tical with the mother of James the less, 
 
 Mary, sister of Lazarus, not identical 
 with the prostitute of Luke vii., nor 
 with Mary Magdalene, 228; coinci- 
 dence between S. John and S. Luke 
 respecting her, 234; her devotion, 246 ; 
 argument from the praise bestowed on 
 her, 248 
 
 Mary, the Blessed Virgin, rebuked by 
 Christ at Cana, 84; her relationship to 
 His brethren, 87; to S. John, to, 3^6, 
 347 ; no special manifestation to her 
 after the Resurrection, 360 
 
 Messiah, Jewish ideas respecting well- 
 known to the Evangelist, 73, 82, 83, 
 142; Samaritan, 106, 113 
 
 Meyer quoted, 103, 159. 268 
 
 ministry, duration of Christ's, 47, 48 
 
 miracles in the Fourth Gospel symboli- 
 cal, 40; spontaneous, 123 
 
 mission of Jesus distinct from that of His 
 disciples, 198, 361; of the Holy Spirit, 
 279, 283, 294 
 
 money, 88, 139 
 
 Moses, contrasted with Christ, 149, 203 : 
 testifies to Christ, 80, 136; and against 
 the Jews, 136, 166 ; the giver, neither 
 of the Law, 69 ; nor of the manna, 149 
 
 Mount Gerizim, temple upon, 111 
 
 Mount of Olives not mentioned by S. 
 John, 176 
 
 multitude, fickleness of the, 91, 142, 158, 
 160, 186, 256 
 
 Nathanael, reasons for identifying with 
 Bartholomew, 80; his character, 81 
 
 Nazarene, 320 
 
 Nazareth, evil report of, 81 
 
 Neapolis, or Sychem, 107 
 
 New Commandment, 271, 290 
 
 Newman, Cardinal, quoted, 93 
 
 Nicodemus, mentioned by S. John only, 
 93; his character, 93; coincidence be- 
 tween S. John and S. Mark in con- 
 nexion with him, 252 
 
 nobleman's son distinct from the centu- 
 rion's servant, 120 
 
 Olives, Mount of, see Mount 
 orally, the Fourth Gospel delivered at 
 first, 33, 51 
 
 Papias, 19 
 
 parables not found in the Fourth Gospel, 
 210 
 
 Paraclete, threefold office of the, 297; 
 mission of, see Mission 
 
 parallelism in the Fourth Gospel, 45, 62, 
 72, 184 
 
 paralytic at Bethesda, 123 
 
 Passion, prominent thoughts in S. John's 
 narrative of the, 317; probable order 
 of the events of the, 381 
 
 Passover, customs at the, 267, 268, 269, 
 322; the first, 88; the second, 138; the 
 last, 245 ; the Last Supper not the Pass- 
 over, 379 
 
 Paul, coincidences between S. John and 
 S., 66, 280 
 
 Pentecost anticipated, 362 
 
 Peter, brought to Jesus by his brother 
 Andrew, 79; named by Jesus, 79; his 
 impetuosity, 264, 272, 321, 356, 370; his 
 denials, 324, 326, 380; his repentance 
 implied but not recorded by S. John, 
 327 ; his visit to the sepulchre, 356 ; 
 commission to him and prediction of 
 his death, 371 
 
 Pharisees, the only sect mentioned by 
 S. John, 73 
 
 Philip, called by Jesus, 80; consulted by 
 Jesus, 139; rebuked by Jesus, 276 ; his 
 character, 276 
 
 Philo, contrasted with S. John, 6r, 67 
 
 Pilate, introduced in the narrative as well 
 known, 329; his residence, 328; tries 
 to avoid putting Jesus to death, 330; 
 his famous question, 334; his conflicting 
 fears, 338, 340; his character, 345 
 
 Polycarp's evidence to the First Epistle, 
 19; fallacious argument from his con- 
 troversy with Anicetus, 32 
 
 Praetorium, 328 
 
 prayer of the Great High Priest, 336 
 
 priests, 72 ; mostly Sadducees, yet com- 
 bine with the Pharisees, 169, 241, 
 
 3'9 
 procession of the Holy Spirit, 294 
 Procurator, Pilate as, conducts the ex- 
 amination, 331 
 prophecies fulfilled in Christ, 89, 249, 343, 
 
 punctuation, differences of, 65, 166, 230, 
 
 253, 270, 278 
 purification, ceremonial, 84, 244 
 Purim, Feast of, 122 
 purple robe, 336 
 purpose, constructions implying, frequent 
 
 in S. John, 115, 118, 148, 153, 195, 232, 
 
 243, 296, 297 
 purpose of the Gospel, 34, 366 
 
 readings, differences of, 67, 70, 104, 141, 
 
 151, 154, 162, 163, 1S9, 199, 206, 212, 
 
 220, 266, 311, 318, 326 
 remission of sins by the Church, 363 
 
INDEX I. 
 
 3S7 
 
 reserve, a characteristic of S. John, 77, 
 
 79. 84, .346 
 resurrection, spiritual, 129 ; of the wicked, 
 
 130; of Christ, 355 ; Jewish belief as 
 
 to, 235 
 robber or bandit, 211, 335; S. John and 
 
 the robber, 15 
 
 Sabbath, of later origin than Circum- 
 cision, i66; Christ's attitude towards, 
 127; miracles wrought on, 201 
 
 Sadducees, not mentioned by S. John, 73 ; 
 combine with the Pharisees, 169, 241 
 
 Salome, mother of S. John, 9; probably 
 sister of the Virgin, 346 
 
 Samaria, 106 
 
 Samaritan, Jesus taunted withbeinga, 193 
 
 Samaritans, relations of, to the Jews, 108, 
 112; origin, 109; readiness to believe 
 in Jesus, 116, 117 
 
 Samaritan Messiah, 106, 113 
 
 Samaritan woman, historical character of 
 the narrative of, io5; her progressive 
 faith. III ; the revelation vouchsafed to 
 her, 114 
 
 Samaritan religion, iii, 112 
 
 Sanhedrin, 169J 174, 178, 327; in a diffi- 
 culty respectmg the execution of Jesus, 
 
 ^329 
 
 Satan, personal existence of, 191 ; in- 
 fluence on Judas, 262 
 
 scourging, Pilate's object in inflicting, 336 
 
 Sebaste, or Samaria, 107 
 
 sepulchre, 233, 339 
 
 serpent, argument from the mention of, 97 
 'Signs, 86 
 
 Siloam, pouring of water from, 171 ; iden- 
 tified with Birket Silwau, 200 
 
 Simon, S. John's usage in employing this 
 name for S. Peter, 372 
 
 Solomon's porch, 219 
 
 Son of Man, use of the phrase in the 
 Gospels, 82; in O. T., 83; its applica- 
 tion to the Messiah, 83 
 
 spiral movement in the Prologue, 71 
 
 style of S. John, 42 — 46, 63, 64, 133 
 
 superscription, 344 
 
 Supper, the Last, 261 
 
 Sychar, 107 
 
 symbolical interpretations of Scripture,37o 
 
 symbolism in the Fourth Gospel, 40, 41 
 
 synagogue at Capernaum, 156 
 
 Synoptic Gospels, relation of to the Fourth, 
 46—50, 77, 9t 
 
 Tabernacles, Feast of, 161 ; ceremonies 
 at, 171, iSo 
 
 table, mode of reclining at, 267 
 
 Talmud quoted, 140; declares fowls un- 
 clean, 327 ; declares that the Jews had 
 lost the power to inflict capital punish- 
 ment, 330 
 
 Targums, 61 
 
 Tatian, 63, 64 
 
 Temple, traffic in the, 88; Christ's public 
 teaching in, 164, [177,] 183, 196; Solo- 
 mon's porch in, 219 
 
 TertuUian, defender of a false reading, 
 67; witness to an early various read- 
 ing, 206; gives the true 'Note of the 
 Church', 272 
 
 Thaddaeus, or Judas, 282 
 
 Theophilus of Antioch; his evidence to 
 the Fourth Gospel, 20 
 
 Thomas, name and character of, 232, 
 275, 363; compared with Philip, 276; 
 nature of his scepticism, 364, 365 
 
 t'lorns, crown of, 336 
 
 Tiberias, not mentioned by the Synop- 
 tists. 138; a centre of education, 11; 
 sea of, 137, 363 ; the boats of known to 
 S. John, 144 
 
 Tiberius, chronology of bis reign in con- 
 nexion with Christ's ministry, 48; 
 Pilate's fear of him, 340 
 
 title on the Cross, 344 
 
 tombs, 233, 339 
 
 tragic brevity in S. John, 270 
 
 tragic tone in S. John, 64, 99, 103 
 
 transfiguration, not recorded by S. John, 
 21 ; not alluded to in v. 37, 133 
 
 transmigration of souls, 198 
 
 treasury, 183 
 
 Trench quoted, 232 
 
 Truth, Jesus is the, 275 ; the Gospel is 
 ihe, 333 
 
 trials, ecclesiastical and civil, of Jesus, 
 322—342 
 
 triumphal entry, 249 
 
 Twelve, the, spoken of as well-known, 158 
 
 typical characters in the Fourth Gospel, 
 39, 121 _ 
 
 typical miracles, 40, 370 
 
 Uncial manuscripts, table of, 51, 52 
 
 versions, table of principal, 52 
 vine, allegory of the, 286 
 vinegar, 348 
 
 voice of one crying, &c., 73 
 voice from heaven, 254 
 
 washing the disciples' feet, 263 
 
 water, the living, 109 
 
 water, Christ walking on the, 143 
 
 Way, Jesus is the, 275 
 
 Westcott quoted, 30, 42, 50, 146, 214, 
 
 307, 316, 317, 333, 362, 369 
 wilderness, 244 
 wine, water turned into, 85; objections 
 
 to the miracle, 86 
 woman of Samaria ; see Samaritan woman, 
 woman taken in adultery; see adultery, 
 women minister to Christ, 10; at the 
 
 cross, 346 ; visit the sepulchre, 354 
 words froui the cross, 382 
 
 Zebedee, 9 
 
3S8 
 
 INDEX II. 
 
 II. WORDS AND PHRASES EXPLAINED. 
 
 abide, 76 
 
 Advocate, 279 
 
 Aenon, 100 
 
 after these things, 121, 352, 
 
 367 
 all flesh, 308 
 allegory, 212 
 ask, 235, 279, 302 
 arm of the Lord, 257 
 bag or box, 247 
 band, 319 
 Barabbas, 335 
 basket, 141 
 bear, 247 
 beginning. 60 
 believe on, 66 
 Bethesda, 122 
 born again, 94 
 branch, 286 
 breathe, 96, 362 
 brethren, 376 
 Caesar's friend, 339 
 Caiaphas, 242 
 captain, 322 
 changers of money, 88 
 children of God, 66 
 children of light, 256 
 cloke, 293 
 Comforter, 279 
 comfortless, 281 
 convey oneself away, 125 
 convince, 99, 192, 298 
 crurifragiinn, 349 
 darkness, 63 
 demon, 193 
 Didymus, 232 
 dispersion, 170 
 division or schism, 173 
 do the truth, 99 
 door, 211 
 early, 528 
 eternal life, 98 
 fault, 334 
 
 feast of the Jews, 138, 160 
 feed, 373 
 firkin, 85 
 fish, 140 
 
 fisher's coat, 369 
 fornication, 190 
 friend of the Bridegroom, 
 
 102 
 fulness, 69 
 
 Gentiles, T71, 251 
 
 give His life, 215 
 
 give glory to God, 204 
 
 glory, 68 
 
 Golgotha, 343 
 
 Good Shepherd, 215 
 
 grace, 68 
 
 grave, 233 
 
 Greeks, 171, 251 
 
 groan, 237 
 
 hall of judgment, 328 
 
 hard, 156 
 
 Hebrew, 122 
 
 Hellenes, 251 
 
 Hosanna, 249 
 
 hour, 84, 252 
 
 Iscariot, 159 
 
 Jewry, 160 
 
 Jews, 72 
 
 judge, y8, 181 
 
 keep, 293, 309 
 
 Lamb of God, 75 
 
 lamp, 132 
 
 last day of the feast, 171 
 
 life, 63 
 
 light, 63, 64 
 
 living water, 109 
 
 Logos, 60 
 
 Lord, 149, '79> 207 
 
 love, 229, 372 
 
 manifest, 367 
 
 mansions, 274 
 
 master, 96, 236 
 
 Messias, 79 
 
 murderer, 191 
 
 name, 66 
 
 napkin, 240 
 
 Nathanael, 80 
 
 new, 271 
 
 nobleman, 118 
 
 now, 305 
 
 ointment of spikenard, 246 
 
 offended, 296 
 
 oiily-begotten, 68, 70, 98 
 
 only God, the, 135 
 
 ordain, 291 
 
 palace, 323 
 
 parable, 212 
 
 Paraclete, 279 
 
 Passover of the Jews, 88 
 
 pennyworth, 139, 247 
 
 power, 66, 218 
 
 pray, 279 
 
 preparation, 349, 3i;3 
 
 prince of this world, 254 
 
 proceed, 294 
 
 prophet, a, 64, 93, no, 202 
 
 prophet, the, 73, 142, 173 
 
 proverb, 303 
 
 purge, 287 
 
 put, 364 
 
 Rabbi, 78, 96, 115 
 
 Rabboni, 359 
 
 reprove, 99, 298 
 
 righteousness, 298 
 
 robber, 211, 335 
 
 ruler of the feast, 85 
 
 ruler of the Jews, 93, 258 
 
 ruler of this world, 254 
 
 sanctify, 312, 313 
 
 sayings, 136 
 
 schism, 173 
 
 scripture, 223 
 
 seal, 148 
 
 send, 361 
 
 sepulchre, 233 
 
 signs, 86 
 
 Siloam, 200 
 
 sir, 149, 179, 207 
 
 sleep, 231 
 
 Son of Man, 82 
 
 son of man, 130 
 
 son of perdition, 311 
 
 sop, 268 
 
 speech, 117, 190 
 
 spirit, 95 
 
 Sychar, 107 
 
 tabernacled, 63 
 
 temple, 90 
 
 tempt, 177 
 
 Thomas, 232 
 
 true, 65, 351 
 
 verily, verily, 82 
 
 voice, 95 
 
 way, 275 
 
 wash, 264 
 
 wind, 95 
 
 without sin, 178 
 
 word, 190, 194 
 
 Word, the, 60 
 
 word of God, 223 
 
 words, 136 
 
 works, 128 
 
 world, 65 
 
 CAMBRIDGE.- PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AND SONS, AT THE UNIVERSITY I'RESS. 
 
,Co-u--.L{^-.r.R.c.f 
 
r 
 
 E^^s^ 
 
 
 
Princeton Theological Seminary Libraries 
 
 1 1012 01262 8782 
 
 DATE DUE 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 HIGHSMITH #45115