^x OF rmcf> 
 
 V.5 
 
EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS 
 ON THE GOSPELS. 
 
 iPOPt ii^.A.M:ir.Y .A.Nr> raiAr.A.TE use. 
 
 WITH THE TEXT COMPLETE. 
 
 BY THE REV. J. C. RYLE, B.A., 
 
 CHRIST CHUBCH, OXFOED, 
 
 VICAR OP STRADBROKE, SUFFOLK. 
 
 ST. JOHlSr. VOL. I. 
 
 ISTEW YOEK: 
 ROBERT CARTER & BROTHERS, 
 
 530 BROADWAY. 
 1879. 
 
PREFACE 
 
 I SEND forth the volume now in the reader's hands, wifh 
 much diffidence, and a very deep sense of responsibility. 
 It is no light matter to publish an exposition of any 
 book in the Bible. It is a peculiarly serious undertak- 
 ing to attempt a Commentary on the Gospel of St. John. 
 
 I do not forget that we are all apt to exaggerate the 
 difficulties of our own particular department of literary 
 labour. But I think every intelligent student of Scrip- 
 ture will bear me out when I say, that St. John's Gospel 
 is pre-eminently full of things " hard to be understood." 
 (2 Pet. iii. 16.) It contains a large portion of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ's doctrinal teaching. It abounds in " deep 
 things of God," and " sayings of the King," which we 
 feel instinctively we have no line to fully fathom, no 
 mind to fully comprehend, no words to fully explain. 
 It must needs be that such a book of Scripture should 
 be difficult. I can truly say that I have commented on 
 many a verse in this Gospel with fear and trembling. I 
 have often said to myself, " Who is sufficient for these 
 things ?" — " The place whereon thou standest is holy 
 ground." (2 Cor. ii. 16 ; Exod. iii. 5.) 
 
 The nature of the work now published, requires a few 
 words of explanation. It is a continuation of the " Expo- 
 sitory Thoughts on the Gospels," of which four volumes, 
 comprising the first three Gospels, have been already 
 Bent forth. Like the volumes on St. Matthew, St. Mark 
 
IV PKEFACE. 
 
 and St. Luke, the basis of the work is a continuous series 
 of short expositions, intended for family or private read 
 ing, or for the use of those who visit the sick and the 
 poor. But, unlike the previous volumes, the work now 
 in the reader's hands contains full explanatory notes on 
 every verse of the portions expounded, forming, in fact, 
 a complete Commentary. 
 
 This "Commentary" is so extensive that it occupies 
 far more space than tll§ " Expository Thoughts," and is, 
 I must honestl}^ confess, the principal part of the work. 
 To some it may appear far too long and full. But the 
 circumstances of the times are my justification.* We 
 live in a day of abounding vagueness and indistinctness 
 on doctrinal subjects in religion. ISTow, if ever, it is the 
 duty of all advocates of clear, well-defined, sharply-cut 
 theolog}^, to supply proof that their views are thoroughly 
 borne out by Scripture. I have endeavoured to do so in 
 this Commentar}^ I hold that the Gospel of St. John, 
 rightly interpreted, is the best and simplest answer to 
 those who profess to admire a vague and indistinct Chris- 
 tianity. 
 
 * The expectations of Bengel, the German commentator, appear likely 
 to be fulfilled with curious accuracy in the present day. He said, in the 
 year A. D. 1740, — "Though Socinianism and Popery at present appear 
 mutually aloof, they will in process of time form a mighty confluence, 
 that will burst all bounds, and bring everything to a crisis. "We 
 may expect it in the following way. The residue of heavenly influence 
 on the professing Church, as a body, wUl have utterly evaporated, its 
 holy things having been already more and more prostituted to the spirit 
 of this world. The IToly Spirit being thus withdrawn from the camp at 
 large, the world A\'ill deem its own victory and triumph secured. Now, 
 therefore, a spirit of liberal Latitudinarianism will prevail everywhere, — 
 a notion that every one may be right in his own way of thinking, and 
 consequently that all is well with the Jew, the Turk, and the Pagan. 
 Ideas of this kind will wonderfully prepare men for embracing the false 
 prophet." {Life of Bengel, Walker's edition, page 322.) How painfully 
 correct these prog:nostications, made 125 jears ago, have proved, any 
 one who observes the state of rehgious feeling in England must know 
 only too well 1 
 
PREFACE. Y 
 
 Tlie theological stand-point which the writer of this 
 Commentary occupies will be obvious to any intelligent 
 reader. Such an one will see at a glance that I belong 
 to that school in the Church of England which, rightly 
 or wrongly, is called " Evangelical." He will see that 
 I have no sympathy whatever with either Komish or 
 Neologian tendencies. He will see that I bold firmly 
 the distinctive theological views of the Eeformers and 
 doctrinal Puritans, and that ^^tally disapprove the 
 loose and broad theology of some modern schools of 
 divines. — But while I say all this, I must be allowed to 
 add, that in interpreting Scripture, I " call no man mas- 
 ter or father." I abhor the idea of wresting and w^arp- 
 ing God's Word in order to made it support party views. 
 Throughout this Commentary I have endeavoured ho- 
 nestlj^ and conscientiously to find out the real meaning 
 of every sentence on which I have commented. I have 
 evaded no difiiculty, and shrunk from no inference. I 
 have simply followed Scripture wherever its words seem- 
 ed to point, and accepted whatever they seemed to mean. 
 I have never hesitated to express my disagreement from 
 the views of other commentators if occasion required ; 
 but when I have done so I have tried to do it with 
 courtesy and respect. 
 
 On one point of vast importance in the present day, 
 the reader will see that I hold very decided opinions. 
 That point is inspiration. I feel no hesitation in avow- 
 ing, that I believe in the "plenary inspiration " of every 
 word of the original text of Holy Scripture. I hold not 
 only that the Bible contains the Word of God, but that 
 every jot of it was written, or brought together, by 
 Divine inspiration, and is the Word of God. I entirely 
 disagree with those who maintain that the writers of the 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 Bible were partially inspired, or inspired to such a 
 limited extent that discrepancies, inaccuracies, and con- 
 tradictions to the facts of science and history, must be 
 expected and do exist in their writings. I utterly repu- 
 diate such a theory. I consider that it practically 
 destroys the whole value of God's Word, puts a sword 
 in the hand of infidels and sceptics, and raises far more 
 serious difficulties than it pretends to solve. 
 
 I grant freely that^Pe theory of " plenary verbal 
 inspiration," involves some difficulties. I do not pretend 
 to answer all the objections brought against it, or to 
 defend all that has been written by its supporters.* I 
 am content to remember that all inspiration is a miracu- 
 lous operation of the Holy Ghost, and, like every opera- 
 tion of the Holy Ghost, must needs be mysterious. It 
 is an operation of which not forty men in the world 
 have been made the subjects, and the manner of which 
 not one of the forty has described. It stands to reason 
 that the whole question of inspiration, like everytliing 
 else supernatural, m.ust necessarily contain much that is 
 mysterious, and much that we cannot explain. — But the 
 difficulties of the " plenary vebal " theory appear to me 
 mere trifles, compared with those which surround the 
 counter theory of "partial inspiration." Once admit 
 the principle that the writers of the Bible could mal^e 
 
 * When I speak of "plenary verbal inspiration," I do not for a 
 moment admit the absurd, theory that all parts of the Bible are equally 
 important. I should never dream of saying that the catalogues in Chro- 
 nicles are of as much value to the Church as the Gospel of St. John. 
 But I do maintain that all parts of the Bible are equally " given by 
 inspiration of God," and that all are to be regarded as " God's Word." 
 If we do not see the Divine character of any particular part, it is because 
 we have at present no eyes to see it. The humblest moss is as much 
 Ihe handiwork of God's creative power as the cedar of Lebanon. Yet 
 it would bo foolish to say it was an equally important part of creation. 
 The least verse in the Bible is just as truly " given by inspiration " 9« 
 the greatest. But it does not follow that it is equally valuable. 
 
PREFACE. Vil 
 
 mistakes, and were not in all things guided by the Spirit, 
 and I know not where I am. I see nothing certain 
 nothing solid, nothing trustworthy in the foundations 
 of my faith. A fog has descended on the Book of God, 
 and enveloped every chapter in uncertainty ! Who 
 shall decide when the writers of Scripture made mis- 
 takes, and when they did not? How am I to know 
 where inspiration ends, and where it begins ? What I 
 think inspired, another may^Bnk uninspired ! The 
 texts that I rest upon, may possibly have been put in 
 by a slip of the pen ! The words and phrases that I 
 love to feed upon, may possibly be weak earthly expres- 
 sions, in writing which the author was left to his own 
 private uninspired mind ! — The glory is departed from 
 my Bible at this rate. A cold feeling of suspicion and 
 doubt creeps over me as I read it. I am almost tempted 
 to lay it down in flat despair. A partially inspired 
 Bible is little better than no Bible a,t all. Give me the 
 *' plenary verbal " theory, with all its difficulties, rather 
 than this. I accept the difficulties of that theory, and 
 humbly wait for their solution. But while I wait, I 
 feel that I am standing on a rock. 
 
 I grant the existence of occasional difficulties, and 
 apparent discrepa,ncies, in Scripture. They are trace- 
 able, in some cases, I believe, to the errors of early 
 transcribers; and in others to, our ignorance of explana- 
 tory circumstances and minute links and details. To tell 
 us that things cannot be explained, merely because we are 
 not at present able to explain them,, is childish and 
 absurd! "He that believeth shall not make haste." 
 (Isa. xxviii. 16.) A true philosopher will never give up 
 a sound theory, on account of a few difficulties. He will 
 rather say^-^"- J can afford to wait. It wUl all he plain 
 
Vlll PREFACE. 
 
 • 
 one day." For my own part, I believe that the vvhole 
 
 Bible, as it came originally from the hands of the inspired 
 writers, was verbally perfect and without flaw. I believe 
 that the inspired writers were infallibly guided by the 
 Holy Ghost, both in their selection of matter and their 
 choice of words. I believe that even now, when we 
 cannot explain alleged difficulties in Holy Scripture, the 
 wisest course is to blame the interpreter and not the text, 
 to suspect our own ignc^fhce to be in fault, and not any 
 defect in God's Word. The theological system of modern 
 days, which delights in magnifying the so-called mistakes 
 of the Bible, in explaining away its miraculous narratives, 
 and in making as littie as possible of its Divine character 
 and supernatural element, is a system that I cannot away 
 with. It seems to me to take a rock from beneath our 
 feet, and plant us on a quicksand. It robs us of bread, 
 and does not give us in its place so much as a stone. 
 
 Nothing, to my mind, is so unutterably painful as the 
 patronizing tone of compassion which the modern advo 
 cates of " partial inspiration" adopt in speaking of the 
 writers of the Bible. They write and talk as if St. Paul 
 and St. John, and their companions, were nothing better 
 than well-meaning pious men, who on some points were 
 greatly mistaken, and far below our enlightened age ! 
 They speak with pity and contempt of that system of 
 divinity which satisfied the master-builders and giants of 
 the Church in by -gone days ! They tell us complacently 
 that a new theology is needed for our age, and that a 
 " freer handling" of the Bible, with pens untrammelled 
 by the fetters which cumbered former interpreters, will 
 produce, and is producing, wonderful results! I tho- 
 roughly distrust these new theologians, however learned 
 jind plausible they may be, and I expect the Church will 
 
PREFACE. ix 
 
 receive no light from them. I see nothing solid in their 
 arguments, and am utterly unmoved by them. I believe 
 that the want of our age is not more "free" handlino- of 
 the Bible, but more ''reverent" handling, more humility, 
 more patient study, and more prayer. I repeat my own 
 firm conviction, that no theory of inspiration involves so 
 few difficulties as that of " plenary verbal inspiration." 
 To that theory I entirely adhere, and on that theory my 
 readers will find this Commentary is written. 
 
 In preparing this Commentary I have made it a point 
 of duty to look through every work on St. John's Gos- 
 pel which I could meet with. I append a list of books, 
 partly because it may be interesting and useful to some 
 readers, and partly because I wish to show that when I 
 differ from the authors, I have not written in ignorance 
 of their opinions. 
 
 The commentaries and expository works on St. John 
 which I have looked through are the following : — 
 
 I. Of Fathers. Origen, Cyril of Alexandria, Chry- 
 sostom, Augustine, Theophylact, Euthymius, and the 
 Catena Aurea. 
 
 II. Of Foreign Reformers and their successors^ to the 
 close of the seventeenth century. Melancthon, Zwingle, 
 Calvin, Ecolampadius, Brentius, Bucer, Bullinger, 
 Gualter, Pellican, Flacius Illyricus, Musculus, Beza^ 
 Aretius, Chemnitius,^ Diodati, Calovius, De Dieu, Coc- 
 ceius, Gomarus, Nifanius, Heinsius, Glassius,f Critici 
 Sacri. 
 
 * The work I here refer to is the Commentary on the " Harmony of 
 the Gospels," begun by Chemnitius, and continued by Lyserus and 
 Gerhard. 
 
 f The work of Glassius to which I here refer, is his " Expositions of 
 the Gospels and Epistles appointed for Sundays." It is a collection of 
 Homilies. 
 
X PREFACE. 
 
 III. Of Rornan Catholic Writers. Rupertus, Ferus, 
 Arias Montanus, Toletus, Barradius, Maldonatus, Cor« 
 nelius a Lapide, Jansenius, Quesnel. 
 
 lY. Of Scotch and English Writers. Rollock, Hut- 
 cliesoD. Poolers Synopsis and Annotations, Cartwright, 
 Trapp, Mayer, Leigh, Lightfoot, Baxter, Hammond, 
 Hall, Henry, Burkitt, Whitby, Pearce, Gill, Scott, 
 Bloomfield, Doddridge, A. Clarke, Barnes, Burgon, 
 Alford, Webster, Wordsworth, J. Brown, D. Brown, 
 Ford. To this list I may also add Arrowsmith, on 
 John i. ; Dyke, on John ii. iii. ; Hildersam, on John iv. ; 
 Trench, on Miracles ; and Schottgen's Horse Hebraicae. 
 
 V. Of German Writers^ from the beginning of th6 
 eighteenth century to the present day. Lampe, Bengel, 
 Tittman, Tholuck, Olshausen, Stier, Besser. 
 
 Of course no man can spend years, as I have now done, 
 in looking through this formidable mass of books, with 
 out forming some decided opinions about the comparative 
 merits of their respective authors. Some of these 
 opinions I have no hesitation in putting down, as they 
 may be of use to some of my younger brethren in the 
 ministry. 
 
 (A.) The Fathers appear to me greatly overrated, 
 as commentators and expositors. Cyril and Chrysos- 
 tom are far the most valuable of them, in my judgment, 
 on St. John. 
 
 (B.) The Continental Reformers and their successors 
 appear to me greatly underrated and neglected. Bren- 
 tins and Musculus, for instance, abound in excellent 
 thoughts and suggestions, but seem quite ignored by 
 most modern commentators. 
 
PREFACE. Xi 
 
 (C.) The Eoman Catholic writers often contain much 
 that is useful and little that is objectionable. Happy 
 would it be for the Church of England if all her Clergy 
 knew their Bibles as well as such men as Ferus and 
 ToletusI 
 
 (D.) The few German writers that I have consulted 
 appear to me to be far too highly esteemed, with the 
 exception of Bengel and Lampe. Stier is always reve- 
 rential, but tremendously diffuse. As to Olshausen, 
 Tholuck, and Tittman, I have generally laid down their 
 works with unmixed disappointment. What people 
 can mean by telling us that we have much to learn from 
 modern German writers on Scripture passes my com- 
 prehension ! — I can only suppose, from my own 
 acquaintance with them, that many say it without hav- 
 ing read them, or without having read other exposi- 
 tors. 
 
 (E.) The Scotch and English commentators I shall 
 pass over in silence, as most of them are well known. 
 I must confess that I think we have little to show in 
 this department of Theological literature. Of our old 
 writers, Rollock, the Scotch divine, is incomparably the 
 best. In fact, I do not know such a "buried treasure" 
 as his Latin commentary on St. John.* — Of modern 
 writers Burgon and Wordsworth strike me as two of 
 the most valuable, though I differ widely from them on 
 such points as the Church and the Sacraments. But I 
 admire their reverential spirit. — Alford is almost always 
 able and clear, but not always in my opinion a safe 
 theological guide. — A thoroughly satisfactory critical 
 
 * Rollock was born a.d. 1555, and died a.d. 1598. He was principaj 
 of the University of Edinburgli. 
 
xn PREFACE. 
 
 commentary on tlie Greek Testament, in tlie English 
 language, is a great desideratum. 
 
 I have only to add that on all points of philology, 
 grammar, ete., I have consulted Flacius, Eavanel, Park- 
 hurst, Leigh, Schleusner, Kaphelius, Suicer, Glass! us, 
 and Winer. 
 
 The vexed question of "various readings," I have 
 deliberately left alone. It is not because I have no 
 opinion on the subject. But the real extent to which 
 all the various readings would affect the meaning of 
 Scripture, if they were admitted, is so much exa,ggerated, 
 that it does not seem to me worth while to mix up the 
 question with such a work as that which I have under- 
 taken. The Greek text which I have been content to 
 use throughout is that of the third Edition of Stephens 
 (1550), edited by Scholefield. I do not say for a moment 
 that it is the best text. I only say I have used it. 
 
 The occasional short-comings of our authorized Eng- 
 lish translation I have not hesitated to notice. I have 
 frequently pointed out expressions which in my judg- 
 ment are not rendered so literally or accurately as they 
 might have been. There is nothing perfect on earth. 
 Our excellent translators undoubtedly fail occasionally 
 to give the full sense of Greek words,, and are not always 
 sufficiently careful about tenses and the article. But it 
 is useless to expect perfection in any translation. Trans- 
 lators are not inspired, and are all liable to err. The 
 " plenary verbal inspiration " which I firmly maintain, 
 is that of the original text of Scripture, and not of any 
 translation. — I have no sympathy however with those 
 who wish to have a new authorized English version of 
 the Bible. I concede the short-comings of the old ver- 
 sion, but judging by the specimens of "]iew and 
 
PREFACE. xii: 
 
 improved " versions which I have seen, I doubt much 
 -whether we should gain anything by attempting to mend 
 it. Taking it for all in all, the authorized English ver- 
 sion is an admirable translation. I am quite content to 
 " let well alone." 
 
 I now conclude this preface with an earnest prayer, 
 that it may please God to pardon the many deficiencies 
 of this volume, and to use it for His own glory and the 
 good of souls. It has cost me a large amount of time 
 and thought and labour. But if the Holy Ghost shall 
 make it useful to the Church of Christ, I shall feel 
 abundantly repaid. 
 
 Ignorance of Scripture is the root of every error in 
 religion, and the source of every heresy. To be allowed 
 to remove a few grains of ignorance, and to throw a few 
 rays of light on God's precious word, is, in my opinion, 
 the greatest honour that can be put on a Christian. 
 
 J. C. E7LE, B.A., 
 
 CHRIST CnURCH, OXFORD. 
 Stradbroke Vicarage, Suffolk, 
 February, 1865. 
 
 P.S. I feel it due to many of my readers to offer some 
 explanation of the long delay which has taken place 
 since the publication of this work on St. John began. 
 An interval of almost five years has elapsed between 
 the publication of the first four chapters and of the fifth 
 and sixth. This delay, I am afraid, has caused incon- 
 venience and annoyance in many quarters. For this I 
 am unfeignedly sorry. 
 
 But the delay has been unavoidable, and has arisen 
 from circumstances entirely beyond my own control. 
 Deaths, domestic anxieties, illness, and change from one 
 residence to anotlier, have had much to do with it. Tho 
 
XIV PKEFACE. 
 
 principal cause has been my removal to my present 
 parish. The work was begun in a little quiet parish of 
 800 people. It has been resumed in a widely-scattered 
 parish of 1400 people, requiring almost the whole of 
 my attention. 
 
 Even now, in sending forth the first volume of the 
 Expository Thoughts on St. John," I dare not promise 
 anything certain as to the time when the work will be 
 completed. I have the will to finish it, but I find it 
 almost impossible to secure the necessary leisure. What 
 absolute need there is of entire freedom from distraction 
 and interruption in writing a Commentary, none know 
 but those who have attempted it. What endless petty 
 interruptions a clergyman must submit to in a poor rural 
 parish of 1400 people, where there is no resident land- 
 lord, and no layman who has leisure, and where many 
 things must necessarily hinge on the clergyman, no one 
 can know unless he has filled the position. 
 
 If the great Head of the Church intends me to finish 
 this work, I believe that He will make my way plain, 
 and remove all obstacles. But my readers must kindly 
 make allowances for my altered position. There are 
 but twelve hours in the day. I cannot create time. It 
 is not one of the primary duties of a parochial clergy- 
 man's ofl&ce to write Commentaries. If therefore the 
 work does not go on so fast as they could wish, they 
 must have the goodness to consider my position, and to 
 believe that there is a cause. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 John. 
 
 1 — 5. Christ eternal, — a distinct Person, — very God, 
 — ^the Creator of all things, — the source of 
 aU light and life 
 
 6 — 13. The minister's office,— Christ the light of the 
 world, — the wickedness of man, — ^the privi- 
 leges of believers .... 
 
 The reality of Christ's incarnation . 
 
 II 
 
 14. 
 
 16—18. 
 
 19—28. 
 29—34. 
 
 35—42. 
 43—51. 
 
 1—11. 
 
 12—25. 
 
 The fulness of Christ, — ^the superiority of 
 Christ to Moses, — Christ the Eevealer of 
 the Father 
 
 John the Baptist's humility, — the blindness 
 of the unconverted Jews . 
 
 PAQI 
 1—4 
 
 13—17 
 24—28 
 
 34—37 
 43—46 
 
 54— 5S 
 
 67—71 
 
 Christ the Lamb of God, — Christ the taker 
 away of sin, — Christ He that baptizeth 
 with the Holy Ghost .... 
 
 The good done by testifying of Christ, — the 
 good behevers may do to others 
 
 Souls led by various ways, — Christ in the Old 
 Testament Scriptures, — Philip's advice to 
 Nathanael, — High character of Nathanael 75 — 80 
 
 Matrimony an honourable estate, — the lawful- 
 ness of mirth and rejoicing, — Christ's al- 
 mighty power . , . . . 
 
 Irreverent use of holy places rebuked, — words 
 of Christ long remembered, — Christ's per- 
 fect knowledge of man's heart . 
 
 87—02 
 
 102— 1 08 
 
XVI 
 
 TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 UL 
 
 J)nN. 
 1—8. 
 
 d— 21. 
 
 22—36. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 The beginnings of some Christians very 
 feeble, — the necessity of the new birth, — 
 the Spirit's operation hke the wind . 118 — 123 
 
 Spiritual ignorance, — God's love the source of 
 salvation, — Christ's death the means of 
 providing salvation, — faith the instrument 
 which makes salvation ours . . 139 — 145 
 
 Jealousy and party-spirit, — true humility, — 
 Christ's dignity set forth, — salvation a pre- 
 sent thing . 169 — 173 
 
 nr. i—e 
 
 7—2 
 
 Baptism, and its true position,- 
 human nature 
 
 -our Lord's 
 
 1^0—193 
 
 V. 
 
 Christ's tact and condescension, — Christ's 
 readiness to give, — the excellence of 
 Christ's gifts, — the necessity of conviction 
 of sin, — the uselessness of formal religion, 
 —Christ's kindness to great sinners . 201 — 206 
 
 27—30. Christ's deaUngs marvellous, — grace an ab- 
 sorbing principle, — true converts zealous 
 to do good 227—232 
 
 31^-42. Christ's zeal to do good, — encouragement to 
 those who labour fof Christ, — men led to 
 Christ in various ways . . . 237 — 241 
 
 43 — 54. The rich have afflictions, -^the young may be 
 sick and die, — affliction a blessing, — Christ's 
 word as good as His presence . . 251 — 255 
 
 The misery caused by sin, — the compassion of 
 Christ, — the lessons that recovery should 
 
 1—15. 
 
 teach 
 
 16—23. Some works lawful on the Sabbath, 
 nity and majesty of Christ . 
 
 -the dig- 
 
 264—268 
 
 276—279 
 
 24 — 29. Hearing Christ the way to salvation, — the 
 privileges of true believers, — Christ's power 
 to give life, — the final resurrection of all 
 the dead 289—293 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. Xvii 
 
 John. PAufi 
 
 V. 30 — 39. The honour Christ puts on His servants, — 
 the honour Christ puts on miracles, — the 
 honour Christ puts on the Scriptures 300—303 
 
 40 — i1. The reason why many are lost, — one principal 
 cause of unbehef, — Christ's testimony to 
 Moses 313—318 
 
 VX 1 — 14. Christ's almighty power, — the office of minis- 
 ters,— the sufficiency of the Gospel for all 
 mankind 323 — 326 
 
 16 — 21. Christ's humihty, — the trials of Christ's disci- 
 ples, — Christ's power over the waters 334 — 32" 
 
 22 — 27. Christ's knowledge of man's heart, — what 
 Christ forbids, — what Christ advises, — what 
 Christ promises 344 — 348 
 
 28 — 34. The ignorance of natural man, — the honour 
 Christ puts on faith, — the high privileges 
 of Christ's hearers over those of the Jews 
 in the wilderness .... 355 — 358 
 
 36—40. Christ the bread of life, — none cast out, — 
 the Father's will about all who come to 
 Christ 36^—370 
 
 41 — 51. Christ's lowly condition an offence to some, — 
 man's natural impotence, — salvation a pre- 
 sent thing 378—382 
 
 52 — 59. The true meaning of eating Christ's body and 
 
 drinkmg Christ's blood . . . 393—396 
 
 60 — 65. Some of Christ's sayings hard, — danger of 
 putting carnal meanings on spiritual words, 
 — Christ's perfect knowledge of hearts . 406 — 409 
 
 •6—7 1. Backsliding an old sin, — Peter's noble declarar 
 tion, — the httle benefit some get from reli- 
 gious privileges ..... 414. — 418 
 
EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS 
 
 0^ THE GOSPELS. 
 
 JOHN I. 1—5. 
 
 1 In the beginning was the Word, 
 and the Word was with God, and 
 the Word was God. 
 
 2 The same was in the begin- 
 ning with God. 
 
 3 All things were made by him ; 
 
 and without him was not any thing 
 made that was made. 
 
 4 In him was life ; and the life 
 was the light of men. 
 
 5 And the light shineth in dark- 
 ness; and the darkness compre- 
 hended it not. 
 
 The Gospel of St. John, which "begins with these verses, 
 is in many respects very unlike the other three Gospels. 
 It contains many things which they omit. It omits many 
 things which they contain. Good reason might easily be 
 shown for this unlikeness. But it is enough to remember 
 that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John wrote under the 
 direct inspiration of God. In the general plan of their 
 respective Gospels, and in the particular details, — in every- 
 thing that they record, and in everything that they do not 
 record, — they were all four equaHy and entirely guided by 
 the Holy Ghost. 
 
 About the matters which St. John was speciaUy inspired 
 to relate in his Gospel, one general remark will suffice. 
 The things which are peculiar to his Gospel are among the 
 most precious possessions of the Church of Christ. No 
 
 1 
 
Z EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 one of the four Gospel-writers has given us such full 
 statements about the divinity of Christ, — about justifica- 
 tion by faith, — about the offices of Christ, — about the work 
 of the Holy Ghost, — and about the privileges of believers, 
 as we read in the pages of St. John. On none of these 
 great subjects, undoubtedly, have Matthew, Mark, and 
 Luke been silent. But in St. John's Gospel, they stand out 
 prominently on the surface, so that he who runs may read. 
 
 The five verses now before us contain a statement of 
 matchless sublimity concerning the divine nature of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ. He it is, beyond all question, whom 
 St. John means, when he speaks of "the Word." No 
 doubt there are heights and depths in that statement 
 which are far beyond man's understanding. And yet 
 there are plain lessons in it, which every Christian would 
 do well to treasure up in his mind. 
 
 We learn, firstly, that our Lord Jesus Christ is eternal. 
 St. John tells us that " in the beginning w^s the Word." 
 He did not begin to exist when the heavens and the earth 
 were made. Much less did He begin to exist when the 
 Gospel was brought into the world. He had glory with 
 the Father '• before the world was." (John xvii. 5.) He 
 was existing when matter was first created, and before 
 time began. He was " before all things." (Col. i. 17.) He 
 was from all eternity. 
 
 We learn, secondly, that our Lord Jesus Christ is a Per- 
 son distinct from God the Father^ and yet one with Him, 
 St. John tells us that " the Word was with God." The 
 Father and the Word, though two persons, are joined by 
 an inefiable union. Where God the Father was from all 
 eternity, there also was the Word, even God the Son, — 
 their glory equal, their majesty co-eternal, and yet their 
 Godhead one. This is a great mystery! Happy is he 
 who can receive it as a little child, without attemptuig 
 to explain it. 
 
3 
 
 "We learn, thirdly, that the Lord Jesus Christ is very 
 God. St. John tells ns that " the Word was God." He 
 is not merely a created angel, or a being inferior to God 
 the Father, and invested by Him with power to redeem 
 sinners. He is nothing less than perfect God, — equal to 
 the Father as touching His Godhead, — God of the sub- 
 stance of the Father, begotten before the worlds. 
 
 We learn, fourthly, that the Lord Jesus Christ is the 
 Creator of all things. St. John tells us that " by Him 
 were all things made, and without Him was not any thing 
 made that was made." So far from being a creature of 
 God, as some heretics have falsely asserted, He ia the Being 
 who made the worlds and all that they contain. " He 
 commanded and they were created." (Psalm xl. 8.) 
 
 We learn, lastly, that the Lord Jesus Christ is the source 
 of all spiritual life and light. St. John tells us, that " in 
 Him was life, and the life was the light of men." He is 
 the eternal fountain, from which alone the sons of men 
 have ever derived life. Whatever spiritual life and light 
 Adam and Eve possessed before the fall, w^as from Christ. 
 Whatever deliverance from sin and spiritual death any child 
 of Adam has ever enjoyed since the fall, whatever light of 
 conscience or understanding any one has obtained, all has 
 flowed from Christ. The vast majority of mankind in 
 every age have refused to Iqiow Him, have forgotten the 
 fall, and their own need of a Saviour. The light has been 
 constantly shining "in darkness." The most have "not 
 comprehended the light." But if any men and women out 
 of the countless millions of mankind have ever had spiritual 
 life and light, they have owed all to Christ. 
 
 Such is a brief summary of the leading lessons which 
 these wonderful verses appear to contain. There is much 
 in them, without controversy, which is above our reason ; 
 but there is nothing contrary to it. There is much that 
 we cannot explain, and must be content humbly to believe, 
 
4 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Let ns however never forget that there are plain practical 
 consequences flowing from the passage, which we can never 
 grasp too firmly, or know too well. 
 
 Would we know, for one thing, the exceeding sinfulness 
 of sin? Let ns often read these first five verses of St. 
 John's Gospel. Let us mark what kind of Being the 
 Redeemer of mankind must needs be, in order to provide 
 eternal redemption for sinners. If no one less than the 
 Eternal God, the Cre-ator and Preserver of all things, 
 could take away the sin of the, world, sin must be a far 
 more abominable thing in the sight of God than most men 
 suppose. The right measure of sin's sinfulness is the dig- 
 nity of Him who came into the world to save sinners. If 
 Christ is so great, then sin must indeed be sinful ! 
 
 Would we know, for another thing, the strength of a 
 true Christian's foundation for hope ? Let us often read 
 these first five verses of St. John's Gospel. Let us mark 
 that the Saviour in whom the believer is bid to trust is 
 nothing less than the Eternal God, One able to save to the 
 uttermost all that come to the Father by Him. He that 
 was " with God," and " was God," is also " Emmanuel, God 
 with us." Let us thank God that our help is laid on One 
 that is mighty. (Psalm Ixxxix. 19.) In ourselves we are 
 great sinners. But in Jesus Christ we have a great Saviour, 
 He is a strong foundation-stone, able to bear the weight of 
 a world's sin. He that believeth on Him shall not be con- 
 founded. (1 Peter ii. 6.) 
 
 Notes. John I. 1 — 5. 
 
 [T7ie Gospel according to St. John.] The following prefatory 
 remarks on St. John's Gospel, may prove useful to some readers. 
 
 Firstly. — There is no doubt that this Gospel was written by John, 
 the Apostle, the son of Zebodee, and brother of James, once a 
 fisherman on the sea of Galilee, and aferwards called to be a 
 disciple of the Lord Jesus, an eye-witness of all Christ's minis- 
 try, and a pillar of the church. John, be it remembered, i« 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 5 
 
 specially called " the disciple whom Jesus loved." He was one 
 of the chosen three who alone saw the daughter of Jairus raised 
 — were eye-witnesses of the transfiguration — and were by-stand- 
 ers during our Lord's agony in the garden. He was the one 
 who leaned on Christ's breast at the last supper, and to whom 
 our Lord committed the care of the Virgin Mary, when lie waa 
 dying on the cross. It is an interesting fact, that he was the 
 disciple who was specially inspired to write the deepest things 
 concerning Christ. 
 Secondly. — There is little doubt that this Gospel was written at a 
 much later date than the other three Gospels. How much 
 later, and at what precise time, we do not know. It is commonly 
 supposed that it was written after the rise of heresies about the 
 Person and natures of Christ, such as those attributed to Ebioh 
 and Cerinthus. It is not likely that it was written at so late a 
 period as the destruction of Jerusalem. If this had been the 
 case, John would hardly have spoken of ti.9 " sheep-market " at 
 Jerusalem as still standing. (John v. 2.) 
 
 Thirdly. — The substance of this Gospel is, for the most part, 
 pecuhar to itself. With the exception of the crucifixion, and a 
 few other matters, the things which St. John was inspired to 
 record concerning our Lord, are only found in his gospel. He 
 says nothing about our Lord's birth and infancy, — His tempta- 
 tion, — the Sermon on the Mount, — the transfiguration, — the 
 prophecy about Jerusalem, and the appointment of the Lord's 
 Supper. He gives us very few miracles, and even fewer para- 
 bles. But the things which John does relate are among the 
 most precious treasures which Christians possess. The chapters 
 about Nicodemus, — the woman of Samaria, — the raising of Laza- 
 rus, and our Lord's appearance to Peter after His resurrection 
 at the sea of Galilee, — the public discourses of the fifth, sixth, 
 seventh, eighth, and tenth chapters, — the private discourses of 
 the thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth chapters, — 
 and, above aU, the prayer of the seventeenth chapter, are some 
 of the most valuable portions of the Bible. All these chapters, 
 be it remembered, we owe to St. John. 
 
 Fourthly. — The style of this Gospel is no less peculiar than its 
 substance. There appears extraordinary simplicity in many of 
 its statements, and yet there is a depth about them which no 
 man can entirely fatiiom. — It contains many expressions which 
 are used in a profound and spiritual sense, such as "hght," 
 "darkness," "world," "life," "truth," "to abide," " to know." — 
 It contains two names of the second and third Persons of the 
 Trinity, not found in the other Gospels. These are, " the Word," 
 as a name of our Lord, and " the Comforter," as a name of the 
 Holy Ghost. — It contains, fi:om time to time, explanatory com- 
 ments and remarks on our Lord's words. — Moreover, it contains 
 
6 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 frequent short explanations of Jewish customs and terms, which 
 serve to show that it was not written so much for Jewish read- 
 ers as for the whole church throughout the world. " Matthew," 
 (says Gregory Nazianzen, quoted by Ford,) " wrote fur the He- 
 brews ; Mark, for the Italians ; Luke, for the Greeks ; the great 
 herald, John, for all." 
 
 Lastly. — The preface of this Gospel is one of the most striking 
 peculiarities about the whole book. Under the term preface, I 
 include the first eighteen verses of the first chapter. This pre- 
 face forms the quintessence of the whole book, and is composed 
 of simple, short, condensed propositions. Nowhere in the Bible 
 shall we find such clear and distinct statements about our Lord 
 Jesus Christ's divine nature. Nowhere shall we find so many 
 expressions, which for want of mental power, no mortal man 
 can fully grasp or explain. In no portion of Scripture is it so 
 deeply important to notice each word, and even each tense em- 
 ployed in each sentence. In no portion of Scripture do the per- 
 fect grammatical accuracy and verbal precision of an inspired 
 composition shine out so brightly. It is not, perhaps, too much 
 to say, that not a single word could be altered in the first five 
 verses of St. John's Gospel, without opening the door to some 
 heresy. 
 
 The first verse of St. John's Gospel, in particular, has always 
 been allowed to be one of the sublimest verses in the Bible. 
 The ancients used to say that it deserved to be written in golden 
 letters in every Christian Church. It has well been said to be an 
 opening worthy of him whom Jesus called " a son of thunder." 
 
 1. — [In the beginning, <!rc.] This wonderful verse contains three 
 things. It tells us that our Lord Jesus Christ, here called the 
 Word, is eternal, — that He is a distinct Person from God the 
 Father, and yet most intimately united to him, — and that He 
 is God. The term " God," be it remembered, in the second 
 clause, is to be taken personally, for God the Father, and in the 
 third to be taken essentially, as signifymg the Divine Being. 
 
 The expression, " in the beginning," means in the beginning 
 of all creation. It is like the first verse of Genesi.^, '' In the 
 beginning God created the heavens and the earth." (Gen. i. I.) 
 
 The expression "was" means " existed, was existing." The 
 whole sentence signifies that when the world was fist called 
 into bein'r, however long ago that may be, — when matter was 
 first formed, however many millions of ages ago that may be, — 
 at that pcrio;! the Lord Jesus Christ was existing. He had no 
 beginning. He was before aU things. There never was the 
 time when He was not. In shcrt, the Lord Jesus Christ is an 
 eternal Be ng. 
 
Several of the fathers dwell strongly on the immense import- 
 ance of the word "was" in this sentence, and on the fact that it 
 is four times repeated in the two first verses of this Gospel. It 
 is not said, "the Word was made," but "the Word was." Basil 
 says, "Those two terms, 'beginning' and 'was,' are Uke two 
 anchors," which the ship of a man's soul may safely ride at, 
 whatever storms of heresy may come. 
 
 The expression, "the Word," is a very difficult one, and is 
 pecuUar to St, John, I see no clear proof that it is used by any 
 other New Testament writer. The texts, Acts xx. 32, and Heb. 
 iv. 12, are, to say the least, doubtful proofs. That it here signi- 
 fies a " person," and not a spoken word, and that it is applied to 
 our Lord Jesus Christ, is clear from the after sentence, " The 
 Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us." That it was a term 
 famihar to the Jews is undeniable. But why this particular 
 name is used by St, John, both here and in his other writings, 
 is a point on which commentators have differed greatly. 
 
 Some think, as Tertullian, Zwingle, Musculus, Bucer, and 
 Calvin, that Christ is called "the Word " because He is the wis- 
 dom of God, and the " wisdom " of the Book of Proverbs. These 
 would have the expression translated, " reason, wisdom, or 
 counsel," 
 
 Some think, as some of the fathers, that Christ is called " the 
 Word," because He is the image and oflfspring of the Father's 
 mind, " the express image of the Father's person," just as our 
 words, if honest and sincere, are the image and representation 
 of our minds. 
 
 Some think, as Cartwright and Tittman, that Christ is called 
 " the Word," because He is the Person who is spoken of in all 
 the Old Testament promises, and the subject of prophecy. 
 
 Some think, as Melancthon, RoUock, Gomarus, and Scott, that 
 Christ is called " the Word," because He is the speaker, utterer, 
 and interpreter of God the Father's will. It is written in this 
 very chapter, that " the only begotten Son hath declared the 
 Father." It is also written, that " God hath in these last days 
 spolcen unto us by his Son," (Heb. i. 1,) 
 
 I think the last of these views the simplest and most satis- 
 factory. All of them are at best only conjectures. There is 
 probably something about the expression which has not yet been 
 discovered. 
 
 It is thought by many that the expression " the Word," is 
 used in several places of the Old Testament, concerning the 
 Second Person in the Trinity. Such places are Psalm xxxiii. 6 ; 
 Psalm cvii. 20, and 2 Sam. vii. 21, compared with 1 Chron. xvii. 
 
EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 19. The proof in all these cases is somewhat doubtful. Never- 
 theless the idea is strengthened by the fact that in Rabbinical 
 writings the Messiah is often spoken of as " the Word." In the 
 third of Genesis, the Chaldee paraphrase says that Adam and 
 Eve " heard the Word of the Lord walking in the garden." 
 
 Arrowsmith, in his admirable work on this chapter, suggests 
 a probable reason why John did not say, "In the beginning was 
 the Son of God," but " the Word."—" John would not at first 
 ahenate the hearts of his readers. He knew that neither Jews 
 nor Gentiles would endure the term, the Son of God. They 
 could not endure to hear of a sonship in the Deity and Godhead : 
 but with this term ' Word,' applied to the Godhead, they were 
 well acquainted." — Poole observes that no term was so abhorred 
 by the Jews as the term " Son of God." — Ferus remarks, that 
 by calHng our Lord "the Word," St. John excludes all idea of a 
 material, carnal relationship between the Father and the Son. 
 Tliis is also shown by Suicer to be the view of Chrysostom, 
 Theodoret, Basil, Gregory, Nyssen, and Theophylact. 
 
 Whatever difl5culty we may feel about this expression, " the 
 Word," in our times, there does not seem to have been the same 
 difficulty felt about it, either by Jews or Gentiles, when St. John 
 wrote his Gospel. To say, as some have done, that he borrowed 
 the expression from the philosophers of his time, is dishonouring 
 to inspiration. But we may safely say that he used an expres- 
 sion, of which the meaning was quite familiar to the first readers 
 of his Gospel, as a name of the Second Person of the Trinity. 
 With this we may be content. Those who wish more informa- 
 tion, should consult VVitsius' Dissertation on the Word Logos, 
 Suicer's Thesaurus, and Adam Clarke's Commentary. 
 
 [The word was with God.] This sentence means, that from all 
 eternity there was a most intimate and ineffable union between 
 the first and second Persons in the blessed Trinity, — between 
 Christ the Word, and God the Father. And yet, though thus 
 inefiably united, the Word and the Father were from all e-ternity 
 two distinct Persons. " It was He," says Pearson, to whom the 
 Father said, " Let us make man in our image." (Gen. i. 26.) 
 
 The truth contained in this sentence, is one of the deepest 
 and most mysterious in the whole range of Christian theology. 
 The nature of this union between the Father and the Son, we 
 have no mental capacity to explain. Augustine draws illustra- 
 tions from the sun and its rays, and from fire and the light of 
 fire, which, though two distinct things, are yet inseparably 
 united, so that where the one is the other is. But all illustra- 
 tio.is on such subjects halt and fail. Hiire, at any rate, it is 
 better to believe than to attempt to explain. Our Lord saya 
 in the Father and the Father in me." "J 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 9 
 
 and the Father are one." '' He that hath seen me hath seen 
 the Father." (John xiv. 9—11; John x. 30.) Let us be fully- 
 persuaded t^i at the Father and the Son are two distinct Per- 
 sons in the Trinity, co-equal and co-eternal, — and yet that they 
 are one in substance and inseparably united and undivided. Let 
 us p^rasp firmly the words of the Athanasian Creed, " Neither 
 confounding the Persons nor dividing the substance." But here 
 let us stop. 
 
 Musculus remarks on this sentence, how carefully St. John 
 writes that " the Word was with God," and not " God was with 
 God." He would have us remember that there are not two 
 Gods but one. And yet " the Word was with God, and was 
 God." 
 
 [The Word was God.] This sentence means that the Lord 
 Jesus Christ, the eternal Word, was in nature, essence, and sub- 
 stance very God, and that "as the Father is God, so also the Son 
 is God." It seems impossible to assert Christ's divinity more 
 distinctly than it is here asserted. The sentence cannot possibly 
 mean that the Father is God, since no one ever thought of dis- 
 puting that. Nor yet can it possibly mean that the title ctf God 
 was conferred on some being inferior to God and uncreated, as 
 the princes of this world are called " gods." He who is here 
 called God, is the same who was uncreated and eternal. There 
 is no inferiority in the Word to God the Father. The Godhead 
 of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one. To 
 maintain in the face of such a text, as some so-called Ciiristians 
 do, that our Lord Jesus Christ was only a man, is a mournful 
 proof of the perversity of the human heart. 
 
 The whole verse, honestly and impartially interpreted, is an 
 unanswerable argument against three classes of heretics. It 
 confutes the Arians, who regard Christ as a Being inferior to 
 God. — It confutes the Sabelhans, who deny any distinction of 
 Persons in the Trinity, and say that God sometimes manifested 
 Himself as the Father, sometimes as the Son, and sometimes as 
 the Spirit, and that the Father and the Spirit suffered on the 
 cross! — Above all it confutes the Socinians and Unitarians who 
 say that Jesus Christ was not God but man, a most holy and 
 perfect man, but only a man. 
 
 In leaving this verse, it is useless to deny that there are deep 
 mysteries in it which man has no mind to comprehend, and no 
 language to express. How there can be a plurahty in unity, 
 and a unity in plurahty, three Persons in the Trinity and One 
 God in essence, — how Christ can be at the same time iji the 
 Father, as regards the unity of the essence, and with the Father, 
 as regards tiie distinction of his Person, — these are matters far 
 beyond our feeble understanding. Happy are we, if we can 
 
 1* 
 
10 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 agree with Bernard's devout remark about the subject, "It is 
 rashness to search too far into it. It is piety tobeheve it. It is 
 life eternal to know it. And we can never have a full ccmpre- 
 hcfi.sion of it, till we come to enjoy it," 
 
 2. — [I'Ae same was in the heginniyig, &c.'\ This verse contains an 
 emphatic repetition of the second clause of the preceding verse. 
 St. John anticipates the possible objection of some perverse 
 mind, that perhaps there was a time when Christ, the Word, 
 was not a distinct Person in the Trinity. In reply to this objec- 
 tion, he declares that the same Word who was eternal, and was 
 God, was also from all eternity a Person in the Godhead distinct 
 from God the Father, and yet with Him by a most intimate and 
 ineffable union. In short, there never was a time when Christ 
 was not " with God." 
 
 There are two passages in the Old Testament which throw 
 strong light on the doctrine of this verse. The one is in the 
 Book of Proverbs viii. 22 — 31. The other is in Zechariah xiii. 
 7. The passage in Proverbs seems intended to explain the 
 verse before us. The passage in Zechariah contains an expres- 
 sion which is almost a parallel to the expression " with God." 
 " Awake, sword, against my shepherd, and against the man 
 that is my fellow, saith the Lord." "The man that is my 
 fellow," according to the best commentators, means the Messiah, 
 Jesus Christ, and a reference to Poole's Synopsis will show that 
 the words signify " the man that is near me, or joined to me." 
 
 Arrowsmith says, " Ask the sun, if ever it were without its 
 beams. Ask the fountain, if ever it were without its streams. 
 So God was never without His Son." 
 
 We must not suppose that the repetition of this second verse 
 is useless or unmeaning. Arrowsmith remarks that"Eepeti- 
 tions have divers uses in Scripture. In prayer they argue affec- 
 tion. In prophecy they note celerity and certainty. In threat- 
 enings they note unavoidableness and suddenness. In precepts 
 they note a necessity of performing them. In truths^ like that 
 before us, they serve to show the necessity of believing and 
 knowing them." 
 3.— [AZZ things.. .made hy Am.] This sentence means that creation 
 was the work of our Lord Jesus Christ, no less than of God the 
 Father. "By him were all things created." (Coloss. i. 16.) 
 " Thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the 
 earth." (Heb. i. 10.) Now He that made all things must needs 
 be God. 
 
 The expression, we must carefully remember, does not imply 
 any inferiority of God the Son to God the Father, as if God 
 the Son was only the agent and workman under another. Nor 
 yet does it imply that creation was in no sense the work of God 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I 11 
 
 the Father, and that He is not the maker of heaven and earth. 
 But it does imply that such is the dignity of the eternal Word, 
 that in creation as well as in every thing else. He co-operated 
 with the Father. " What things soever the Father doeth, 
 these also doeth the Son likewise." (John v. 19.) "By whom 
 also He made the worlds." (Heb. i. 2.) When we read the 
 expression " by me kings reign," (Prov. viii. 15,) we do not for 
 a moment suppose, that kings are superior in dignity to Him by 
 whom they reign. 
 
 Jansenius remarks that this verse completely overthrows the 
 heretical notion entertained by the Manichees that the material 
 world was formed by an evil spirit, as well as the notion of the 
 Platonic school that some part of creation was made by angels 
 and demons. 
 
 [Without him was not anything made, &c.] This sentence 
 appears added, to show the utter impossibility of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ being no more than a created being. If not even 
 the slightest thing was created without Him, it is plain that He 
 cannot possibly be a creature Himself 
 
 The fathers raised curious speculations about the origin of 
 evil from the expression now before us. " If nothing was made 
 without Christ," theyargued, "from whence came sin?" The 
 simplest answer to this question is, that sin was not among the 
 things which were originally created at the beginning. It came 
 in afterwards, at the fall, "By one m.an sin entered into the 
 world." (Rom. v. 12.) That it could not have entered without 
 divine permission, and that its entrance has been overruled to 
 the display of divine mercy in redemption, are undeniable truths. 
 But we have no right to say that sin was among the "all 
 things," which were "made by Christ." 
 
 L —[In Him was life.l This sentence means that in the eternal 
 counsels of the Trinity, Christ was appointed to be the source, 
 fountain, origin, and cause of hfe. From Him all life was to 
 iSow. As to the kind of " life" which is here meant, there is 
 much difference of opinion among commentators. 
 
 Some think as Cyril, Theophylact, Chemnitius, and Calvin, 
 that the expression refers specially to the continued preservation 
 of all created things by Christ's providence. Having created all 
 things, He keeps all ahve and in order. 
 
 Some think as Zwingle, Cartwright, Arrowsmith, Poole, 
 Alford, and most modern commentators, that the expression in- 
 cludes all sorts of life, both vegetable, animal, and spiritual. 
 " Thou sendest forth thy spirit, and they are created." (Psalm 
 civ. 30.) " In Him we live, and move, and have our beiag." 
 (Acis xvii. 28.) 
 
12 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Some think, as Luther, Melancthon, Bre^tius, Flacius, Liglit- 
 foot, Lampe, and Pearce, that tlie expression apphes solely to 
 spiritual life, and that it is meant to declare that Christ alone is 
 the source of all life to the souls of men, whether in time or 
 eternity. He was the creator of all things, and He also was 
 the author of new creation. To this opinion I decidedly incline. 
 For one thing, natural life seems already included in the pre- 
 ceding verse about cieation. For another thing, it is the view 
 which seems to agree best with the conclusion of the verse, and 
 to be in harmony with the words, '' With thee is the fountain of 
 life : in thy hght we shall see light." " God hath given to us 
 eternal Ufe, and this life is in His Son." (Psalm sxxvi. 9; 1 
 John V. 11.) 
 
 [The Ufe was the light of men.] This sentence means that the 
 life which was in Christ, was intended before the fall to be the 
 guide of man's soul to heaven, and the supply of man's heart 
 and conscience, — and that since the fall of man it has been the 
 salvation and the comfort of all who have been saved. It is 
 those and those only who have followed Christ as their Tght, 
 who have lived before God and reached heaven. There has 
 never been any spiritual life or light enjoyed by men, excepting 
 from Christ. 
 
 5. — [The light shineth in darhness.'] This sentence means that the 
 spiritual hght which Chiist, the source of life, offers to man, has 
 always been neglected since the fall, and is still neglected by un- 
 regenerate men. It has been like a candle shining in a dark 
 place, a light in the middle of a world of darkness, — making the 
 darkness more visible. Unregenerate men are darkness itself 
 about spiritual things. "Ye were darkness." (Ephes. v. 8.) 
 
 Arrowsmith remarks on this sentence, " Christ hath shined in 
 all ages in the works of creation and providence. He left not 
 Himself without witness. Every creature is a kind of professor 
 that readeth man a lecture concerning God, of His wisdom, and 
 power, and goodness." 
 
 [The darkness comprehended it not.'] This sentence means 
 that the natural heart of man has always been so dark since the 
 fall, that the great majority of mankind have neither understood, 
 nor received, nor laid hold upon the light offered to them by 
 Christ. 
 
 The difference in the tenses of the tv/o verbs used in this 
 verse is very remarkable. About the " light" the present 
 tense is used ; " It shineth now as it has always shone ; it is 
 still shining." — About the " darkness" the past ten-e is used ; 
 " It has not comprehended the light ; it never has compre- 
 hended it from the first, and does not comprehend it at the pre- 
 sent day." 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 
 
 13 
 
 The Grreek word which we render "comprehended," is the 
 same that is used in Ephes. iii, 18. In Acts iv. 14, it is trans- 
 lated "perceived," — in Rom. ix. 30, " attained," — in Phihpp. iii. 
 13, "apprehend," — in John viii. 3, "taken," — and in 1 Thess. v. 
 4, " overtake." 
 
 At this point, the remark of Bengel upon the whole passage 
 deserves attention. " In the first and second verses of this 
 chapter, mention is made of a state before the creation of the 
 world ; in the third verse, the world's creation ; in the fourth, 
 the time of man's uprightness ; in the fifth, the time of man's 
 decUne and fall." 
 
 I cannot close these notes on the opening verses of St. John's 
 Gospel without expressing my deep sense of the utter inability 
 of any human commentator to enter fully into the vast and 
 sublime truths which the passage contains. I have laboured to 
 throw a little light on the passage, and have not hesitated to ex- 
 ceed the average length of these notes on account of the immense 
 importance of this part of Scripture. But after saying all that I 
 have said, I feel as if I had only faintly touched the surface of 
 the passage. There is something here which nothing but the 
 light of eternity will ever fully reveal. 
 
 JOHN I. 6—13. 
 
 6 There was a man sent from 
 God, whose name was John. 
 
 t The same came for a witness, 
 to bear witness of the Light, that 
 all men through him mighi believe. 
 
 8 He was not that Light, but loas 
 sent to bear witness of that Light. 
 
 9 That was the true Light, 
 which light eth every man that 
 Cometh into the world. 
 
 10 He was in the world, and the 
 
 world was made by him, and the 
 world knew him not. 
 
 11 He came unto his own, and 
 his own received him not. 
 
 12 But as many as received him, 
 to them gave he power to become 
 the sons of God, even to them that 
 beheve on his name : 
 
 13 Which were born, not of 
 blood, nor of the will of the flesh, 
 nor of the wiU of man, but of God. 
 
 St. John, after beginning his gospel with a statement of 
 our Lord's nature as God, proceeds to speak of His fore- 
 runner, John the Baptist. The contrast between the lan- 
 guage used about the Saviour, and that used about His 
 forerunner, ought not to be overlooked. Of Christ we are 
 told that He was the eternal God, — the Creator of all 
 
14 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 things,— -the source of life and light. Of John the Baptist 
 we are told simply, that " there was a man sent from God, 
 whose name was John." 
 
 We see, firstly, in these verses, the true nature of a 
 Christian miiiister^s office. We have it in the description 
 of John the Baptist : " He came for a witness, to bear wit 
 ness of the light, that all men through him might believe." 
 
 Christian ministers are not priests, nor mediators between 
 God and man. They are not agents into whose hands men 
 may commit their souls, and carry on their religion by 
 deputy. They are witnesses. They are intended to bear 
 testimony to God's truth, and specially to the great truth 
 that Christ is the only Saviour and light of the world. This 
 was St. Peter's ministry on the day of Pentecost. — *' With 
 many other words did he testify.'''' (Acts ii. 40.) This was 
 the whole tenor of St. Paul's ministry. — '' He testified both 
 to the Jews and Greeks repentance towards God, and faith 
 towards our Lord Jesus Christ." (Acts xx. 21.) Unless 
 a Christian minister bears a full testimony to Christ, he is 
 not faithful to his office. So long as he does testify of 
 Christ, he has done his part, and will receive his reward, 
 although his hearers may not believe his testimony. Until 
 a ministers hearers believe on that Christ of whom they 
 are told, they receive no benefit from the ministry. They 
 may be pleased and interested ; but they are not profited 
 until they believe. The great end of a minister's testimony 
 
 15 " that through him, men may believe." 
 
 We see, secondly, in these verses, one principal position 
 which our Lord Jesus Christ occupies towards mankind. 
 We have it in the words, " He was the true light which 
 lighteth every man that cometh into the world." 
 
 Christ is to the souls of men what the sun is to the world. 
 He is the centre and source of all spiritual light, warmth, 
 life, health, growth, beauty, and fertility. Like the sun. 
 He shines for the common benefit of all mankind, — for high 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 15 
 
 and for low, for rich and for poor, for Jew and for Greek. 
 Like the sun, He is free to alL All may look at Him, and 
 drink health out of His hgbt. If millions of mankind were 
 mad enough to dwell in caves under ground, or to bandage 
 their eyes, their darkness would be their own fault, and 
 not the fault of the sun. So, likewise, if millions of men 
 and women love spiritual " darkness rather than light," the 
 blame must be laid on their blind hearts, and not on Christ. 
 " Their foolish hearts are darkened." (John iii. 19; Rom. 
 i. 21.) But whether men will see or not, Christ is the true 
 sun, and the light of the world. There is no light for 
 sinners except in the Lord Jesus. 
 
 "We see, thirdly, in these verses, the desperate wickedness 
 of man's natural heart. We have it in the words, Christ 
 " was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and 
 the world knew Him not. He came unto His own, and 
 His own received Him not." 
 
 Christ was in the world invisibly, long before He was 
 born of the Virgin Mary. He was there from the very 
 beginning, ruling, ordering, and governing the whole crea- 
 tion. By Him all things consisted. (Coloss. i. 17.) He 
 gave to all life and breath, rain from heaven, and fruitful 
 seasons. By Him kings reigned, and nations were increased 
 or diminished. Yet men knew Him not, and honoured 
 Him not. They *' worshipped and served the creature more 
 than the Creator." (Rom. i. 25.) Well may the natural 
 heart be called " wicked !" 
 
 But Christ came visibly into the world, when He was 
 born at Bethlehem, and fared no better. He came to the very 
 people whom He had brought out from Egypt, and purchased 
 for His own. He came to the Jews, whom He had separated 
 from other nations, and to whom He had revealed Himself 
 by the prophets. He came to those very Jews who had 
 read of Him in the Old Testament Scriptures, — seen Him 
 under types and figures in their temple services, — and pro 
 
16 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 fessed to be waiting for His coming. And yet, when He 
 came, those very Jews received Him not. They even 
 rejected Him, despised Him, and slew Him. Well may 
 ? the natural heart be called " desjDcrately wicked !" 
 
 We see, lastly, in these verses, the vast privileges of all 
 who receive Christ, and believe 07i Sim. We are told that 
 "as many as received Him, to them gave He power to 
 become the sons of God, even to them that believe on His 
 name." 
 
 Christ will never be without some servants. If the vast 
 majority of the Jews did not receive Him as the Messiah, 
 there were, at any rate, a few who did. To them He gave 
 the privilege of being God's children. He adopted them 
 as members of His Father's family. He reckoned them 
 His own brethren and sisters, bone of His bone, and flesh of 
 His flesh. He conferred on them a dignity which was ample 
 recompense for th-e cross which they had to carry for His 
 sake. He made them sons and daughters of the Lord 
 Almighty. 
 
 Privileges like these, be it remembered, are the posses- 
 sion of all, in every age, who receive Christ by faith, and 
 follow Him as their Saviour. They are " children of God 
 by faith in Christ Jesus." (Gal. iii. 26.) They are born 
 again by a new and heavenly birth, and adopted into the 
 family of the King of kings. Few in number, and despised 
 by the world as they are, they are cared for with infinite 
 love by a Father in heaven, who, for His Son's sake, is 
 well pleased with them. In time He provides them with 
 everything that is for their good. In eternity He will give 
 them a crown of glory that fadeth not away. These are 
 great things ! But faith in Christ gives men an ample 
 title to them. Good masters care for their servants, and 
 Christ cares for His. 
 
 Are we ourselves sons of God ? Have we been born 
 again ? Have we the marks which always accompany the 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 17 
 
 new birth, — sense of sin, foith in Jesus, love of others, 
 righteous living, separation from the world ? Let us 
 never be content till we can give a satisfactory answer to 
 these questions. 
 
 Do we desire to be sons of God ? Then let us " receive 
 Christ" as our Saviour, and believe on Him with the 
 heart. To every one that so receives Him, He will give 
 the privilege of becoming a son of God. 
 
 Notes. John I. 6 — 13. 
 
 6. — [Ihere was a man sent from God j.... John.] This is a short and 
 striking description of John the Baptist, He was the messenger 
 whom God promised to send before Messiah's face. He was 
 born when his parents were aged, by God's miraculous inter- 
 position. He was filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother's 
 womb. He received a special commission from God to preach 
 the baptism of repentance, and to proclaim the immediate com- 
 ing of Christ. In short, he was specially raised up by God to 
 prepare the way for the Messiah. For all these reasons he is 
 here called " a man sent from God." It is, in one sense, the 
 common mark of all true ministers of "the Gospel. Ignorant, 
 
 ^ bhnd, and unconverted ministers may be ordained and sent by 
 man. But they are not " sent from God." 
 
 7. — [ Came for a witness.] This does not mean, as it might at first 
 sight appear, " came to be a witness." The Greek word which 
 we translate '' witness," does not mean " a person," but the testi- 
 mony which a witness bears. 
 
 [To hear witness of the light.] This means, to testify concern- 
 ing Jesus Christ the hght of the world, that He was the promised 
 Messiah, the Lamb of God, the Bridegroom, the Almighty 
 Saviour, to whom all dark souls ought to apply. 
 
 [All men.] This cannot of course signify " all mankind." It 
 means all who heard John's testimony, and all Jews who were 
 really locking for a Redeemer. One end of John the Baptist's 
 testimony was that all such should believe on Christ the true 
 light. 
 
 [Through him.] This does not mean "through Christ" and 
 Christ's grace, but through John the Baptist and John's testi- 
 mony. It is one of those texts which show the immense im- 
 portance of the ministerial office. It is a means and instrument 
 through which the Holy Spirit is pleased to produce faith lu 
 man's heart. " Faith cometh by hearing." Through John the 
 
18 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Baptist's testimony, Andrew was led to believe in Jesns and 
 become a disciple. Just so now, through the preaching of minis- 
 ters sinners learn to believe on Christ and are saved. 
 
 8. — [He luas not that light] This expression would be more lite- 
 rally rendered, "' He was not the light," the promised light of 
 sinners, the hght of the world. The Greek article " the," is 
 used in a similar emphatic manner, to denote eminence and 
 distinction, in the following passages. " That bread." John vi. 
 32. "That prophet." John i. 21—25. "That day." 1 Thess. 
 V. 4. " That way." Acts ix. 2. 
 
 Let it be noted that our Lord himself calls John the Baptist 
 at a later period, " The burning and shining light." (John v. 35.) 
 But it is a curious fact that the Greek word there rendered 
 "Ught," is not the one used here. It is a word which is fre- 
 quently translated " candle." John the Baptist was a " candle," 
 but not the light itself Believers are called " the light of the 
 world." (Matt. v. 14,) but only as members of Christ the light, 
 and borrowing light from him. Christ alone is the great sun 
 and fountain of aU light, the light itself 
 
 9. — [That was the true light.] The force of the expression " true " 
 in this sentence, is well brought out by Arrowsmith in his com- 
 mentary on this verse. He saj- s that Christ is " the true Kght " 
 in four respects. Firstly, He is undeceiving light, the true light 
 in opposition to all the false lights of the Gentiles. — Secondly, 
 He is real hght, true in opposition to ceremonial types and 
 shadows. — Thirdly, He is underived light, tr.ue in opposition to 
 all light that is borrowed, communicated, or participated from 
 another.— Fourthly, He is supereminent light, true in opposition 
 to all that is ordinary and common. 
 
 [Which lighteth every man. ...cometh... .world.] This sentence haa 
 caused much difference of opinioa among commentators, in 
 . respect to two points. 
 
 (o ) In the first place, men differ as to the application of the 
 words, "that cometh into the world." Some connect these 
 words with " the true light," and read the words, " this is the 
 true light that coming into the world lighteth every man." In 
 favour of this view, the words "hght is come into the world," 
 (John iii. 19,) and " I am come a light into the world," (John 
 xii. 46,) deserve notice. — Others connect the words with " every 
 man," and regard them as a sweeping description of every one 
 naturally born of the v^^eed of Adam. That "coming into the 
 world " is a Hebiew phrase for being born, is shown by Nifa- 
 nius. The construction of the whole verse in the original Greekj 
 is such that either rendering is grammatical and correct. 
 
 Opinions are so nicely balanced on this point, and so much 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 19 
 
 may be said on either side, that I venture my own judgmont 
 with much hesitiition. But I am inchned to think on the whole, 
 with Chemnitius and Grlassius, that our translators are right, and 
 that the clause " that cometh into the world," is better con- 
 nected with " every man " than with " the true hght." — If the 
 verse is rendered '' this is the true light that coming into the 
 world lighteth every man," it seems railier to narrow the bless- 
 ing of the tiue light, and to confine his illumining benefits to the 
 times after His incarnation. Thi?, be it remembered, is precisely 
 the view of the Socinian. And yet it is unqne>;tionably true 
 that Christ's incarnation increased gi-eatly the spiritual light in 
 the world. St. John says, " The darkness is past and the true 
 light now shineth." (1 John ii. 8.) If, on the other hand, the 
 verse is rendered as our version has it, the words " that cometh 
 into the world," seem very suitably joined to " every man," as 
 expressing the universality of the blessings which Christ confers 
 on man. He is not only the true light of the Jew, but of " every 
 man that is born into the world," of every name, and people, 
 and tongue. To suppose, as some have done, that this applica- 
 tion of the words " come into the world," involves the preexist- 
 ence of souls, is, to say the least, a foolish thought. 
 
 The point is, happily, one on which men may agree to differ. 
 Sound doctrine may be got out of either view. 
 
 (h.) The second difference of opinion respecting this verse 
 arises from the words, " lighteth every man," This expression 
 has received widely different interpretations. All, except here- 
 tics, are agreed that the words cannot mean that aU are con- 
 verted, and cannot signify the final, universal salvation of all 
 mankind. What then do they mean? 
 
 Some think, as Cyril, that Christ " the true light," lighteth 
 every man and woman on earth with the light of reason, intelU- 
 gence, and consciousness of right and wrong. This view is par- 
 tially true, and yet it seems weak and defective. 
 
 Some think, as the Quakers are report^^d to do, that Christ 
 lighteth every man and woman on earth with an inward light of 
 grace, sufficient to save him, if he will only use it. This view 
 is a dangerous one, and beside contradicting many texts of 
 Scripture, leads on to downright Pelagianism. 
 
 Some think, as Augustine, that Christ lighteth all that are 
 lighted by His grace, and that '' every man " is practically the 
 same as every believer. They quote in support of this view, the 
 verse, "The Lord upholdeth aU that fall," (Psalm cxlv. 141.) 
 where " all " can only mean, " all those that are upheld are up- 
 held by the Lord." A favourite illustration of this view is the 
 saying, that a schoolmaster " teaches aU the boys in a town,** 
 
20 EXPOSITORY THOUaHTS. 
 
 that is, " all who are taught are taught by him." This interpre- 
 tation, however, is not thoroughly satisfactory, and has an 
 appearance of quibbling and unfairness about it. 
 
 Some think, as Chrysostom, and Brentius in his Homilies, and 
 Lightfoot, that Christ is really given to be the light of all man- 
 kind. They think that when it is said. He " lighteth every 
 man," it means that He shines suflficiently for the salvation of 
 all mankind, both Jews and G-entiles, (hke the sun shining upon 
 all creation,) though the majority of men are so blinded by sin 
 that they do not see Him. Yet Christ is for every man. " He 
 lighteth all," says Chrysostom, " as far as in Him lies." — '' There 
 is power and good will in the light," says Chemnitius, " to illu- 
 mine all ; but some love darkness rather than light." Arrow- 
 smith says, " Christ doth dispense to every one hght sufficient 
 to leave him without excuse. But Christ doth not dispense to 
 every one converting light sufficient to bring him to salvation." 
 
 I believe this last view to be the most probable one, though 
 I confess that it is not unattended by difficulties. But I rest 
 in the conclusion that Clirist is offered as a light to all the 
 world, and that every one born into the world will prove at 
 last to have been in some way indebted to Christ, even though 
 not saved. 
 
 Pearce says of the Greek word rendered '"lighteth," that, "in 
 the Hebrew tongue that which is only intended to be done is 
 often expressed as a thing actually done." He regards thia 
 expression before us as a similar one. He gives, as parallel 
 instances, 1 Cor. x. 33, "please," for "intend to please," Gal. 
 V. 4, "justified," for "intend to be justified," and 1 John ii. 26, 
 "seduce," for "intend to seduce," 
 
 The Greek word rendered " lighteth " is used eleven times in 
 the New Testament, and is translated " to give light, to light, 
 to bring to light, to enlighten, to illuminate." 
 
 10. — [He was in the world, dr. ...knew him not] This verse de- 
 scribes the unbelief of the whole world before Christ's incarna- 
 tion. He "was in the world " invisibly, before He was born of 
 the Virgin Mary, as in the days of Noah. (1 Pet. iii. 19.) Ha 
 was to be seen in His works and in His providential govern- 
 ment of all things, if men had only had eyes to see Him. And 
 yet the very world which He had made, the work of his hands, 
 did not acknowledge, beheve, or obey Him. It knew Him not. 
 At Athens, Paul found an altar " to the unknown God." 
 
 That tlie expression applies to Christ before His incarnation, 
 and not after, is said by Lampe to be the unanimous opinion of 
 Origen, Chrysostom, Augustine, Cyril, Theodoret, Beda, Theo- 
 phylact, and Euthymius. 
 
21 
 
 There is a striking similarity between the declaration of this 
 verse and the contents of the latter part of the 1st chapter of 
 the Epistle to the Eomans. In fact the line of argument by 
 which St. Paul shows the Grentiles to be guilty, in the first 
 chapter of that epistle, and the Jews to be equally guilty and 
 excuseless in the second chapter, is only a full exposition of 
 what St. John here states briefly in two verses. 
 
 11.— [^e cavie unto his own,. ..received him not] This verse de- 
 scribes the unbehef of the Jewish nation after the incarnation 
 of Christ, and during His ministry among them. He came to 
 a people who were peculiarly His own, by their redemption 
 from Egypt, by their introduction into the land of Canaan, and 
 by their possession of the law of Moses, and the covenants, and 
 yet they did not believe on Him, or receive Him, but actually 
 rejected and slew Him. 
 
 There is a peculiarity about the Greek words rendered " his 
 own," in this verse, which ought not to be overlooked. The 
 first " his own " is in the neuter gender, and means literally " his 
 own things." The second '*his own" is in the masculine gen- 
 der, and means "his own men, servants or subjects." It is 
 probably meant to show that our Lord came to a people whose 
 land, territory, cities, temple, were all His own property, and 
 had been originally granted by Himself. The Jews, Palestine, 
 Jerusalem, the temple, were all Chri'st's peculiar possession. 
 Israel was '^His inheritance." (Psalm Ixxviii. 71.)— This made 
 the sin of those who '^ received Him not," even more sinful. 
 
 12. — [As many as received Jlim.] This expression signifies, "as 
 many as believed on Christ, and acknowledged Him as the 
 Messiah." It is only another form of the expression at the end 
 of the verse, "believed on His name." To receive Christ is to 
 accept Him with a willing heart, and to take Him as our Saviour. 
 It is one of many forms of speech, by which that justifying 
 faith which unites the sinner's soul to Christ is expressed in the 
 Bible. To believe on Christ with the heart, is to receive Him, 
 and to receive Him is to believe on Him. — St. Paul says to the 
 Colossians, " As ye have received Christ, so walk ve in Him." 
 (Col. ii. 6.) 
 
 The Greek word rendered, " As many as," is literally, "who- 
 soever," " whatsoever persons." Glassius remarks, that the 
 expression denotes the universality of the benefits which Christ 
 conferred. " Whosoever " received Him, Pharisees, Saddueees, 
 learned or unlearned, male or female, Jews or Gentiles, to them 
 He gave the privilege of sonship to God. 
 
 [To them gave he power to become the sons of God.] This 
 expression means, "He gave them the privilege of adoption 
 into God's family." They became the " children of God by 
 
22 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 faith in Ohrist Jesus." (Gal. iii, 26.) " Whosoever beHeveth that 
 
 Jesus is the Christ is born of God." (1 John v. 1.) There is 
 
 , no sonship to God without Hving faith in Christ. Let this neyer 
 
 Ibe forgotten. To talk of Gcd being men's Father, and men 
 \ being God's children, while they do not believe on the Son of 
 vGod, is contrary to Scripture. Those are not children of God 
 who have not faith in Jesus. 
 
 The word "power" in this sentence requires careful guarding 
 against misrepresentation. It means, as the marginal reading 
 says, " right or privilege." It does not mean strength or abihty. 
 It does not mean that Christ confers on those who receive Him 
 a spiritual and moral strength, by which they convert them- 
 selves, change their own hearts, and make themselves God's 
 children. No doubt Christ gives to all His people all needful 
 grace to supply all the wants of their hearts, and the necessities 
 of their position. No doubt He gives them strength to carry 
 the cross, fight the good fight, and overcome the world. But 
 that is not the truth taught in the words before us, and must be 
 sought in other places. The words before us only mean that 
 Christ confers the privilege of adoption on all believers, and did 
 80 especially on His first disciples. While their unbelieving 
 fellow-countrymen were boasting of being children of Abraham, 
 Christ gave His disciples the far higher privilege of being 
 children of God. 
 
 The Greek word rendered " power " is used 102 times in the 
 New Testament, and never on one occasion in the sense of 
 physical, moral, or spiritual strength to do a thing. It is gene- 
 rally translated, " authority, right, power, liberty, jurisdiction." 
 
 [To them that believe on His name.] These words are added to 
 make clearer, if possible, the character of those who have the 
 privilege of being sons of God. They are they who receive 
 Christ and believe on His name. Arrowsmith remarks, " The 
 word 'name,' in the Scripture, is often put for person. The 
 receivers of Christ are said to believe on His name, because the 
 direct object of their faith is the person of Christ. It is not the 
 believing that Christ died for all, or for me, or for the elect, or 
 any such proposition, that saveth. It is believing on Christ. 
 The person, or name of Christ, is the object of faith." 
 
 The expression, "believe on His name," ought not to be over- 
 looked. Arrowsmith remarks that there is a known distinction 
 amongst divines, between believing God, that there is such a 
 Being, — believing God, that Avhat He says is true, — and believ- 
 ing on God in the way of faith and confidence as our God. And 
 he observes, most truly, that precisely the same distinction exists 
 between faith that there is such a Saviour as Christ, — faith that 
 what Christ says is true, — and faith of reliance on Christ as our 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 23 
 
 Saviour. ^Believing on Christ's name is exactly this faith of 
 reliance, and is the faith that saves and justifies. 
 
 13, — [ Which luere horn, &c., &c....of Godi\ The birth here spoken 
 of is the new birth, or rep-eneration, that complete change of 
 heart and nature which takes place in a'man when he becomes 
 a real Christian. It is a change so great that no other figure 
 but that of birth can fully express it. It is as when a new 
 being, with new appetites, wants, and desires is brought into 
 the world. A person born of Grod is " a new creature, old things 
 are passed away, behold all things are become new." (2 Cor. 
 V. 17.) 
 
 The persons who believe on Christ's name are said to be born 
 " not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of 
 man, but of God." The interpretation of this expression which 
 is usually given by commentators appears to me neither correct 
 nor seemly. The true meaning of the words, I believe, is this. 
 BeHevers did not become what they are " by blood," that is by 
 descent from Abraham or blood connection with godly people. 
 Grace does not descend from parent to child. — Nor yet did 
 believers become what they are by the will of the flesh, — that 
 is by the efforts and exertions of their own natural hearts. 
 Nature can never change itself. " That which is born of the 
 flesh is flesh." — Nor yet did believers become what they are by 
 the will of man, — that is by the acts and deeds of others. 
 Neither ordained ministers, nor any one else, can confer grace 
 upon another. Man cannot regenerate hearts. — Believers 
 become v/hat they are solely and entirely by the grace of God. 
 It is to God's free grace, preventing, calling, converting, renew- 
 ing and sanctifying, that they owx their new birth. They are 
 born of God, or, as the third chapter says more distinctly, 
 " born of the Spirit." 
 
 The word which w^e render "blood," in the singular number, 
 is, in the Greek, plural, " bloods." — This peculiarity has made 
 gome conjecture that the expression refers to the blood shed in 
 circumcision and sacrifice, and teaches the inability of these 
 things to regenerate man. But this idea seems far-fetched and 
 improbable. The use of the plural number appears to me 
 intended to exclude aU fleshly confidence in any descent or rela- 
 tionship. It was neither the blood of Abraham, or of David, or 
 of Aaron, or of Judah, or of Levi, which could give grace or 
 make any one a child of God. 
 
 This is the first time the new birth is spoken of by name in 
 Scripture. Let us not fail to notice how carefully the doctrine 
 is fenced against errors, and how emphatically we are told what 
 this new birth does not come from, as well as what it does come 
 from. It is a strikins: fact that when St. Peter mentions the 
 
24 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 new birth, he fences it in like manner, (I Pet. i. 23,) and 
 when he speaks of baptism '' saving " us, he carefallj adds that 
 it is "not the putting away the filtli of the flesh." (1 Pet. iii, 
 21.) In the face of all these cautions, it is curious to observe 
 the pertinacity with which many overthrow the whole doctrine 
 of the new birth by the assertion that all baptized persons are 
 born again ! 
 
 We must be careful that we do not interpret the words 
 " w^hich were born " as if the new birth was a change which 
 takes place in a man after he has believed in Christ, and is the 
 jnext step after faith. Saving faith and regeneration are insepa- 
 Irable. The moment that a man really believes in Christ, how- 
 ever feebly, he is born of God. The weakn»ess of his faith may 
 make him unconscious of the change, just as a new-born infant 
 knows little or nothing about itself But w^here there is faith 
 there is always new birth, and where there is no faith there is 
 no regeneration. 
 
 JOHN I. 14. 
 
 14 And the "Word was made flesh, gotten of the Father,) full of grace 
 and dwelt among us, (and we beheld and truth, 
 his glory, the glory as of the only be- , 
 
 The passage of Scripture now before us is very short, if 
 we measure it by words. But it is very long, if we 
 measure it by the nature of its contents. The substance 
 of it is so immensely important that we shall do well to 
 give it separate and distinct consideration. This single 
 verse contains more than enough matter for a whole 
 exposition. 
 
 The main truth which this verse teaches is the reality of 
 our Lord Jesus ChrisVs incarnation^ or heing made man, 
 St. John tells us that " the "Word was made flesh, and 
 dwelt among us." 
 
 The plain meaning of these words is, that our divine 
 Saviour really took human nature upon Him, in order to 
 save sinners. He really became a man like ourselves in 
 all things, sin only excepted. Like ourselves, he was born 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 25 
 
 of a woman, though born in a miraculous manner. Like 
 ourselves, He grew from infancy to boyhood, and from 
 boyhood to man's estate, both in wisdom and in stature. 
 (Luke ii. 52.) Like ourselves, he hungered, thirsted, ate, 
 drank, slept, was wearied, felt pain, wept, rejoiced, mar- 
 velled, was moved to anger and compassion. Having be 
 come flesh, and taken a body, He prayed, read the Scrip- 
 tures, suffered being tempted, and submitted His human 
 will to the will of God the Father. And finally, in the 
 same body. He really suffered and shed His blood, really 
 died, was really buried, really rose again, and really 
 ascended up into heaven. And yet all this time He was 
 God as well as man ! 
 
 This union of two natures in Christ's one Person is 
 doubtless one of the greatest mysteries of the Christian 
 religion. It needs to be carefully stated. It is just one 
 of those great truths which are not meant to be curiously 
 pried into, but to be reverently believed. Nowhere, per- 
 haps, shall Ave find a more wise and judicious statement 
 than in the second article of the Church of England. 
 " The Son, which is the "Word of the Father, begotten 
 from everlasting of the Father, the very and eternal God, 
 and of one substance with the Father, took man's nature 
 in the womb of the blessed Virgin of her substance : so 
 that two whole and perfect natures, that is to say, the God- 
 head and the manhood, were joined together in one Per- 
 son, never to be divided, whereof is one Christ, very God 
 and very man." This is a most valuable declaration. This 
 is " sound speech, which cannot be condemned." 
 
 But while we do not pretend to explain the union of two 
 natures in our Lord Jesus Christ's Person, we must not 
 hesitate to fence the subject with well-defined cautions. 
 While we state most carefully what we do believe, we must 
 not shrink from declaring boldly what we do not believe. 
 We must never forget, that though our Lord was God and 
 
 2 
 
26 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 man at the same time, the divine and human natures in 
 Him were never confounded. One nature did not swallow 
 up the other. The two natures remained perfect and dis- 
 tinct. The divinity of Cln-ist was never for a moment laid 
 aside, although veiled. The manhood of Christ, during 
 His life-time, was never for a moment unlike our own, 
 though by union with the Godhead, greatly dignified. 
 Though perfect God, Christ has always been perfect man 
 from the first moment of His incarnation. He that is gone 
 into heaven, and is sitting at the Father's right hand to 
 intercede for sinners, is man as well as God. Though per- 
 fect man, Christ never ceased to be perfect God. He that 
 suflfered for sin on the cross, and was made sin for us, was 
 " God manifest in the flesh." The blood with which the 
 Church was purchased, is called the blood " of God." 
 (Acts XX. 28.) Though He became "flesh" in the fullest 
 sense, when He was born of the Virgin Mary, He never at 
 any period cea,sed to be the Eternal Word. To say that 
 He constantly manifested His divine nature during His 
 earthly ministry, would, of course, be contrary to plain 
 facts. To attempt to explain why His Godhead was some- 
 times veiled and at other times unveiled, while He was on 
 earth, would be venturing on ground which we had better 
 leave alone. But to say that at any instant of His earthly 
 ministry He was not fully and entirely God, is nothing less 
 than heresy. 
 
 The cautions just given may seem at first sight needless, 
 wearisome, and hair-spHtting. It is precisely the neglect 
 of such cautions which ruins many souls. This constant 
 undivided union of two perfect natures in Christ's Person 
 is exactly that which gives infinite value to His mediation, 
 and qualifies Him to be the very Mediator that sinners 
 need. Our Mediator is One who can sympathize with us, 
 because He is very man. And yet, at the same time. He 
 is One who can deal with the Father for us on equal terms, 
 
27 
 
 because He is very God. — It is the same union which gives 
 infinite value to His righteousness, when imputed to be- 
 lievers. It is the righteousness of One who was God as 
 well, as man. — It is the same union which gives infinite 
 value to the atoning blood which He shed for sinners on 
 the cross. It is the blood of One who was God as well as 
 man. — It is the same union which gives infinite value to 
 His resurrection. When He rose again, as the Head of the 
 body of believers, He rose not as a mere man, but as God. 
 — Let these things sink deeply into our hearts. The second 
 Adam is far greater than the first Adam was. The first 
 Adam was only man, and so he fell. The second Adam 
 was God as well as man, and so He completely con- 
 quered. 
 
 Let us leave the subject with feelings of deep gratitude 
 and thankfulness. It is full of abounding consolation for 
 all who know Christ by faith, and believe on Him. 
 
 Did the Word become flesh ? Then He is One who can 
 be touched with the feeling of His people's infirmities, 
 because He has suffered Himself, being tempted. He is 
 almighty because He is God, and yet He can feel with us, 
 because He is man. 
 
 Did the Word become flesh ? Then He can supply us 
 with a perfect pattern and example for our daily life. 
 Had he walked among us as an angel or a spirit, we 
 could never have copied Him. But having dwelt among 
 us as a man, we know that the true standard of holiness is 
 to " walk even as He walked." (1 John ii. 6.) He is a 
 perfect pattern, because He is God. But He is also a pat- 
 tern exactly suited to our wants, because He is man. 
 
 Finally, did the Word become flesh ? Then let us see 
 in our mortal bodies a real, true dignity, and not defile 
 them by sin. Vile and weak as our body may seem, it is a 
 body which the Eternal Son of God was not ashamed to 
 take upon Himself, and to take up to heaven. That simple 
 
28 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 fact is a pledge that He will raise our bodies at the last 
 day, and glorify them together with His own. 
 
 Notes. John I. 14. 
 
 [And the ivord was made flesh.] This sentence means that the 
 eternal Word of God, the second Person in the Trinity, became 
 a man, like one of ourselves in all things, sin only excepted 
 This He accomphshed, by being born of the Virgin Mary, after 
 a miraculous manner, through the operation of the Holy Grhost 
 And tlie end for which He became flesh, was that He might 
 live and die for sinners. 
 
 The expression " the "Word," shows clearly that " the Word " 
 who " was with God and was God," must be a Person. It could 
 not reasonably be said of any one but a Person, that He became 
 " flesh and dwelt among us." Whether St. John could have 
 found any other name for the second Person of the Trinity 
 equally proper, we need not trouble ourselves to inquire. It 
 certainly would not have been accurately correct to say that 
 " Jesus was made flesh," because the name Jesus was not given 
 to our lord till after His incarnation. Nor yet would it have 
 been correct to say, " In the beginning was Christ," because the 
 name Christ belongs to the times after the fall of man. 
 
 This is the last time that John uses this expression, " The 
 Word," about Christ in his Gospel. From the time of His incar- 
 nation he generally speaks of Him as " Jesus," or " the Lord." 
 
 [ Was inade.] This expression might perhaps have been better 
 translated " became." . At any rate, we must carefully remember 
 that it does not signify " was created." Tlie Athanasian Creed 
 pays truly, " The Son is of the Father alone, neither made nor 
 created, but begotten." 
 
 [Flesh.] The use of this word, instead of " man," ought not 
 to be overlooked. It is purposely used in order to show us that 
 when our Lord became incarnate, He took upon Him nothing 
 less than our whole nature, consisting of a true body and a 
 reasonable soul. As Arrowsmith says, " That which was not 
 taken could not be healed. If Christ had not taken the whole 
 man. He could not have saved the sou\"— It also implies that 
 our Lord took upon Him a body liable to those weaknesses, 
 fatigues, and pains, which are inseparable from the idea of tlesh. 
 He' did not become a man like Adam before the fd', with a 
 nature free from all infirmity. He became a man like any one 
 of Adam's children, with a nature hahle to every thing that f dlen 
 humanity is Hable to, except sin. He was made " flesh," and '' all 
 flesh is gra^b."— Finally, it teaches that our Lord did not assume 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 29 
 
 the finman nature of any one family, or class, or people, but 
 that nature which is common to all Adam's children, whether 
 Jews or G-entiles. Ke came to be a Saviour for " all flesh," and 
 so was made " flesh." 
 
 The subject of this sentence is a deeply mysterious one, but 
 one about which it is most important to have clear views. Next 
 to the doctrine of the Trinity, there is no doctrine on whif h 
 fallen man has built so many deadly heresies as the incarnation 
 of Christ. There is unquestionably much about this union of 
 two natures in one person which we cannot explain, and must 
 be content to beheve. There is much that we cannot under- 
 stand, be it remembered, in the union of body and soul in our 
 own persons. But there are some points in the subject of 
 Christ's incarnation which we must hold fast, and never let go. 
 
 (a.) In the first place, let us carefully remember, that when 
 " the Word became flesh," He became so by the union of two 
 perfect and distinct natures in one Person. The manner of this 
 union we cannot explain, but the fact we must firmly believe. 
 " Christ," says the Athnnasian Creed, " is God and Man ; God of 
 the substance of the Father, begotten before the world, and man 
 of the substance of His mofhei', born in the world ; perfect God 
 and perfect man. Who, although He be God and man, yet He 
 is not two but one Christ; one not by conversion of the godhead 
 into flesh, but by taking of the manhood into God." These 
 words are very important. The Word was not made flesh by 
 changing one nature into another, or by laying aside one nature 
 and taking up another. In all our thoughts about Christ, ht us 
 take care that we do not divide His Person, and that we maintain 
 steadily that He has two distinct and perfect natures. The old 
 Latin line on the subject, quoted by Gomarus, is worth remem- 
 bering. It represents "the Word made flesh," as saying, "I am 
 what I was, that is God : — I was not what I am, that is man : — 
 I am now called both, that is both God and man." 
 
 (&.) Secondly, when " the Word became flesh," He did not cease 
 for a moment to be God. No doubt He was pleased to veil His 
 divinity and to hide His power, and more especially so at some 
 seasons. He emptied Himself of external marks of glory and 
 was called " the carpenter." But He never laid His divinity 
 aside. God cannot cease to be God. It was as God-man that 
 He lived, suffered, died, and rose again. It is writ :en that God 
 '' has purchased the Church with His own blood.'' It was the 
 blood of one who was not man only, but God. 
 
 (c.) Thirdly, when " the Word became flesh," He was made 
 a man in the truth of our nature like unto us in all things, ana 
 fiom that hcur has never ceased to be man. His humanity was 
 not a humanity different from our own, and though now glorified 
 
so EXPOSITOKY THOUGHTS. 
 
 is our humanity still. It was perfect man no less than pprfect 
 God, who resisted temptation, fulfilled the law perfectly, endured 
 the contradiction of smners, spent nig-hts in prayer, kept His will 
 in subjecLion to the Father's will, suffered, died, and at length 
 ascended up to heaven with flesh, bones, and all things apper- 
 taining to man's nature. It is written, that in "all things it be- 
 hoved Him to be made like unto His brethren." Moreover, He 
 did not lay aside His humanity when He left the world. He 
 that ascended np on the mount Olives, and is sitting at the right 
 hand of God to intercede for believers, is one who is still man as 
 well as God. Our High Priest in heaven is not God only, but 
 man. Christ's humanity as well as divinity are both in heaven. 
 One in our nature, our elder Brother, has gone as our Fore- 
 runner to prepare a place for us. 
 
 {d.) Lastly, When "the Word became flesh," He did not 
 take on Him " peccable flesh." It is written that He was made 
 in " the likeness of sinful flesh." (Rom. viii. 3.) But we must 
 not go beyond this. Christ was " made sin fur us." (2 Cor. 5, 
 21.) But He " knew no sin," and was holy, harmless, undefiled, 
 separate from sinners, and without taint of corruption. Satan 
 found nothing in Him. Christ's human nature was liable to 
 weakness, but not to sin. The words of the fifteenth Article 
 must never be forgotten, Christ was " void from sin, both in His 
 flesh and in His Spirit." 
 
 For want of a clear understanding of this union of two natures 
 in Christ's Person, the heresies which arose in the eaily Church 
 weie many and great. And 3^et Arrowsmith points out that no 
 less than lour of these heresies are at once confuted by a right 
 interpretation of the sentence now before us. 
 
 *' The Arians hold that Jesus Christ was not true God. This 
 text calleth Him the Word, and maketh Him a Person in the 
 Trinity. 
 
 " The Apollinarians acknowledge Christ to be God, yea, and 
 man too ; but they hold that He took only the body of a man, 
 not the soul of a man, while His divinity supplied the room of 
 a soul. We interpret the word ' flesh ' for the whole human 
 nature, both soul and body. 
 
 " The Nestorians grant Christ to be both God and man : bu^ 
 then they say the Godhead made one person, and the manhood 
 another person. We interpret the woi-ds ' was made' as imply- 
 ing an union, in which Christ assumed not the person of man, 
 but the nature of man. 
 
 "The Eutychians held but one person in Christ; but then 
 they confounded the natures. They say the Godhead and man- 
 hood made such a mixture as to produce a third tiling. Here 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 31 
 
 Miey also are confuted by the right understand! jg of the union 
 between the Word and flesh." 
 
 He then goes on to show how the ancient Church met all 
 these heretics with four adverbs, which briefly and conveniently 
 defined the union of two natures in Christ's person. They said 
 that the divine and human natures when " the Word was made 
 flesh," were united truly^ to oppose the Arians, — perfectly, to 
 oppose the ApoUinarians, — undividedly, to oppose the Nestorians, 
 — and unmixedly^ to oppose the Eatychians. 
 
 Those who wish to examine this subject further, will do well 
 to consult Pearson on the Creed, Dods on the Incarnation of the 
 Eternal Word, and Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity, B. v., chap, 
 51, 52, 53, 54. 
 
 [Dwelt among us.'] The Greek word rendered dwelt, means 
 literally " tabernacled," or " dwelt in a tent." The sentence does 
 not mean that Christ dwelt in His human body as in a tabernacle, 
 which He left when He ascended up to heaven. " Christ," says 
 Arrowsmith, "continueth now, and shall for ever, as trae man 
 as when He was born of the Virgin Mary. — He so took human 
 nature as never to lay it down again." The sentence only means 
 that Christ dwelt among men on earth for thirty-three years. 
 He was on earth so long conversing among men, that there 
 could be no doubt of the reality of His incarnation. He did 
 not appear for a few minutes, like a phantom or ghost. He did 
 not come down for a brief visit of a few days, but was living 
 among us in His human body for the duration of a whole gene- 
 ration of men. For thirty-three years He pitched His tent in 
 Palestine, and was going to and fro among its inhabitants. 
 
 Arrowsmit^ remarks that three sorts of men are described in 
 the Bible as living in tents ; shepherds, sojourners, and soldiers. 
 He thinks that the phrase here used has reference to the calling 
 of all these three, and that it points to Christ's life on earth 
 being that of a shepherd, a traveller, and a soldier. But it may 
 be doubted whether this is not a somewhat fanciful idea, how- 
 ever pleasing and true. The Greek word rendered " dwelt " is only 
 used in four other places in the New Testament, (Rev. vii. 15 ; 
 xii. 12 ; xiii. 6 ; xxi. 3,) and in each of them is applied to a 
 permanent, and not a temporary dwelling. 
 
 [ Wt beheld his glory.] St. John here declares, that although 
 *Hhe Word was made flesh," he and others beheld from time 
 to time His glory, and saw manifest proof that He was not 
 man only, but the " only begotten Son of God." 
 
 There is a difference of opinion among commentators as to the 
 right application of these words. Some think that they apply 
 to Christ's aacension, which John witnessed, and to all His mi^ 
 
32 EXPOSITOKY THOUGHTS. 
 
 raculous actions tbrougliout His ministry, in all of which, as it 
 is said of the miracle of Cana, He " maniftsted forth his glory," 
 and His disciples saw it. — Others think tliat they aj^iply especially 
 to our Lord's transfiguration, when He put on for a little season 
 His glory, in the presence of John, James, and Peter. I am on 
 the whole mclined to think that this is the true view, and the 
 more so, because of Peter's words in speaking of the transfigura- 
 tion, (2 Pet. i. 16, 18,) and the words which immediately follow 
 in the verse we are now considering. 
 
 [The glory as of the only begotten of the Father.] This sen- 
 tence means " such glory as became and was suitable to one who 
 is the only begotten Son of Grod the Father." These words will 
 hardly apply to Christ's miracles. They seem to confine the glory 
 which John says " we beheld," to the vision of glory which he 
 and his two companions saw when Christ was transfigured, and 
 they heard the Father saying, " This is my beloved Son." 
 
 Lightfoot's paraphrase of this expression is w^orth reading 
 though he does not apply the passage to the transfiguration 
 " We saw His glory as what was worthy, as became, the only be- 
 gotten Son of God. He did not glisten in any worldly pomp or 
 grandeur, according to what the Jewish nation fondly dreamed 
 their Messiah would do. But He was dressed with the glory of 
 holiness, grace, truth, and the power of miracles." 
 
 We must carefully remember that the adverb " as " in this 
 place, does not imply comparison, or similitude, as if John only 
 meant that the Word's glory was like that of the only begotten 
 Son of God. Chrysostom says, " The expression ' as ' in this 
 place does not belong to similarity or comparison, but to con- 
 firmation and unquestionable definition, as though he said, we 
 beheld glory such as it was becoming and likely that He should 
 possess, who is the only begotten and true Son of God and King 
 of all." He also remarks that it is a common manner of speak- 
 ing, when people are describing the appearance of a king in 
 state, to say that " he was like a king," meaning only that he 
 was a real king. 
 
 Glassius, in his Philologia, makes the saT,e comment on the 
 expression, and quotes as parallel cases of the use of ths adverb 
 ''as," 2 Pet. j. 3; 1 Pet. i. 19; Philem. 9; Rom. ix. 32; Matt, 
 xiv. 5; 2 Coi. iii. 18. He thinks it a Hebraism, denoting not 
 the similitude, but the reality and truth of a thing, and quotes 
 Psalm cxxii. 3, and Hosea iv. 4, as Old Testament instances. 
 
 [The only degoften of the Father.] This remarkable expression 
 describes our Lord's eternal generation, or Sonship. He is that 
 Person who alone has been begotten of the Father from all 
 eternity, and from all eternity has been His beloved Son. 
 
JOHN-, CHAP. I. 83 
 
 The phrase is only used five times in the New Testament, and 
 only in St. John's writing's. That God always had a Son appears 
 in the Old Testament. " What is his son's name," says Agar. 
 (Prov. XXX, 4.) So also the Father says to Mes-iah, " rhou art 
 my Son : this day have I begotten thee." (Psal. ii. 7.) But the 
 Sonship now before us, we must carefully remember, is not to 
 be dated from any " day." It is the everlasting Sonship of 
 which John speaks. 
 
 The subject is one of those which we must be content to 
 believe and reverence, but must not attempt to define too nar- 
 rowly. We are taught distinctly in Scripture that in the unity 
 of the Godhead, there are three Persons of one substance, power, 
 and eternity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. We 
 are taught, with equal distinctness, that *' Sonship " describes 
 the everlasting relation which exists between the first and 
 second Persons in the Trinity, and that Christ is the only begot- 
 ten and eternal Son of God. We are taught, vvdth equal dis- 
 tinctness, that the Father loveth the Son, and loved Him before 
 the foundation of the world. (John xvii. 24.) But here we must 
 be content to pause. Our feeble faculties could not comprehend 
 more if more were told us. 
 
 Let us however remember carefully, when we think of Christ 
 as the only begotten Son of the Father, that we must not attach 
 the least idea of inferiority to the idea of His Sonship. As the 
 Athanasian creed says, " The Godhead of the Father, of the Son, 
 and of the Holy Ghost is all one, the glory equal, the majesty 
 co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son." And yet 
 the Father is not the Son, and the Son is not the Father. The 
 argument of the ancient Arians, that if Christ is the Son of 
 God, he must necessarily be inferior in dignity to God, and 
 subsequent in existence to God, is one that will not stand for a 
 moment. The reply is simple. We are not talking of the rela- 
 tionship of mortal beings, but of the relationship between the 
 Persons of the Trinity, who are eternal. All analogies and illus- 
 trations drawn from human parents and children are necessarily 
 defective. As Augustine said, so must we say, " Show me and 
 explain to me an eternal Father, and I will show you and explain 
 to you an eternal Son." We must believe and not try to 
 explain. Christ's generation, as God, is eternal, — who shall 
 declare it? He was begotten from everlasting of the Father. 
 He was always the beloved Son. And yet " He is equal to the 
 Father as touching his godhead, though inferior to Him as touch- 
 ing his manhood." 
 
 [Full of Grace and Truth.] These words do not belong to 
 the Father, though they follow His name so closely. They 
 belong to " the Word." The meaning of them is differently 
 explained. 
 
 2* 
 
84 
 
 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Some tliink that they describe our Lord Jesus Christ's cha- 
 r«icter, during the time that He was upon the earth, in general 
 terms. Full of grace were His lips, and full of grace was His 
 life. He was full of the grace of G-od, the Spirit dwelling in 
 Him without measure, full of kindness, love, and favour to man ; 
 — full of truth in His deeds and words, for in His hps was no 
 guile, full of truth in His preaching concerning God the Father's 
 love to sinners, and the way of salvation, for He was ever 
 unfolding in rich abundance all truths that man can need to 
 know for his soul's good. 
 
 Some think that the words describe especially the spiritual 
 riches that Christ brought into the world, when He became 
 incarnate, and set up His kingdom. He came full of the gospel 
 of grace, in contradistinction to the burdensome requirements of 
 the ceremonial law. He came full of truth, of real, true, solid 
 comfort, in contradistinction to the types, and figures, and 
 shadows of the law of Moses. In short the full grace of God, 
 and the full truth about the way of acceptance, were never 
 clearly seen until the Word became flesh, dwelt among us on 
 earth, opened the treasure-house, and revealed grace and truth 
 in His own person. 
 
 I decidedly prefer the second of these two views. The first 
 is truth, but not the truth of the passage. The second appears 
 to me to harmonize with the 17th verse, which follows almost 
 immediately, where the law and the gospel are contrasted, und 
 we are told that " grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." 
 
 JOHN I. 15—18. 
 
 15 John bare witness of him, and 
 cried, saying, This was he of whom 
 I spake, He that cometh after me 
 is preferred before me : for he was 
 before me. 
 
 16 And of his fulness have aU 
 we received, and grace for grace. 
 
 1*1 For the law was given by 
 Moses, but grace and truth came 
 by Jesus Christ. 
 
 18 No man hath seen God at 
 any time ; the only beo;otten Son, 
 which is in the bosom of the Father, 
 he hath declared him. 
 
 The passage before us contains three great declarations 
 about our Lord Jesus Christ. Each of the three is 
 among the foundation principles of Christianity. 
 
 We are taught, firstly, that it is Christ alone who sup- 
 plies all the spiritual wants of all believers, ft is written 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 35 
 
 that " of his fulness have we all received, and grace ioi 
 grace." 
 
 There is an infinite fulness in Jesus Christ. As St. Paul 
 says, *' It pleased the Father that in him should all fulness 
 dwell." — " In Him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and 
 knowledge." (Coloss. i. 19; ii. 3.) There is laid up in 
 Him, as in a treasury, a boundless supply of all that any 
 sinner can need, either in time or eternity. The Spirit of 
 Life is His special gift to the Church, and conveys from 
 Him, as from a great root, sap and vigour to all the believ- 
 ing branches. He is rich in mercy, grace, wisdom, right- 
 eousness, sanctification, and redemption. Out of Christ's 
 fulness, all believers in every age of the world, have been 
 supplied. They did not clearly understand the fountain 
 from which their supplies flowed, in Old Testament times. 
 The Old Testament saints only saw Christ afar off, and not 
 face to face. But from Abel downwards, all saved souls 
 have received all they have had from Jesus Christ alone. 
 Every saint in glory will at last acknowledge that he is 
 Christ's debtor for all he is. Jesus will prove to have been 
 all in all. 
 
 We are taught, secondly, the vast superiority of Christ 
 to Moses, and of the Gospel to the Law. It is written that 
 *' the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came 
 by Jesus Christ." 
 
 Moses was employed by God " as a servant," to convey 
 to Israel the moral and ceremonial law. (Heb. iii. 5.) As 
 a servant, he was faithful to Him who appointed him, but 
 he was only a servant. The moral law, which he brought 
 down from Mount Sinai, was holy, and just, and good. 
 But it could not justify. It had no healing power. It 
 could wound, but it could not bind up. It " worked wrath." 
 (Rom. iv. 15.) It pronounced a curse against any imperfect 
 obedience. — The ceremonial law, which he was commanded 
 to impose on Israel, was full of deep meaning and typical 
 
6b EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 instruction. Its ordinances and ceremonies made it an 
 excellent schoolmaster to guide men toward Christ. (Gal. 
 iii. 24.) But the ceremonial law was only a schoolmaster. 
 It could not make him that kept it perfect, as pertaining 
 to the conscience. (Heb. ix. 9.) It laid a grievous yoke 
 on men's hearts, which they were not able to bear. It was 
 a rninistration of death and condemnation. (2 Cor. iii. 
 7 — 9.) The light which men got from Moses and the law 
 was at best only starlight compared to noon-day. 
 
 Christ, on the other hand, came into the world " as a 
 Son," with the keys of God's treasury of grace and truth 
 entirely in His hands. (Heb. iii. 6.) Grace came by Him, 
 when He made fully known God's gracious plan of salva- 
 tion, by faith in His own blood, and opened the fountain 
 of mercy to all the world. — Truth came by Him, when He 
 fulfilled in His own Person the types of the Old Testament, 
 and revealed Himself as the true Sacrifice, the true mercy- 
 seat, and the true Priest. N'o doubt there was much of 
 " grace and truth " under the law of Moses. But the 
 whole of God's grace, and the whole truth about redemp- 
 tion, were never known until Jesus came into the world, 
 and died for sinners. 
 
 We are taught, thirdly, that it is Christ alone who has 
 revealed God the Father to man. It is written that " no 
 man hath seen God at any time : the only begotten Son, 
 which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared 
 him." 
 
 The eye of mortal man has never beheld God the 
 Father. No man could bear the sight. Even to Moses 
 it was said, " Thou canst not see my face : for there 
 shall no man see me, and live." (Exod. xxxiii. 20.) 
 Yet all that mortal man is capable of knowing about 
 God the Father is fully revealed to us by God the Son. 
 He, who was in the bosom of the Father from all eternity, 
 has been pleased to take our nature upon Him, and to 
 
37 
 
 exhibit to us in the form of man, all that our minds can 
 comprehend of the Father's perfections. In Christ's words, 
 and deeds, and life, and death, we learn as much concern- 
 ing God the Father as our feeble minds can at present 
 bear. His perfect wisdom, — His almighty power, — His 
 unspeakable love to sinners, — His incomparable holiness, — 
 His hatred of sin, could never be -epresented to our eyes 
 more clearly than we see them in Christ's life and death. 
 In truth, " God was manifest in the flesh," when the Word 
 took on Him a body. "He was the brightness of the 
 Father's glory, and the express image of His person." 
 He says Himself, " I and my Father are one." " He that 
 hath seen me hath seen the Father." *' In Him dw^elleth 
 all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." (Coloss. ii. 9.) 
 These are deep and mysterious things. But they are true. 
 (1 Tim. iii. 16 ; Heb. i. 3 ; John x. 30 ; xiv. 9.) 
 
 And now, after reading this passage, can we ever give 
 too much honour to Christ? Can we ever think too 
 highly of Him ? Let us banish the unworthy thought 
 from our minds for ever. Let us learn to exalt Him 
 more in our hearts, and to rest more confidingly the whole 
 weight of our souls in His hands. Men may easily fall 
 into error about the three Persons in the holy Trinity 
 if they do not carefully adhere to the teaching of Scrip- 
 ture. But no man ever errs on the side of giving too 
 much honour to God the Son. Christ is the meeting- 
 point between the Trinity and the sinner's soul. "He 
 that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father 
 which sent Him." (John v. 23.) 
 
 Notes. John I. 15 — 18. 
 
 15. — [John hare witness....cried.] The time at which John the 
 Baptist bore this testimony is not specified. We have not yet 
 come to the historic part of John's Gospel, properly speaking. 
 We are still in the i troductory preface. It seems therefore 
 probable, as Lightfoot says, that the sentence before us describea 
 
88 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 the habitual character of John's testimony to Christ. He was, 
 throughout his ministry, continually proclaiming Christ's great- 
 ness and superiority to himself, both in nature and dignity. 
 
 [Cried] The Greek word so rendered, implies a very loud 
 cry, like that of one making a proclamation. Parkhurst defines 
 it in this place as " speaking out very openly." 
 
 [He that Cometh after me.. ..pr^ef erred hefore....was hefore we. 
 This sentence has caused much discussion and some difference 
 of opinion. The Greek words literally translated would be, 
 " He that cometh after me has become, or been made, in front 
 of me, — for he was first of me." I feel no doubt that our English 
 version gives the correct meaning of the sentence. — Hammond's 
 note on the text is very good. 
 
 The first " before," signifies before in place, position, or dig- 
 nity. The Greek adverb so rendered, is used forty-nine times 
 in the New Testament, but never once in the sense of " before 
 in point of time or age." 
 
 The second " before," signifies before in point of time or ex- 
 istence. " He was existing before me, at the time when I was 
 not." The expression is certainly remarkable and uncommon, 
 but there is another exactly like it in this Gospel, " It hated me 
 before it hated you," where the literal rendering would be, "it 
 hated me first of you." 
 
 The sentence " he was before me," is a distinct statement of 
 Christ's pre-existence. He was born at least six months after 
 John the Baptist, and was therefore younger in age than John. 
 Yet John says, " He was before me. He was existing when I 
 was born," If he had meant only, that our Lord was a more 
 honourable person than himself, he would surely have said, " He 
 is before me." 
 
 The greatness of John the Baptist's spiritual knowledge ap- 
 pears in this expression. He understood the doctrine of Christ's 
 pre-existence. Christians are apt to think far too slightingly 
 of John the Baptist's attainments, and the depths of his teach- 
 ing. 
 
 16. — [Q/* His fulness have all we received^ This sentence means, 
 " all we who believe on Jesus, have received an abundant sup- 
 ply of all that our souls need out of the fall store that resides in 
 Him for His people. It is from Christ and Christ alone, that all 
 our spiritual wants have been supplied." 
 
 Waterland, in his book oa the Trinity, calls particular atten- 
 tion to this expression. He thinks that it was specially used 
 with a view to the strange doctrines of the Gnostics in general, 
 and th« Cerinthians in particular, whose heresies arose before 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 39 
 
 St. Jo- n's Gospel was written. They seem to have held that 
 there was a certain fulness or plenitude of the Deity, into which 
 only certain spiiitnnl men, including themselves, were to be 
 received, and from which others who were less spiritual, though 
 they had grace, were to be excluded. " St. John," says Water- 
 land, " here asserts, that all Christians, equally and indiflferently, 
 all behevers at large, have received of the plenitude or fulness 
 of the divine Word, and that not sparingly, but in the largest 
 measure, even grace upon grace." 
 
 Melancthon on this verse, caUs particular attention to the 
 word " all," He observes that it embraces the whole Church of 
 God, from Adam downwards. All who have been saved have 
 received out of Christ's fulness, and all other sources of fulness 
 are distinctly excluded. 
 
 [Grace for grace.] This expression is very pecuHar, and haa 
 caused much dijBference of opinion among commentators. 
 
 1. Some think it means "the new grace of the Gospel in 
 place of. or instead of, the old grace of the law." This is the 
 view of Cyril, Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius, Rupertus, 
 Lyranus, Bucer, Beza, ScaHger, De Dieu, Calovius, Jansenius, 
 Lampe, and Quesnel. 
 
 2. Some think that it means "grace, on account of God's 
 grace or favour, and specially His favour towards His Son." 
 This is the view of Zwingle, Melancthon, Chemnitius, Flacius, 
 RoUock, Grotius, Camerarius, Tarnovius, Toletus, Barradius, 
 Cartwright, and Cornelius a Lapide. 
 
 3. Some think that it means " grace on account of, or in return 
 for, the grace of faith that is in us." This is the view of Augus- 
 tine, Gomarus, and Beda. 
 
 4. Some think that it means " grace answering to, or propor- 
 tioned to, the grace that is in Christ." This is the view of Cal- 
 vin, Leigh, and Bridge. 
 
 5. Some think that it means " grace for the propagation of 
 grace." This is the view of Lightfoot. 
 
 6. Some think that it means " accumulated grace, abundant 
 grace, grace upon grace." This is the view of Schleusner, Winer, 
 Bucer, Pellican, Musculus, Gualter, Poole, Nifanius, Pearce, 
 Bnrkitt, Doddridge, Bengel, A. Clarke, Tittman, Olshausen, 
 Barnes, and Alford. 
 
 Brentius, Bullinger, Aretius, Jansenius, Hutcheson, Gill, Scott, 
 and Henry, give several views, but signify their adhesion to no 
 one in particular. 
 
 On the whole, I am inchned to think that the sixth and last 
 
40 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 is the correct view. I admit fully that the Greek preposition, 
 here rendered ''for," is only found in three senses in the G-reek 
 Testament,— viz. : " In the room or place of." (Matt. li. 22.) " In 
 return for." .(Rom. xii. 17.) and '' On account of" (Acts xii. 23 ; 
 Ephes. V. 31.) Ill composition it also signifies " opposition," 
 but with that we have nothing to do here. In the present case 
 I think the meaning is " grace in the place of grace, constant, 
 fresh, abundant suppUes of new grace, to take the place of old 
 grace, and therefore unfaihng, abundant grace, continually fill- 
 ing up and supplying all our need." 
 
 17. — [For the law was given, Sc] This verse seems intended to 
 show the inferiority of the law to the Gospel. It does so by 
 putting in strong contrast the leading characteristics of the Old 
 and New dispensations, — the religion which began with Moses, 
 and the religion which began with Christ. 
 
 By Mose5 was given the law, — the moral law, full of high and 
 holy demands, and of stern threatenings against disobedience ; 
 — the ceremonial law, full of burdensome sacrifices, ordinances, 
 and ceremonie.^, which never healed the worshipper's conscience, 
 and at best were only shadows of good things to come. 
 
 By Christ, on the other hand, came grace and truth, — grace 
 by the full manifestation of God's plan of salvation, and the offer 
 of complete pardon to every soul that believes on Jesus, — and 
 truth, by the unveiled exhibition of Christ Himself, as the true 
 sacrifice, the true Priest, and the true atonement for sin. 
 
 Augustine, on this verse, says, " The law threatened, not 
 helped; commanded, not healed; showed, not took away, our 
 feebleness. But it made ready for the Physician, who was to 
 come with grace and truth." 
 
 18.— [A^o man hath seen God, c&c] This verse seems intended to 
 show the infinite personal superiority of Christ to Moses, or to 
 any other saint that ever lived. 
 
 No man hath ever seen God the Father ; neither Abraham nor 
 Moses, nor Joshua, nor David, nor Isaiah, nor Daniel. All 
 these, however holy and good men, were still only men, and 
 quite incapable of beholding God face to face, from very weak- 
 ness. What they knew of God the Father, they knew only by 
 report, or by special revelation, vouchsafed to them from time to 
 time. They were but servants, and " The servant knoweth not 
 what his lord doeth." (John xv. 15.) 
 
 Christ on tne other hand, is the only begotten Son, which if 
 in the bosom of the Father. He is one who is most intimately 
 united fiora all eternity to God the Father, and is equal to Him 
 in all things. He, during the time of His earthly ministry here, 
 fully showed to man all that man can bear to know concerning 
 
41 
 
 His Father. lie has revealed His Father's wisdom, and hoKnes^, 
 aud compas-ion, and power, and hatred of siu, and love of sin- 
 ner.?, in the fullest possible way. He has brou,2:ht into clear 
 light the great mystery how God the Father can be just, and 
 yet justify the ungodly. The knowledge of the Father which a 
 man derived from the teaching of Moses, is as ditferentfrom that 
 derived from the teaching of Christ, as twilight is different from 
 noon-day. 
 
 We must carefully remember that none of the appearances of 
 God to man, described in the Old Testament, were the appear- 
 ances of God the Father. He whom Abraham, and Jacob, and 
 Moses, and Joshua, and Isaiah, and Daniel saw, was not the 
 First Person in the Trinity, but the Second. 
 
 The speculations of some commentators on the sentence now 
 before us, as to whether any created being, angel or spirit, has 
 ever seen God the Father, are, to say the least, unprofitable. 
 The sentence before us speaks of man, being written lor man's 
 use. 
 
 The expression, " Which is in the bosom of the Father," is 
 doubtless a figurative one, mercifully accommodated to man's 
 capacity. As one who lies in the bosom of another is fairly sup- 
 posed to be most intimate with him, to know all his secrets, and 
 possess all his affections, so is it, we are to understand, in the 
 union of the Father and the Son. It is more close than man's 
 mind can conceive. 
 
 The Greek word rendered " declared," means Hterally, "hath 
 expounded." It is the root of the words, which are well known 
 among hterary students of the Bible, " exegesis and exegetical." 
 The idea is that of giving a full and particular explanation. 
 (Acts XV. 14.) Whether the " Declaring of God the Father," 
 here described, is to be confined to Christ's oral teaching about 
 the Father, or Avhether it means also that Christ has in His 
 Person given a visible representation of many of the Father's 
 attributes, is a doubtful point. Perhaps both ideas are included 
 in the expression. 
 
 In leaving this passage, I must say something about the dis- 
 puted question, To whom do the three verses beginning, " And 
 of his fulness," belong? Are they the words of John the Bap- 
 tist, and a part of his test'mony ? Or are they the words of 
 John the Gospel-writer, and an explanatory comment of his, 
 such as we occasionally find in his Gospel? — There is something 
 to be said on both sides. 
 
 (a.) Some think that these three verses were spoken by John 
 the Baptist, because of the awkwardness and abruptness with 
 
42 , ■ EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 which his testimony eads upon the other theory, — because they 
 run on harmoniously with the fifteenth verse, — and because 
 there is nothing in them which we might not reasonably expect 
 John the Baptist to say. 
 
 This is the opinion of Origen, Athanasius, Basil, Cyprian, 
 Augustine, Theophylact, Rupertus, Melancthon, Calvin, Zwingle, 
 Erasmus, Chemnitins, Grualter, Musculus, Bucer, Flacius, Bul- 
 linger, Pt^lican, Toletus, G-omarus, Nifanius, Rollock, Poole, 
 Burkitt, Hutcheson, Bengel, and Cartwright. 
 
 (b.) Others think, that the three verses are the comment of 
 John the Gospel-writer, arising out of John's testimony about 
 Christ's pre-existence, and out of the expression, Grace and 
 truth, in the fourteenth verse. — They regard the verses as an 
 exposition of the expression, "Full of grace and truth." — They 
 question whether the language is such as would have been used 
 by John the Baptist, — whether he would have said " all we," 
 after just saying " me," — whether he would have used the 
 word "fulness," — whether he would, at so early a period, have 
 contrasted the religion of Moses and of Christ, — and whether 
 he would have so openly declared Christ to be the only begotten 
 Son, which is in the bosom of the Father. — Finally, they think 
 that if these were John the Baptist's words, the Gospel would 
 not have begun again in the nineteenth verse, " This is the 
 record of John." 
 
 This is the opinion of Cyril, Chrysostom, Euthymius, Beda, 
 Lyranus, Brentius, Beza, Ft^rus, Grotius, Aretius, Barradius, 
 Maldonatus, Cornelius a Lapide, Jansenius, Lightfoot, Arrow- 
 smith. Gill, Doddri.lge, Lampe, Pearce, Henry, Tittman, A. 
 Clarke, Barnes, OLshausen, Altord, and Wordsworth, — Baxter 
 and Scott decline any decided opinion on the point, and Whitby 
 says nothing about it. 
 
 The arguments on either side are so nicely balanced, and the 
 names on either side are so weighty, that I venture an opinion 
 with much difl&dence. But on the whole, I am inclined to think 
 that the three verses are not the words of John the Baptist, but 
 of John the Evangelist. — The remarkable style of the first eight- 
 een verses of this chapter makes the abruptness and brevity of 
 the testimony which John the Baptist bears, upon this theory, 
 appear to me not strange. — And the connection between the 
 three verses, and the words "full of grace and truth" in the 
 fourteenth verse, appears to me much more marked and d'stinct, 
 than the conned ion between John's testimony, and the words 
 " of his fulness all we have received." 
 
 Happily the point is one which involves no serious question, 
 and is therefore one on which Christians may be content to 
 differ, if they cannot convince one another. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 
 
 43 
 
 JOHN I. 19—28. 
 
 24 And they ■which were sent 
 were of the Pharisees. 
 
 25 And they asked him, and said 
 unto him, Why baptizest thou then, 
 if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, 
 neither tha^ prophet ? 
 
 26 John answered them saying, 
 I baptize with water: but there 
 standeth one among you, whom ye 
 know not ; 
 
 27 He it is, who coming after 
 me is preferred before me, whose 
 shoe's latchet I am not worthy to 
 unloose. 
 
 28 These things were done in 
 Bethabara beyond Jordan, where 
 John was baptizing. 
 
 19 And this is the record of 
 John, when the Jews sent Priests 
 and Levites from Jerusalem to ask 
 him, "Who art thou ? 
 
 20 And he confessed, and de- 
 nied not ; but confessed, I am not 
 the Christ. 
 
 21 And they asked him. What 
 then? Art thou Elias? And he 
 saith, I am not. Art thou that 
 prophet? And he answered, No. 
 
 22 Then said they unto him, Who 
 art thou? that we may give an 
 answer to them that sent us. What 
 sayest thou of thyself? 
 
 23 He said, I am the voice of 
 one crying in the wilderness, Make 
 straight the way of the Lord, as 
 said the prophet Esaias. 
 
 The verses we have now read begin the properly histori- 
 cal part of St. John's Gospel. Hitherto we have been 
 reading deep and weighty statements about Christ's divine 
 nature, incarnation, and dignity. Now we come to the 
 plain narrative of the days of Christ's earthly ministry, and 
 the plain story of Christ's doings and sayings among men. 
 And here, like the other Gospel-writers, St. John begins at 
 once with " the record " or testimony of John the Baptist. 
 (Matt. iii. 1 ; Mark i. 2 ; Luke iii. 2.) 
 
 We have, for one thing, in these verses, an instructive 
 example of true humility. That example is supplied by 
 John the Baptist himself. 
 
 John the Baptist was an eminent saint of God. There 
 are few names which stand higher than his in the Bible 
 calendar of great and good men. The Lord Jesus Himself 
 declared that "Among them that are born of woman there 
 hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist." (Matt. 
 xi. 11.) The Lord Jesus Himself declared that he was " a 
 burning and a shining light." (John v. 35.) Yet here in 
 
44 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 tbis passage we see this emincDt saint lowly, self-abased, 
 and full of humility. He puts away from himself ihi 
 honour which the Jews from Jerusalem were ready to paj 
 him. He declines all flattering titles. He speaks of him.J 
 self as nothing more than the '.' voice of one crying in th( 
 wilderness," and as one who " baptized with water." He 
 proclaims loudly that there is One standing among the 
 Jews far greater than himself. One whose shoe-latchet he 
 is not worthy to unloose. He claims honour not for him- 
 self but for Christ. To exalt Christ was his mission, and 
 to that mission he steadfastly adheres. 
 
 The greatest saints of God in every age of the Church 
 have always been men of John the Baptist's spirit. In 
 gifts, and knowledge, and general character they have 
 often differed widely. But in one respect they have 
 always been alike; — they have been "clothed with hu- 
 mility." (1 Pet. V. 5.) They have not sought their own 
 honour. They have thought little of themselves. They 
 have been ever willing to decrease if Christ might only 
 increase, to be nothing if Christ might be all. And here 
 has been the secret of the honour God has put upon them. 
 " He that humbleth himself shall be exalted." (Luke xiv. 11.) 
 
 If we profess to have any real Christianity, let us strive 
 to be of John the Baptist's spirit. Let us study humility. 
 This is the grace with which all must begin, who would be 
 saved. We have no true religion about us, until we ca^t 
 away our high thoughts, and feel ourselves sinners. — This 
 is the grace which all saints may follow after, and which 
 none have any excuse for neglecting. All God's children 
 have not gifts, or money, or time to work, or a wide sphere 
 of usefulness ; but all may be humble. — This is the grace, 
 above all, which will appear most beautiful in our latter 
 end. Kever shall we feel the need of humility so deeply, 
 as when we lie on our deathbeds, and stand before the 
 jiidgment-seat of Christ. Our whole lives will then appeal 
 
45 
 
 a long catalogue of imperfections, ourselves nothing, and 
 Christ all. 
 
 We have, for another thing, in these verses, a raoumful 
 example of the blinchiess of unconverted men. That ex- 
 ample is supplied by the state of the Jews who came to 
 question John the Baptist. 
 
 These Jews professed to be waiting, for the appearance 
 of Messiah. Like all the Pharisees they prided themselves 
 on being children of Abraham, and possessors of the cove- 
 nants. They rested in the law, and made their boast of 
 God. They professed to know God's will, and to believe 
 God's promises. They w^ere confident that they themselves 
 were guides of the bhnd, and lights of them that sat in 
 darkness. (Rom. ii. 17 — 19.) And yet at this very 
 moment their souls were utterly in the dark. " There was 
 standing among them," as John the Baptist told them, 
 " One whom they knew not." Christ Himself, the promis- 
 ed Messiah, was in the midst of them, and yet they neither 
 knew Him, nor saw Him, nor received Him, nor acknow- 
 ledged Him, nor believed Him. And w^orse than this, the 
 vast majority of them never would know Him ! The 
 words of John the Baptist are a prophetic description of a 
 state of things which lasted during the whole of onr Lord's 
 earthly ministry. Christ " stood among the Jews," and 
 yet the Jews knew Him not, and the greater part of them 
 died in their sins. 
 
 It is a solemn thought that John the Baptist's words in 
 this place apply strictly to thousands in the present day. 
 Christ is still standing among many who neither see, nor 
 know, nor believe. Christ is passing by in many a parish 
 and many a congregation, and the vast mnjority have 
 neither an eye to see Him, nor an ear to hear Him. The 
 spirit of slumber seems poured out upon them. Money, 
 and pleasure, and the world they know ; but tht/ know 
 not Chribt. The kinijjdom of God is close to them ; but 
 
46 EXPOSITOKY THOUGHTS. 
 
 they sleep, Salvation is within their reach ; but they sleep 
 Mercy, grace, peace, heaven, eternal life, are so nigh that 
 they might touch thera ; and yet they sleep. "Christ 
 standeth among them and they know him not." These are 
 sorrowful things to write down. But every faithful minis- 
 ter of Christ can testify, like John the Baptist, that they 
 are true. 
 
 What are we doing ourselves ? This, after all, is the 
 great question that concerns us. Do we know the extent 
 of our religious privileges in this country, and in these 
 times ? Are we aware that Christ is going to and fro in 
 our land, inviting souls to join Him and to be His disciples ? 
 Do we know that the time is short and that the door of 
 mercy will soon be closed for evermore ? Do we know 
 that Christ rejected will soon be Christ withdrawn ? — 
 Happy are they who can give a good account of these 
 inquiries and who " know the day of their visitation !" 
 (Luke xix. 44.) It will be better at the last day never to 
 have been born, than to have had Christ *' standing among 
 us " and not to have known Him. 
 
 Notes. John I. 19 — 28. 
 
 19. — [This is the record.] The Greek word translated "record," is 
 the same that is rendered •' witness" in the 7th verse. The sen- 
 tence means, " this is the testimony that John bore." 
 
 [WAen.] This word raises the question, " At what time was 
 this testimony of John borne?" It appears to have been after 
 our Lord Jesus Christ's b;iptism, and at the end of Bis forty 
 days' temptation in the wilderness. The 29th verse tells us, that 
 " the next day John seeth Jesus coming to him." It is worthy 
 of notice that nowhere in the Gospels do we find "days "so 
 carefully marked, as in that portion of the first chapter of St. 
 John, which we have now begun. 
 
 [The Jevs.] This expression is remarkable, a"=5 pecuhar to St. 
 John's Gospel, lie generally speaks of our Lord s en( mies and 
 questioners, as "the Jews." It seems to indicate that St. John 
 did not write his Gospel in Palestine or at Jerusalem, and that 
 it was written especially for the Gentile Christians scatteied 
 over the world, and much later than the other three Gospels. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 47 
 
 [Sent Priests and Levites.... Jerusalem.] These words show that 
 those who questioned John the Baptist on this occasion, were a 
 formal deputation, senl with authority from the Sanhedrim, or 
 ecclesiastical council of the Jews, to inquire about John's pro- 
 ceedings, and to report Avhat he taught, and whom he gave him- 
 self out to be. 
 
 Wordsworth remarks, that "More honour was paid by the 
 Jews to John than to Christ, both ia the persons s(mt, and in 
 the place from which they were sent. They esteemed John for 
 his sacerdotal lineage." When Christ appeared, they called Him. 
 the Carpenter's Son. Our Lord refers to this great respect at 
 first shown to John, when He says, "ye were wilhng for a 
 season to rejoice in his light." (John v. 33.) 
 
 [To ash him, Who a7^t thou?] We can hardly suppo-e that 
 these Priests and Levites were ignorant that John was the son 
 of a priest, Zacharias, and therefore a Levite himself. Their 
 inquiry seems to refer to John's office. " What did he profess to 
 be ? Did he assume to be the Messiah ? Did he claim to be a 
 prophet? What reason could he assign for his having taken up 
 his remarkable position as a preacher and a baptizer at a distance 
 from Jerusalem ? What account could he give of himself and 
 his ministry ?" 
 
 Two things are plainly taught in this verse. One is, the great 
 sensation which John the Baptist's ministry caused throughout 
 Palestine. He attracted so much notice, and such crowds fol- 
 lowed him, that the Sanhedrim felt it necessary to inquire about 
 him. — The other is, the state of expectation in which the minds 
 of the Jews were at this particular season. Partly from the 
 seventy weeks of Daniel having expired, partly from the sceptre 
 having practically departed from Judah, there was evidently an 
 expectation that some remarkable person was about to appear. 
 — As to the sort of person the Jews expected, it is plain that 
 they only looked for a temporal King, who would make them 
 once more an independent nation. They had no idea of a spiri- 
 tual Saviour from sin. But as to the fact that this vague expecta- 
 tion existed throughout the East at this particular time, w^have 
 the direct testimony of Latin historians. The extraordmary 
 ministry of John the Baptist, at once suggested the idea to the 
 Jews at Jerusalem, that he might possibly be the expected 
 Redeemer. Therefore they sent to ask, "Who art thou? Art 
 thou the long expected King?" 
 20. — [Re confessed....denied not....confessed^ &c.] , This is a peculiar 
 form of speech, implying a very positive, unmistakeable, empha- 
 tic assf-veration. It gives the idea of a man shrinking with holy 
 indignation from the very thought of being regarded as the 
 Christ ; — " Pain me not by suggesting that such an one as I can 
 be the Christ of God. I am one far inferior to Him." 
 
48 • EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Bengel says on this verse, '' Whilst John denied himself, he 
 did not deny Christ." — Luther makes some excellent remarks on 
 the strong temptation which was here put in John's way, to take 
 honour to himself, and the humility and faith which he showed 
 in overcoming it. 
 
 21. — [Art tliou Elias ?] This question was not an absurd and 
 unnatural one, as some commentators have thought fit to say. 
 It was based upon that prophecy of Malachi, which speaks of 
 God "sending EUjah the prophet before the great and terrible 
 day of the Lord." (Mai. iv, 5 ) The manner, dress, and ministry 
 of John the Baptist, as well as his appearing in the wilderness, 
 constituted a great similarity between him and Elijah, and sug- 
 gested tlie idea that John might possibly be Elijah. " If this 
 man," thought the Priests and Levites, " is not the Christ, per- 
 haps he is his forerunner, the prophet Elijah." 
 
 [And he saith^ I am not.] This answer of John's deserves 
 particular notice, and involv^es a grave difficulty. How could 
 John say, " I am not Elias," when Christ says distinctly in ano- 
 ther place, '' This is Elias." How shall we reconcile these two 
 statements ? — To me it seems impossible to explain John's words, 
 except on the simple theory, that there are two comings of 
 Elijah the prophet. The first was only a coming in spjrit and 
 in power, but not a literal coming. The second will be a literal 
 and real appearance on earth of him whom Ehsha saw taken up 
 into heaven. The first coming took place at Christ's first advent, 
 and was fulfilled by John the Baptist going before Messiah's face 
 in the spirit and power of Elijah. The second coming of Elijah 
 will take place at the second advent of Jesus Christ, and will be 
 fulfilled by Elijah himself once more coming as a prophet to the 
 tribes of Israel. 
 
 It is of this second, future, literal coming of Elias that John 
 speaks in this place. When he says, " I am not Elias," he means, 
 " I am not that Elijah you mean, who was taken up to heaven 
 900 years ago. The coming of that Elijah is yet a future thing. 
 I am the forerunner of the first advent in humiliation, not of the 
 second advent in glory. I am not the herald of Christ coming 
 to reign, as Elijah will be one day, but the herald of Christ com- 
 ing to suffer on the cross. I am not come to prepare the way 
 for a conquering Kin;r, such as you fondly expect, but for a meek 
 and lowly Saviour, whose great work is to bear our tins and to 
 die. I am not the Elias you expect." 
 
 In confirmation of this view, our Lnr "'s remarkable words in 
 another Grospel. ought to be carefully studied. He says distinctly 
 "Elias iruly sliall first cane, and rest >re all things," (Ma't. xvii. 
 11.) And yet He adds in the same breath, " I say unto you 
 . that Elias is come already," that is, " He is come, in a certain 
 
49 
 
 sense, by John the Baptist going before my face in the spirit and 
 ] ower of Ehas." In short, our Lord says at the same time, 
 "Eiias shall come," and "Elias is come!" — To me His words 
 seem a plain proof of the theory I am here mninta-ning, that 
 there are two comings of Elias. In spirit Elias came, when John 
 the Baptist came, a man like to Elias in mind and habits. But 
 in the flesh Elias has not yet come, and is yet to appear. And 
 it was in the view of this future, literal coming, that John the 
 Baptist saM, '' I am not Elias." — He knew th it the Jews were 
 thinking of the times of Messiah's glory, and of the literal com- 
 ing of Elijah, which would usher in those times. Therefore he 
 says, "I am not the E ias you mean. I belong to a different 
 dispensation." 
 
 The other view, which is undoubtedly ma'ntained by the vast 
 majority of commentators, appears to me surrounded with insu- 
 perable difl&culties. According to them, there never was to be 
 more than one fulfilment of Ma'achi's prophecy about Elias. It 
 was to be fulfilled by John the Baptist; and when he appeared, 
 it had received its full accomplishment. How John the Baptist's 
 answer in tli's place can be satisfactorily exp'ained, according to 
 this theory, I am quite unable to see. The Jcavs ask him plaitdy, 
 whether he is Elias, that is, whether he is the person who is to 
 fulfil Malachi's prophecy. This, at any rate, was evidently the 
 idea in their minds. He answers distinctly that he is not. And 
 yet according to the theory against which I contend, he wds 
 Elias, and he ought to have rephed, " I am." In short, he 
 appears to say that which is i.ot true ! — Tliere never was to be 
 any one after him, who was to fulfil Malachi's prophecy, and yet 
 he declares in effect that he does not fulfil it, by saying that ho 
 is not Elias ! 
 
 About the future hteral coming of Elijah the prophet, when 
 the Jews will at last see a living person, who will say, " I am 
 EUas," this is not the place to speak. Whether or not he will 
 minister to any but the Jews, — whether or not he will prove 
 one of the two witnesses spoken of in Etvelation, (Rev. xi. 3,) 
 are interesting and disputed questions. I will only remark, that 
 the subject deserves far more attention than it ordinarily receives. 
 
 The following quotations from the Fathers will show that the 
 opinion I have expressed is not a modern one : 
 
 Chrysostom, on Matt. xvii. 10, says, " As there are two com- 
 ings of Christ, — first, to suffer, — secondly, to judg.^, so there are 
 two com'ngs of Elias ; first of John before Christ's first coming, 
 who is called Elias, l3ecause he came in the manner and spirit 
 of Elias; secondly, of the person of Elijah, the Tishbite, bef>re 
 Christ's second coming." — Jerome and Theophylact say just the 
 same. 
 
 3 
 
50 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Gregory, quoted by Mayer, says, "Whereas John deni^^th him- 
 self to be Ehas, and Christ after affirmeth it, there is no contra- 
 diction. There is a double coming of Elias. The one is in spirit, 
 before Christ's coming to redeem ; the other in person, before 
 Christ's coming to judgment. According to the first, Christ's 
 s^.ying is true, ' This is Ehas.' According to the second, John's 
 speech is true, ' I am not.' This was the fittest answer to men 
 asking in a curnal sense." 
 
 Augustine says, " What John was to the first advent, Ehas 
 will be to the second advent. As there are two advents, s ) there 
 are two heralds." 
 
 {Art thou that prophet ?] There are two views of this ques- 
 tion. Some think, as Augustine and Gregory, that the words 
 should be as our marginal reading has them, " Art thou a pro- 
 phet?" Others think, as Cyril and Chrysostom, that the ques- 
 tion referred to '' the prophet," of whom Moses foretold that he 
 would come. (Deut. xviii. 15.) I decidedly prefer the latter 
 view. It seems veiy improbable that John the Baptist would 
 entirely deny that he was a prophet. — Besides this, it seems not 
 unreasonable that the Jews would ask whether he was " the 
 great prophet foretold by Moses." And to this question, John 
 answers most truly, that he was not. — It admits of doubt, whe- 
 ther the Jews who qu^-sLioned him, clearly saw that the "pro- 
 phet hke unto Moses," and the " Messiah," were to be one and 
 the same. It rather looks as if they thought " Christ " and " the 
 prophet" were two different persons. 
 
 Lightfoot thinks that the question refers to a common expec- 
 tation among the Jews, that the prophets were to rise again at 
 the coming of Messiah, and that John's questioners meant, "Art 
 thou one of the prophets raised from the dead ?" This supersti- 
 tious notion explains the words of the disciples in Luke, " Others 
 say that one of the old prophets is risen again." (Luke ix. 19.) 
 But the Greek article in the words before us, seems to me too 
 strong to be rendered " a prophet." 
 
 22. — [An answer to them that sent us.] This expression c> nfirms the 
 opinion already given, about the character of those who ques- 
 tioned John. They were not idle inquirers, but a formal depu- 
 
 • tation sent down from the Sanhedrim at Jerusalem, with a c im- 
 mission to find out who John was, and to make a report of what 
 th y discovered. 
 
 23, — [He said, I am the voice, <frc.] John the Baptist's account of 
 himself in this verse, consists of a reference to Scripture. He 
 reminds the Priests and Levites who wanted to know who he 
 was, of Isaiah's prophecy concerning the times of the Messiah. 
 (Isaiah xl. 3.) They would there fmd Isaiah saying, with the 
 abruptness of an inspired prophe", and speaking as if he saw 
 
51 
 
 what lie was describing, "The voice of Him that crielh in the 
 wilderness 1" That means, "I hear in spirit, as I look forward 
 to Messiah's time, a man crying in a wilderness, prepare ye the 
 way of the Lord," — " That prophecy," says John the Baptist, 
 " is this day fulfilled in me. I am the person whom Isaiah saw 
 and heard in vision. I am come to prepare the way for Mes- 
 siah, like a man going before a King in a desert country, to pre- 
 pare a road for his master. I am come to make ready the barren 
 hearts of the Jewish nation for Christ's first advtnt, and the 
 kingdom of God. I am only a voice. I do not come to work 
 miracles. I do not want disciples to follow me, but my master. 
 The object of my mission is to be a herald, a crier, a warning 
 voice to my fellow-countrymen, so that when my master begins 
 His ministry they may not be found unprepared." 
 
 [The wilderness.'] The common view of this expression is, 
 that it refers to John the Baptist's ministry having begun in the 
 wilderness of Judaea. I rather doubt the correctness of this idea. 
 The whole quotation is undeniably figurative. The prophet com- 
 pares Messiah's forerunner to one preparing a road for a King 
 through a desert or uninhabited country. The " way " or road, 
 is unquestionably figurative, and the straightness of the way too. 
 No one supposes that Isaiah meant that John the Baptist was 
 hteraUy to make a road. But if the '' way " is figurative, the 
 country through which it is made must surely be figurative too. 
 I therefore think that the wilderness is a prophetical and figu- 
 rative description of the spiritual barrenness of Israel, when the 
 Messiah's forerunner began his ministry. At the same time, 
 I fully admit that John's retired and 'ascetic habits and hia 
 residence in the wilderness, form a remarkable coincidence with 
 the text. 
 
 The expression " voice," has often been remarked as a beauti- 
 ful illustration of the general character of John's ministry. He 
 was eminently a humble man. He was one who desired to be 
 heard, and to awaken attention by the sound of his testimony, 
 but not to be seen or visibly honoured. 
 2i..—[And they....senf....Pharisees.] The object of this verse is 
 somewhat doubtful. Some think that it refers to the verse pre- 
 ceding, which ontains a quotation from Isaiah. They which 
 wer.' s nt, being Phui-ees, and not Sadduoees or Herodian?, 
 should have seen and admitted the Scriptural charact r of John's 
 mi s;on._Some think, :ti8 Bengel, that it refers to the following 
 verse, in which a question was raised about baptism. They 
 which ^^ere sent, being Pharisees, were specially strict about 
 cerenionies, ordinances, and forms. Therefore they were not 
 satisfied with a reference to Scripture. They asked John's 
 authority for baptizing. Some think that it refers generally to 
 the notorious enmity and disUke with which the Phar.sees 
 
52 EXPOSITOKY THOUGHTS. 
 
 regarded John the Baptist all through his ministry. Our Lord 
 says in another place, " They rejected the counsel of God, not 
 being baptized by him." (Luke vii. 30.) The text before us 
 would then mean, that they which ask-d all these questions, 
 asked them with a thoroughly unfriendly spirit, and with no 
 real desire to learn Grod's truth, because they were Pharisees. 
 
 25. — [Why haptizest thou.. ..if thou he not, Sc] This verse evidently 
 imphes that John's c[uestioners expi 3ted the Messiah, or his fore- 
 runner, to baptize whenever he apptared. It is not unlikely, as 
 Lightfoot says, that the idea arose from the text in Ezekiel, de- 
 scribing Messiah's time, " Then will I sprinkle clean water upon 
 you, and ye shall be clean," &c. (Ezek. xxxvi. 24.) 
 
 Luther thinks, that this verse shows that the questioners who 
 came to John, now changed their tone. Hitherto they had 
 flattered. Now they began to threaten. 
 
 One thing is yerj clear from this verse. The Jews were not 
 unacquainted with baptism as a religious ordinance. It was 
 one of the ceremonies, according to Lightfoot, by which proselytes 
 were admitted into the Jewish Church. Moreover it is worthy 
 of notice, that when proselytes were so admitted, their children 
 were baptized together with them. It was not therefore the fact 
 of John baptizing, which the Pharisees here called in question, 
 but his authority for administering baptism. 
 
 26. — [/ laptize with water; hut <fcc.] The answer of John the 
 Baptist here reported is very eUiptical, and the full meaning of 
 what he said must be suppUed fTom other places. He seems 
 to say, " I do not baptize by my own authority, but by a com- 
 mission fro n One far higher than either you or I. I only 
 baptize with Avater ; and I do not do it to make disciples for my- 
 self, but for my master. I form no party. I ask no man to follow 
 me. I tell all whom I baptize to believe on that Mighty One who is 
 coming after me. I am only the servant of One far gi-eater than 
 myself, who is even now standing among you, if you had eyes to 
 see him. He is one so much above me in nature and dignity, 
 that I am not worthy to be his humblest servant. He can 
 baptize hearts, and will fulfil the promises about Messiah, to 
 which you are vaguely referring. In the mean time I only 
 baptize with water all those who profess repentance and willing- 
 ness to receive my master. — I baptize for another and not for 
 myself." 
 
 [There standeth one among you.] I doubt whether these wor -s 
 literally mean, "There is standing in the crowd of you m • 
 hearers." I prefer the sense, " there is already living and abiding 
 among you in this land of Judaui one greater than I." I think 
 this the sense because of the words in the 29th verse, " John 
 seeth Jesus coming to him," which seem to imply that he was 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 53 
 
 not with him the previous clay. — The thought seems parallel to 
 that contained in the words, ," Tlie kingdom of God cometh 
 not with observation." — " The messenger of Grod cometh sud- 
 denly to his temple." (Mai. iii. i ; Luke xvii. 20.) All serve to 
 point to the same truth, viz. — that when Messiah came the first 
 time, He came quietly, Avithout noise, without display, without 
 the nation of the Jews knowing it, so that he "stood among 
 them," and yet they were not aware of His presence. 
 
 The Greek word rendered "standeth," is in the perfect tense, 
 and would be literally rendered, " there hath stood," that is, 
 ''hatli stood for some httle time, and is still standing." The 
 Messiah has come and is present. Bengel renders it, " hath 
 taken his stand." 
 
 Tlie view I have maintained of the meaning of the word 
 " standeth," is held by Parkhurst, who defines it as " being or 
 living," and quotes John vi. 22, as a parallel instance. Pearce 
 takes the same view, and quotes Acts xxvi. 22. Jansenius 
 renders it, "has conversed among you, as when he sat among 
 the doctors" in the temple. Aretius renders it, " He is present 
 in the flesh, and walking in Judaea." 
 
 f Ye know not] Tiiis seems to mean, not only that the Jews 
 knew not Jesus the Messiah by sight, but that they had no 
 spiritual knowledge of him, and of the true nature of his office, 
 as the Saviour of sinners. — " Ye look for a conquering, reigning 
 Messiah. Ye know not the suffering Messiah, who came to be 
 cut ofi", and to be crucified for sinners." 
 
 Bengel remarks, that John is here specially " addressing 
 inhabitants of Jerusalem, who had not been present at the 
 bapdsm of Jesus. And he Avhets their desires, that they may be 
 anxious to become acquainted with him." 
 
 27. — [Coining after... .preferred before.] The remarks made on the 
 15th verse apply fully to this expression. John declares, that 
 though his master, in point of time, began his ministry after 
 him, in point of dignity he was far above him. To exalt Christ, 
 and abase himself, seem ideas never long out of John's mind. 
 
 [Shoe's lafchet... .worthy to unloose.] This is evidently a pro- 
 verbial expression. "I am so interior to Him that came after 
 me, that in comparison with him, I am like the humblest 
 servant compared to his master." To be not fit to carry a 
 person's shoes, in our times, is a well-known proverb, describing 
 inferiority. 
 
 28. — [These things....done in Bethahara.] In hot countries hke 
 
 Palestine, it was evidently important for John the Baptist to be 
 near a supply of water, suited to the baptism of the multitudes 
 who came to him. If Beth-barah, spoken of in Gideon's history 
 
54 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 is the same place, it is worthy of notice that it is specially 
 mentioned as near " waters.'' (Judges vii. 24.) 
 
 The name of the place ought always to be dear to the hearts 
 of Christians. It is the place where the first disciples of Jesus 
 were made, and the foundation of the Christian church was laid. 
 It was here, " the next day," that Jesus was publicly proclaimed 
 as the "Lamb of God." It was here, ''the day after," that 
 Andrew and another disciple followed Jesus. Here then the 
 Church of Christ, properly so called, began. 
 
 In leaving this passage, let us remember that John the 
 Baptist's ministry left the Jews entirely without excuse, when 
 afterwards they refused to believe on Christ. They could never 
 plead that our Lord's ministry came on them unawares and 
 took them by surprise. The whole nation dwelling in Pales- 
 tine, from the great ecclesiastical council down to the humblest 
 classes, were evidently aroused to a state of attention by John's 
 doings. 
 
 JOHN L 29—34. 
 
 29 The next day John seeth Jesus 
 coming unto him, and saith. Behold 
 the Lamb of God, which taketh away 
 the sin of the world. 
 
 33 This is he of whom I said, After 
 me Cometh a man which is preferred 
 before me : for he was before me. 
 
 31 And I knew him not: but that 
 he should be made manifest to Israel, 
 therefore am I come baptizing with 
 water. 
 
 32 And John bare record, saying. 
 
 I saw the Spirit descending from 
 heaven like a dove, and it abode upon 
 him. 
 
 33 And I knew him not : but he 
 that sent me to baptize with water, 
 the same said unto me, Upon whom 
 thou shalt see the Spirit descending, 
 and remaining on him, the same is 
 he which baptizeth with the Holy 
 Ghost. 
 
 34 And I saw, and bare record 
 that this is the Son of God. 
 
 This passage contains a verse which ought to be printed 
 in great letters -in the memory of every reader of the 
 Bible. All the stars in heaven are bright and beautiful, 
 and yet one star exceedeth another star in glory. So also 
 all texts of Scripture are inspired and profitable, and yet 
 some texts are richer than others. Of such texts the first 
 verse before us is preeminently one. Never was there a 
 fuller testimony borne to Christ upon earth, than that 
 which is here borne by John the Baptist. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 55 
 
 Let us notice, firstly, in this passage, the peculiar name 
 xjchich John the Baptist gives to Christ. He calls Him 
 *' The Lamb of God." 
 
 This name did not merely mean, as some have supposed, 
 that (/hrist was meek and gentle as a lamb. This would 
 be truth no doubt, but only a very small portion of tho 
 truth. There are greater things here than this ! It 
 meant that Christ was the great sacrifice for sin, who 
 was come to make atonement for transgression by His 
 own death upon the cross. He was the true Lamb Avhich 
 Abraham told Isaac at Moriah God would provide. (Gen. 
 xxii. 8.) He was the true Lamb to which every morning 
 and evening sacrifice in the temple had daily pointed. He 
 was the Lamb of which Isaiah had prophesied, that He 
 would be " brought to the slaughter." (Isaiah liii. '7.) 
 He was the true Lamb of which the passover lamb in 
 Egypt had been a vivid type. In short, He was the great 
 propitiation for sin which God had covenanted from all 
 eternity to send into the world. He was God's Lamb. 
 
 Let us take heed that in all our thoughts of Christ, we 
 first think of Him as John the Baptist here represents 
 Him. Let us serve him faithfully as our Master. Let 
 US obey Him loyally as our King. Let us study His 
 teaching as our Prophet. Let us walk diligently after 
 Him as our Example. Let us look anxiously for Him as 
 our coming Redeemer of body as well as soul. But above 
 all, let us prize Him as our sacrifice, and rest our whole 
 weight on His death as an atonement for sin. Let His 
 blood be more precious in our eyes every year we live. 
 Whatever else we glory in about Christ, let us glory 
 above all things in His cross. This is the corner-stone, 
 this is the citadel, this is the rule of true Christian 
 theology. We know nothing rightly about Christ, until 
 we see him with John the Baptist's eyes, and can rejoice 
 in Him as " the Lamb that was slain." 
 
56 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Let us notice, secondly, in this passage, the peculiar work 
 which John the Baptist describes Christ as doing. He 
 says that " he taketh away the sin of the world." 
 
 Christ is a Saviour. He did not come on earth to be a 
 conqueror, or a philosopher, or a mere teacher of morality. 
 He came to save sinners. He came to do that which man 
 could never do for himself, — ^to do that which money and 
 learning can never obtain, — to do that which is essential to 
 man's real happiness, — He came to " take away sin." 
 
 Christ is a complete Saviour. He " taketh away sin." 
 He did not merely make vague proclamations of pardon, 
 mercy, and forgiveness. He " took" our sins upon Him- 
 self, and carried them away. He allowed them to be laid 
 upon Himself, and "bore them in His own body on the 
 tree." (l Pet. ii. 24.) The sins of every one that believes 
 on Jesus are made as though they had never been sinned 
 at all. The Lamb of God has taken them clean away. 
 
 Christ is an almighty Saviour, and a Saviour for all man- 
 kind. He "taketh away the sin of the world." He did 
 not die for the Jews only, but for the Gentile as well as the 
 Jew. He did not suffer for a few persons only, but for all 
 mankind. The payment that He made on the cross was 
 more than enough to make satisfaction for the debts of all. 
 The blood that He shed was precious enough to wash away 
 the sins of all. His atonement on the cross was sufficient 
 for all mankind, though efficient only to them that believe. 
 The sin that He took up and bore on the cross was the sin 
 of the whole world. 
 
 Last, but not least, Christ is a perpetual and unwearied 
 Saviour. He " taketh away " sin. He is daily taking it 
 away from every one that believes on Him, — daily purging, 
 daily cleansing, daily washing the souls of His people, daily 
 granting and applying fresh supplies of mercy. He did 
 not cease to work for His saints, when He died for them on 
 the cross. He lives in heaven as a Priest, to present His 
 
57 
 
 sacrifice continually before God. In grace as well as in 
 providence, Christ workethi still. He is ever taking away 
 sin. 
 
 These are golden truths indeed. Well would it be for 
 the Church of Christ, if they were used by all who know 
 them ! Our very familiarity with texts like these is one of 
 our greatest dangers. Blessed are they who not only keep 
 this text in their memories, but feed upon it in their hearts ! 
 
 Let us notice, lastly, in this passage, the peculiar office 
 which John the Baptist attributes to Christ. He speaks 
 of Him as Him " which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost." 
 
 The baptism here spoken of is not the baptism of water. 
 It does not consist either of dipping or sprinkling. It does 
 not belong exclusively either to infants or to grown up 
 people. It is not a baptism which any man can give, Epis- 
 copalian or Presbyterian, Independent or Methodist, lay- 
 man or minister. It is a baptism which the great Head of 
 the Church keeps exclusively in His own hands. It consists 
 of the implanting of grace into the inward man. It is the 
 same thing with the new birth. It is a baptism, not of the 
 body, but of the heart. It is a baptism which the penitent 
 thief received, though neither dipped nor sprinkled by the 
 hand of man. It is a baptism which Ananias and Sapphira 
 did not receive, though admitted into church-communion 
 by apostolic men. 
 
 Let it be a settled principle in our religion that the bap- 
 tism of which John the Baptist speaks here, is the baptism 
 which is absolutely necessary to salvation. It is well to be 
 baptized into the visible Church ; but it is far better to be 
 ba^)tized into that Church which is made up of true believ- 
 ers. The baptism of water is a most blessed and profitable 
 ordinance, and cannot be neglected without great sin. But 
 the baptism of the Holy Ghost is of far greater importance. 
 The man who dies with his heart not baptized by Christ 
 can never be saved. 
 
 S* 
 
68 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. • 
 
 Let us ask ourselves, as we leave this passage, "Whether 
 we are baptized with the Holy Ghost, and whether we 
 have any real interest in the Lamb of God? Thousands, 
 unhappily, are wasting their time in controversy about 
 water baptism, and neglecting the baptism of the heart 
 Thousands more are content with a head-knowledge of the 
 Lamb of God, or have never sought Him by faith, that 
 their own sins may be actually taken away. Let us take 
 heed that we ourselves have new hearts, and believe to the 
 saving of our souls. 
 
 Notes. John I 29—34. 
 
 29. — [The next day.] This means the day after the conversation 
 between John the Baptist and the deputation of priests and Le- 
 vites. The careful marking of days by St. John at this stage of 
 his gospel deserves particular notice. 
 
 [Seeth Jesus coming unto him.] These words seem to prove 
 that Jesus was not present on the preceding day, during the 
 conversation with the priests and Levites, and that John's words, 
 ''standeth among you," cannot be Hterally taken. 
 
 It seems probable, as before observed, that our Lord came 
 back to John after His temptation in the wilderness. The Spirit 
 took Him into the wilderness "immediately" after His baptism, 
 (Mark i. 12,) and it was upon His return, at the end of forty days, 
 that John the Baptist saw him again. 
 
 [And saithj iehold.] This appears to have been a public, open, 
 proclamation made by John to his disciples and the multitude 
 who surrounded him. "Behold that person who is coming 
 towards us. He is the Lamb of Grod, the Messiah of whom I 
 have been preaching to you, and on whom I have told you to 
 believe." 
 
 [The Lamb of Ood^ There can be no reasonable doubt that 
 John gave this name to our Lord because He was the true sacri- 
 fice for sin, the true antitype of the passover lamb, and the lamb 
 prophesied of by Isaiah. (Is. liii. 7.) The idea that he only 
 refers to the quietness and meekness of our Lord's personal 
 character is utterly unsatisfactory. He is describing our Lord's 
 official character as the great propitiation for sin. 
 
 The expression, " Lamb of God," according to some, signifies 
 " that eminent, great, divine, and most excellent Lamb." It is a 
 well-known Hebraism to describe anything very great as a thing 
 
59 
 
 " of God." Thus we read of " thunderings of Grod," and 
 "trembling of God," (Exod. ix. 28; 1 Sam. xiv. 15.) — According 
 to others i signifies the Lamb which God has provided from all 
 eternity, and which God has long covenanted and promised to 
 send into the world to be slain for sinners. Both views make 
 good doctrine, but the second seems the preferable one. 
 
 Bengel thinks that John called our Lord "the Lamb of God," 
 with a special reference to the Passover, which was then near. 
 (John ii. 13.) He also sees a parallel between the expression 
 " Lamb of God," and the phrase. " sacrifice of God," (Psalm li. 
 17,) which means " the sacrifice which God acknowledges as 
 pleasing to Him." 
 
 Chemnitius thinks, in addition to other reasons why John 
 calls our Lord " the Lamb," that he desired to show that Christ's 
 kingdom was not pohtical. He was neither the ram nor the 
 he-goat described in Daniel. (Dan. viii. 20.) 
 
 [Taketh away.] The Greek word so rendered, is given in the 
 marginal reading, " beareth." Both ideas are included. It means 
 " taketh away by his expiatory death." The Lamb of God " bear- 
 eth " the sin of the world by taking it upon Himself He 
 allowed our guilt to be laid upon Him, and carried it away like 
 the scapegoat, so that there was none left. It is one of the 
 many expressions which describe the great Scripture truth, that 
 Christ's death was a vicarious sacrifice for sin. He became our 
 substitute. He took upon Him our sin. He was made sin for 
 us. Our sins were imputed to Him. He was made a curse for 
 us. 
 
 The word here rendered " taketh away " is found at least 100 
 times in the New Testament. In 82 places it is rendered, " take," 
 — " take up," — or " take away." In 5 places it is, " bear." In 4 
 it is, "lift up." In 2 it is, " remove." In most of the other places 
 it is the imperative expression, "away with !" All point to the 
 same view of the text before us, viz., " a complete atonement for 
 sin." 
 
 The use of the present tense, " taketh away," is remarked by 
 all the best commentators, ancient and modern. It is intended 
 to show the completeness of Christ's satisfaction for sin, and 
 the continual application of His once-made sacrifice. He is 
 always taking sin away. RoUock observes, " The influence of 
 Christ's sacrifice is perpetual, and His blood never dries up." 
 
 The idea maintained by some, that "taking away sin," in this 
 place, includes sanctification as well as justification, seems to me 
 quite untenable. That Christ " takes away " the power of a 
 believ<ir's sins, when He applies His redemption to his soul, is no 
 doubt true. But it is not the truth of this text. 
 
60 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 [The sin.] Let it be noted that the singular number is used 
 here. It is '' the sin," not " the sins." The expression seems to 
 me purposely intended to show that what Christ took away, and 
 bore on the cross, was not the sin of certain people only, but the 
 whole accumulated mass of all the sins of all the children of 
 Adam. He bore the weight of all, and made an atonement 
 sufl&cient to make satisfaction for all. 
 
 The idea propounded by some, that "the sin " which Christ is 
 said here to take away, is only man's original sin, — and that for 
 man's actual sins each man must make satisfaction himself, ia 
 destitute of the slightest foundation in Scripture, contradicts 
 scores of plain texts, and utterly overthrows the whole Gospel. 
 
 [Of the world.] It is almost needless to say that there are 
 two views of this expression. Some say, that it only means, 
 that Christ takes away the sins of G-entiles as well as Jews, and 
 that it does not mean the sin of any but the elect. Others say, 
 that it really means that Christ "taketh away" the sin of all 
 mankind, that is, that He made an atonement sufficient for all, 
 and that all are salvalle, though not all saved, in consequence of 
 His death. 
 
 I decidedly prefer the latter of these two views. I hold as 
 strongly as any one, that Christ's death is profitable to none but 
 to the elect who believe on His name. But I dare not limit and 
 pare down such expressions as the one before us. I dare not 
 say that no atonement has been made, in any sense, except for 
 the elect. I beheve it is possible to be more systematic than the 
 Bible in our statements. When I read that the wicked who are 
 lost, " deny the Lord that bought them," (2 Peter ii. 1,) and that 
 " God was in Christ, reconcihng the world unto himself," (2 Cor. 
 V. 19,) I dare not confine the intention of redemption to the 
 saints alone. Christ is for every man. 
 
 I am aware the objection is often made, that "if Christ taketh 
 away the sin of the world, and yet the vast majority of men die 
 in their sins and are lost, Christ's work for many was wrought 
 in vain." I see no force in this objection. I think we might as 
 well argue, that because sin came into the world and marred 
 creation, creation was in vain. We are not talking of the works 
 of men, but of the eternal Word, and we must be content to see 
 much in His works that we do not entirely understand. Though 
 multitudes are lost, I have no doubt the last day will prove that 
 nothing that Christ did for them was in vain. 
 
 I rest in the view of the text, that in some ineffable and inscru- 
 table way, the whole world's sin was borne and atoned for by 
 Christ. " He taketh away, or makes atoriement for, the sin cf 
 all the men and women in the world." I have no doubt, from 
 Scripture, that the vast majority of " the world's " inhabitants will 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 61 
 
 be found at last to have received no benefit from Christ, and to 
 have died in their sin?. I repudiate the idea of universal salva- 
 tion, as a dangerous heresy, and utterly contrary to Scripture. — 
 But ihe lost will not prove to be lost because Christ did nothing 
 for them. He bore their sins. He carried their transgressions. 
 He provided payment, but they would not put in their claim to 
 any interest in it. He set the prison door open to all; but the 
 majority would not come out and be free. In the w^ork of the 
 Father in election, and of the spirit in conversion, I see limita- 
 tion m the Bible most clearly. But in the work of Christ in 
 atonement I see no limitation. The atonement was made for all 
 the world, though it is applied to and enjoyed by none but be- 
 lievers. — Christ's intercession is the peculiar privilege of His 
 people. But Christ's atonement is a benefit which is ojBfered 
 freely and honestly to all mankind. 
 
 In saying all this I am fully aware that the word ^' world " is 
 sometimes used in a qualified sense, and must be interpreted 
 with some limitation. When it is said, " The world knew him 
 not," (John i. 10,) it cannot mean that not a single person in the 
 world knew Him. Bat in the text before us I see no necessity 
 for limitation. I see the whole mass of mankind's guilt brought 
 together in one singular word, " the sin of the world," and that 
 sin, I am told, Christ '' taketh away." And I believe the true 
 meaning to be, that the Lamb of God has made atonement 
 sufficient for all mankind, though efficient unquestionably to none 
 but believers. 
 
 Augustine remarks, " How weighty must be the blood of the 
 Lamb, by whom the world was made, to turn the scale when 
 weighed against the world!" 
 
 Calvin, in his commentary on this verse, says, ' John uses the 
 word sin in the singular number for any kind of iniquity ; as if 
 he had said that every kind of unrighteousness which alienates 
 men from God is taken away by Christ. And when he says ' The 
 sin of the world,' he extends this favour indiscriminately to the 
 whole human race, that the Jews might not think that He had 
 been sent to them alone. Hence we infer that the whole world 
 is involved in the same condemnation ; and that as all men, 
 without exception, are guilty of unrighteousness before God, 
 they need to be reconciled to Him. John the Baptist, by speak- 
 ing generally of the sin of the world, intended to impress upon 
 us the conviction of our own misery, and to exhort us to seek 
 the remedy. Now our duty is to embrace the benefit which is 
 offered to all, that each of us may be convinced that there is 
 nothing to hinder him from obtaining reconciliation in Christ, 
 provided that he comes to Him by the guidance of f lith." 
 
 Brentius says, "Although all the men in the world do not 
 
62 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 receive the benefit of Christ's passion, because all do not believ<! 
 on Christ, yet that benefit is so offered to the whole woild, that 
 whosoever, whether circumcised or uncircumcised, king or peas- 
 ant, high or low, rich or poor, sick or well, old or youn^-, receive- 
 Christ by faith, is justified before God, and saved with an eternal 
 salvation." 
 
 Muscnlus says, " John places before us no one particular person 
 whose sins the Lamb has come to take away; but under the 
 expression ' the world,' he comprehends the whole race of mortals 
 from the very beginning of the world to the end of it." 
 
 Melancthon says, " lie taketh away the sin, that is the univer- 
 sal condemnation, of the human race." 
 
 Chemnitius says, "John affirms that the benefits of Christ 
 belong not to the Jews only, but to the whole world, and that 
 no one who is in the world is excluded from them, if he is only 
 wilhng to receive them by faith." 
 
 The deep spiritual knowledge exhibited by John the Baptist 
 in this verse, ought not to be overlooked. Such a sentence as 
 the one before us never fell from the lips of any other disciple of 
 Christ before the day of Pentecost. Others could say that our 
 Lord was the Christ, the Son of God, the Messiah, the Son of 
 David, the King of Israel, the Son of the Blessed, who was to 
 come into the world. But none seem to have seen so clearly as 
 John that Christ was the sacrifice for sin, the Lamb that was to 
 be slain. Weh would it be for the Church of Christ in the 
 nineteenth century, if all its ministers possessed as much know- 
 ledge of Christ's atonement as is here shown by John the 
 Baptist 1 John saw the vicarious sacrifice of Christ, before He 
 died on the cross. Many so-called Christians cannot see Christ's 
 vicarious sacrifice even at this day ! 
 
 30. — [This is he of whom I said.] These words appear to have been 
 spoken in our Lord's presence, and to have been specially 
 intended to point the multitude to Him. "This person before 
 you is He of whom I have repeatedly spoken in my ministry, as 
 the coming One who is far greater than myself. You see Him 
 now before you." 
 
 [A man.Jie was before me.] ' The human and divine natures 
 of our Lord are here brought together by John in one sentence, 
 "He of whom I spake to you is a man, and yet at the same time 
 He is One who was before rae, because He has existed from all 
 eternity." 
 
 31. — [/ knew him not] This means "I was not acquainted with 
 Him in time past. There has been no private collusion or 
 arrangement between Him and me. I did not even know Him 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 68 
 
 by sight until the day when He came to be baptized." The 
 difficulty connected with these words of John will be considered 
 fwlly at the 33d verse. 
 
 [That he should he made manifest to Israd^ t&c] John here 
 declares that the great end of his ministry was, that this wonder- 
 ful Person, whom he had just pointed out, should be manifested 
 and made known to the Jews. He did not come to form a party 
 of his own, or to baptize in his own namr^. The whole object of 
 his preaching and baptizing was now betore his hearers, it was 
 simply to make known to Israel the Mighty One, the Lamb of 
 God, whom they now saw. 
 
 32. — [And John hare record^ These words seem to denote a pubhc 
 and solemn testimony borne by John to the fact, that our Lord 
 had been visibly acknowledged by God the Father as the Messiah. 
 If his hearers would have further proof that this Person, to 
 whom he was pointing them, was really the Christ, he would tell 
 them what he had seen with his own eyes. He would bear 
 witness that he had seen visible proofs that this Person was really 
 the Messiah. 
 
 [/saw.] This means, "At the time when our Lord was 
 baptized, I saw this heavenly vision." Whether any beside John 
 saw this vision, and heard the voice of the Father, which accom- 
 panied it, may well be doubted. At any rate, if they did, they 
 did not understand either what they saw or heard. 
 
 [The Spirit descending^ &c'\ This means that John saw 
 something coming down from heaven after the manner of a dove 
 flying downwards, and that what he saw was the Holy Spirit, 
 graciously revealing Himself in a visible manner. 
 
 [It abode upon him.] This means that the heavenly vision of 
 the Holy Spirit rested upon Christ at the time of His baptism. 
 It lighted down upon Him as a dove would settle down, and did 
 not leave Him. 
 
 I cannot satisfy myself that the expression " like a dove " in 
 this verse, means that any dove was really seen by John, when 
 our Lord was baptized. All the four Gospel-writers describe an 
 appearance "like a dove." St. Luke distinctly speaks of "a 
 bodily shape." That something visible was seen by John is 
 plain, and that its appearance descending on our Lord, resembled 
 tlie downward flight of a dove, is also plain. But I am unable 
 to see that the Holy Ghost took upon Him the actual form of a 
 dove. 
 
 Some think, as Augustine, that the likeness to a dove was 
 especially employed at this time, to answer the figure of Noah's 
 flood. He says, " As a dove did at that time bring tidings of the 
 
64 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 abating of the water, so doth it now of the abating of the wrath 
 of God, upon the preaching of the Gospel." 
 
 We must beware of supposing for a moment, that this vision 
 of the Spirit descending was meant to imply, that our Lord 
 first received the grace of the Holy Ghost at that particular time, 
 or that He had not received it before in the same degree. We 
 must not doubt that the Holy Ghost dwelt in Jesus " without 
 measure " from the very time of His incarnation. The vision 
 was meant to show the Church, that when Christ's ministry 
 began, a fuUer revelation of all Three Persons in the Trinity was 
 made at once to mankind. It was meant at the same time to be 
 a formal testimony to John the Baptist that the Messiah was 
 before him, — that this was the promised Saviour whom God had 
 anointed with the Holy Ghost and sent into the world, ^-that 
 the time of Christ's ministry had begun, — that He who had the 
 Spirit to bestow on men was before him, — and that His entrance 
 on His public work was attested by the presence both of the 
 Father and the Holy Ghost, in short, by a manifestation of all 
 three Persons in the Trinity at one time. 
 
 As a Levite, John doubtless was familiar with all the ceremo- 
 nies by which the Jewish high priests and kings were solemnly 
 inducted into their office. For his satisfaction, therefore, our 
 Lord received visible attestation from heaven, and was pubhcly 
 recognized as the Messiah, the anointed Priest, and King, and 
 Prophet, before his forerunner's eyes. 
 
 Musculus on this verse remarks, " The Spirit did not descend 
 on Christ's account, who was never separate, either from the 
 Holy Spirit or fi om the Father, — but oa our account, that He 
 who came to redeem the world, might be made manifest, through 
 John's declaration of Him." 
 
 3Z. — [I knew himnot] The Greek word so rendered, both here 
 and in the 31st verse, is hterally, "I had not known him." 
 There is a difficulty connected with the expression which 
 demands explanation. St. Matthew tells us, that when our 
 Lord came to John to be baptized, John said to him, " I have 
 need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?" (Mait. 
 iii. 14,) showing plainly by these words that he knew He was 
 before him. And yet here we find John saying, " I knew him 
 not." How can this apparent inconsistency be reconciled ? 
 
 Some think, as Chrysostom, that " John is speaking of former 
 times, and not of the times near to his baptism." 
 
 Some think, as Augustine, that it means, '' I had not known 
 till that day that Jesus would baptize with the Holy Ghost, 
 although I had long known him porsoaaUy, and had recognized 
 him as the Christ of God. But when He came to be baptized, 
 
JOHN CHAP. I. 6c 
 
 it was also revealed to me, that He would confer on men the 
 great gift of the Holy Ghost." 
 
 Some think, as Brentiu^ and Beza, that it means, " I had not 
 known Jesus by sight until the day when He came to be bap- 
 tized. I knew that He had been born of the Virgin Mary, but 
 was not personally acquainted with Him, having been myself 
 brought up ' in the desert.' (Luke i. 80.) I had only been told 
 by Him who senrt me to baptize, that whenever the Messiah 
 came to be baptized, I should recognize Him by the descent of 
 the Holy Ghost. When He did come, I received a secret reve- 
 lation from God that Messiah stood before me, and under the 
 power of that feeling I confessed my unworthiness to baptize 
 Him. But when, at last I did baptize Him, I received a full con- 
 firmation of my faith by beholding the promised sign of the 
 descent of the Holy Ghost." Those who hold this view, think 
 the case of Samuel receiving a secret revelation about Saul, an 
 illustration of the matter. (1 Sam. ix. 15.) 
 
 Some think, as Poole, that it means, " I knew him not per- 
 fectly and distinctly, though I had an impression when I first 
 saw Him coming to be baptized, that He was One far greater 
 than myself, and under that impression demurred to baptizing 
 Him. After His baptism I saw clearly who He was." 
 
 The last explanation is perhaps the simplest, and most proba- 
 ble. That John at one time did not know our Lord by sight at 
 all, that he afterwards knew Him imperfectly, and that his per- 
 fect knowledge of Him, His nature, ofl&ce, and work, was not 
 attained till the time when the Spirit descended at His baptism, 
 are points that seem clear. The time when he said, " I have 
 need to be baptized of thee," would seem to be the time of im- 
 perfect knowledge, when the fact that Jesus was the Messiah 
 began to dawn upon him, and made him cry out, '' comest thou 
 to me ?" 
 
 Chrysostom observes, that the expression is a proof '' that the 
 miracles which they say belong to Christ's childhood are false, 
 and the invention of those who bring them to notice. For if 
 He had begun from His early age to work miracles, neither 
 could John have been ignorant of Him, nor would the multitude 
 have needed a teacher to make Him known." 
 
 [He that sent ine...same saidi] This expression indicates that 
 John the Baptist had many special revelations of God concern- 
 ing His work, of which we have no record given to us. He 
 seems to have been taught and instructed like one of the old 
 prophets. 
 
 [He which haptizeth loith ihe Holy Ghost] The remarkable 
 
66 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 description of our Lord, here given by John the Baptist, has 
 received three very different interpretations. 
 
 Some think that it means, " Tliis is He who shall institute 
 Christian baptism, with which the gift of tl^e Holy Ghost shall 
 be connected. His baptism shall be like mine, a baptism of 
 water. But it shall not be a baptism of water only, as mine is, 
 but a baptism accompanied by the regenerating grace of the 
 Spirit." 
 
 Some think that it means, " This is He who shall baptize with 
 the Holy G-host on the day of Pentecost, and confer miraculous 
 gifts on the church." 
 
 Some think it means, "This is He who shall baptize the 
 hearts of men, which neither thou canst do nor any other human 
 minister. He has the prerogative of giving spiritual life. He 
 is the giver of- the Holy Spirit to all who believe on Him." 
 
 I am decidedly of opinion that this third view is the correct 
 one. It is the only one which seems at all answerable to the 
 majesty of the person spoken of, the dignity of the speaker, and 
 the solemnity of the occasion. — To say, "This is He who shall 
 institute Christian baptism " seems a very lame and impotent 
 account of the expression. — To say, " This is He who shall 
 bestow miraculous gifts at the day of Pentecost," is a degree 
 better, but gives a picture of our Lord's office confined to a 
 single generation. — But to say, " This is He who, in every age 
 of the church, will baptize the hearts of his people by the Holy 
 Ghost, and by this baptism continually replenish the ranks of 
 His mystical i3ody," is saying that which exactly suits the occa- 
 sion, and describes our Lord's work in the world in a worthy 
 manner. 
 
 Musculus, on this verse, remarks, " What is it to baptize with 
 the Holy Ghost ? It is to regenerate the hearts of the elect, 
 and consecrate them into the fellowship of the sons of God." 
 Again, he says, "It is Christ alone who baptizes with the Holy 
 Ghost, a power which, as divine, He keeps in His own hands 
 and never communicates to any minister." 
 
 The view T have maintained is ably set forth in Bucer's com- 
 mentary on this place. He s-ays, " By the baptism of water Ave 
 arc received into the outward Church of God ; by the baptism 
 of the Spirit into the inward Church." The opinion of one who 
 Wivs Regius Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, in the reign of 
 Edward the Sixth, and the personal friend and adviser of Cran- 
 mer and the other English reformers, deserves much considera- 
 tion. It proves, at any rate, that the doctrine of inward baptism 
 of the Spirit, which Christ alone gives to every beUever, and the 
 identity of this baptism with conversion or new birth, are not 
 
JOH^^ CHAP. I. 
 
 67 
 
 Ruch modern and contemptible notions as some persons are 
 pleased to think. 
 
 The untenableness of the view, held by many, that John's 
 baptism was not the same as Christian bap' ism, to all intents 
 and purposes, is ably shown by Lin^htfoot, in his Harmony of the 
 Four Evangelists. If it was not Christian baptism, it would be 
 hard to prove that some of the disciples ever received Chris- 
 tian baptism at all. There is not the slightest evidence that 
 Andrew, Peter, and Philip were baptized by Jesus. 
 
 The familiarity which John displays with the Holy Ghost and 
 his work, deserves particular attention. To say, as many do, 
 that the Holy Grliost was not known until the day of Pentecost, 
 is saying what cannot be proved. The Holy Grhost has always 
 been in the hearts of believers in every age of the world. His 
 abundant outpouring is undoubtedly a leading mark of the days 
 since Christ came into the world. But the Holy Ghost was ever 
 in God's elect, and without Him there never was a soul saved. 
 34. — [/ saw and hare record, dx.] This means, " I saw perfectly, 
 and from that time have distinctly and unhesitatingly testified 
 that the person whom you now see before you is the Christ, the 
 Son of the living God. From the day of His baptism I have 
 been fully convinced that this is the Messiah." 
 
 John here declares his own firm conviction of our Lord's 
 divinity and eternal generation. He w^as satisfied that our Lord 
 was not the son of Mary only, but the Son of God. 
 
 JOHN L 35—42. 
 
 35 Again the next day after 
 John stood, and two of his disci- 
 ples; 
 
 36 And looking upon Jesus as 
 he walked, he saith, Behold the 
 Lamb of Gk)dl 
 
 3*7 And the two disciples heard 
 him speak, and they followed 
 Jesus. 
 
 38 Then Jesus turned, and saw 
 them following, and salth unto 
 them. What seek ye? They said 
 unto him. Rabbi, (which is to say, 
 being interpreted, Master,) where 
 dwellest thou? 
 
 39 He saith unto them, Come 
 ani see. They came and saw 
 
 where he dwelt, and abode with 
 him that day, for it was about the 
 tenth hour. 
 
 40 One of the two which heara 
 John speak, and followed him, waa 
 Andrew, Simon Peter's brother. 
 
 41 He first findeth his own 
 brother Simon, and saith unto him, 
 We have found the Messias, which 
 is, being interpreted, the Christ. 
 
 42 And he brought him to Je- 
 sus. And when Jesus beheld him, 
 he said. Thou art Simon the son 
 of Jona : thou shalt be called Ce- 
 phas, which is by interpretation, A 
 stone. 
 
68 ■ EXPOSITOKY THOUGHTS. 
 
 These verses ought always to be interesting to every true 
 Christian. They describe the first beginnings of the 
 Christian Church. Yast as that church is now, there was 
 a time when it consisted of only two weak raenibers. The 
 calling of those two members is described in the passage 
 which is now before our eyes. 
 
 We see, for one thing, in these verses, what good is done 
 hy continually testifying of Christ. 
 
 The first time that John the Baptist cried, " Behold the 
 Lamb of God," no result appears to have followed. We 
 are not told of any who heard, inquired, and believed. 
 But when he repeated the same words the next day, we 
 read that two of His disciples "heard him speak and fol- 
 lowed Jesus." They were received most graciously by Him 
 whom they followed. "They came and saw where he 
 dwelt, and abode with him that day." Truly it was a day 
 in their lives most eventful, and most blessed ! From that 
 day they became fast and firm disciples of the new-found 
 Messiah. They took up the cross. They continued with 
 Him in His temptations. They followed Him whitherso- 
 ever He went. One of them at least, if not both, became 
 a chosen apostle, and a master builder in the Christian 
 temple. And all was owing to John the Baptist's testi- 
 mony, " Behold the lamb of God." That testimony was a 
 little seed. But it bore mighty fruits. 
 
 This simple story is a pattern of the way in which good 
 has been done to souls in every age of the Christian 
 Church. By such testimony as that before us, and by none 
 else, men and women are converted and saved. It is by 
 exalting Christ, not the church, — Christ, not the sacra- 
 ments, — Christ, not the ministry, — it is by this means that 
 hearts are moved, and sinners are turned to God. To the 
 world such testimony may seem weakness and foolishness. 
 Yet, like the ram's horns, before whose blast the walls of 
 Jericho fell down, this testimony is mighty to the pulling 
 
69 
 
 down of strongholds. The stoiy of the crucified Lamb of 
 God has proved in every age, the power of God unto sal- 
 vation. Those who have done most for Christ's cause in 
 every part Df the world, have been men like John the 
 Baptist. They have not cried, Behold me, or Behold the 
 church, or Behold the ordinances, but " Behold the Lamb." 
 If souls are to be saved, men must be pointed directly t( 
 Christ. 
 
 One thing, however, must never be forgotten. There 
 must be patient continuance in preaching and teaching the 
 truth, if we want good to be done. Christ must be set 
 forth again and again, as the " Lamb of God which taketh 
 away the sin of the world." The story of grace must be 
 told repeatedly, — line upon line, and precept upon precept. 
 It is the constant dropping w^hich wears away the stone. 
 The promise shall never be broken, that " God's word shall 
 not return unto him void." (Isai. Iv. 11.) But it is nowhere 
 said that it shall do good the very first time that it is 
 preached. It was not the first proclamation of John the 
 Baptist, but the second, which made Andrew and his com- 
 panion follow Jesus. 
 
 We see, for another thing, lohat good a believer may do 
 to others^ by speaking to them about Christ. 
 
 No sooner does Andrew become a disciple, than he tells 
 iiis brother Simon what a discovery he has made. Like 
 one who has unexpectedly heard good tidings, he hastens 
 to impart it to the one nearest and dearest to him. He 
 says- to his brother, ""We have found the Messias," and 
 he " brings him to elesus." Who can tell what might have 
 happened if Andrew had been of a silent, reserved, and 
 uncommunicative spirit, like many a Christian in the 
 present day ? Who can tell but his brother might Jiave 
 lived and died a fisherman on the Galilean lake? But 
 happily for Simon, Andrew was not a man of this sort. 
 He was one whose heart was so full that he must speak. 
 
70 EXPOSITORS THOUGHTS. 
 
 And to Andrew's out-spoken testimony, under God, the 
 great apostle Peter owed the first beginning of light in 
 his soul. 
 
 The fact before us is most striking and instructive. Out 
 of the three first members of the Chnstian Church, one at 
 least was brought to Jesus, by the private, quiet word of 
 a relative. He seems to have heard no public preaching. 
 He saw no mighty miracle wrought. He was not con- 
 vinced by any powerful reasoning. He only heard his 
 brother telling him that he had found a Saviour himself, 
 and at once the work began in his soul. The simple testi- 
 mony of a warm-hearted brother was the first link in the 
 chain by which Peter was drawn out of the world, and 
 joined to Christ. The first blow in that mighty work by 
 which Peter was made a pillar of the Church, was struck 
 by Andrew's words, " We have found the Christ." 
 
 Well would it be for the Church of Christ, if all believ 
 ers were more like Andrew ! Well would it be for souls 
 if all men and women who have been converted themselves, 
 would speak to their friends and relatives on spiritual sub- 
 jects, and tell them what they have found! How much 
 good might be done ! How many might be led to Jesus, 
 who now live and die in unbelief! The work of testifying 
 the Gospel of the grace of God ought not to be left to 
 ministers alone. All who have received mercy ought to 
 fijid a tongue, and to declare what God has done for their 
 souls. All who have been delivered from the power of the 
 devil, ought to " go home and tell their friends what great 
 things God has done for them." (Mark v. 19.) Thousands, 
 humanly speaking, would listen to a word from a friend, 
 who will not listen to a sermon. Every believer ought to 
 be a home-missionary, a missionary to his family, children, 
 servants, neighbours, and friends. Surely, if we can find 
 nothing to say to others about Jesus, we may well doubt 
 whether we are savingly acquainted with Him ourselves. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 71 
 
 Let us take heed that we are among those who really 
 follow Christ, and abide with Him. It is not enough to 
 hear Him preached from the pulpit, and to read of Him as 
 described in books. We must actually follow Him, pour 
 out our hearts before Him, and hold personal communion 
 with Him. Then, and not till then, we shall feel con- 
 strained to speak of Him to others. The man who only 
 knows Christ by the hearing of the ear, will never do much 
 for the spread of Christ's cause in the earth. 
 
 Notes. John I. 35—42. 
 
 35. — [The next day.] Let St. John's particularity in noting days at 
 this period of our Lord's history, be observed again in this verse. 
 If, as many suppose, St. John was one of the two who this day 
 followed Jesus and became His disciples, we can well under- 
 stand that it was a memorable day to him. 
 
 [John stood.] This expression seems to imply that there was 
 some particular spot near Bethabara, where John the Baptist 
 was in the habit of standing, to preach, and to receive those who 
 came to be baptized. While he '' stood " here, the event which 
 follows took place. 
 36. — [Looliing.... Jesus ^ as he walked.] This probably means that he 
 saw Jesus walking among the crowd of persons who were at- 
 tracted to Bethabara, alone, without followers, and as yet not 
 recognized by any one as the Messiah. 
 
 Stier remarks, "John saw Jesus walking, in silent meditation, 
 waiting for His hour, and His Father's commands ; in full pre- 
 paration for the world and its sin : equipped for the testimony 
 to the truth, with that armour, which has been tested aud 
 approved in His first great spiritual conflict ; and for the utter- 
 ance of the new words of God, which the Father has given 
 Him." 
 
 [lie saithj behold, t£-c.] This seems to have been a second 
 public proclamation of our Lord's office and character, a partial 
 repetition of what had been said the day before ; and yet, as the 
 event shows, a more effective proclamation. The same truth 
 may do good the second time that it is preached, which does 
 noihing the first time. 
 d7 . — [Heard.. ..speak....foUowed.] The three steps described in this 
 verse, are very noteworthy. John the Baptist "speaks." The 
 disciples " hear," After hearing they '' follow Jesus." This is 
 a succinct summary of God's way of saving myriads of souls. 
 
72 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Eollock on this verse remarks, '' We learn by this example, 
 how powerful is the preaching of Christ, — yea, one or two words 
 about Christ and the cross, how powerful are they in changing 
 the hearts of men ! Preach, if you like, about the great deeds 
 of kings and generals, and their courage and dory ; — these things 
 will please men for a little time, but they will not convert them. 
 But preach concerning Him that was crucified, a subject appa- 
 rently ignominious and foohsh, — and then the story of the cross, 
 which is foolishness to them that perish, will be the power and 
 wisdom of God to them that believe." 
 
 38. — [ What seek ye ?] We cannot doubt that our Lord knew per- 
 fectly well the hearts and motives of these two disciples. In 
 asking this question, therefore, He spoke partly for th'iir encou- 
 ragement, and partly to stir them up to self-inquiry. " What 
 seek ye ? Is there anything that I can do for you, any truth 
 that I can teach you, any burden that I can take away ? If so, 
 speak, and be not afraid." — " What seek ye ? Are you sure 
 that you are following me with right motives? Are you sure 
 that you are not regarding me as a temporal ruler ? Are you 
 sure that you are not, like other Jews, seeking riches, honour, 
 greatness, in this world ? Prove your own selves, and be sure 
 that you are seeking the right object." 
 
 [ Which is to say, being interpreted.] This is one of a class of 
 expressions which shows that John wrote for Gentile readers 
 rather than Jews. A Jew would not have needed this parenthe- 
 tical comment. This same remark apphes to verse 41. 
 
 [Where dwellest thou ?] This question seems to imply a desire 
 for conversation and private communion. *' We would fain know 
 more of Thee. We are drawn to Thee by John the Baptist's 
 proclamation. We w^ould like to go aside with Thee from the 
 crowd, and inquire of Thee more privately and quietly, at thy 
 dwelling, about the things which are upon our heart"?." 
 
 To apply the text, as many do, to our Lord's spiritual dwell- 
 ing in ''contrite hearts," &c., (Isaiah Iviii. 15,) may produce 
 good doctrinal and practical theology. But it is not the point 
 of the text. 
 
 3D — [Come and see.] The great afFabilitv, and condescension of 
 these first words of our Lord's after His public appearance aa 
 Messiah, ought not. to be overlooked. The very first thing that 
 we hear Him saying, after He has been publicly proclaimed as 
 the "Lamb of God," is ''Come and see." It is a pleasant type 
 of wb.at He has been ever saying to the sons of men from that; 
 day down to thi?. " Come and see who I am, and what I am. 
 Come and be acquainted with me." 
 
 Schottgen and Lightfoot both remark, that the expression 
 
73 
 
 '' Come and see," is a very common one in Rabbinical writings, 
 and would be very familiar to the Jews. 
 
 [ Where he dwelt] We can only suppose that the place where 
 our Lord was dwelling at this time, was some temporary resi- 
 dence in or near Bethabara. At the best, it was probably some 
 • humble lodging. It is not impossible that it was nothing more 
 than a cave. He often " had not where to lay His head," If 
 the two disciples had the least relic of Jewish expectation, that 
 Messiah would appear in royal dignity and glory, our Lord's 
 d welling would go far to disabuse their minds of the idea. 
 
 [Abode with Him that day. ..tenth hour.] The Jewish day began 
 at six o'clock in the morning. The tenth hour therefore means, 
 four o'clock in the afternoon. At this late hour of the day, His 
 disciples found it impossible to conclude their couversatioa with 
 Jesus, and therefore remained in the same lodging with Him all 
 night. 
 
 Many commentators, from Augustine downwards, make the 
 natural remark, that this evening must have been a blessed 
 evening for these two disciples ; and that it would have been 
 pleasant if the conversation had been given to us 1 Yet if it 
 had been good for us to know the conversation, it would doubt- 
 less have been recorded. There are no deficiencies in Scrip- 
 ture. 
 
 40. — [One of the two... .was Andrew.] The priority of Andrew to 
 Peter ought not to be overlooked, Peter, to whom the Church 
 of Rome boastfully attributes a primacy among the apostles 
 was neither converted nor made acquainted with Christ, so soon 
 as his brother. 
 
 Who the other of these two disciples was, we are not told. It 
 is highly probable, as Chrysostom and Theophylact conjecture, 
 that it was St. John himself. On seven other occasions in this 
 Gospel he humbly withholds his name. (John xiii. 23 ; xix. 26, 
 35 ; XX. 2 ; xxi. 7, 20, 24.) It is therefore very hkely that he with- 
 held it here. — The supposition of Musculus, and others, that the 
 other disciple was a person of less zeal and sincerity than Andrew, 
 and is therefore not named, appears to me improbable. 
 
 41. — [He first.] This expression must either mean that Andrew 
 was the first of the two disciples who brought a brother to 
 Jesus. — or that he was the first disciple, speaking generally, who 
 spoke to others of the Messiah, when he had found Him, — or 
 that h(i was the first to tell his brothei Peter, and Peter was not 
 the first to tell him about Christ. 
 
 [ We have found.] This expression implies arv unexpected and 
 joyful discovery. The evening's conversation which Andrew 
 
7-1 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 had held mth Jesus, had convinced him that He was indeed 
 the Christ. 
 
 [Ihe Messias... .interpreted.... Christ.] It is almost needless to 
 remark, that these names mean the " anointed one." The first 
 is Hebrew, and the second is Greek. Kings, prophets, and 
 priests, in the Old Testament, were anointed, and our Lord as 
 the Prophet, Priest, and King of the Church was called tne 
 Anointed One, not because He was really anointed with oil, but 
 because he was " anointed with the Holy Ghost." (Acts x. 38.) 
 
 The extent of Andrew's religious knowledge ought not to be 
 overlooked. Poor and humble in station as he was, he seems, 
 like all the Jews, to have known what the Old Testament 
 prophets had foretold about Messiah, and to have been prepared 
 to hear of a person appearing in the character of Messiah. It 
 is one of many expressions in the Gospels which show that the 
 lower orders among the Jews were far better acquainted with the 
 letter of the Old Testament Scriptures, than the poor in our own 
 day generally are with the letter of the New Testament, or indeed 
 of any part of the Bible. 
 
 Calvin remarks on Andrew's conduct, " Woe to our indolence, 
 if we do not, after having been fully enlightened, endeavour 
 to make others partakers of the same griice." 
 
 42. — [When Jesus heheld....said....thou art Simon.'] Our Lord here 
 displayed His perfect knowledge of all persons, names, and 
 things. He needed not that any should tell Him who and what 
 a person was. This knowledge was supposed by the Jews to be 
 a peculiar attribute of Messiah, whenever He came. He was to 
 be one of " quick understanding." (Isaiah xi. 3.) Enough fur 
 us to know that it is a peculiar attribute of God. He alone 
 knows the hearts of men. Our Lord's perfect knowledge of all 
 hearts was one among many proofs of His divinity. The same 
 knowledge appears again in His address to Nathanael, in this 
 chapter, ver. 47, and in His conversation with the Samaritan 
 woman. (John iv. 18, etc.) — The eflect produced in both cases, 
 is very worthy of notice. 
 
 [Cephas.] This is a Syriac word, and is equivalent to the 
 Greek word Petros, which we render Peter. Both mean a stone, 
 a portion of a rock. "Petra" means a rock, "Petros" a piece 
 of a rock. Peter was the latter, but not the former. 
 
 [A stone.] The marginal reading here, as Lightfoot remarks, 
 would have been much better than that which the translators 
 have put in our version. If the words were "Ceplias, wldch is 
 by interpretation Peter," it would have conveyed our Lord's 
 meaning far more clearly. 
 
 The custom of having two names appears to have been 
 
JOHN, CHAP. 1. 75 
 
 common in !N'ew Testament times. The apostle Petei seems to 
 have been only known as " Cephas" in the Corinthian Church. 
 Out of the five other places in the New Testament where the 
 name Cephas is found, four are in the epistle to the Corinthians, 
 while the name Peter is not used in that epistle at all. 
 
 Nifanius gives the names of three Popes who have so grossly 
 mistaken the origin of the word Cephas as to suppose that it is 
 derived from the Greek word which signifies " a head," and that 
 it indicated Peter's headship in the Church! Such a palpable 
 blunder is one of a thousand proofs that Popes are no more infal- 
 lible than other men. Calovius makes the same charge against 
 no less a person than Cardinal Beharmine, 
 
 If it be asked why our Lord gave Simon this new name, the 
 best answer appears to be that it was given with a special refer- 
 ence to the change which grace was to work in Simon's heart. 
 Naturally impulsive, unstable, and unsteady, he was finally to 
 become a firm, solid stone in the Church of Christ, and to testify 
 his unshaken adherence to Christ by suffering martyrdom. 
 
 Chrysostom thinks that our Lord altered Simon's name " to 
 show that it was He who gave the old covenant, that it was He 
 who called Abram Abraham, and Sarai Sarah, and Jacob Israel." 
 
 Lightfoot, on these verses, after noticing the error which 
 Roman Catholic writers attempt to found upon it, about Peter 
 being the rock upon which the Church is built, makes the following 
 curious observation, — " If they will so pertinaciously adhere to 
 it, let us apprehend our Lord speaking prophetically ^ and fore- 
 telling the grand error that would spring up in the Church, 
 namely that Peter is a rock, than which the Christian Church has 
 known nothing more sad and destructive." 
 
 Let it be noted, in leaving this passage, that the selection of 
 such humble unlearned men as th -se here described, to be the 
 first apostles and preachers of the Grospel, is a strong evidence 
 of the truth of Christianity. A religion which was propagated 
 by such weak instruments, in the face of persecution and oppo- 
 sition from the great and learned, must be a religion from God. 
 Such results from such instrumentahty cannot possibly be ac- 
 counted for on natural principles. 
 
 JOHN 1. 43—51. 
 
 43 The day following Jesus 
 would go forth into Galilee, and 
 findeth Philip, and saith unto him, 
 Follow me. 
 
 44 Now Philip was of Bethsaldn, 
 the city of Andrew and Peter. 
 
 45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and 
 saith unto him. We have found 
 
76 
 
 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 him, of whocr Moses in the Law, 
 and the PropI.ets, did write, Jesus 
 of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. 
 
 46 And Nathanael said unto 
 him, Can there any good thing 
 come out of Nazareth? Phihp 
 eaith unto him, Come and see. 
 
 47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming 
 to him, and saith of him, Behold 
 an Israehte indeed, in whom is no 
 guile I 
 
 48 Nathanael saith unto him, 
 "Whence knowest thou me ? Jesus 
 answered and said unto him. Be- 
 fore that Philip called thee, when 
 
 thou wast under the fig tree, I saw 
 thee. 
 
 49 Nathanael answered and saith 
 unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son 
 of God ; thou art the King of Israo^ 
 
 50 Jesus ar swered and said ur 
 to him. Because I said unto thee, 
 I saw thee under the fig tree, be- 
 lievest thou ? thou shalt see greater 
 things than these. 
 
 51 And he saith unto him. Yen- 
 ly, verily, I say unto you. Hereafter 
 ye shall see heaven open, and the 
 angels of God ascending and de- 
 scending upon the Son of man. 
 
 Let us observe, as we read these verses, how variovs are 
 the ijaths by which souls are led into the narrow way of life. 
 
 We are told of a man, named Philip, being added to 
 the little company of Christ's disciples. He does not 
 appear to have been moved, like Andrew and his com- 
 panions, by the testimony of John the Baptist. He was 
 not drawn, like Simon Peter, by the out-spoken declara- 
 tion of a brother. He seems to have been called directly 
 by Christ Himself, and the agency of man seems not to 
 have been used in his calling. Yet in faith and life he 
 became one with those who were disciples before him. 
 Though led by different paths, they all entered the same 
 road, embraced the same truths, served the same Master, 
 and at length reached the same home. 
 
 The fact before us is a deeply important one. It throws 
 light on the history of all God's people in every age, and 
 of every tongue. There are diversities of operations in 
 the saving of souls. All true Christians are led by one 
 Spirit, washed in one blood, serve one Lord, lean on one 
 Saviour, bcjieve one truth, and walk by one general rule. 
 But all are not converted in one and the same manner. 
 All do not pass through the same experience. In conver- 
 sion, the Holy Ghost acts as a sovereign. He calleth 
 every one severally as He will. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 77 
 
 A careful recollection of this point may save us much 
 trouble. We must beware of making the experience of 
 other believers the measure of our own. We must beware 
 of denying another's grace, because he has not been led 
 by the same way as ourselves. Has a man got the real 
 grace of God ? This is the only question that concerns 
 us. — Is he a penitent man ? Is he a believer ? Does he 
 live a holy life ? — Provided these inquiries can be answered 
 satisfactorily, we may well be content. It matters nothing 
 by what path a man has been led, if he has only been led 
 at last into the right way. 
 
 Let us observe, secondly, in these verses, how much of 
 Christ there is in the Old Testament Scriptures, We read 
 that when Philip described Christ to Nathanael, he says, 
 " We have found Him of whom Moses in the law and the 
 prophets did write." 
 
 Christ is the sum and substance of the Old Testament. 
 To Him the earliest promises pointed in the days of Adam, 
 and Enoch, and Noah, and Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob. 
 To Him every sacrifice pointed in the ceremonial worship 
 appointed at Mount Sinai. Of Him every high priest was 
 a type, and every part of the tabernacle was a shadow, 
 and every judge and deliverer of Israel was a figure. He 
 was the prophet like unto Moses, whom the Lord God 
 promised to send, and the King of the house of David, who 
 came to be David's Lord as well as son. He was the Son 
 of the virgin, and the Lamb, foretold by Isaiah, — the 
 righteous Branch mentioned by Jeremiah, — the true Shep- 
 herd, foreseen by Ezekiel, — the Messenger of the Cove- 
 nant, promised by Malachi, — and the Messiah, who, accord- 
 ing to Daniel, was to be cut off, though not for Himself. 
 The further we read in the volume of the Old Testament, 
 the clearer do we find the testimony about Christ. The 
 ' light which the inspired writers enjoyed in ancient daya 
 was, at best, but dim, compared to that of the Gospel. 
 
78 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 But the coming Person tliey all saw afar oft*, and on whom 
 they all fixed their eyes, was one and the same. The 
 Spirit, which was in them, testified of Christ. (1 Pet. 
 
 i. 11.) 
 
 Do we stumble at this saying ? Do we find it hard to 
 see Christ in the Old Testament, because we do not see 
 His name ? Let us be sure that the fault is all our own. 
 It is our spiritual vision which is to blame, and not the 
 book. The eyei of our understanding need to be enlight- 
 ened. The veil has yet to be taken away. Let us pray 
 for a more humble, childlike, and teachable spirit, and 
 let us take up "Moses and the prophets" again. Christ 
 is there, though our eyes may not yet have seen Him. 
 May we never rest till we can subscribe to our Lord's 
 words about the Old Testament Scriptures, "They are 
 they which testify of me." (John v. 39.) 
 
 Let us observe, thirdly, in these verses, the good advice 
 which Philip gave to Nathanael. The mind of Nathanael 
 was full of doubts about the Saviour, of whom Philip told 
 Him. " Can there any good thing," he said, " come out 
 of Nazareth ?" And what did Philip reply ? He said, 
 " Come and see." 
 
 Wiser counsel than this it would be impossible to con- 
 ceive ! If Philip had reproved Nathanael's unbelief, he 
 might have driven him back for many a day, and given 
 offence. If he had reasoned with him, he might have 
 failed to convince him, or might have confirmed him in his 
 doubts. But by inviting him to prove the matter for him- 
 self, he showed his entire confidence in the truth of his 
 own assertion, and his willingness to have it tested and 
 proved. And the result shows the wisdom of Philip's 
 words. Nathanael owed his early acquaintance with Christ 
 to that frank invitation, " Come and see." 
 
 If we call ourselves true Christians, let us never be 
 afraid to deal with people about their souls as Philip dealt 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 79 
 
 %vit]i ^f»thaiiael. Let us invite tbem boldly to make proof 
 of otr religion. Let us tell them confidently that they 
 cannot know its real value until they have tried it. Let 
 us assure them that vital Christianity courts every possible 
 inquiry. It has no secrets. It has nothing to conceal. 
 Its faith and practice are spoken against, just because they 
 are not known. Its enemies speak evil of things with 
 which they are not acquainted. They understand neither 
 what they say nor whereof they afiirm. Philip's mode of 
 dealing, we may be sure, is one principal way to do good. 
 Few are ever moved by reasoning and argument. Still 
 fewer are frightened into repentance. The man who does 
 most good to souls, is often the simple believer who says 
 to his friends, " I have found a Saviour ; come and see 
 Him." 
 
 Let us observe, lastly, in these verses, the high character 
 which Jesus gives of Nathanael. He calls him " an Israelite 
 indeed, in whom is no guile." 
 
 Nathanael, there can be no doubt, was a true child of 
 God, and a child of God in difficult times. He was one 
 of a very little flock. Like Simeon and Anna, and other 
 pious Jews, he was living by faith and waiting prayer- 
 fully for the promised Redeemer, when our Lord's 
 ministry began. He had that which grace alone can 
 give, an honest heart, a heart without guile. His know- 
 ledge was probably small. His spiritual eyesight waa 
 dim. But he was one who had lived carefully up to his 
 light. He had diligently used such knowledge as he 
 possessed. His eye had been single," though his vision 
 had not been strong. His spiritual judgment had been 
 honest, though it had not been powerful. What he saw 
 in Scripture, he had held firmly, in spite of Pharisees 
 and Sadducees, and all the fashionable religion of the 
 day. He was an honest Old Testament believer, who 
 had stood alone. And here was the secret of our Lord's 
 
80 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 peculiar commendation! He declared ISTatlianael to be 
 a true son of Abraham, — a Jew inwardly, possessing 
 circumcision in the spirit as well as in the letter, — an 
 Israelite in heart, as well as a son of Jacob iu the flesh. 
 
 Let us pray that we may be of the same spirit as 
 Kathanael. An honest, unprejudiced mind, — a child-like 
 willingness to follow the truth, wherever the truth may 
 lead us, — a sim]3le, hearty desire to be guided, taught, and 
 led by the Spirit, — a thorough determination to use every 
 spark of light which we have, — are a possession of price- 
 less value. A man of this spirit may live in the midst 
 of much darkness, and be surrounded by every possible 
 disadvantage to his soul. But the Lord Jesus will take 
 care that such a man does not miss the way to heaven. 
 "The meek will he guide in judgment: and the meek 
 will he teach his way." (Psalm xxv. 9.) 
 
 Notes. John L 43 — 51. 
 
 43. — [The day following.] This is the fourth successive day which 
 is specially named by St. John, and its events described. The 
 first contained John the Baptisfs reply to the priests and Levites, 
 — the second, his public announcement of our Lord as the 
 Lamb of God, — the third, the calling of Andrew and his com- 
 panion, and Peter, — the fourth describes the calling of Philip 
 and Nathanael. 
 
 [ Would go fo7'th.'] The Greek word rendered " would," signifieg 
 that our Lord " willed or had a will." 
 
 {Findeth Philip.'] It does not appear where Philip was when 
 Jesus called him. He must either have been at Bethabara, 
 among John's hearers, — or at some place ou the road from 
 Bethabara to Galilee, — or at his own native place, Bethsaida. 
 The last ia perhaps the most probable idea 
 
 [Follow me.] This simple sentence describe? the direct quick* 
 ening voice of an almighty Saviour. It is evident that the power 
 of the Holy Ghost accompanied our Lord's words, and that as 
 soon as they were spoken, Philip, like Matthew the publican, 
 arose, left all, and became a disciple. In conversion God acta 
 as a sovereign. One is called in one way, and another in another. 
 .RoUock observes on this verse, " This teaches us that Christ ia 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 81 
 
 able to call any one whom He pleases into the kingdom of 
 heaven, without the ministry either of angel or man." 
 
 44. — [Philip... of Bethsaida city Andrew Peter ^ This verse 
 
 seems to make it probable that Piiihp's conversion and calling 
 took place at Bethsaida. Andrew and Peter having been con- 
 verted and become companions of Jesus on His way to Galilee, 
 •would appear to have taken Him to their own native place, 
 Bethsaida. 
 
 i5 — [ We have found Mm.] Philip, like his fellow-citizen, Andrew, 
 seems to have expected the appearance of Messiah. 
 
 Chrysostom remarks, " Seest thou what a thoughtful mind he 
 had, how assiduously he meditates on the writings of Moses, and 
 expected the advent? The expression, 'we have found,' belongs 
 always to those who are in some way seeking." 
 
 [IIim....3foses... .prophets did ivrite.] Here, as in the case of 
 Andrew, we should notice the famiharity with the general con- 
 tents of Scripture which a poor Jew like Phihp possessed. He 
 thoroughly understood that " Moses and the prophets" held forth 
 the promise of a coming Kedeemer, and that a better Priest, 
 Prophet, and King were foretold in their writings. " The Old 
 Testament," as the Church of England Article wisely declares, 
 "is not contrary to the New; for both in the Old Testament and 
 New, everlasting lile is offered to mankind by Christ." We must 
 beware, in these latter days, of despising the Old Testament. It 
 is one by-path to infidelity. 
 
 [Jesus of Nazarei'h...son of Joseph.] Philip here describes our 
 Lord according to the common report about Him, and in all 
 probability according to his own present knowledge. His heart 
 was at present better than his head. The miraculous conception 
 of Christ was hidden from him. Yet it is not unworthy of 
 remark, that this ignorant account of our Lord was very likely the 
 cause of Nathanael's doubt and prejudice, exhibited in the next 
 verse. The mistakes of young converts are often mighty stum- 
 bling-blocks in the way of other people's souls. We must not, 
 however, despise Philip because of his mistake. Eollock remarks, 
 " I had rather a man should stammer and babble about Christ, 
 providing he does it sincerely and from his heart, and has before 
 i him as an object the glory of Grod and salvation of men, than 
 say many things eloquently about Christ, for ostentation and 
 vain glory." 
 
 x6. — [Can any good thing. ..come.. .Nazareth?] This question shows 
 the low estimate in which Nazareth, where our Lord had 
 been brought up, was held. It was an obscure town in a corner 
 of Q-alilee, not far from the borders of the province, and its 
 reputation seems to have been very bad. Nathanael could not 
 
 4* 
 
82 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 remember anj prophecy about Messiah coming out of jSTazareth. 
 and at once stumbled at the idea of Him whom "Moses and 
 the prophets" had desoribed, belonging to such a contemptible 
 place. 
 
 The condescension of our Lord in living thirty years in such 
 a place as Nazareth, is strongly brought out by Nathan ael's 
 question. 
 
 Augustine, Cyril, Origen, and others thought that the sentence 
 before us ought not to be interpreted as a question, but as a 
 simp'.e affirmation, " Some good thing may come out of Nazareth." 
 Wycliffe's version also takes this vievs^. The sentence would 
 then be the expression of a calm and unprejudiced mind, 
 acknowledging the possibihty of good coming from Nazareth. 
 Musculus thinks it possible, in this view of the expression, that 
 Nathanael might have had in his mind the remarkable pro- 
 phetical saying quoted in St. Matthew, " He shall be called a 
 Nazarenel" The judgment of the great majority of interpreters 
 agrees with our own translation, that it is a question, and 
 not an assertion ; and it is by far the more probable view of the 
 text. 
 
 l^Come and see.] How common this expression was among 
 the Jewish religious teachers has been already noticed. Philip's 
 wisdom in not arguing and reasoning with Nathanael, should be 
 observed. Ford gives a good quotation from Adam, " Little good 
 comes by disputing. Pride is generally at the bottom of it, and 
 not charity or love of truth; and it is seldom managed with 
 decency or candour enough to produce any good effect. Let fall 
 a word in season, and wait in patience till the rain drops on it 
 from heaven." 
 
 47. — \_In whom is no guile] It is very likely that in using this 
 expression our Lord referred to the 32nd Psalm, where the 
 character of the godly man is described. He is not only one 
 whose iniquities are forgiven, but one '' in whose lips there is no 
 guile." The expression imphes a true heart, a really converted 
 man, a genuine son of Abraham by faith, as well as a son accord- 
 ing to the flesh. 
 
 Hutcheson observes, " The true mark of a true Israelite m 
 spirit, is not sinlessness or perfection, but sincerity." 
 
 48. — [ Whence Jcnowest thou me ?] This question implies Nathanael's 
 surprise that Jesus should exhibit any knowledge of his cha- 
 racter. 
 
 [When...under.. Jig-tree I saw thee.] The common opinion 
 about this expression is, that Nathanael was praying or holding 
 (:ommunion with God under the fig-tree. It may be so. We are 
 told nothing about it, and are entirely left to conjecture. If it 
 
JOHN, CHAP. I. 83 
 
 ftad been good for us to know, it would have been told us. 
 Sufficient for us to understand that when Nathanael thought 
 he was alone and no eye upon him, the Lord Jesus, by His 
 divine power of seeing and knowing all things, was perfectly 
 acquainted with all that Nathanael said, thought, and did. His 
 " eyes are in every place." (Prov. xv. 3.) 
 
 Chrysostom and Theophylact think that the expression only 
 refers to the conversation between Philip and Nathanael about 
 Jesus, which had taken place under a fig-tree. Grrotius takes 
 the same view. 
 
 Grill mentions a tradition in the Syriac dictionary, "that 
 Nathanael's mother had laid him under a fig-tree when the 
 infants were slain at Bethlehem by Herod," (Matt, ii, 16,) and 
 that our Lord showed His perfect knowledge by referring to this 
 fact. 
 
 Heinsius thinks there is a reference to the prophecy of Zecha- 
 riah, '' In that day ye shall call every man his neighbour, under 
 the vine and under the fig-tree," (Zech. iii. 10,) and that hence 
 Nathanael drew the inference that Messiah's days were come, 
 and Messiah before him. 
 
 Augustine sees an allegory in the fig-tree, and gravely says, 
 " that as Adam and Eve, when they had sinned, made themselves 
 aprons of fig-leaves, fig-leaves must signify sins. Nathanael 
 therefore being under the fig-tree, signifies being under the sha- 
 dow of death ! " 
 i9. — [Thou art... Son of God.. .King of Israel] These words are the 
 outburst of a heart convinced at once that Jesus was the Mes- 
 siah. They are a noble confession that our Lord was that divine 
 Person who was promised to come into the world to redeem sin- 
 ners, and that King who was prophesied of as the future Gather- 
 er and Ruler of the tribes of Israel. Whether Nathanael clearly 
 understood the nature of our Lord's kingdom at this time, may 
 be reasonably doubted. But that he saw, like Peter, that He 
 was the Christ, the Son of the Blessed, we cannot doubt. Tho 
 restoring of the kingdom to Israel was a subject which we know 
 from other pa siges of Scripture, was one of the last which the 
 first disciples were able to understand aright. (Acts i. 6.) 
 
 The history of Nathanael's calling at this point should be 
 compared with that of the woman of Samaria, in the fourth 
 chapter of this G^ospel. It is striking to observe that a discovery 
 and conviction of our Lord's perfect knowledge of the most se- 
 cret things, was in both cases the turning point. 
 
 It should not be forgotten, that the title " King of Israel," was 
 one which our Lord never refused during His ministry, though 
 He never took to Himself His great power and actually reigned. 
 
84 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 The angc4 Gabriel foretold that, the " Lord God would give unto 
 Him the throne of His father David, and that He would lei n 
 over the house of Jacob, and that of His kingdom there would 
 be no end." (Luke i. 32, 33.) When the wise men came from 
 the East, they inquired for him who was born " Kinir of th 
 Jews." (Matt. ii. 2.) When our Lord was crucified, the title 
 over His head was, " King of the Jews." All this shall yet be 
 literally true. Christ shall yet be King in Zion, and reign over 
 the gathered and restored tribes of Israel at His second coming. 
 And then the words of Nathanael shall be seen completely ful- 
 filled He shall be acknowledged by all ai the " Son of God, 
 and King of Israel." 
 
 50. — [Believest thou ?] It admits of a question whether this ex- 
 pression would not be bet'er rendered, as it might be with per- 
 fect gramma* ical correctness, "thou believest." It would then 
 be very like our Lord's words to Thomas, " Because thou hast 
 seen me, thou hast believed." (John xx. 29.) The sense would 
 be, " Because I said I saw thee under the fig-tree thou believest. 
 It is well. Great is thy faith. But I tell thee for thy comfort 
 and encouragement, that thou shalt one day see far greater 
 proofs of my divinity and Messiahship than these." Wycliffe's, 
 Tyndale's, and Cranmer's versions, all render the expression as 
 an atiirmation, and not as a question. Aretius maintains the 
 same view. 
 
 61.— [Verily J verily I say.] This expression is peculiar to St. John's 
 Gospel, and very remarkable. It is the word which is familiar 
 to all Christians, " Amen," twice repeated. It is found twenty- 
 five times in this G-ospe', always at the beginning of a sentence, 
 and always used by Christ. In every place it implies a very 
 solemn, emphatic assertion of some great truth, or heart-search- 
 ing fact. No other writer in the New Testament, except St. 
 John, ever gives the double "Amen." 
 
 [Hereafter... ye shall see.. .heaven.. .angels. ..Son of man.] This 
 prediction is very remarkable. It should be carefully observed, 
 that it is i.ot addressed to Nathanael alone. The preceding verse 
 says, "thou shalt see." The present verse says, " ye shall see," 
 — that is, " thou and all my other disciples." 
 
 About the true meaning of the prediction, commentators differ 
 exceedingly. Arguing, as nearly all do, that the words plainly 
 refer to Jacob's vision of the ladder reaching from heaven to 
 earth, (Gen. xxviii. 12,) they disagree about the way in which 
 the prediction is fulfilled. 
 
 Some think, as Stier, that the predicion must be interpreted 
 figuratively, and that it was fulfilled when our Lord was upon 
 earth. They think it only means that Nathanael and the other 
 disciplots would see a still fuller revelation of Christ and t!:e 
 
85 
 
 Gospel by and bye. They would see a figurative fulfilment of 
 Jacob's vision, and a way opened from earth to heaven for all 
 true IsraeUtes or believers. They would see still greater proofs, 
 in the shape of miracles and signs, that Jesus was the bon of 
 God, Heaven, ir. a spiritual sense shut by the sin of the first 
 Adam, would be opened by the obedience of the second Adam. 
 " The heavenly ladder," says Bonaventura, quoted by Calovius, 
 " was broken in Adam and repaired in Christ." — According to 
 this view, '" the angels of Grod " in the text mean nothing in 
 particular, which, to say the least, seems a very loose and un- 
 sati factory explanation. 
 
 Others think, as Rollock, that the prediction must be inter- 
 preted literally, and that it was fulfilled while our Lord was on 
 earth. They think it was accomplished when our Lord was 
 transfigured, — when an angel appeared in the garden of Geth- 
 semane, — and when our Lord ascended on the Mount of Olives. 
 Tills view also seems very unsatisfiictory. The transfiguration 
 and the agony in the garden, were not seen by Nathanael at all. 
 There is nothing whatever said about angels appearing, either 
 at the transfiguration or the ascension. And as to "angels. as- 
 cending and descending," there is nothing at any period of the 
 Gospel history at all answering to the expression. 
 
 The only true and satisfactory view, I behove, is that which 
 makes the whole prediction apply to events which are still future. 
 Our Lord spoke of His second coming and kingdom. When He 
 comes the second time to take His great power and reign, the 
 words of this text shall be literally fulfilled. His believing peo- 
 ple shall see heaven open, and a constant communication kept up 
 between heaven and earth, — the tabernacle of God with men, 
 and the angels visibly ministering to the King of Israel, and 
 King of all the earth. 
 
 The context confirms me in this view of the text. Nathanael 
 believed Jesus to be the Messiah, when he was lowly and poor. 
 Jesus rewards his faith by assuring him that, lowly as He now 
 seems. He shall one day come in the clouds of heaven and reign 
 as a King, 
 
 I am further confirmed by the striking likeness between our 
 Lord's words here, and those He addressed to the chief priests, 
 in the day that He was arraigned as a prisoner before them. 
 "Hereafter ye Aall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand 
 of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven." (Matt, xxvi, 64.) 
 
 This view of the p'-ediction is maintained by Gomarus. 
 
 I am aware that son:e maintain, in opposition to the view I 
 support, that the Greek word rendered " hereafter," must mean 
 " from henceforth, i. e immediately after the present time, and 
 
86 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 ever hereafter," and does not imply a distant event. In reply, 
 I would have it specially noted, that the Greek word here trans- 
 lated " hereafter," is the very same that is used b}^ our Lord in 
 the solemn words, just quoted, which he addressed to the chief 
 priests when He was arraigned. (Matt. xxvi. 69.) In that case, 
 there cannot be any reasonable doubt that He spoke of a far 
 distant event and time. I believe, that in like manner. He 
 speaks of a far distant event and time in this place. 
 
 As to the nature of Christ's future kingdom, and the inter- 
 course which shall then be kept up by angels between earth and 
 heaven, this is not the place to speak. I only remark, that the 
 words before us will probably receive a far more real and literal 
 accomplishment than many of us are expecting. 
 
 It is worthy of remark that Nathanael calls our Lord " the 
 Son of Gro^l." Jesus in His prediction tells him he shall see 
 angels ascending and descending on the " Son of man." He 
 whom Nathanael now saw as a man, would yet appear as man 
 glorified in the heavenly kingdom. He would even then be 
 G-od-man. The expression " Son of man," here first used by St. 
 •John, seems derived, as Chemnitius says, from Daniel's words in 
 a prophecy about Messiah. (Dan. vii. 13, 14.) It is never applied 
 to our Lord by any but Himself, except by Stephen. (Acts vii. 
 56.) Lightfoot thinks that " it is used so often by our Saviour 
 about Himself, as intimating that he is the second Adam, the 
 true seed of the woman." 
 
 In leaving this passage, the question naturally arises, Who 
 was Nathanael ? How is it that we hear so little afterwards of 
 so good a man and so clear-sighted a believer ? 
 
 Some think, as Augustine and others, that Nathanael was 
 purposely not placed among our Lord's immediate companions 
 and apostles, because he was a man of learning and knowledge, 
 lest any should say that our Lord chose learned men to be His 
 first ministers. I can see nothing in this argument. There is 
 no evidence to my own mind that Nathanael was more leai-ned 
 than other Jews of humble birth, in our Lord's time. More- 
 over he was a friend of Philip, one of our Lord's apostles, and 
 most probably a man of similar position and attainments. — In 
 fact we are told elsewhere that he lived at " Cana of Galilee." 
 (John xxi. 1.) 
 
 Some think, because Nathanael lived at Cana, that he was the 
 same person as the apostle Simon the Canaanite, (Matt. x. 4 ; 
 Mark iii. 18.) 
 
 Some think, that he was Stephen the martyr, because Stephen 
 saw the hear 3ns opened in vision. (Acts vii. 56.) 
 
JOHN, CHAP. II. 
 
 87 
 
 The most probable opinion to my own mind is, that Nathanae! 
 was the apostle who is called elsewhere Bartholomew, and who, 
 hke others of the apostles, had two names. In favour of this 
 opinion there are three remarkable facts. The first is, that in 
 three lists of the twelve apostles out of four, the names of Philip 
 and Bartholomew are always found together. (Matt. x. 3; Mark 
 iii. 18 ; Luke vi. 14.) — The second is, that Nathanael is specially 
 mentioned after our Lord's ascension as a companion of Peter, 
 Thomas, James, John, and two other disciples. — The third is, 
 that St. John never once mentions the name of Bartholomew 
 in his Grospel. — The objection that Nathanael's name is never 
 mentioned by Matthew, Mark, or Luke, is of no weight. No one 
 of the three, it may be replied, tells us that Peter was called 
 Cephas. Only Matthew gives Jude, the brother of James, the 
 name of Lebbaeus. 
 
 The point happily is not one of any particular importance. I 
 only say that the conjectural probabihty that Nathanael was an 
 apostle, and was the same as Bartholomew, seems to me very 
 strong and well founded. 
 
 In leaving this chapter the observation of Aretius is worth 
 quoting. He remarks that the chapter is singularly rich in 
 names or epithets applied to the Lord Jesus Christ. He num- 
 bers up the following twenty-one. 1. The Word. 2. God. 3. 
 Life. 4. Light. 5. The true light. 6. The only begotten of 
 the Father. 7. Full of grace and truth. 8. Jesus Christ. 9. 
 The only begotten Son. 10. The Lord. 11. The Lamb of God. 
 12. Jesus. 13. A Man. 14. The Son of God. 15. Rabbi. 16. 
 Teacher. 17. Messiah. 18. Christ. 19. The Son of Joseph. 
 20. The King of Israel. 21. The Son of man. 
 
 JOHN IL 1.— 11. 
 
 1 And the third day there was a 
 marriage in Cana of Galilee ; and 
 the mother of Jesus was there : 
 
 2 And both Jesus was called, and 
 his disciples, to the marriage. 
 
 3 And when they wanted wine, 
 the mother of Jesus saith unto him, 
 They have no wine. 
 
 4 Jesus saith unto her, "Woman, 
 what have I to do with thee ? mine 
 hour is not yet come. 
 
 6 His mother saith unto the ser- 
 
 vants, Whatsoever he saith unto 
 you, do it. 
 
 6 And there were set there six 
 waterpots of stone, after the man- 
 ner of the purifying of the Jews, 
 containing two or three firkins 
 apiece. 
 
 7 Jesus saith unto them, Fill the 
 waterpots with water. And they 
 filled them up to the brim. 
 
 8 And he saith unto them, Draw 
 out now, and bear unto the gov- 
 
88 
 
 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 ernor of the feast. And they bare 
 it. 
 
 9 When the ruler of the 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, 
 
 10 And saith unto him, Every 
 
 man at the beginning doth set forth 
 good wine; and when men hava 
 well drunk, then that which is 
 worse : but thou hast kept the good 
 wine until now. 
 
 11 This beginning of miracles 
 did Jesus iu Cana of Galilee, and 
 manifested forth his glory ; and his 
 disciples beUeved on him. 
 
 These verses describe a miracle which should always 
 possess a special interest in the eyes of a true Christian. 
 It is the first, in order of time, of the many mighty 
 works which Jesus did, when He was upon earth. We 
 are distinctly told, " This beginning of miracles did Jesus 
 in Cana of Galilee." — Like every other miracle which St. 
 John was inspired to record, it is related with great 
 minuteness and particularity. And, like every other 
 miracle in St. John's Gospel, it is rich in spiritual les- 
 sons. 
 
 We learn, firstly, from these verses, how honourable in 
 the sight of Christ is the estate of matrimony. To be 
 present at a " marriage" was almost the first public act of 
 our Lord's earthly ministry. 
 
 Marriage is not a sacrament, as the Church of Rome 
 asserts. It is simply a state of life ordained by God for 
 man's benefit. But it is a state which ought never to be 
 spoken of with levity, or regarded with disrespect. The 
 Prayerbook service has well described it, as " an honoura- 
 ble estate, instituted of God in the time of man's inno- 
 cency, and signifying unto us the mystical union that is 
 betwixt Christ and his Church." Society is never in a 
 healthy condition, and true religion never flourishes in 
 that land where the marriage tie is lightly esteemed. 
 They who lightly esteem it have not the mind of Christ. 
 He who " beautified and adorned the estate of matrimony 
 by His presence and first miracle that He wrought in 
 Cana of Galilee," is One who is always of one mind. 
 
89 
 
 " Marriage," snys the Holy Ghost by St. Panl, " is hon 
 ourable in all." (Heb. xiii. 4.) 
 
 One thing, however, ought not to be forgotten. 
 Marriage is a step which so seriously affects the temporal 
 happiness and spiritual welfare of two immortal sonls, 
 that it ought never to be taken in hand " unadvisedly, 
 lightly, wantonly, and without due consideration." To 
 be truly happy, it should be undertaken "reverently, 
 discreetly, soberly, and in the fear of God." Christ's 
 blessing and presence are essential to a happy w^edding. 
 The marriage at which there is no place for Christ and 
 His disciples, is not one that can justly be expected to 
 prosper. 
 
 We learn, secondly, from these verses, that there are times 
 when it is lawful to be merry and rejoice. Our Lord 
 Himself sanctioned a wedding-feast by His own presence. 
 He did not refuse to be a guest at " a marriage in Cana 
 of Galilee." "A feast," it is written, "is made for 
 laughter, and wine maketh merry." (Eccles. x. 19.) 
 Our Lord, in the passage before us, countenances both 
 the feast and the use of wine. 
 
 True religion was never meant to make men melancholy. 
 On the contrary, it was intended to increase real joy and 
 happiness among men. The servant of Christ unquestion- 
 ably ought to have nothing to do with races, balls, theatres, 
 and such-like amusements, which tend to frivolity and dis- 
 sipation, if not to sin. But he has no right to hand over 
 innocent recreations and family gatherings to the devil and 
 the world. The Christian who withdraws entirely from 
 the society of his fellow-men, and walks the earth with a 
 face as melancholy as if he was always attending a funeral, 
 does injury to the cause of the Gospel. A cheerful, kindly 
 spirit is a great recommendation to a believer. It is a 
 positive nusfortune to Christianity when a Christian cannot 
 smUe. A merry heart, and a readiness to take part in all 
 
90 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 innocent mirth, are gifts of inestimable value. They go 
 far to soften prejudices, to take up stumbling-blocks out of 
 the way, and to make way for Christ and the Gospel. 
 
 The subject no doubt is a difficult and delicate one. On 
 no point of Christian practice is it so hard to hit the mean 
 between that which is lawful and that which is unlawful, 
 between that which is right and that which is wi'ong. It 
 is very hard indeed to be both merry and wise. High 
 spirits soon degenerate into levity. Acceptance of many 
 invitations to feasts soon leads to waste of time, and begets 
 leanness of soul. Frequent eating and drinking at other 
 men's tables, soon lowers a Christian's tone of rehgion. 
 Going often into company is a heavy strain on spirituality 
 of heart. Here, if anywhere, God's children have need to 
 be on their guard. Each must know his own strength and 
 natural temperament, and act accordingly. One believer 
 can go without risk where another cannot. Happy is he 
 who can use his Christian liberty without abusing it ! It 
 is possible to be sorely wounded in soul at marriage feasts 
 and the tables of friends. 
 
 One golden rule on the subject may be laid down, the 
 use of which will save us much trouble. Let us take care 
 that we always go to feasts in the spirit of our divine 
 Master, and that we never go where He would not have 
 gone. Like Him, let us endeavour to be always " about 
 our Father's business." (Luke ii. 49.) Like Him, let us 
 willingly promote joy and gladness, but let us strive that 
 it may be sinless joy, if not joy in the Lord. Let us en- 
 deavour to bring the salt of grace into every company, and 
 to drop the word in season in every ear we address. Much 
 good may be done in society by giving a healthy tone to 
 conversation. Let us never be ashamed to show our 
 colours, and to make men see whose we are and whom we 
 serve. "We may well say, ''Who is sufficient for these 
 things?" But if Christ went to a marriage feast in Cana 
 
JOHN, CHAP. II. 91 
 
 there is surely something that Christians can do on similar 
 occasions. Let them only remember that if they go where 
 their Master went, they must go in their Master's spirit. 
 
 We learn lastly, from these verses, the Ahnighty poioer 
 of our Lord Jesus Christ. "We are told of a miracle which 
 He wrought at the marriage feast, when the wine failed, 
 By a mere act of will He changed water into wine, and so 
 supplied the need of all the guests. 
 
 The manner in which the miracle was worked deserves 
 especial notice. We are not told of any outward visible 
 action which preceded or accompanied it. It is not said 
 that He touched the waterpots containing the water that 
 was made wine. It is not said that He commanded the 
 water to change its qualities, or that He prayed to His 
 Father in Heaven. He simply willed the change, and it 
 took place. We read of no prophet or apostle in the Bible 
 who ever worked a miracle after this fashion. He who 
 could do such a mighty work, in such a manner, was no- 
 thing less than very God. 
 
 It is a comfortable thought that the same almighty 
 power of will which our Lord here displayed is still exer- 
 cised on behalf of His believing people. They have no 
 need of His bodily presence to maintain their cause. 
 They have no reason to be cast down because they can- 
 not see Him with their eyes interceding for them, or touch 
 Him with their hands, that they may cling to Him for 
 safety. If He " wills " their salvation and the daily sup- 
 ply of all their spiritual need, they are as safe and well 
 provided for as if they saw Him standing by them. 
 Christ's will is as mighty and effectual as Christ's deed. 
 The will of Him who could say to the Father, " I will 
 that they whom thou hast given me be with me where I 
 am," is a will that has all power in heaven and earth, and 
 must prevail. (John xvii. 24.) 
 
 Happy are those who, like the disciples, believe on Him 
 
92 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 by whom this miracle was wrought. A greater marriage 
 feast than that of Cana will one day be held, when Christ 
 Himself will be the bridegroom and believers will be the 
 bride. A greater glory will one day be manifested, when 
 Jesus shall take to Himself His great power and reign. 
 Blessed will they be in that day who are called to the 
 narriage supper of the Lamb ! (Rev. xix. 9.) 
 
 Notes. .John H. 1 — 11. 
 
 1. — [The third day.} The question naturally arises, " What day 
 was this ? From what day was it the third ?" The most pro- 
 bable answer is, that it was the third day after the last event 
 described in the preceding chapter, the third day after Nathanael 
 was brought to Jesus and became a disciple. The meaning 
 therefore is, " The third day after the conversation between 
 Jesus and Nathanael." 
 
 [A marriage in Oana.] Let it be remembered, that we are 
 told elsewhere that Nathanael was an inhabitant of Cana. (John 
 xxi. 2.) This makes it far from improbable, that Nathanael, 
 after he became a disciple, invited our Lord to visit the place 
 where he lived. Cana is a place not mentioned in the Old 
 Testament. Robinson, in his Biblical Researches, says it was a 
 village about three hours' journey from Nazareth. 
 
 [The mother of Jesus was there.] We must suppose that the 
 Virgin Mary was in some way connected with the bride or 
 bridegroom, and was therefore present at the marriage and as- 
 sisting in the arrangements of the feast. Without some such 
 supposition it is difficult to understand her speaking to the ser- 
 vants, as she afterwards does. 
 
 The absence of Joseph's name, both here and in other places 
 where the mother of our Lord is mentioned in the Gospels and 
 Acts, has induced most commentators to think that Joseph was 
 dead when our Lord began His public ministry. Tlie point is 
 one of which we know nothing except by conjecture. It de- 
 serves notice, however, that the Jews of Capernaum speak of 
 Jesus as " the ?on of Joseph, whose fathei^ and mother we know^ 
 (John vi. 42 ) IP it had been profitable to us to know more 
 about Jo>eph, we should have been told more. The Roman 
 Catholic Church has already given him a superstitious reverence, 
 upon the authority of tradition, and withput the slightest war- 
 rant of Scripture. What would have not been said about Joseph 
 by the Romish Churo,h, if he had been more prominently men- 
 tioned in God's Word ? 
 
JOHN, CHAP. II. 93 
 
 Lighlfool points out that a comparison of Mark iii. 18, Mark 
 vi. 3, and John xix. 25, makes it exceedingly probable that the 
 Virgin Mary's sister, called elsewhere Mary, the wife of Clcophas 
 or Alfheus, and all her family, lived at Cana. He observes, that 
 in the list of our Lord's " brethren " or cousins we find the follow- 
 ing names, — James, Joses, Juda, and Simon. Of these he thinks 
 that James, Juda, and Simon were apostles. James tt e apostle 
 is expressly called " the brother of our Lord," and the son of 
 Alpheus, and Jude is expressly called brother of this James 
 (Gal. i. 19; Jude 1.) The remaining brother, Simon, he think 
 was the apostle who is called Simon the Canaanite. This, Light- 
 foot argues, is a proof that his father and mother lived at Cana ; 
 and hence he concludes that this marriage feast was in the house 
 of Alpheus. That Alpheus and Cleophas were th-e same person 
 is a general and well-founded opinion. 
 
 2. — [Jesus was called., .disciples.'] Our Lord was doubtless invited 
 as the Virgin Mary's son. His disciples were invited as His 
 friends and companions. We cannot, of course, suppose, at so 
 early a period of our Lord's ministry, that He was recognized as 
 a religious teacher, or those with Him as disciples of a new 
 faith. The disciples here spoken of must be the five mentioned 
 in the last chapter, viz., Andrew and his companion, (probably 
 John.) Simon Peter, Philip, and Nathanael. 
 
 {To the marriage^ We know nothing about the names of the 
 bride and bridegroom. There is a legend among Romish writers 
 that the bridegroom was John the apostle, and that though 
 married, John left wife and home at once, in order to become 
 Christ's disciple ! The whole story is utterly destitute of Scrip- 
 tural foundation, and a tissue of improbabilities. Baronius 
 conjectures that the bridegroom was Simon the Canaanite, but 
 witliout any proof worth mentioning. 
 
 Let it be noted, that the presence of Jesus, and His disciples, 
 and the Virgin Mary at a marriage, is a significant fact, which 
 stands out in strong contrast to the Patristic and Roman Catholic 
 doctrine, of the imperfection of the state of marriage compared 
 to that of celibacy. " Forbidding to marry " is a doctrine of 
 Antichrist, not of Christ. (1 Tim. iv. 3.) 
 
 The Roman Catholic argument, that Christ, by His presence, 
 made marriage a sacrament, is utterly worthless. Dyke remarks 
 that we might ns well call feasts and burials sacraments, because 
 Christ was pre-^ent at them. He says, " There is required a word 
 of institution to make a sacrair.ent. Let the Papists show any 
 such word here used. And if Christ did make marriaj,e a sacra- 
 ment, why do they call it a work of the flesh ? Are saciaments 
 works of the fle.sh ? " 
 
94 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 The suggestion of some modern writers, that our Lord's pre- 
 sence at a marriage feast condemns those Christians who decline 
 to go to such amusements as balls, and routs, and dancing-parties, 
 has no weight in it at all. The objects for which people meet 
 together at a marriage feast and at a ball are widely different. 
 The one is a mere irrehgious assembly for pleasure and recrea- 
 tion of a very questionable tendency, entailing late hours, and 
 ministering to worldliness, levity, and the love of display. The 
 other is a gathering of friends to witness the most important step 
 in life that two persons can take, and a gathering closely con- 
 nected with a religious ceremony. 
 
 3. — [ When they wanted ivine.'] The Greek words so rendered mean 
 literally, " Wine having failed." This circumstance probably 
 shows the poor and humble condition of those to whose marriage 
 Jesus was invited. His acquaintances and those of His mother 
 were not wealthy persons. 
 
 It throws light on this expression, and indeed on the whole 
 story, to remember that a marriage feast among the Jews was often 
 an affair of several days' duration, and an occasion when many 
 were invited. Consequently it entailed not only much expense, 
 but a considerable consumption of food and wine. Thus Sam- 
 son's marriage feast lasted seven days. (Judges xv. 10—18.) 
 Thus the marriage fea^t described in the par,.ble of the King's 
 Son, was a feast which large numbers were invited to attend. 
 (Matt. xxii. 2, &c.) This being the case, we may well understand 
 that in the feasts of those who were not wealthy the wine might 
 soon run short, without there having been any excess of drinking. 
 So it seems to have happened in the case before us. 
 
 [^TTie mother of Jesus.... saith.... no wine.] This little sentence 
 has given rise to various and strange interpretations. 
 
 Some have thought, as Bengel. that Mary suggested to our 
 Lord that it was time for Him and His disciples to depart and 
 leave the feast, in order to spare the feelings of the bride and 
 bridegr >om, and to avoid exposing their poverty. 
 
 Some have thought, as Calvin, that she wished our Lord to 
 occupy the minds of the guests by profitable discourse, and so 
 to take off their attention from the deficiency of wine. 
 
 By far the most reasonable and probable idea is, that Mary 
 conjectured that our Lord might in some way supply the de- 
 ficiency of wine. How it would be done she could not tell. 
 There is not the slightest ground for supposing that our Lord 
 had ever worked a miracle up to this time. But it wculd be 
 foolish to suppose that Mary did not remember well all the mi- 
 raculous I ireumstances of our Lord's birth, and all the words 
 
JOHN, CHAP. II. 95 
 
 spoken before by the angel Gabriel concerning Him. — "We cannot 
 doubt, that altho jgh our Lord had lived a quiet li'e at Nazareth for 
 thirty \ ears, and done no miracles, His motlier must have observed 
 in Him a per''ection of word and deed utterly unlike the behaviour 
 of common men. — We cannot doubt that she was aware of all 
 the events of the la?t few weeks, — our Lord's baptism by John, 
 John's public proclamation of JELim as the Messiah, and the 
 gatheiini^ around Jesr.s of a small knot of disciples. — Remem- 
 bering all these thing-, we surely need not wonder that Marv'a 
 expectations were greatly raised. She looJ<:ed for her Son speedily 
 doing some great mir:icle. She was in daily expectation that 
 He would prove Himself the Messiah by some mighty act. And 
 it was under these feelings that she turned to Him, saying, 
 " They have no wine." It is as though she said, — " Surely the 
 time is come for declaring thyself. Manifest thy power, as I 
 have long expected thee to do, by providing a supply of wine." 
 
 The argument which the Roman Catholics draw from this 
 expression in favour of the Virgin Mary's intercession in heaven 
 for sinners, and the consequent lawfulness of praying to her, is 
 utterly worthless, and most unhappy. For one thing, it does not 
 follow, because the petitions of living saints are heard upon earth, 
 that the petitions of dead saints in heaven. are effectual. For 
 another thing, it is an unfortunate fact, that this petition, the 
 only one that we ever find addressed to our Lord by the Virgin 
 Mary, brought from Him an immediate rebuke ! Men must be 
 in great straits for an argument when they can reason in this 
 way in defence of the invocation of saints ! 
 
 ^Melancthon, Chemnitius, and others, think that this want of 
 wine at the marriage feast is purposely mentioned in order to 
 remind married persons, or those who intend marriage, that 
 matrimony brings with it cares as well as comforts, and specially 
 cares from poverty. They that marry do well, and with Christ's 
 blessmg will have happiness. But they must not expect to 
 escape " trouble in the flesh " from the very day of marriage. 
 (1 Cor. vii. 28.) 
 
 i. — [Jesus saith, Woman, what, &c., <fec.] This remarkable verse 
 has naturally attracted great attention. In interpreting it, it is 
 very important to avoid the extremes into which some Protest- 
 ants and nearly all Roman Cathohc writers have fallen, in their 
 interpretations. 
 
 On the one side we must not lay too much stress on the ex- 
 pression " Woman." It is surely a mistake to suppose, as. Calvin 
 and (t'ners suggest, that it conveys any reproof, or is anywise 
 inconsistent with reverence and respect. The very same ex- 
 pression was used by our Lord when He addressed His mother 
 for the last time on the cross, and aflfectionatedy commended her 
 
96 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 to John's care. He said, " Woman, behold thy son." (John 
 xix. 26.) The Yirgm Mary was an erring woman, hke all other 
 believing women, but we must not lay more blame on her than 
 Scripture warrants. 
 
 On the other side, it is useless to deny that our Lord's words 
 were intended, as Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Euthymius say, 
 to be a rebuke to Mary. She erred here, perhaps from aflfection- 
 ate desire to bring honour to her Son, as she erred on other 
 occasions. The words before us were meant to remind her, that 
 she must henceforth leave our Lord to choose His own times and 
 modes of acting.- The season of subjection to her and Joseph 
 was over. The season of his public ministry had at length 
 begun. In carrjing on that ministry, she must not presume to 
 suggest to Him. The utter contrariety of this verse to the 
 teaching of the Roman Catholic Church about the Virgin Mary 
 is too palpable to be explained away. She was not without 
 error and sin, as Romish writers have dared to assert, and was 
 not meant to be prayed to and adored. If our Lord would not 
 allow His mother even to suggest to Him the working of a mira- 
 cle, we may well suppose that aU Roman Catholic prayers to the 
 Virgin Mary, and especially prayers entreating her to " command 
 her Son," are most offensive and blasphemous in His eyes. 
 
 The Greek expression, rendered "what have I to do Avith 
 thee," would be translated literally, "what to me and thee?" 
 It is an elliptical expression, of which the full meaning probably 
 is, "What is there in common to me and thee ? " " My thoughts," 
 as Bengel says, " are one thing, and thine another." — It is the 
 same phrase that is used in an interrogative form in Matt. viii. 
 29 ; Mark i. 24, v. 7 ; Luke viii 28 ; and in an imperative form in 
 Matt, xxvii. 19. 
 
 [Mine hour is not yet come.] The simplest and most reason- 
 able view of these words is to refer them to Christ's "hour" or 
 time for working a miracle. It is like the expression, " my time 
 is not yet full come." (John vii. 8.) Our Lord did not tell Mary 
 that He would not work a miracle. But He would have her 
 know that she roust not expect Him to do mighty works to 
 please His relatives after the flesh. He would only work a 
 miracle, upon this or any other occasion, when the fitting season 
 f3r it, the time appointed in God's counsel, had arrived. 
 
 There is a curious idea maintained by Augustine, Wordsworth, 
 and others, that our Lord here referred to the hour of His cruci- 
 fixion, and that He meant, " My hour is not yet come for recog 
 nizing thee and honouring thee publicly as my mother, but 1 
 shall do it one day on the cross." This however seems a very 
 far-fetched and improbable application of the words. 
 
97 
 
 L. — [His mother saUh.,.do it] Two tilings are very noteworthy in 
 this verse. One is the meekness v^^ith which the Yiigin Mary 
 submitted to the gentle rebuke which came from our Lord's 
 mouth, in the last verse. The other is the firm faith which she 
 still exhibited in our Lord's power to work a miracle in order to 
 supply the lack of wine, and in the probability of His working 
 it. 
 
 Dyke observes, " The direction which Mary gives to the ser 
 vants belongs to us all. We must perform simple obedience to 
 Christ in all things ; His sayings mu^t be our doings. No rea- 
 soning of the matter must there be, no inquiry, as into men's 
 commandments and speeches ; but this must suffice, ' Christ hath 
 said it.' This is the bhnd obedience which Jesuits yield to their 
 superiors, but it is the obedience that belongs to Christ. Many 
 will do something that Christ says, but not whatsoever He says." 
 
 It is not, perhaps going too far to say, that after observing 
 her Son's perfect life and perfect wisdom during tliirty years at 
 Nazareth, Mary spoke the words before us with special confidence, 
 and with a greater depth of meaning than appears on the sur- 
 face of the sentence. — "Whatsoever He says deserves attention. 
 Whatsoever He says, do it." — At any rate the verse contains a 
 deep practical lesson for the whole Church of Christ. Whatso- 
 ever Christ says, let us obey and do. 
 
 G. —[Six water-pots... .after the manner. ...Jews.] St. John mentions 
 these details in describing the miracle, with a special reference 
 to Gentile readers. He meant them to understand that there 
 was nothing remarkable in the circumstance that there were six 
 large water-pots of stone in the place where the feast was held. 
 The peculiar customs of the Jews about ceremonial washings 
 and purifyings, made it necessary to have a large supply of 
 water at hand. The words of St. Mark throw light on the verse 
 before us : — " The Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash 
 their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders," &c. 
 (Mark vii. 3, &c.) The presence of the six water-pots, therefore, 
 could not arise from coUusion or pre-arrangement. It was a 
 natural consequence of Jewish habits in our Lord's times. 
 
 [Two or three firlins apiece.] Many fooHsh and unprofitable 
 r^-niarks have been built on this expression, as to the very large 
 quantity of wine w^hich our Lord must have created when the 
 miracle we are considering was wrought. It might suffice to 
 reply that there is much uncertainty about th5 precise quantity 
 of liquid which the ancient measure, which we here render 
 " firkins," contained. But the best and safest answer is, that we 
 must not measure the demands of a Jewish marriage feast, which 
 perhaps lasted several days, and included a large number of 
 guests, by the feasts of our own times. 
 
 5 
 
98 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 7. — [J£sus saith....fll the water-pots, dc] The remark is frequently 
 made Dy commentators on this verse, \vith much propriety, that 
 these simple words describe the duty of all who woik for Christ, 
 and especially of ministers and teachers. They aie to hear 
 Christ's voice, and do as He tells them, and then leave the result 
 to Him. Duties are ours. Events are God's. It is ours to fill 
 the water-pots. It is Christ's to make the water wine. 
 
 [Up to the hrim.] This circumstance is no doubt mentioned 
 in order to show that there was no room left for trick, jugglery, 
 or imposture. What was put into the water-pots was water, and 
 only water, and they were so filled that nothing could be infused, 
 or mingled with their contents. 
 
 8. — [And he saith...draw out now.] It was at this moment, no 
 doubt, that the miracle took place. By an act of will our Lord 
 changed the contents of the water-pots. That which was poured 
 in was water. That which was drawn out was wine. To Him 
 who created the vine and made it bear grapes at the first, the 
 change was perfectly easy. He who could create matter out of 
 nothing, could much more easily change one kind of matter into 
 another. 
 
 [The governor of the feast.] Thi& person appears to have been 
 one who presided at large entertainments like that before us, 
 and superintended all the proceedings. The Greek word so 
 rendered, is precisely the same as that translated " ruler of the 
 feast," in the following verse. The presence of such a person 
 at feasts was a well-known custom among the Greeks and 
 Eomans. 
 
 9. — [Tasted... wine... Ten ew not whence it was.] The testimony of the 
 ruler of the feast is specially adduced, in order to show the 
 reality of the miracle. He knew nothing of what had been 
 done to the water-pots. He had not seen the water poured in 
 by our Lord's command. There was no collusion or conspiracy 
 between him and the servants, much less between him and our 
 Lord. Hence the value of his testimony. He not only testifies 
 that the liquid which a few minutes before was water was now 
 wine, but that it was also wine of more than common goodness 
 and strength, — not wine mixed with water, but pure, good 
 wine. 
 
 Let the word " tasted " be carefully noticed in this place. It 
 supplies a strong incidental argument against the Romish doctrine 
 of transubsfantiation. The occasion before us is the only known 
 occasion on which our Lord changed one liquid into another. 
 When He did so change it, the reality of the change was 
 at once proved by the "taste." Why is it then that in ihe 
 oretended change of the sacramental wine in the Lord's Supper 
 
JOHN, CHAP. ir. 99 
 
 into Christ's blood the change cannot be detected by the senses? 
 Why does the wine after consecration tasle Hke wine, jus' as it 
 did before? — These are questions which the Roman Caihohcs 
 rannot satisfactorily answer. The pretended change of the bread 
 and wine in the Lord's Supper is a complete delusion. It is 
 contradicted by the senses of every communicant. The bread 
 after consecration is still bread, and the wine is still wine. That 
 which contradicts our senses we are nowhere required in God's 
 Word to beHeve. 
 
 10, — {Every man at the heginning, d;c.] The words in this sentence 
 must not be pressed too closely, in order to bring out of them a 
 spiritual meaning. The ruler of the feast makes a general remark 
 about the way in which banquets were usually managed. The 
 ordinary custom was to bring the best wine first, and the inferior 
 wine last. But the wine before him, drawn from the water-pots, 
 was so singularly good, that the custom of this day seemed 
 reversed. The verse is a strong incidental testimony to the 
 reality and greatness of our Lord's miracle. Not only did He 
 change water into wine, but into wine so singularly good as to 
 excite remark and attention. 
 
 [ When men have weU drunk.] Foohsh remarks have sometimes 
 been made on this expression, as if our Lord had countenanced 
 excessive drinking on this occasion. For one thing, it may be 
 remarked that the Greek word rendered " have well drunk," does 
 not necessarily imply intoxication. It may be justly interpieted, 
 as Schleusner and Parkhurst observe, "have drunk sufficiently, 
 or drunk freely." — Men who have had enough, are indifferent as 
 to the quality of the wine set before them. For another thing, 
 we must remember that the ruler of the feast was only making 
 a general remark about men's ordinary customs in supplying 
 wine to their guests. There is nothing whatever to show that 
 he was alluding to the guests actually before him. 
 
 [Thou hast kept the good wine until noiv.] A good practical 
 remark has often been raised from these words of the ruler of 
 the feast. The world gives its best things, like the best wine, 
 first, and its worst things last. The longer we serve the w^orld, 
 the more disappointing, unsatisfactory, and unsavoury will its 
 gifts prove, Christ, on the other hand, gives His servimts their 
 best things last. They have first the cross, the race, and the 
 battle, and then the rest, the glory, and the crown. Specially 
 will it be found true at his second advent. Then will believers 
 say emphatically, " Thou hast kept the good wine until now." 
 These are pious and useful thoughts. But it may be doubted 
 whether they are more than accommodations. 
 
 This is perhaps the proper place to remark, that it seems 
 utterly impossible, on any fair and honest interpretation, to re- 
 
100 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 concile the passage before us with the leading principles of whs* 
 is commonly called " Teetotalism," If our Lord Jesus Christ 
 actually worked a miracle in order to supply wine at a marriage 
 feast, ic seems to me impossible, by any ingenuity, to prove that 
 drinking wine is sinful. Temperance in all things is one of the 
 fruits of the Spirit. An intemperate man is an unconverted 
 man. Total abstinence from fermented liquors is in many cases 
 most useful and desirable. But to say, as many do say, that to 
 drink any fermented liquor at all is '" a sin," is taking up ground 
 that cannot be maintained in the face of the passage before us, 
 without wresting the plain meaning of Scripture, and charging 
 Christ with abetting sin. 
 
 ) . — [TJiis heginning of miracles, t&c] The plain meaning of this 
 sentence seems to be that this was the first miracle which cur 
 Lord Jesus Christ ever worked. The miracles which some have 
 reported that He worked in His infancy and childhood, are 
 destitute of the slightest foundation in Scripture, and utterly 
 unworthy of credit. Those who wish to see their absurdity will 
 find specimens of them in the preliminary Essay to Trench's 
 Notes on Miracles. 
 
 Lightfoot suggests the five following reasons why the miracle 
 now before us was purposely the first that Christ worked. 1. As 
 marriage was the first institution ordained by God, so at a 
 marriage was Christ's first miracle. 2. As Christ had showed 
 Himself miraculous a little while ago by a fast, so He doth now 
 by an extraordinary provision at a fea'>t. When He would not 
 make stones bread, it was not because He could not. 3. He 
 would not make stones into bread to satisfy Satan, but He was 
 willing to turn water into wine to show forth His own glory. 
 4. The first miracle wrought in the world by man was transfor- 
 mation, (Exod. vii. 9,) and the first miracle wrought by the Son 
 of Man was of the same nature. 5. The first time you hear of 
 John the Baptist, you hear of his strict diet, and so the first time 
 you hear of Christ in His public ministry, you hear of Him at a 
 marriage feast. 
 
 \^}fanifested forth his glory.] I am unable to see that those 
 words refer to the expression used in the first chapter, " We be- 
 held his glory." (Jonn i. 14.) I believe the meaniag to be that 
 " by this miracle Jesus now for the first time opened or revealed 
 His glorious and divine power, and His commission to be the 
 Messiah." After thirty years' seclusion at Nazxreth, He now 
 for the first time hfted up the veil which He h id thrown over 
 His divinity in becoming flesh, and revealed so nething of His 
 almighty power and Grodhead. 
 
 [His disciples believed on him.] These words cannot of cc urse 
 rcican that Arndew, and John, and Peter, and Philip, and Na- 
 
JOHN, CHAP. II. 101 
 
 thanael now believed on Jesus for the first time. The probable 
 meaning is, that from this time forth they believed more confi- 
 dently, more implicitly, and more unhesitatingly. From this time 
 they felt thorougly convinced, in spite of much remaining igno- 
 rance, that He whom they were following was the Messiah. 
 
 I cannot close the note or this wonderful miracle without 
 saying something about the allegorical and typical meanings 
 assigned to it by the fathers and many other commentators. 
 Many see in the miracle an allegorical history of the introduction 
 of the Grospel into the world. Like the marriage feast, the 
 Gospel was an occasion of joy. As at the marriage feast, the 
 personal presence of Jesus was the great feature of the Gospel. 
 The times of the Jewish dispensation were times of deficiency 
 and dim light. The coming of Christ supplied all that was 
 lacking. Revealed religion before Christ was like water. Christ 
 coming into the world turned the water of the old dispensation 
 into wine. The good wine was reserved until the time of Christ. 
 The first miracle wrought by Moses was turning water into 
 blood. The first wrought by Christ was turning water into wine. 
 
 These are undoubtedly pious thoughts, and full of truth. I 
 should be sor y to speak harshly of them, or to pronounce de- 
 cidedly that they may not be legitimately deduced from the 
 miracle. I only venture the remark, that it is far wiser to 
 abstain from allegorical interpretations as a general rule, and 
 to be content with the plain meaning which appears on the sur- 
 face of Scripture. Once begin allegorizing Scripture, and you 
 never know where you are to stop. You may prove anything, 
 and find anything in the Bible upon the allegorical system, and 
 at last throw open the floodgate to a torrent of wild fanaticism. 
 
 The allegorical lessons drawn from this miracle by Augustine, 
 Bernard, and Alcuin, are striking examples of the extremes into 
 M'^hich allegory may run. When such a man as Augustine, for 
 instance, tells us that the two or three firkins mean the two 
 races of men, Jews and Greeks, or the three sons of Noah, — or 
 when he says that the six water-pots in the miracle before us 
 denote six successive prophetical periods in the days between 
 Adam and Christ, one cannot but feel that there is something 
 wrong. These are his words, "The six water-pots, containing 
 two or three firkins apiece, are six ages, containing the prophecy 
 belonging to all nations, whether as referred to two kinds of 
 men, Jews and Gentiles, as the apostle often says, or to three, 
 on account of the three sons of Noah." The system of inter- 
 preting Scripture which can lead a good man into such assertions 
 as this, must surely be a dangerous two-edged weapon, and 
 likely to do more harm than good. 
 
 That all our Lord's miracles were deeply significant, I do not 
 
102 
 
 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 deny. Tnat all were intended to convey deep spiritual lessons, 
 beside supplying proofs of His divinity, I make no question. 
 All I maintain is that they require reverent and delicate Landling, 
 and that to rush hastily into allegorical interpretations of them, 
 and invest every minute portion of them with a figurative mean- 
 ing, is an unwise mode of handling Scripture, and eminently 
 calculated to bring the Bible into contempt. 
 
 Hardly any commentator has drawn more useful practical 
 lessons Irom this miracle than Melancthon. Those who think 
 lightly of Protestant divinity would do well to compare his com- 
 mentary on the whole passage with that of Augustine. 
 
 JOHN n. 12—25, 
 
 12 After this he went down to 
 Capernaum, he, and his mother, and 
 his brethren, and his disciples : and 
 they continued there not many days. 
 
 13 And the Jews' Passover was 
 at hand, and Jesus went up to Je- 
 rusalem. 
 
 14 And found in the temple those 
 that sold oxen and sheep and doves, 
 and the changers of money sitting : 
 
 15 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 the changers' money, and over- 
 threw the tables ; 
 
 1 6 And said unto them that sold 
 doves. Take these things hence; 
 make not my Father's house an 
 house of merchandise. 
 
 11 And his disciples remembered 
 that it was written. The zeal of 
 thine house hath eaten me up. 
 
 18 Then answered the Jews and 
 iaid :mtc him, "What sign shewest 
 thoi. unto us, seeing that thou do- 
 est these things ? I 
 
 The second miracle which our Lord is recorded to have 
 wrought demands our attention in these verses. Like the 
 fii'st miracle at Cana, it is eminently typical and significant 
 
 19 Jesus answered and said unto 
 them, Destroy this temple, and in 
 three days I will raise it up. 
 
 20 Then said the Jews, Forty 
 and six years was this temple in 
 building, and wilt thou rear it up 
 in three days? 
 
 21 But he spake of the temple 
 of his body. 
 
 22 When therefore he was risen 
 from the dead, his disciples remem- 
 bered that he had said this unto 
 them ; and they believed the Scrip- 
 ture, and the word which Jesus had 
 said. 
 
 23 Now when he was in Jerusa- 
 lem, at the Passover, in the feast 
 day, many believed in his name, 
 when they saw the miracles which 
 he did. 
 
 24 But Jesus did not commit 
 himself unto them, because he 
 knew all men, 
 
 25 And needed not that any 
 should testify of man : for he knev? 
 what was in man. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. II. 103 
 
 ot things yet to come. To attend a marriage feast, and 
 cleanse the temple from profanation were among the first 
 acts of our Lord's ministry at His first coming. To purify 
 the whole visible Church, an4 hold a marriage supper, will 
 be amongst His first acts, when He comes again. 
 
 We see, for one thing, in this passage, liow much Christ 
 disapproves all irreverent behaviour in the house of God. 
 
 We are told that He drove out of the temple those 
 whom He found selling oxen and sheep and doves within 
 its walls, — that He poured out the changers' money and 
 overthrew their tables, — and that He said to them that 
 sold doves, " take these things hence, make not my 
 Father's house an house of merchandise." On no occasion 
 in our Lord's earthly ministry do we find Him acting so 
 energetically, and exhibiting such righteous indignation, 
 as on the occasion now before us. Nothing seems to have 
 called from Him such a marked display of holy wrath as 
 the gross irreverence which the priests permitted in the 
 temple, notwithstanding all their boasted zeal for God's 
 law. Twice, it will be remembered. He discovered the 
 same profanation of His Father's house going on, within 
 three years, once at the beginning of His ministry and 
 once at the end. Twice we see Him expressing his dis- 
 pleasure in the strongest terms. " The thing is doubled '* 
 in order to impress a lesson more strongly on our minds. 
 
 The passage is one that ought to raise deep searchings 
 of heart in many quarters. Are there none who profess 
 and call themselves Christians, behaving every Sunday 
 just as badly as these Jews ? Are there none who secretly 
 bring into the house of God their money, their lands, their 
 houses,- their cattle, and a whole train of worldly affairs? 
 Are there none who bring their bodies only into the place 
 of worship, and allow their hearts to wander into the 
 ends of the earth? Are there none who are "almost in 
 all evil, in the midst of the congregation?" (Prov. v. 14.) 
 
104 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 These are serious questions ! Multitudes, it may be feared, 
 could not give them a satisfactory answer. Christian 
 churclies and chapels, no doubt, are very unlike the Jew- 
 ish temjile. They are not built after a divine pattern. 
 They have no altars or holy places. Their furniture has 
 no typical meaning. But they are places where God's 
 word is read, and where Christ is specially present. The 
 man who professes to worship in them should surely 
 behave with reverence and respect. The man who brings 
 his worldly matters with him when he professes to wor- 
 ship, is doing that which is evidently most offensive to 
 Christ. The words which Solomon wrote by the Holy 
 Ghost are applicable to all times, " Keep thy foot when 
 thou goest to the house of God." (Eccles. v. 1.) 
 
 We see, for another thing, in this passage, how men may 
 remember words of religious truth long after they are spok- 
 en^ and may one day see a meaning in them which at first 
 they did not see. 
 
 We are told that our Lord said to the Jews, " Destroy 
 this temple and in three days I will raise it up." St. John 
 informs us distinctly that " He spake of the temple of His 
 body," that he referred to His own resurrection. Yet 
 the meaning of the sentence was not understood by our 
 Lord's disciples at the time that it was spoken. It was 
 not till '' He was risen from the dead," three years after 
 the events here described, that the full significance of the 
 sentence flashed on their hearts. For three years it was a 
 dark and useless saying to them. For three years it lay 
 sleeping in their minds, like a seed in a tomb, and bore no 
 fruit. But at the end . of that time the darkness passed 
 away. Tliey saw the application of their Master's words, 
 and as they saw it were confirmed in their faith. "They 
 remembered that He had said this," and as they remem- 
 bered " they believed." 
 
 It is a comfortable and cheering thought, that the same 
 
JOHN", CHAP. II. 105 
 
 kind of thing tliat happened to the disciples is often going 
 on at the present day. The sermons that are preached to 
 apparently heedless ears in churches, are not all lost and 
 thrc Tvn away. The instruction that is given in schools 
 and pastoral visits, is not all wasted and forgotten. The 
 texts that are taught by parents to children are not all 
 taught in vain. There is often a resurrection of sermons, 
 and texts, and instruction, after an interval of many years. 
 The good seed sometimes springs up after he that sowed 
 it has been long dead and gone. Let preachers go on 
 preaching, and teachers go on teaching, and parents go on 
 training up children in the way they should go. Let them 
 sow the good seed of Bible truth in faith and patience. 
 Their labour is not in vain in the Lord. Their words are 
 remembered far more than they think, and will yet spring 
 up "after many days." (1 Cor. xv. 58 ; Eccles. xi. 1.) 
 
 "We see, lastly, in this passage, how perfect is our Lord 
 Jesus Ghrisfs knowledge of the human heart. 
 
 We are told that when our Lord was at Jerusalem, the 
 first time, He "did not commit Himself" to those who 
 professed belief in Him. He knew that they were not to 
 be depended on. They were astonished at the miracles 
 which they saw Him work. They were even intellectually 
 convinced that He was the Messiah, whom they had long 
 expected. But they were not "disciples indeed." (John 
 viii. 31.) They were not converted, and true believers. 
 Their hearts were not right in the sight of God, though 
 their feelings were excited. Their inward man was not 
 renewed, whatever they might profess with their lips. Our 
 Lord knew that nearly all of them were stony-ground hear- 
 ers. (Luke viii. 13.) As soon as tribulation or persecu- 
 tion arose because of the word, their so-called faith would 
 probably wither away and come to an end. All this our 
 Lord saw clearly, if others around Him did not. Andrew, 
 and Peter, and John, and Philip, and Nathanael, perhaps 
 
 5* 
 
106 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 wondered that their Master did not receive these seeming 
 believers with open arms. But they could only judge 
 things by the outward appearance. Their Master could 
 read hearts. " He knew what was in man." 
 
 The truth now before us, is one which ought to make 
 hypocrites and false professors tremble. They may de- 
 ceive men, but they cannot deceive Christ. They may 
 wear a cloak of religion, and appear, like whited sepul- 
 chres, beautiful in the eyes of men. But the eyes of 
 Christ see their inward rottenness, and the judgment of 
 Christ will surely overtake them, except they repent. 
 Christ is already reading their hearts, and as He reads He 
 is displeased. They are known in heaven, if they are not 
 known on earth, and they will be known at length to their 
 shame, before assembled worlds, if they die unchanged. 
 It is written, " I know thy works, that thou hast a name 
 that thou livest, and art dead." (Rev. iii. 1.) 
 
 But the truth before us has two sides, like the pillar of 
 cloud and fire at the Red sea. (Exod. xiv. 20.) If it looks 
 darkly on hypocrites, it looks brightly on true believers. 
 If it threatens wrath to false professors, it speaks peace to 
 all who love the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity. A real 
 Christian may be weak, but he is true. One thing, at any 
 rate, the servant of Christ can say, when cast down by a 
 sense of his own infirmity, or pained by the slander of a 
 lying world. He can say, " Lord, I am a poor sinner, but 
 I am in earnest, I am true. Thou knowest all things : thou 
 knowest that I love thee. Thou knowest all hearts, and 
 thou knowest that, weak as my heart is, it is a heart that 
 cleaves to thee." The false Christian shrinks from the eye 
 of an all-seeing Saviour. The true Christian desires his 
 Lord's eye to be on him morning, noon, and night. Ho 
 has notliing to hide. 
 
JOHN-, CHAP. II. 107 
 
 Notes. John II. 12 — 25. 
 
 J2. — [Re went down to Capernaum.] The strict accuracy of John'a 
 writing is note-worthy here. Cana was a village in the hill 
 country. Capernaum was a town on the shore of the lake of 
 Galilee, at a very much lower level than Cana. It is therefore 
 said that Jesus " went downy 
 
 Capernaum appears to have been our Lord's principal residence 
 in Galilee during his earthly ministry. " Leaving Nazareth, he 
 dwelt in Capernaum." (Matt. iv. 13.) At no place does He seem 
 to have worked so many miracles ; and on no place does He de- 
 nounce so severe a judgment for its impenitence and neglect of 
 privileges : " Thou Capernaum which art exalted to heaven shalt 
 be cast down to hell." (Matt. xi. 23.) It is a striking fact that 
 though Capernaum was a wealthy and important place in our 
 Lord's time, it has so entirely passed away and been " cast down," 
 that even its situation has never been clearly ascertained. 
 
 [His mother.] Here again we see no mention of Joseph. 
 Whether the Virgin Mary was a constant companion of our Lord 
 throughout His earthly ministry, may be doubted. We see her 
 here. We see her again at the crucifixion. But we see her in 
 another place " standing without and desiring to speak with 
 him " when He was talking to the people, and giving occasion to 
 the solemn saying, " Who is my mother ?" (Matt. xii. 46.) In- 
 deed there is no proof that Mary ever saw more clearly than the 
 rest of our Lord's disciples the whole purpose of Christ's advent, 
 or was at all more prepared than the rest for His crucifixion and 
 sufferings. 
 
 [His brethren.] There is no good ground for supposing that 
 these were our Lord's brethren according to the flesh, and that 
 Mary ever had any other son after our Lord's miraculous birth. — 
 For one thing, it is well known to every careful reader, that the 
 word "brethren" is apphed in the Bible to many relatives be- 
 sides those whom we call " brethren." Abraham says to Lot, 
 " We be brethren," (Gen. xiii, 8,) though Lot was his nephew. 
 Mishael and Elzaphan were called the " brethren " of Nadab and 
 Abihu, though they were only cousins. (Lev. x. 4.) — Jacob said 
 " to his brethren " gather stones (Gen. xxxi. 46) ; yet they were 
 his sons and servants. — For another thing, it is quite possible 
 that Joseph might have had children by a former marriage, be- 
 fore he was espoused to the Virgin Mary ; and these children, we 
 can well understand, wou'd be called our Lord's " brethren." — In 
 the last place, we know that the Apostle James was called oui 
 '' Lord's brother," (Gal. i. 19,) and yet we are distinctly told that 
 he was the son of Alpheus or Cleophas, the husband of the Vir- 
 gin Mary's sister. It is therefore most probable that " brethren" 
 
108 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 in the verse before us means " cousins," some of whom believed 
 on our Lord, though others did not. (John vii. 5.) 
 
 Tj is an interesting fact, that two at least of our Lord's apostlea 
 were His kinsmen according to the flesh, viz., James and Jude, 
 the sons of Alpheus. To them w^e may probably add Simon, on 
 the strength of Mark vi. 3, and perhaps Matthew also, on the 
 strength of Mark ii. 14 and Matthew ix. 9. 
 
 [And his disciples.'] This expression, being used after the 
 words " His brethren," may raise a doubt whether any of our 
 Lord's relatives as yet believed on Him, except the Virgin Mary. 
 It is possible that they only followed Him now out of curiosity, 
 in consequence of the miracle he had just wrought. 
 
 13. — [The Jews^ passover...at hand.] This expression is another 
 proof that St. John wrote his Gospel for Gentile believers rather 
 than for Jews. 
 
 Our Lord's regular attendance on the feasts and ordinances of 
 the law of Moses, deserves notice. So lorig as the dispensation 
 of the Old Testament lasted, He gave it all due honour, how- 
 ever unworthy the hands which administered it. The unvvor- 
 thiness of ministers wiU not justify us in neglecting God's ordi- 
 nances. 
 
 The exact number of Passovers which our Lord kept, and con- 
 sequently the exact length of His ministry from His baptism to 
 His crucifixion, are points on which there is much difference of 
 opinion. For myself I can see no better view than the old one, 
 that our Lord's ministiy lasted three years. It evidently began 
 shortly before a Passovei-, and ended with a Passover. But 
 whether it included only three Passovers, and in that case lasted 
 between two and three years, — or four Passovers, and in that 
 case lasted between three and four years, — I think we have no 
 materials for deciding positively. If I must venture an opinion, 
 I think it most likely that our Lord only kept three Passovers. — 
 But it is an open question, and one happily not of deep moment. 
 — Three Passovers are distinctly named by John, viz., the one 
 before us, the one in the sixth chapter, (John vi. 3.,) and the one 
 at which our Lord was crucified. If the ''feast" mentioned in 
 the fifth chapter (John v. 1,) was the Passover, our Lord kept 
 four Passovers. But this last point cannot be settled. 
 
 Sir Isaac Newton thought that our Lord kept no less than five 
 Passovers. Some few writers have maintained that He kept 
 only two. Those who wish to see the subject discussed will ^nd 
 it in Doddridge's notes on this place. 
 
 [Jesus went up to Jerusalem.] Let it be noted, that th's jour- 
 ney, and all the circumstances which attended this visit to Jeru- 
 
JOHN, CHAP. II. 109 
 
 salem, are only related by St. John. For some wise reason the 
 other three G-ospel writers were inspired to leave out this part 
 of our Lord's history. 
 
 H. — [Found in the temple those that sold, <&c.] The presence of 
 oxen, sheep, doves, and money-changers, within the temple 
 courts, is easily accounted for. The animals were intended to 
 supply the wants of Jews who came to the Passover and other 
 feasts, from distant places, and required sacrifices. For them 
 the dealers in oxen, sheep, and doves, were ready, within a few 
 yards of the altar. The changers of money came naturally 
 enough where buying and selling went on, to meet the conve- 
 nience of Jews who had nothing but foreign money, which they 
 wished to exchange for the current coin of Jerusalem. The 
 tendency of the whole custom was evidently most profane. It 
 was no doubt connived at by the priests from covetous motives. 
 They were either connected with those who sold animals and 
 changed money, and shared in their profits ; or else they re- 
 ceived a rent for the privilege of carrying on business within the 
 sacred walls. No doubt they would have pleaded that all was 
 done with a good intention ! Their end was to provide facilities 
 for worshipping Grod ! But good intentions cannot sanctify un- 
 scriptural actions. As Dyke says on the passage, ''No pretence 
 of good ends can justify that which is forbidden by G-od." 
 
 When we are told that our Lord found all this going on '* in 
 the temple," we must of course understand that it means " in 
 the courtyards surrounding the temple, — within the precincts of 
 the temple." But these courtyards, we must remember, were 
 regarded as part of the temple, and therefore holy ground. 
 
 I am inclined to see in this visit of our Lord to the temple at 
 His first appearance in Jerusalem after beginning His ministry, a 
 partial though very imperfect fulfilment of Malachi's prophecy : 
 " The Lord whom ye seek shaU suddenly come to his temple." 
 (Mai. iii. 1.) While the Jewish nation was expecting the ap- 
 pearance of a conquering Messiah with power and great glory, 
 the true Messiah suddenly appeared in the temple, and declared 
 His presence, not by exhibiting temporal power, but b}^ insisting 
 on greater purity in the temple worship, as the first thing which 
 the nation needed. 
 
 That a fuller and more complete accomplishment of Malachi's 
 words remains yet to come, I feel no doubt. But like many Old 
 Testament prophecies about Messiah, the words were purposely 
 intended to have a double fulfilment, — a partial one at Messiah's 
 first coming to suffer, a complete one at Messiah's second coming 
 to reign. 
 
 The great majority of the best comment ators hold that our 
 Lord cast out the buyers and sellers from the temple twice, once 
 
110 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 at the beginning of His ministry and once at the end. — -It ia 
 fair to say that Bishop Pearce and a few other writers think that 
 it only happened once, — at the end of His ministry, just before 
 His crucifixion. Bat the arguments in favor of this view do 
 not appear to me at all weighty or satisfactory. 
 
 15. — [Made a scourge of small cords.] The Greek word translated 
 " small cords," means literally a " cord made of rushes," Some 
 have thought that these rushes were used as Htter for the sheep 
 and oxen. Others have thought that such small cords as these 
 might very hkely have been lying about, after having been 
 used for tying up the oxen. Whether the scourge was applied 
 to those persons who brought the animals into the temple, as a 
 sort of chastisement, as some old painters have represented the 
 scene, we do not know. The more probable view seems to be, 
 that the scourge was simply meant to assist our Lord in speedily 
 ejecting the sheep and oxen. 
 
 The whole transaction is a remarkable one, as exhibiting our 
 Lord using more physical exertion, and energetic bodily action, 
 than we see Him using at any other period of His ministry. A 
 word, a touch, or the reaching forth of a hand, are the ordinary 
 limits of His actions. Here we see Him doing no less than 
 four things : — (1) Making the scourge ; — (2) Driving out the 
 animals ; — (3) Pouring out on the ground the changers' money ; 
 — (4) Overthrowing the tables. On no occasion do we find Him 
 showing such strong outward marks of indignation, as at the 
 sight of the profanation of the temple. Remembering that the 
 whole transaction is a striking type of what Christ will do to 
 His visible church at His second coming, we may get some idea 
 of the deep meaning of that remarkable expression, " The wrath 
 of the Lamb." (Rev. vi. 16.) 
 
 A remark of Dyke on our Lord's conduct in this place, is 
 worth noticing. " This act of Christ is not to be drawn into 
 imitation, because He did it as Lord of the temple by virtue of 
 His Sonship. Therefore the Papists grossly abuse this place 
 that hence gather the power of the Pope to punish offenders 
 even with corporal punishments, or to deprive princes of their 
 kingdoms. As for ministers, the only whip they may use is their 
 tongue, in powerful preaching against abuses. — As for private 
 persons, God hath not tied their tongues, though He hath their 
 hands. As occasion is ofiered, they may show their detestation 
 and dislike of corruption." 
 
 10. — [Said... .sold doves.. ..take these things hence.] The distinction 
 between our Lord's mode of dealing with each of the obiects of 
 His displeasure deserves notice. The oxen and sheep He drove 
 out. There was no danger of their beirg lost by such treatment. 
 — The money He th7'ew on the ground. It might be soon picked 
 
Ill 
 
 tip and carried away. — The doves He simply ordered to be talcen 
 away. Had He done more, they might have flown away, and 
 been completely lost to their owners. — It would have been well 
 for the church, if all church reformers had blended like wisdom 
 with a like zeal in their proceeding?. In the present instance all 
 were rebuked and all instructed. But no one was really injured, 
 and nothing was lost. 
 
 [i/y Father's house.'] This expression is note-worthy. Whether 
 the Jews observed it, in the hurry and confusion of the whole 
 transaction, may be questioned. It was evidently an assertion by 
 our Lord of His divine Sonship, and consequently of his right to 
 vindicate the purity of His Father's place of worsliip. On another 
 occasion when our Lord called God His Father, the Jews at 
 once said that He " made himself equal with God." (John v. 18.) 
 Some have thought that the expression is parallel to that used 
 in the description of Christ among the doctors, (Luke ii. 49.) and 
 that the words used there, * I must be about my Father's business," 
 would have been better rendered, " I must be in my Father's 
 house." 
 
 The fact that the profane custom which our Lord here re- 
 proved was resumed by the Jews, and that two or three years 
 afterward our Lord found the same thing going on again in 
 the temple, and again cast out the buyers and sellers, ought not 
 to be overlooked. It is a striking proof of the desperate wicked- 
 ness and fallen condition of the priests and rulers of the temple. 
 They were deaf to all counsel and reproof, and given over to 
 a reprobate mind. — The difference between our Lord's language 
 at the second visit and that used at the first, ought also to be 
 noticed. At the first visit He only says, " Make not my Father's 
 house a house of merchandise," a place of buying and selling. 
 At the second visit He says, " Ye have made it a den of thieves." 
 (Matt. xxi. 13.) The more wicked and hardened men are, the 
 louder must be our protest, and the sharper our rebuke. 
 
 [A house of merchandise.] Musculus remarks on this ex- 
 pression, that if the sale of animals for sacrifices called forth 
 Christ's displeasure, much more must He be displeased at what 
 goes on continually in Roman Cathohc Churches, The sale of 
 masses, indulgences, &c., must be far more ofifensive to Christ 
 than the sale of oxen and sheep. 
 
 The complete success of our Lord on this occasion, and the ab- 
 sence of the slightest opposition on the part of the Jews, deserve 
 notice. It is a fact that induced some of the Fathers to call this 
 the greatest miracle Christ ever worked. There are however 
 three things to be remembered in considering this matter. For 
 one thing, the conscience of the Jews was on our Lord's side. 
 They knew that lie was right and they were wrong. For 
 
112 EXPOSITOKY IHOUGHTS. 
 
 another thing, as a nation familiar with the history of the Old 
 Testament Prophets, they ^vould not be surprised at an indi- 
 vidual apparently under a divine impulse suddenly doing what 
 our Lord did. — Above all there can be little doubt that a divine 
 influence was brought to bear on all present, as it was when out 
 Lord rode into Jerusalem on an ass, and when He caused Hia 
 enemies in the garden to " go backward and fall to the ground," 
 (Malt. xxi. 9, 10 ; John xviii. 6.) Here, as on other occasions, our 
 Lord showed His disciples that He had complete power over all 
 wills and minds, when He thought fit to exercise it; and that 
 when He was rejected and disobeyed by the Jews, it was not 
 because He had no power to compel obedience. They had no 
 power against Him except when He permitted. 
 
 The allegorical meanings assigned to the sheep, oxen, and 
 doves, by Augustine, Origen, and Bede, are too absurd to be 
 quoted. They may be seen in the Catena of Aquinas. Origen 
 sees in the casting out of the animals, a type of the dissolution 
 of the Jewish dispensation with its offerings and sacrifices. 
 
 Beza sees a peculiar fitness in our Lord's action of purifying 
 the temple. It became Him who was to be our Prophet, Priest, 
 and King, to exhibit the same zeal for the purity of Grod's house 
 that was formerly exhibited by such men as the Prophet Isaiah, 
 the priest Jehoiada, and the kings Hezekiah and Josiali. (2 
 Chron. xxiv. 16.) 
 17. — [Sis disciples remembered, Sc.'] These words certainly appear 
 to mean that our Lord's disciples "remembered" the text which 
 is here quoted, at the very time when our Lord was casting out 
 the buyers and sellers. It occurred to their minds as a striking 
 illustration of the spirit which their divine Master was exhibit- 
 ing. He was completely absorbed for the moment in zeal for 
 the purity of Grod's house. It is one among many proofs of the 
 familiarity of the poor and unlearned Jews with the Old Testa- 
 ment Scriptures. Whether, however, the disciples regarded the 
 Psalm, of which they remembered this verse, as applicable to 
 the Messiah, may be reasonably doubted. 
 
 [ITie zeal of thine house... .eaten me.] The 69th Psalm, from 
 whi^h this text is taken, is quoted no less than seven times in 
 the New Testament, as the utterance of Messiah. In the first 
 twenty-one verses of the Psalm the Messiah's sufferings are related 
 by Himself. The fifth verse is undoubtedly very remarkable as 
 coming from Messiah's lips, when He speaks of " my foohshness" 
 and "my sins." Ainsworth says it means, "false imputation of 
 sins." '* Thou knowest if there be any such as my foes charge 
 me with.'"' Bonar says much the same. 
 
 The text before us shows that it is sometimes justifiable to be 
 entirely absorbed and eaten up, so to speak, by zeal for some 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IT. 113 
 
 object in. Avhich God's glory is concerned. Mose?, Phineas, and 
 Paul at Athens, are examples of such zeal. (Exodus xxxii. 19 ; 
 Numbers xxv. 11 ; Acts xvii. 16.) 
 
 Augustine remarks on this text, " Let the zeal of the house of 
 God ever eat thee. — For example : Seest thou a brother running 
 to the theatre ? stop him, warn him, be grieved for him, if the 
 zeal of Grod's house hath now eaten thee. — Seest thou others 
 running and wanting to drink themselves drunk ? Stop whom 
 thou canst, hold whom thou canst, frighten whom thou canst; 
 whom thou canst, win in gentleness; do not in any wise sit still 
 and do nothing." 
 
 18. — [Then answered the Jews and said.'] Doddridge remarks here 
 that these Jews were probably the rulers, because the G-reat 
 Assembly, or Sanhedrim, sat in the temple, and our Lord's 
 actions would undoubtedly come to their knowledge without 
 delay. This makes the question and answer which follow the 
 more important, 
 
 [ What sign showest thou....doest these things.} This question 
 of the Jews shows us that they admitted the lawfulness of a 
 man doing such things as our Lord had done, if he could prove 
 that he had a divine commission. He had suddenly taken upon 
 Himself a great and independent authority. Though neither a 
 priest nor a Levite, He had virtually interfered with the man- 
 agement of the temple courts. Let Him now show that He was 
 a prophet, like Elijah or Amos, and they would concede He had 
 a warrant for His conduct. 
 
 19 — [Jesus answered.. ..destroy this temple.] The meaning of this 
 remarkable expression is either hypothetical or prophetical. It 
 must either be rendered, " Supposing you destroy this temple," 
 or "Ye will destroy this temple," — "If ye kill my body," or 
 '* When ye shall kill my body." — It is of course absurd to sup- 
 pose that our Lord literally commanded the Jews to destroy 
 Him. The use of the imperative instead of the future, must 
 surely be familiar to every Bible reader. See especially the 
 109th Psalm. In the present case it is truly astonishing that 
 any one can see difficulty in our Lord's expression. He only 
 used a mode of speaking which is in common use among our- 
 selves. If a lawyer said to his cUent in a consultation, " Take 
 such a step, and you will be ruined," we all know that he would 
 not be commanding his client to take the step. He would only 
 mean, "If you do take such a step." — A similar form of lan- 
 guage may be seen in our Lord's words, " Fill ye up the mea- 
 sure of your fathers," addressed to the Pharisees. (Matt, xxiii. 
 32.) No one would sny that our Lord commanded the Phari- 
 sees tc do this. It is a prophecy. — So also, " Make the tree 
 good," (Matt. xii. 33,) is not so much a command as an hypo- 
 thesis. See also Isai. viii. 9, 10. 
 
114 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 [In three days I will raise it up.] This is a prophecy of our 
 Lord's resurrection. Bat it is a very remarkable one, from 
 the fact that our Lord distinctly asserts His own power to raise 
 Himself up. It is like the expression, '' I have power to lay 
 down my life, and I have power to take it again." (John x. 18.) 
 Both the expressions deserve particular notice, because many 
 now-a-days assert that our Lord's resurrection was owing to 
 the operation of God the Father and of G-od the Holy Ghost, and 
 that He did not rise by His own power. This is a dangerous 
 heresy. That the Father and the Holy Ghost co-operated in the 
 resurrection of our Lord's body there can be no doubt. It is 
 clearly 'taught in many places. But to say that our Lerd did 
 not raise his own body, is to contradict the text before us, and 
 the other which has been already quoted. 
 
 Hurrion, quoted by Ford, observes, '* The efficient cause of 
 Christ's resurrection was the infinite power of God, which being 
 common to all the Persons m the blessed Trinity, the resurrec- 
 tion is sometimes ascribed to the Father, sometimes to the Son, 
 and sometimes to the Holy Ghost. Christ's being raised by the 
 Father and the Spirit is not inconsistent with His raising Him- 
 Belf ; for ' what things soever the Father doeth, these also doeth 
 the Son,' (John v. 19,) for being one in nature, they are also one 
 in operation." 
 
 The questions naturally arise in many minds, Why did Jesus 
 not work some miracle at once, as a sign, to convince the Jews ? 
 Why did He not at once proclaim Himself the Mes.siah ? Why 
 did he give the Jews so dark and mysterious a reply as the one 
 before us? — The answer to these questions is this. For one thing 
 we must remark, it was a leading principle in our Lord's dealings 
 with men, not to force conviction on them, but to speak to them 
 according to what He saw was the state of their hearts. He 
 answered fools according to their folly. (Prov. xxvi. 5.) If He 
 had given the Jews a more direct reply. He knew that it would 
 have brought His ministry to an abrupt end, and would have led 
 to His being cut off before the time. — For another thing, we must 
 remember, that however dark our Lord's saying seemed when it 
 was spoken, it did in effect tell the Jews of the greatest and most 
 im'oortant sign which could be given them as a proof of His 
 Messiahship. It told them of His future resurrection. It was 
 equivalent to saying, "You ask me for a sign, and I will give 
 yon one. I will rise again from the dead the third day after my 
 crucifixion. If I do not so rise from the dead, you need not 
 believe that I am the Messiah. Bat if I do so rise, you will be 
 without ex juse if you do not beUeve on me." In effect our Lord 
 staked the truth of His mission on His resurrection. He did 
 the same when He said that He would give the Jewish nation 
 no sign but that of the prophet Jonas. (Matt. xii. 39.) When 
 
JOHN, CHAP. II. 115 
 
 the apostles began to preach, they continnally referred the Jewa 
 to Christ's resurrection as the proof of His Messiahship. And 
 why did they do so? One main reason was, because their Mas- 
 ter had told the Jew?, the first time He appeared in the temple, 
 that the great sign they must look to was His own rising again 
 from the dead. 
 
 20. — {Then said... .Jews, forty and six years, Sc] This expression 
 has given rise to some diflference of opinion. The temple to 
 which the Jews refer, cannot of course be the temple built by 
 Solomon. That temple was completely destroyed by Nebuchad- 
 nezzar. — Nor yet does it seem likely to have been the temple 
 built by Zerubbabel and his companions, after the return from 
 Babylon. There is no sufficiently clear proof that this temple 
 was forty and six years building. — By far the most probable 
 view is, that the temple spoken of is the one repaired, or rather 
 re-built by Herod, and that the forty-six years here mentioned 
 mean the time during which these repairs were going on, and 
 that the entire completion of them had not been effected up to 
 our Lord's time. These repairs, according to Josephus, had been 
 going on exactly forty-six years when our Lord visited the tem- 
 ple. They were so extensive and costly, that eighteen thousand 
 workmen were employed about them, and they amounted to a 
 re-building. Moreover, the minds of the Jews would probably 
 be full of them at this particular time, because they were of re- 
 cent date, if not going on at that very time. The Greek words 
 might fairly be rendered, " Forty and six ^ ears has this temple 
 been building." — They denote a time, as Whitby remarks, not 
 perfectly past. 
 
 If any one desires to see an instance of the extravagant lengths 
 into which a good man may be led, in following the allegorical 
 system of interpreting Scripture, he will do well to read Augus- 
 tine's allegorical explanation of the forty and six years. It is far 
 too absurd to be worth inserting here. 
 
 [ Wilt thou rear it up in three days f] This question implies 
 three things, — a sneer, astonishment, and incredulity. There is 
 probably an emphasis meant to be laid on the word " thou." 
 Such an one as thou 1 Wilt thou do it ? 
 
 That this saying of our Lord, nevertheless, was not thrown 
 away and forgotten, but stuck in the minds of the Jews, though 
 they did not understand it, is strikingly proved by two facts. — 
 One is, that the false witnesses brought it forward, though in a 
 garbled form, when our Lord was arraigned before the high 
 priests. — The? other is, that the Jews taunted Him with it when 
 He hung on the cross. (Matt. xxvi. 61 ; xxvii. 40.) 
 
 1\, — [But he spaJce....temple....hody.] This verse is an instance of 
 St. John's habit of making explanatory comments in his Qos- 
 
116 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 pel as he goes on, in order to make things clear to his Gontile 
 readers. 
 
 Let it be noted, that as our Lord calls His own body a "tem- 
 ple," so also the bodies of His believing people are called " the 
 temple of the Holy Ghost." (1 Cor. vi. 19.) If it was wrong 
 to defile and profane the temple made of stone and wood, how 
 much more is it wrong to defile by sin the temple of our bodies ! 
 St. Paul and St. Peter both call our bodies our "tabernacle." 
 (2Cor. V. 1; 2 Pet. i. 13.) 
 
 22. — l^When.... risen.... dead....disciples remembered.'] This sentence 
 is an interesting proof of two things. For one thing, it shows 
 how much hght was brought to the minds of the disciples by 
 our Lord's resurrection, and how many hard sayings of His were 
 at once unravelled and made plnin. — For another thing, it shows 
 how long truth may lie dormant in men's minds without being 
 understood, or doing them any service. It is one of the special 
 offices of the Holy Ghost to bring things to remembrance. (John 
 xiv. 26.) We must not suppose religious teaching does no good 
 because it is not understood immediately. It may do good long 
 after the teacher is dead. 
 
 [They believed the Scripture.] What Scripture does this mean ? 
 It cannot, of course, be our Lord's saying. What our Lord said 
 is specially added, as something beside the Scripture, which the 
 disciples " beheved." — Nor yet does it seem likely that it means 
 anv particular text in the Old Testament about the resurrection. 
 I incline to the opinion, that it means generally the whole testi- 
 mony of Scripture to our Lord's claim to be received as the 
 Messiah. When Jesus rose from the dead, the disciples were 
 fully convinced that the Scripture about the Messiah was fulfilled 
 in their Master. 
 
 The expression "believed" cannot mean that the disciples 
 then believed for the first time. As in other places, it signifies 
 that they believed fully, and without any more doubt and hesi- 
 tation. The same may be said of John xiv. 1. 
 
 23. — [Many believed.] These persons do not appear to have really 
 believed with the heart, but to have been only convinced in their 
 understandings. The distinction between intellectual belief and 
 saving belief, and between one degree of saving behef and ano- 
 ther, ought to be carefully noticed in Scripture. There is a faith 
 wtich devils have, and a faith which is the gift of God. The 
 persons mentioned in this verse had the former, but not the 
 latter. So also we are told that Simon Matifus " believed." 
 (Acts viii. 13.) Again, there is a real heart-belief which a man 
 may have that admits of great increase. This is the belief 
 spoken of in the preceding verse. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. II. 117 
 
 [ When they saiu the miracles.'] This expression shows us that 
 there were many miracles worked by our Lord which are no- 
 where recorded in Scripture. St. John himself tells us so twice 
 over. (John xx. 30; xxi. 25.) Nicodemus refers to these miracles 
 in the beginning- of the following chapter. (John iii, 2.) If it 
 had been good for us to know anything about these miracles, 
 they would no doubt have been recorded. But it is well to re- 
 member that there were such miracles, in order that we may 
 rightly understand the unbelief and hardness of the Jews a 
 Jerusalem. The miracles whit-h are related as having been 
 worked in or near Jerusalem, we must remember, are by no 
 means all that our Lord worked there. 
 
 24. — {Did not commit himself.] The Greek word so rendered means 
 literally " Did not trust himself" It is the same verb that is 
 generally rendered "believe." 
 
 [He knew all men.] This is a direct assertion of our Lord's 
 divine omniscience. As God He knew all mankind, and these 
 seeming believers among others. As God, He knew that their 
 hearts were like the stony ground in the parable, and their faith 
 only temporary. 
 
 Melancthon makes some very wise remarks on this verse, as 
 to the example which our Lord sets us here of caution in deal- 
 ing with strangers. It is a melancholy fact, which the expe- 
 rience of years always confirjns, that we must not trust implicitly 
 to appearances of kindness, or be ready to open our hearts to 
 every one as a friend, upon short acquaintance. The man who 
 does not hastily contract intimacies, may be thought cold and 
 distant by some ; but in the long run of life he will escape many 
 sorrows. It is a wise saying, that a man ought to be friendly 
 with all, but intimate with few. 
 
 25. — [N'eeded not.. .testify of man.] These words mean that our 
 Lord had no need of any one's testimony "about man." He 
 required no information from others about the real character of 
 those who professed faith in Him. 
 
 [He knew what was in man.] This means that our Lord, as 
 God, possessed a perfect knowledge of man's inner nature, and 
 was a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. We 
 should remember Solomon's words in his prayer, " Thou only 
 knowest the hearts of all the children of men." (1 Kings viii. 39.) 
 
 The immense difference between our Lord and all ministers 
 of His Gospel appears strikingly in this verse. Ministers are 
 constantly deceived in their estimate of people. Christ never 
 was, and never could be. When He allowed Judas Iscariot to 
 be a disciple, He "was perfectly acquainted with his character. 
 
 Wordsworth observes that the two last verses of this chapter 
 
118 
 
 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 " afford an instance of the peculiar manner in whi(3li the Holy 
 Spirit, in St. John's Gospel, pronounces jud,2:ment on things and 
 
 persons, 
 xiii. 11 ; 
 
 Compare vi. 
 xxi. 17." 
 
 64, 71; vii. 39; viii. 27; xii. 33, 37; 
 
 In leaving the whole passage, I cannot help remarking what 
 a faithful picture of human nature it exhibits, and how many are 
 the ways in which human corruption and infirmity show them- 
 selves. Within the space of a few verses we find some openly 
 profaning Grod's temple for the sake of gain, — some angrily de- 
 manding a sign of Him who shows zeal for purity, — some pro- 
 fessing a false faith, — and some few only believing, but even 
 these believing with a weak, unintelligent faith. It is the state 
 of things which exists everywhere and always. 
 
 JOHN III. 1—8. 
 
 1 There was a man of the Phari- 
 sees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of 
 the Jews : 
 
 2 The same came to Jesus by 
 night, and said unto him. Rabbi, 
 we know that thou art a teacher 
 come from G-od: for no man can 
 do these miracles that thou doest, 
 except Grod be with him. 
 
 3 Jesus answered and said un- 
 to him, Yerily, verily, I say unto 
 thee, Except a man be born again, 
 he cannot see the kingdom of 
 God. 
 
 4 Nicodemus saith unto him. 
 How can a man be born when he 
 is old? can he enter the second 
 
 time into lis mother's womb, and 
 be born ? 
 
 5 Jesus answered, Yerily, verily, 
 I say unto thee. Except a man be 
 bom of water and of the Spirit, he 
 cannot enter into the kingdom of 
 God. 
 
 6 That which is born of the 
 flesh is flesh; and that which is 
 born of the Spirit is spirit. 
 
 7 Marvel not that I said unto 
 thee. Ye must be born again. 
 
 8 The wind bloweth where it 
 listeth, and thou hearest the sound 
 thereof, but canst not tell whence it 
 Cometh, and whither it goeth : so is 
 every one thai is born of the Spirit. 
 
 The conversation between Christ and Nicodemus, which 
 begins with these verses, is one of the most important 
 passages in the whole Bible. Nowhere else do we find 
 stronger statements about those two mighty subjects, the 
 new birth, and salvation by faith in the Son of God. Tho 
 servant of Christ will do well to make himself thoroughly 
 acquainted with this chapter. A man may be ignorant of 
 many things in religion, and yet be saved. But to be 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 119 
 
 ignorant of the matters handled in this chapter, is to be in 
 the broad way which leadeth to destruction. 
 
 We should notice, firstly, in these verses, what a weak 
 2nd feeble heginning a man may m,aJce in religion^ and yet 
 finally prove a strong Christian. We are told of a certain 
 Pharisee, named Nicodemus, who feeling concerned about 
 his soul, " came to Jesus by night." 
 
 There can be little doubt that Nicodemus acted as he 
 did on this occasion from the fear of man. He was afraid 
 of what man would think, or say, or do, if his visit to Jesus 
 was known. He came "by night," because he had not 
 faith and courage enough to come by day. And yet there 
 was a time afterwards when this very Nicodemus took our 
 Lord's part in open day in the council of the Jews. " Doth 
 our law judge any man," he said, " before it hear him and 
 know what he doeth." (John vii. 51.) — Nor was this all. 
 There came a time when this very Nicodemus was one of 
 the only two men who did honour to our Lord's dead 
 body. He helped Joseph of Arimathea to bury Jesus, 
 when even the apostles had forsaken their Master and fled. 
 His last things were more than his first. Though he began 
 ill, he ended well. 
 
 The history of Nicodemus is meant to teach us that we 
 should never " despise the day of small things " in religion. 
 (Zee. iv. 10.) We must not set down a man as having no 
 grace, because his first steps towards God are timid and 
 wavering, and the first movements of his soul are uncertain, 
 hesitating, and stamped with much imperfection. We 
 must remember our Lord's reception of Nicodemus. He 
 did not "break the bruised reed, or quench the smoking 
 flax," which He saw before Him. (Matt. xii. 20.) Like Him, 
 let us take inquirers by the hand, and deal with them 
 gently and lovingly. In everything there must be a begin- 
 ning. It is not those who make the most flaming profes- 
 sion of religion at first, who endure the longest and prove 
 
1.20 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 the most steadfast. Judas Iscariot was an apostle when 
 Nicodemns was just groping his way slowly into full light, 
 Yet afterwards, when Nicodemns was boldly helping to 
 bury bis crucified Saviour, Judas Iscariot had betrayed 
 Him, and hanged himself! This is a fact which ought not 
 to be forgotten. 
 
 We should notice, secondly, in these verses, what a 
 mighty change our Lord declares to he needful to salvation^ 
 and what a remarkable expression He uses in describing it. 
 He speaks of a new birth. He says to Nicodemus, "Ex- 
 cept a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of 
 God." He announces the same truth in other words, in 
 order to make it more plain to his hearer's mind : " Except 
 a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter 
 into the kingdom of God." By this expression He meant 
 Nicodemus to understand that " no one could become His 
 disciple, unless his inward man was as thoroughly cleansed 
 and renewed by the Spirit, as the outward man is cleansed 
 by water." To possess the privileges of Judaism a man 
 only needed to be born of the seed of Abraham after the 
 flesh. To possess the privileges of Christ's kingdom, a man 
 must be born again of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 The change which our Lord here declares needful to 
 salvation is evidently no slight or superficial one. It is 
 not merely reformation, or amendment, or moral change, 
 or outward altei*ation of life. It is a thorough change of 
 heart, will, and character. It is a resurrection. It is a new 
 creation. It is a passing from death to life. It is the im- 
 planting in our dead hearts of a new principle from above. 
 It is the calling into existence of a new creature, with a 
 new nature, new habits of life, new tastes, new desires, 
 new appetites, new judgments, new opinions, new hopes, 
 and new fears. All this, and nothing less than this is im- 
 plied, when our Lord declares that we all need a "new 
 birth." 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 121 
 
 This change of heart is rendered absolutely necessary to 
 salvation by the corrupt condition in which we are ah, 
 without exception, born. " That which is bom of the flesh 
 is flesh." Our nature is thoroughly fallen. The carnal 
 inind is enmity against God. (Rom. viii. V.) We come 
 into the world without faith, or love, or fear toward God 
 We have no natural inclination to serve Him or obey Him, 
 and no natural pleasure in doing His will. Left to himself, 
 no child of Adam would ever turn to God. The truest 
 description of the change which we all need in order to 
 make us real Christians, is the expression, "new birth." 
 
 This mighty change, it must never be forgotten, we can- 
 not give to ourselves. The very name which our Lord 
 gives to it is a convincing proof of this. He calls it " a 
 birth." No man is the author of his own existence, and no 
 man can quicken his own soul. We might as well expect a 
 dead man to give himself life, as exj^ect a natural man to 
 make himself spiritual. A power from above must be put 
 in exercise, even that same power which created the world. 
 (2 Cor. iv. 6.) Man can do many things ; but he cannot 
 give life either to himself or to others. To give life is the 
 peculiar prerogative of God. Well may our Lord declare 
 that we need to be *' born again I" 
 
 This mighty change, we must, above all, remember, is 
 a thing without which we cannot go to heaven, and could 
 not enjoy heaven if we went there. Our Lord's words on 
 this point are distinct and express. " Except a man be 
 born again, he can neither see nor enter the kingdom of 
 God." Heaven may be reached without money, or rank, 
 Of learning. But it is clear as dayhght, if words have any 
 meaning, that nobody can enter heaven without a "new 
 birth." 
 
 We should notice, lastly, in these verses, the insti*i/ctive 
 comparison which our Lord uses in explaining the neu Mrth. 
 He saw Nicodemus perplexed and astonished by the things 
 
 6 
 
122 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 lie had just heard. He graciously helped his wondering 
 mind by an illustration drawn from "the wind." A more 
 beautiful and fitting illustration of the work of the Spirit it 
 is impossible to conceive. 
 
 There is much about the wind that is mysterious and 
 inexplicable. " Thou canst not tell," says our Lord, 
 " whence it cometh and whither it goeth." We cannot 
 handle it with our hands, or see it with our eyes. When 
 the wind blows, we cannot point out the exact spot where 
 its breath first began to be felt, and the exact distance to 
 which its influence shall extend. But we do not on that 
 account deny its presence. — It is just the same with the 
 operations of the Spirit, in the new birth of man. They 
 may be mysterious, sovereign, and incomprehensible to us 
 in many ways. But it is foolish to stumble at them because 
 there is much about them that we cannot explain. 
 
 But whatever mystery there may be about the wind, ita 
 presence may always be known by its sou ad and effects. 
 "Thou hearest the sound thereof," says our Lord. When 
 our ears hear it whistling in the windows, and our eyes see 
 the clouds driving before it, we do not hesitate to say, 
 " There is wind." — It is just the same with the operations 
 of the Holy Spirit in the new birth of man. Marvellous 
 and incomprehensible as His work may be, it is work that 
 can always be seen and known. The new birth is a thing 
 that " cannot be hid." There will always be visible "fruits 
 of the Spirit" in every one that is born of the Spirit. 
 
 Would we know what the marks of the new birth are ? 
 —We shall find them already written for our learning in 
 the First Epistle of St. John. The man born of God 
 " believes that Jesus is the Christ," — " doth not commit 
 sin," — "doeth righteousness," — "loves the brethren," — 
 " overcomes the world," — " keepeth himself from the 
 wicked one." — This is the man born of the Spirit ! Where 
 these fruits are to be seen, there is the new birth of which 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 123 
 
 our Lord is speaking. He that lacks these marks, is yet 
 dead in trespasses and sins. (John v. 1 ; iii. 9 ; ii. 29 ; iii. 
 14; V. 4 ; V. 18.) 
 
 And noAV let us solemnly ask ourselves, Whether we 
 know anything of the mighty change of which we have 
 been reading? Have we been born again? Can any 
 marks of the new birth be seen in us ? Can the sound of 
 the Spirit be heard in our daily conversation ? Is the image 
 and superscription of the Spirit to be discerned in our 
 lives ? — Happy is the man who can give satisfactory 
 answers to these questions ! A day will come when those 
 who are not born again will wish that they had never been 
 born at all. 
 
 Notes. John III. 1 — 8. 
 
 1. — [There ivas a man, <S;c.] The close connection of the conversa- 
 tion between Christ and Nicodemus with the end of the preceding 
 chapter ought to be carefully noted. In fact the original Greek 
 contains a connecting particle, which our translators have omitted 
 to express in our version. The chapter should begin, " And there 
 was a man," or " Now there was a man." — The convers^ation took 
 place when our Lord " was in Jerusalem," at the time of the 
 Passover. Nicodemus was one of those who '' saw the miracles 
 which Jesus did," and was so much struck by what he saw, that 
 he sought out our Lord in order to converse with Him. 
 
 [ Of the Pharisees.] The striking variety of character in those 
 who were brought to believe on Christ while He was on earth, 
 ought not to be overlooked. His disciples were not drawn exclu- 
 sively from any one class. As a general rule, none were more 
 bitterly opposed to Him and His doctrines than the Pharisees. 
 Yet here we see that nothing is impossible with grace. Even a 
 Pharisee became an inquirer, and ultimately a disciple ! Nicode- 
 mus and St. Paul are standing proofs that no heart is too hnrd to 
 be converted. The third chapter shows us Jesus teaching a proud, 
 moral Pharisee. The fourth will show him teaching an ignor mt, 
 immoral Samaritan woman. None are too bad to be taught by 
 Christ. 
 
 [A ruler of the Jews.] The civil government of the Jews at 
 this time, we must remember, was in the hands of the Eornans. 
 "When Nicodemus is called " a ruler," it means that he was a 
 chief person among the Jews, probably in high ecclesiartical 
 
124 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 position, and certainly a famous religious teacher. See the IDth 
 verse. 
 
 2. — [The same came...hy night] The fact here recorded appeals tc 
 me to show that Nicodemus was influenced by the fear of man, 
 and was afraid or ashamed to visit Jesus by day. — The view 
 maintained by some, that we ought not to blame him for coming 
 by night, because it was the quietest time for conversation, and 
 the time when an interview was least liable to be interrupted, or 
 because tlie Jewish teachers were in the habit of receiving inquir 
 ers by night, appears to me undeserving of attention. 1 arr 
 confirmed in this opmion by the fact, that on the only otbei 
 occasions where Nicodemus is mentioned, he is specially described 
 as the man who " came to Jesus by night." This repeated 
 expression appears to me to im.ply blame. (John vii. 50 • 
 xix. 39.) 
 
 How any one can waste time, as some famous commentators 
 do, in speculating how the conversation between Christ and 
 Nicodemus was reported, is to my mind perfectly astonishing. 
 To hint, as one has done, that Jesus must have told St. John 
 about the conversation afterwards, or that St. John must have 
 been present, appears to me to strike a blow at the very root of 
 inspiration. Both here and elsewhere, frequently, St. John 
 describes things which he only knew by the direct ins[)iration of 
 " the Holy Ghost. 
 
 [Rabbi.] This expression was a name of dignity among the 
 Hebrews, signifying Doctor or Master. Cruden says that the 
 name came originally from the Chaldees, and that it was not used 
 bef Te the time of captivity, except in describing the officers of 
 the kings of Assyria and Babylon. Thus we find the names of 
 Rab-saris and Rab-shakeh. (2 Kings xviii. 17.) The use of the 
 word here by Nicodemus, was intended to mark his respect for 
 our Lord. 
 
 [We know.] Different reasons have been assigned for Nicode- 
 mus' use of the plural number in this place. Whom did he mean 
 when he said " we ?" Some say that he meant himself and 
 many of his brethren among the Pharisees. — Some say that he 
 meant himself and the secret believers of all classes mentioned 
 at the end of the last chapter. — Some say, as Lightfoot, that he 
 meant no one in particular, but use ] the plural lor the singular, 
 according to an idiom common in all languages. ' He only meant, 
 "It is commonly known." — I venture the suggestion, that Nico- 
 demus probably used the plural number intentionally, on account 
 of its vagueness, and avoided the singular number from motives 
 of caution, that he might not commit himself too much. Even 
 at the present day people will talk of "we" in religion, long 
 before they will talk of " I." — Weak faith strives to be hid in a 
 crowd. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 125 
 
 [Thou art a teacher come from God.] This cautious sentence 
 is an instructive indication of the state of Nicodeinus' mind. He 
 was naturally a timid, hesitating, slow-moving man. That Jesus 
 was somebody remarkable, he m- as convinced by His miracles. 
 That He might possibly be the Messiah, had probably crossed his 
 mind, and the more so because he doubtless knew of the ministry 
 of John the Baptist, and had heard that John spake of one 
 greater than himself who was yet to come. But until he can 
 make out more about Jesus, by private conversation, he declines 
 to commit himself to any stronger statement than that before us. 
 The G-reek words would be more literally rendered, " From God 
 thou hast come a teacher." 
 
 Lightfoot thinks that Nicodemus here refers to the long cessa- 
 tion of prophecy, which had now lasted for four hundred years. 
 During this long period no one had appeared from God to teach 
 the once-favouied Jewish nation, as the prophets did of old. But 
 now, he seems to say, " Thou hast appeared as the prophets did 
 in former times, to teach us." 
 
 [No man can do these miracles.. ..with Am.] This sentence has 
 been justly called an illustration of one great purpose of our 
 Lord's miracles. They arrested men's attention. They were 
 evidences of a divine mission. They showed that He who 
 wrought them was no ordinary Person, and ought to be lis- 
 tened to. 
 
 I am aware that some have thought that Nicodemus attached 
 too much weight to our Lord's miracles, and have boldly asserted 
 that miracles are no necessary proof of a divine mission, seeing 
 that Anti-christ will appear with signs and lying wonders. (2 
 Thess. ii. 9; Rev. xiii. 14.) Li reply it might be sufficient to 
 remark that our Lord Himself declared that " His works bore 
 witness that the Father had sent Him." (John v. 36 ; x. 25 ; xv. 
 24.) But I also think that sufficient stress is not laid on the 
 expression, " These miracles that thou doest." The character 
 and quality of our Lord's miracles were such as to prove His 
 divine commission. False teachers and .Anti-christs may be 
 permitted to work some miracles, like the magicians who with- 
 stood Moses. But there is a point beyond which Anti-christ 
 and his servants cannot go. Such miracles as our Lord worked 
 could only be wrought by the finger of God. I therefore think 
 that Nicodemus' argument was just and correct. — It is moreover 
 worthy of note, that the expression he uses is precisely the same 
 as that used by St. Peter when describing our Lord's ministry 
 and miracles. He says, " God was with him." (Acts x. 38.) 
 
 The expression, " God being with a man," is a common 
 phrase in the Scriptures, denoting the possession of certain special 
 
126 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 gifts or graces from Grod, beyond those ordinnrily given to men, 
 Tiius 1 Sam. xvi 18; iii. 19; and xviii. 12—14. 
 
 3. — [Jesvs answered.] Tiie question has often been asked, "To 
 what did our Lord answer?" No question was put to him. 
 What is the connecting hnk between the words of Nicodemus, 
 and the solemn statement contained in the first words which our 
 Lord addressed to him ? 
 
 I believe the true reply to these questions is, that our Lord, as 
 on many other occasions, made answer according to what He 
 saw going on in Nicodemus' heart. He knew that the inquirer 
 before Him, hke all the Jews, was expecting the appearance of 
 Messiah, and was even suspecting that he had found Him. He 
 therefore begins, by telling him at once what was absolutely need- 
 ful if he would belong to JMessiah's kingdom. It was not a tem- 
 poral kingdom, as he vainly supposed, but a spiritual one. It 
 was not a kingdom, in which all persons born of the seed of 
 Abraham, would, as a matter of course, have a place because of 
 their birth. It was a kingdom in which grace, not blood, was 
 the indispensable condition of admission. The first thing need- 
 ful in order to belong to Messiah's kingdom, was to be '' born 
 again." Men must renounce aU idea of privileges by reason of 
 their natural birth. All men, whether Jews or Gentiles, must 
 be born again, born anew, born from above by a spiritual birth. — 
 "Nicodemus," our Lord seems to say, "if you want to know 
 how a man is to become a member of Messiah's kingdom, under- 
 stand this day, that the first step is to be born again. Think not 
 because Abraham is your father, that Messiah will acknowledge 
 you as one of his subjects. I tell you at once, that the first thing 
 you and all other men need is a new birth." 
 
 I am quite aware that several other explanations have been 
 given of the link between Nicodemus' remark and our Lord's 
 opening assertion. I will only say, that the one I have given, 
 appears to me by far the simplest and most satisfactory. 
 
 [Verili/^ verily^ I say unto thee.] This expression, which is 
 peculiar to St. John's Gospel, has "been already commented on. 
 (John i. 51.) BaL it is useful to remark, in considering the verse 
 before ua, that the phrase is never used except in connection 
 with some statement oi^ great importance and solemnity. 
 
 [Except a man.] The Greek word which our version has ren- 
 dered " a man," would be more literally translated, " any one," 
 or "any person." The change called the " new birth," our Lord 
 would have us know, is of universal necessity. Nobody can be 
 saved without it. 
 
 [Born again.] The Greek word here rendered " again," might 
 be tiu'islated with equal correctness, "fi:om above," i. e. from 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 127 
 
 heaven, or from God. It is so translated in this cbapfer, (verse* 
 31,) and in four other places in the New Testament. (John xix. 
 11 ; James i. 17; iii. 15, 17.) In one other place, (Galat. iv. 9,) 
 it is " again." Many commentators in every age, as Origen, 
 Cyril, Theophylact, Bullinger, Lightfoot, Erasmus, Bengel, have 
 maintained strongly, that " born from above,'' and not " born 
 again," is the true and better translation of the phrase. Cran 
 mer s version renders it " born from above," and our own trans- 
 lators have allowed it in. a marginal reading. My own impres- 
 sion agrees with that of most commentators, that " born again " 
 is the right translation. — For one thing, it seems most probable 
 that Nico clemus understood our Lord to mean " born again," or 
 else he would hardly have asked the question, " Can a man enter 
 the second time into his mother's womb and be born." — For ano- 
 ther thing, the G-reek words used in four other places where 
 regeneration is spoken of in the New Testament, admit of no 
 other meaning than being " born again," and could not possibly 
 be rendered " born from above." See 1 Pet. 1. 3, 23 ; Matt. xix. 
 28 ; Titus iii. 5. 
 
 The point is happily not one of importance, and men may 
 agree to dififer about it, if they cannot convince one another. 
 Every true Christian is undoubtedly " born from above '' by the 
 quickening power of God in heaven, — as well as " born again " by 
 a second spiritual birth. 
 
 The meaning of our Lord when He said, " except a man be 
 born again," is unhappily a subject on which there is a wide 
 difference of opinion in the Church of Christ. — The expression 
 at any rate cannot be said to stand alone. It is used six times 
 in the Gospel of St. John, once in the first Epistle of St. Peter, 
 and six times in the first Epistle of St. John. (John i. 13 ; iii. 
 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 ; 1 Peter i. 23 ; 1 John ii. 29 ; iii. 9 ; iv. 7 ; v. 1, 4, 
 18.) Common sense and fair interpretation of language, point 
 out that "born again, born of the Spirit, and born of God," are 
 expressions so intimately connected with one another, that they 
 mean one and the same thing. The only question is, " What do 
 they mean ?" 
 
 Some think that to be '* born again," means nothing more 
 than " an outward reformation, or such outward conformity as 
 a proselyte might yield to a new set of rules of life." — This is 
 an almost obsolete and utterly unsatisfactory interpretation. It 
 makes our Lord tell Nicodemus nothing more than he might 
 have learned from heathen philosophers, — such as Socrates, Plato, 
 or Aristotle ; or than he might have heard from any Rabbi about 
 the duties of a proselyte from heathenism to Judaism. 
 
 Some think that to be "born again," means to be admitted 
 into the Church of Christ by baptism, and to receive a spiritual 
 
128 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 change of heart inseparably connected with baptism. — This again 
 is an unsatisfactory interpretation. For one tjiing, it seems 
 improbable, that the first truth which (>ur Lord would propound 
 to an inquiring Pharisee, would be the necessity of baptism. He 
 certainly never did so on any other occasion. — For another thing, 
 if our Lord only meant baptism, it is difficult to account for the 
 astonishment and perplexity which Nicodemiis expressed on 
 hearing our Lord's words. Baptism was not a thing with which 
 a Pharisee was unacquainted. In the Jewish Church proselytes 
 were baptized. — Last, but not least, it is clear ft-om St. John's 
 first Epistle, that to be " born again, born of the Spirit, or born 
 of God," means something much greater than baptism. The 
 picture which the apostle there gives of the man who is " born 
 of God," could certainly not be given of the man who is 
 baptized. 
 
 The true view of the expression I beheve to be this. Being 
 " born again," means that complete change of heart and character 
 which is produced in a man by the Holy Ghost, when he repents, 
 behoves on Christ, and becomes a true Christian. It is a change 
 which is frequently spoken of in the Bible. In Ezekiel it is 
 called "taking away the stony heart and giving a heart of flesh," 
 — " giving a new heart, and putting within a new spirit." (Ezek. 
 xi. 19 ; xxxvi. 26.) In Acts it is called " repentance and conver- 
 sion." (Acts iii. 19.) In Romans it is called "being ahve 
 from the dead," (Rom, vi, 13.) In Corinthians it is called " being 
 a new creature," (2 Cor. v. 17.) In Ephesians it is called 
 " being quickened," (Ephes, ii. 1,) In Colossians it is called 
 " putting off the old man and putting on the new." (CoIo?b. iii, 
 9. 10.) In Titus it is called the "washing of regenerat.on." 
 (Titus iii, 5.) In Peter it is called " being called out of darkness 
 into light," and being "made partaker of the divine natuie," 
 (1 Peter ii. 9; 2 Peter i. 4.) In John it is called "passing from 
 death to life." (1 John iii. 14.) I believe that all these e3>.pres- 
 sions come to the same thing in the end. They are all the same 
 truth, only viewed from different sides. They all mean that 
 mighty inward change of heart, which our Lord here CkUIs a 
 " new birth," and which John the Baptist foretold would spe- 
 cially characterize Messiah's kingdom. He was to baptize not 
 with water, but with the Holy Ghost. Our Lord begins Hi? 
 address to Nicodemus by taking up His forerunner's prediction: 
 — He tells him that he must be " born again " or baptized with 
 the Spirit. — Human nature is so entirely corrupt, diseased, nnd 
 ruined by the fall, that all who would be saved must be born 
 again. No lesser change will sulhce. They need nothing less 
 than a new birth. 
 
 [He cannot see.] This expression has received two interpro- 
 tation.i. Some think that it means, " he cannot understand ot 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 129 
 
 comprehend." Otliers think that it means, "he cannot enter, 
 enjoy, partake of^ or posses'^" Tlie last I believe to be the true 
 meaning of the expression. The first is truth, but not the truth 
 of the text. The second ib confirmed by the language used in 
 the fifth verse, and is a common form of speech of which there 
 are many instances in the Bible. Thus we find, to " see hfe,'' 
 (John lii. 36,)— to "see corruption," (Psalm xvi. 10,) — to "see 
 death," (John viii. 51,) — to see evil," (Psalm xc. 15,) — to " see 
 sorrow." (Rev. xviii. 7.) 
 
 [The Hngdom of Godi] This expression means that spiritual 
 kingdom which Messiah came into the world to set up, and of 
 which all believers are the subjects, — the kingdom which is now 
 small, and weak, and despised, but which shall be great and 
 glorious at the second advent. Our Lord declares that no man 
 can belong to that kingdom and be one of its subjects, without 
 a new birth. To belong to the covenant of Israel with all its 
 temporal privileges, a man need only be born of Jewish parents. 
 To belong to Messiah's kingdom, a man must be " born again " 
 of the Spirit, and have a new heart. 
 
 Luther's remark on this verse, quoted by Stier, is worth 
 reading. He supposes our Lord to say, " My doctrine is not of 
 doing, and of leaving undone, but of being and becoming ; so 
 that it is not a new work to be done, but the being new 
 created; — not the living otherwise but the being new born." 
 
 The unvarying suitableness of our Lord's t-eaching to the special 
 state of mind of those whom He taught, deserves observation. 
 To the young ruler fond of his money, He says, " Sell all and 
 give to the poor." — To the multitude craving food, He says, 
 " Labour not for the meat that perisheth." — To the Samaritan 
 woman coming to draw water, He commends " living water." 
 — To the Pharisee proud of his hirth^ as a son of Abraham, He 
 says, " Ye must be born again." (Luke xviii. 22 ; John vi. 27 ; 
 iv. 10.) 
 
 4. — [Nicodemus saifh...Jiow.] The question of Nicodemus is pre- 
 cisely one of those which the natural ignorance of man in 
 spiritual things prompts a person to ask. Just as the Samaritan 
 woman, in the 4th chapter, put a carnal meaning on our Lord's 
 words about " living water," and the Jews, in the 6th chapter, 
 put a carnal meaning on the "bread of God," so Nicodemus 
 puts a carnal meaning on the expression " born again." — There 
 is nothing which the heart of man in every part and every age 
 of the world is so slow to understand as the work of the Holy 
 Ghost. Our minds are so gross and sensuous, that we cannot 
 take in the idea of an inward and spiritual operation. Unless 
 we can see things and touch things in religion we are slow to 
 believe them 
 
 6* 
 
180 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 f mien he is old.] This expression seems to indicate that 
 Nicoderaus himself was an old man when this conversation 
 took place. If this be so, it is only fair, in judging his case, to make 
 some allowance for the slowness with which old age receives new 
 opiniors, and. specially in the things of religion. At the same 
 time it supplies an encouraging proof that no man is too old to be 
 converted. One of our Lord's first converts was an old manl 
 
 6. — [Boccept....horn of water and of the Spirit] This famous text 
 ha^ unhappily given rise to widely different interpretations. On 
 one thing only respecting it, nearly all commentators are agreed 
 It is the same truth that is laid down in the third verse, only 
 laid down with greater fulness in compassion to Nicodemus' 
 weakness of understanding. But what does it mean ? The ex- 
 pression " born of water " is pecuhar to this place, and occurs 
 nowhere else in the Bible. It cannot be literally interpreted. 
 No one can be hterally " born of water." What then does the 
 phrase signify ? When can it be said of any one, that he is 
 " born of water and of the Spirit ? " 
 
 The first and commonest interpretation is to refer the text 
 entirely to baptism, and to draw from it the inseparable connec- 
 tion of baptism and spiritual regeneration. — According to this 
 view of the text, our Lord tells Nicodemus that baptism is abso- 
 lutely necessary to salvation, and is the appointed means of 
 giving new birth to the heart of man. " If you wish to belong 
 to my kingdom, you must be born again, as I have already 
 said ; and if you wish to be born again, the only way to obtain 
 this mighty blessing is to be baptized. Except a man be re- 
 genei'ated or born again by baptism, he cannot enter my king- 
 dom." This is the view of the text which is maintained by 
 the fathers, by the Roman Catholic writers, by the Lutheran 
 commentators, and by many English divines down to the present 
 day. It is a view which is supported by much learning, and by 
 many strange and far-fetched arguments, such as Gqu. i. 2. It 
 is, however, a view which to my own mind is utterly unsatis- 
 factory. 
 
 The second, and less common in«terpretation, is to refer the 
 text partly to baptism and partly to that real regeneration of 
 heart, which a man may receive, like the penitent thief, without 
 having been baptized. — According to this view, our Lord tells 
 Nicodemus that a new birth is absolutely necessary to salvation, 
 and that to be baptized, or " born of water," is one of the appointed 
 ways by which regeneration is effected. Those who hold this 
 view deny as stoutly as any that there is- any inseparable con- 
 nection between baptism and regeneration. They hold that multi- 
 tudes are " born of water " who are never born of the Spirit. But 
 they maintain that the word " water " must be intended to point 
 us to baptism, and that by the use of the expression, "born of 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 131 
 
 water," our Lord meant to defend both John's baptism and Hig 
 own, and to show their value. This is the view of the text 
 which is maintained by some few of the best Roman Cathohc 
 writers, such as Rupertus and Ferus, — by almost all the 
 English Reformers, and by many excellent commentators down 
 to the present day. It is a view, which to my own mind 
 seems not much more satisfactory than the former one. already 
 described, on account of the strange consequences which it 
 involves. 
 
 The third, and much the least common interpretation, is to 
 refer the text entirely to the regeneration of man's heart, and to 
 exclude baptism altogether from any place in it. — According to 
 this vie-w, our Lord explains to Nicodemus, by the use of a figure, 
 what He had meant when he spoke of bemg " born again." He 
 would have Nicodemus know that a man must have his heart as 
 thoroughly cleansed and renewed by the Spirit as the body is 
 cleansed and purified by water. He must be born of the Spirit 
 working on his inward nature, as water works on the material 
 body. In short, he must have a " clean heart" created in him if 
 he would belong to Messiah's kingdom. Most of those who take 
 this view, consider that baptism was certainly meant to point to 
 the change of heart described in the text, but that this text was 
 meant to point out something distinct from baptism, and even 
 more important than baptism. This is the view which I believe 
 to be the true one, and to which I unhesitatingly adhere. 
 
 Those who hold that baptism is not referred to in this text, are 
 undoubtedly a small minority among theologians, but their 
 names are weighty. Among them will be found Calvin, Zwingle, 
 Bullinger, Gualter, Archbishop Whitgift, Bishop Prideaux, 
 Whitaker, Fulke, Poole, Hutcheson, Charnock, G-ill, Cartwright, 
 Grotius, Cocceius, Gomarus, Piscator, Rivetus, Chamier, Witsius, 
 Mastricht, Turretin, Lampe, Barkitt, A. Clarke, and, according 
 to Lampe, Wycliffe, Daille and Parous, — I do not assert this on 
 second-hand information. I have verified the assertion by examin- 
 ing with my own eyes the works of all the authors above named, 
 excepting the tliree referred to by Lampe. On the precise mean- 
 ing of the word " water" they are not agreed. But they aU hold 
 that our Lord did not mean baptism when He spoke of being 
 " born of water and the Spirit." — Dean Alford, I observe, says 
 that the expression " refers to the token, or outward si<in of 
 baptism, on any honest interpretation." How far it is justifiable 
 to use such language about an opinion supportei by so many 
 great names, I leave to the reader to decide ! Those who wish 
 to see the view of the text which I advocate more fully defended, 
 will find what they want in Lampe's Dissertations and Chamier'a 
 Panstratia, 
 
 In adhering to a view of this text which is adopted by so few 
 
132 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 commentators, I feel a natural desire to give the reasons of my 
 opinion at full length, and I think that the importance of the 
 subject in the present day justifies me in doing so. In giving 
 theee reasons I must decline entering into questions which are 
 not directly before me. The value of the sacrament of baptism, 
 — the right of infants to baptism, — the true meaning of the Church 
 of England Baptismal Service, are matters which I shall not 
 touch. The meaning of our Lord's words, " Except a man be 
 born of water and of the Spirit," is the only point to which I 
 shall confine myself I believe that in using thess words our 
 Lord did not refer to baptism, and I think so for the following 
 reasons. 
 
 (a.) Firstly, there is nothing in the words of the text which 
 necessarily requires to be referred to baptism. " Water," — " wash- 
 ing," — and " cleansing" are figurative expressions, frequently used 
 in Scripture, in order to denote a spiritual operation on man's heart. 
 (See Psa, li. 7-10 ; Isai. xliv. 3 ; Jer. iv. 14 ; Ezek. xxxvi. 25 ; 
 John iv. 10; vii. 38, 39) The expression, "Born of water and 
 of the Spirit," is doubtless very peculiar. But it is not more 
 peculiar than the parallel expression, "He shall baptize you with 
 the Holy Ghost and with fire." (Matt. iii. 10.) To explain this 
 last text by the tongues of fire on the day of Pentecost, is an 
 utterly unsatisfactory interpretation, and confines the fulfilment 
 of a mighty general promise to one single act and one single dny. 
 I believe that in each case an element is mentioned in connection 
 with the Spirit, in order to show the nature of the Spirit's opera- 
 tion. Men must be "baptized with the Holy Ghost," purifying 
 their hearts from corruption, as fire purifies metal, and must be 
 "born of the Spirit," cleansing their hearts as luater cleanses the 
 body. The use of fire and water as the great instruments of 
 purification, was well known to the Jews. See Num. xxxi. 23, 
 where both are mentioned together. Chrysostom well remarks 
 that " Scripture sometimes connects the grace of the Spirit with 
 fire, and sometimes with water." 
 
 (h.) Secondly, the assertion that " water " must mean baptism, 
 because baptism is the ordinary means of regeneration, is an 
 assertion utterly destitute of Scriptural proof. It is no doubt 
 written of professing saints and believers, that "they have been 
 buried with Christ in baptism," and that " as many as have been 
 baptized into Christ have put on Christ." (Rom. vi. 4 ; Gal. iii. 
 27.) But there is not a single text which declares that baptism i.j 
 the only way by which people are born again. On the contraiy, 
 we find two plain texts in which regeneration is distinctly a crib- 
 ed, not to baptism, but to the word, (1 Pet. i. 23 ; James i. 18.) 
 Moreover the case of Simon Magus clear iy proves, that in apos- 
 tolic times all persons did not receive grace when they were 
 baptized. St. Peter tells him a very few days after his baptism 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 138 
 
 " Thou art in the gall of bitterness and the bond of iniquity, — 
 thy heart 'S not right in the sight of God, — thou hast neither 
 part nor Ijt in this matter." (Acts viii. 21 — 23.) The assertion, 
 therefore, that '•' water " must mean baptism, is a mere gratuitous 
 assumption, and must fall to the ground. 
 
 (c.) Thirdly, if " water " in the text before us means baptism^ 
 it fallows as a logical consequence that baptism is absolutely 
 necessary to salvation, and that all who have died unbaptized 
 since these words were spoken, have been lost! The penitent 
 thief was lost on this theory, for he was never baptized ! All 
 infants who have died unbaptized have been lost ! The whole 
 body of the Quakers, who die in their own communion, are lost! 
 There is no evading this conclusion, unless we adopt the absurd 
 and untenable hypothesis that the kingdom of G-od in this solemn 
 passage means nothing more than the visible church. Where 
 our Lord, in declaring a great general truth, makes no exceptions, 
 we have no right to make them. If words mean anything, to 
 refer " water " to baptism excludes unbaptized persons from 
 heaven ! And yet there is not another instance in Scripture of 
 an outward ordinance being made absolutely necessary to salva- 
 tion, and specially an ordinance which a man cannot confer on 
 himself. A new, regenerate heart is undoubtedly necessary to the 
 salvation of every one, without exception, and it is of this only, I 
 behave, that the text before us speaks. 
 
 (cZ.) Fourthly, if we accept the theory that baptism is the 
 ordinary means of conveying the grace of regeneration, that all 
 baptized persons are necessarily regenerated, and that all who 
 are " born of water " are at the same time born of the Spirit, we 
 are irresistibly involved in the most dangerous and pernicious 
 consequences. — We pour contempt on the whole work of the 
 Spirit, and on the blessed doctrine of regeneration. We bring 
 into the Church a new and unscriptural kind of new birth, a new 
 birth that cannot be seen by its fruits. We make out that people 
 are " born of G-od " when they have not one of the marks of 
 regeneration laid down by St. John. — We encourage the rankest 
 antinomianism. We lead people to suppose that they have grace 
 in their hearts while they are servants of sin, and that they have 
 the Holy Spirit within them while they are obeying the lusts of 
 the flesh. — Last, but not least, we pour contempt on the holy 
 sacrament of baptism. We turn it into a mere form, in which 
 faith and prayer have no place at all. We lead people to suppose 
 that it matters nothing in what spirit they bring their children 
 to baptism, and that if water is sprinkled, and certain words are 
 used, an infant is, as a matter of course, born again. Worst of 
 all, we induce people secietly to despise baptism, because we 
 teach them that it always conveys a mighty spiritual blessing, 
 while t^eir own eye? teU them, that, in a multitude of cases, it 
 
134 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 does no good at all. — I see no possibility of avoiding tlu'sc con- 
 sequences, however little some pei sons who hold the inseparability 
 of baptism and regeneration may intend them. Happily I have 
 the comfort of thinking that there is an utter want of logic in 
 some hearts which have much grace. 
 
 (e.) Fifthly, if " born of water an d of the Spirit " was meant 
 to teach Nicodemus that baptism is the ordinary means of con- 
 veying spiritual regeneration, it is very difficult to understand 
 why our Lord rebuked him for not knowing it. " Knowest thou 
 not these tilings?" How could he know them? That there 
 was such a thing as baptism, he knew as a Pharisee. But that 
 baptism was the appointed means of conveying "new birth," he 
 could not know. It was a doctrine nowhere taught in the Old 
 Testament. It is a doctrine, on the showing of its own advocates, 
 peculiar to Chi istianity. And yet Nicodemus is rebuked for not 
 knowing it ! To my mind this is inexplicable. The necessity 
 of a thorough change of heart, on the contrary, Nicodemus might 
 have known from the Old Testament Scriptures. And it was for 
 ignorance of this, not for ignorance of baptismal regeneration, 
 that he was rebuked. 
 
 (/.) Sixthly and lastly, if it be true that "to be born of 
 water" means baptism, and that baptism is the ordinary means 
 of conveying the grace of regeneration, it is most extraordinary 
 that there is so little about baptism in the Epistles of the New 
 Testament. In Romans it is only twice mentioned, — and in 
 1st Corinthians, seven times. — In Galatians, Ephesians, Colos- 
 sians, Hebrews, and the 1st Peter we find it named once in each 
 Epistle. In tliirteen of the remaining Epistles it is neither 
 named nor referred to. In the two Pastoral Epistles to Timothy, 
 where we might expect something about baptism, if anywhere, 
 there is not a word about it ! In the Epistle to Titus the only 
 text that can possibly be applied to baptism is by no means 
 clearly applicable. (Titus iii. 5.) Nor is this all. In the one 
 Epistle which mentions baptism seven times, we find the writer 
 saying that " Christ sent him not to baptize, but to preach the 
 Gospel," and actually " thanking God," that he had " baptized 
 none of the Corinthians, save Crispus and Gains." (1 Cor. i. 
 14, 17.) He would surely never have said this, if all whom he 
 baptized were at once born again. Imagine St. Paul saying, 
 '' I thank God I regenerated none of you !" Moreover, it is a star- 
 tling fact, that this very same Apostle, in the very same Epistle, 
 says to these same Corinthians, " I have begotten you through 
 the Gospel." (1 Cor. iv. 14.) My deliberate! conviction is, that 
 St. Paul would never have written these sentences, if he had 
 believed that the only way to be born of the Spirit was to be 
 baptized. 
 
 I give these reasons with a sorrowful feehng that to many 
 
JOHX, CHAP. III. 135 
 
 they are given in vain. But I have felt it due to iryself, in 
 maintaining an opinion about a most important text which 
 is not commonly held, to state fully my reasons, and to show 
 that my opinion is not hghtly maintained. 
 
 Before leaving this subject, I think it right, in self-defence, to 
 say something about the fact, that the view I maintain is not 
 held by the great majority of commentators. This fact undoubt- 
 edly cahs for some explanation. 
 
 With regard to the Fathers, no one can read their writings 
 without seeing that they were fallible men. On no point doea 
 their weakness appear so strongly, as in their language about 
 the sacraments. The man who intends to abide by all the 
 opinions of the Fathers about the sacraments, will have to 
 swallow a great deal. After all, the very earliest Father, whose 
 commentary on St. John's Gospel is extant, is Origen. who died 
 in 253, A.D. The true view of the text before us, might easily 
 be lost in the period of at least 150 years between Origen's day 
 and the days of St. John. Tertulhan incidentally applies tho 
 text before us to baptism, in one of his writings. But even he 
 was not born till 160, a.d., at least two generations after St. 
 John's time. 
 
 "With regard to the Lutheran writers, their avowed opinions 
 upon the sacraments make their interpretations of the text before 
 us of little weight. They have a peculiar sacramental theory to 
 maintain when they expound Scripture, and to that theory they 
 steadfastly adhere. Yet even Brentius on this text confesses, that 
 the baptism here signified by " water," means something much 
 more than the sacrament of baptism, and includes the whole 
 doctrine of the Gospel. — The Roman Catholic commentators are, 
 of course, even more fettered in their views of the sacraments 
 than the Lutherans, and hardly call for any remark. Their con- 
 i^nt endeavour in expounding Scripture, is to maintain the 
 sacramental system of their own church, and a text like that 
 before us is unhesitatingly applied to baptism. 
 
 "With regard to our own English reformers and their immediate 
 successors, their opinions about a text like this are perhaps less 
 valuable than upon any subject. They always display an exces- 
 sive anxiety to agree with the Fathers. They were anxious 
 in every way to conciliate opponents, and to support their own 
 Protestantism by appeals to primitive antiquity. When, there- 
 fore, they saw that the Fathers refer-ed the text before us to 
 baptism, and that at best the point was doubtful, we cannot 
 wonder that they held, that to be "born of water" was to be 
 baptized. Yet even they seem not unanimous on the point ; and 
 Latimer's well-known assertion, that "to be christened with 
 water is not regeneration," must not be forgotten. — The famous 
 
136 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 remarks of Hooker, which are so frequently thrown in the teeth 
 of those who take the view of "water and the Spirit," which I 
 do, are a curious instance of the coolness witli which a great man 
 can soihetimes draw an illogical conclusion in his own favour, 
 from some bioad general premise. He lays down the general 
 principle '' that when a literal construction of a text will stand, 
 that furthest from the letter is commonly the worst." He then 
 proceeds to take it for granted, that to interpret " born of water " 
 of baptism, is the literal constiuction of the text now before us. 
 Unfortunately this is precisely the point that I for one do not 
 concede ; and his conclusion is consequently, to my mind, worth- 
 less. Moreover when we talk of a "literal" sense, there must 
 evidently be so^ne limit to it. If not, we cannot answer the 
 Eoman Catholic, when he proves transubstantiation from the 
 words, " this is my body." 
 
 I beheve that for a true and sound exposition of the text before 
 us, we must look to the Puritans and Dutch divines of the seven- 
 teenth century. It was necessary for men to be a generation 
 further off from Romanism, before they were able to give a 
 dispassionate opinion about such a text as this. The early 
 Protestants did not see the consequences of the language they 
 sometimes used about baptism with sufficient clearness. Other- 
 wise, I beheve they Avould not have written about it as they 
 did. To. any one who asks for a specimen of the 17th century 
 divinity, I would say, that one of the simplest and best state- 
 ments of the true meaning of the text before us, will be found in 
 Poole's Annotations. 
 
 In leaving the whole subject, there is one fact which I think 
 deserves very serious consideration. Those Churches of Chris- 
 tendom at the present day, which distinctly maintain that all 
 baptized persons are born of the Spirit, are as a general rule, the 
 most corrupt churches in the world. Those bodies of Christians 
 on the other hand, which deny the inseparable connection of 
 bapti-m and the new birth, are precisely those bodies which 
 are most pure in faith and practice, and do most for the 
 extension of the Gospel in the world. This is a great fact which 
 ought not to be forgotten. 
 
 6. — {^That which is born.. .flesh.. .spirit] In this verse, our Lord 
 gives Nicodemus the reason why the change of heart called 
 "new birth," is a thing of such absolute necessity, and why 
 no slight moral change will suffice. Nicodemus had spoken of 
 " entering a second time into his mother's womb." Our Lord 
 tells him, that even if such a thing was possible, it would not 
 make him fit for the kingdom of God. The child of human 
 parents would always be like the purents from which it sprung, 
 if it was born a hundred times over. " That which is born ot 
 the fleah is flesh." All men and women are by nature corrupt. 
 
137 
 
 sinful, -fleshly, and alienated from God. " They that are in the 
 flesh cannot please God." (Rom. viii. 8.) Their children will 
 always be born with a nature like that of their parents. To 
 bring a clean thing out of an unclean, is proverbially impossible 
 A bramble will never bear grapes, however much it may be 
 L'ultivated, and a natural man will never be a godly man without 
 the Spirit. In order to be really spiritual and fit for the kiDg- 
 dom of God, a new power from without must enter into a man's 
 nature. " That which is born of the spirit is spirit." 
 
 The sentence is undoubtedly very elliptical, and expressed in 
 abstract terms. It is like St. Paul's words, " The carnal mind 
 is enmity against God." (Rom. viii. 7.) But the general mean- 
 ing is unmistakeable. Human nature is so utterly fallen, 
 corrupt, and carnal, that nothing can come from it by natural 
 generation, but a fallen, corrupt, and carnal offspring. There 
 is no seh-curative power in man. He will always go on repro- 
 ducing himself To become spiritual and fit for communion 
 with God, nothing less is required than the entrance of the 
 Spirit of God into our hearts. In one word, we must have that 
 new birth of the Spirit which our Lord twice described to 
 Nicodemus. 
 
 The word '' flesh," I am inclined to think, with Poole and 
 Dyke, is taken in two senses in this verse. In the first case, it 
 means the natural body of man, as in John i. 14. In the second 
 case, it means the corrupt carnal nature of man, as in Gal. v. 
 17. — The same remark applies to the word Spirit. In the first 
 instance, it means the Holy Spirit, and in the second, the spiritual 
 nature which the Spirit produces. The offspring of all children 
 of Adam is fleshly. The ofifspring of the Spirit is spiritual. Nei- 
 ther the grace, nor rank, nor money, nor learning of parents will 
 prevent a chil»J having a corrupt heart, if it is naturally born of 
 the flesh. Nothing will make any one spiritual but being born 
 again of the spirit. 
 
 It must be carefully remembered, in considering this verse, 
 that it cannot be applied to the human nature of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ. Though He had a true body like our own, He was not 
 *' born of the flesh" as we are. by natural generation, but con- 
 ceived by the miraculous operation of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 7. — [Marvel not. .must he horn again.] In reading this verse, the 
 stress ought to be laid on the two last words, " born again." It 
 is evident that the thing which stumbled Nicodemus was the 
 idea of any " new birth" at all being necessary. He felt unable 
 to understand what this "new birth" was. Our Lord forbids 
 him to marvel, and proceeds to explain the new birth by a 
 familiar illustration. 
 
 It is a noteworthy and striking fact, that no doctrine has ex- 
 
l38 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 cited *ucli surprise in every age of the Church, and has called 
 forth s ) much opposition from the great and learned, as this very 
 doctrine of the new birth. The men of the present day who 
 sneer at conversions and revivals, as fanaticism and enthusiasm, 
 are nowise better than Nicodemus. Like him, they expose their 
 own ignorance of the work of the Holy Grhost. 
 
 8. — [The wind hloweth, c&c] The object of this verse appears to be 
 to explain the work of the Holy Ghost in the regeneration of 
 man, by a familiar illustration drawn from the wind. Mysterious 
 as the Spirit's work was, Nicodemus must allow that there was 
 much of mystery about the wind. " The wind bloweth where it 
 listeth." We cannot account for the direction in which it blows, 
 or for the beginning or extent of its influence. But when we 
 hear the sound of the wind, we do not for a moment question 
 that it is blowing. Our Lord tells Nicodemus that it is just the 
 same with the operations of the Spirit. There is doubtless much 
 about them that is mysterious and incomprehensible. But when 
 we see fruit brought forth, in a manifest change of heart and 
 life, we have no right to question the reaUty of the Spirit's 
 operations. 
 
 The last clause of the verse is undeniably somewhat diflBcult, 
 — " So is every one that is born of the Spirit." We should rather 
 have expected, " So does the Spirit operate on every one that is 
 born again." And this wa=;, no doubt, our Lord's meaning. Yet 
 the form of speech which our Lord uses is not altogether without 
 parallel in the New Testament. For instance, we read, " The 
 kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good 
 seed." (Matt. xiii. 24.) The likeness in this case is clearly not 
 between the man and the kingdom. The meaning is that the 
 whole story is an illustration of the kingdom of heaven. So also 
 we read that '' the kingdom of heaven is hke unto a merchant- 
 man seeking goodly pearls," and might make a similar remark. 
 (Matt. xiii. 45.) 
 
 The G-reek word translated " wind," at the beginning of this 
 verse, might be rendered with equal correctness, " the Spirit." 
 Many think, as Origen, Augustine, Rupertus, Bengel, Schottgen, 
 Ambrose, Jansenius, Wyclifife's Version, Bucer, and Bede, that 
 it ought to be so rendered. They deny that our Lord brought 
 in the idea of " the wind" at all. They object to it being said of 
 the wind that " it listeth," and tay that the expression cannot be 
 applied to any but a person. 
 
 This notion seems to me, as it does :o the great majority of 
 commentators, entirely untenable. For one thing, it creates 
 great awkwardness to make a comparison between tlie Spirit and 
 the work of the Spirit, which we must do if this theory is 
 correct. "The Spirit bloweth, — and so is every one born of the 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 
 
 139 
 
 Spirit!" — For another thing, it seems to me very strange to 
 speak of the Holy Ghost as *' blowing," and to speak of the 
 "sound" of the Holy Ghost, or of that "sound" being heard by 
 Nicodemus. 
 
 I can see no difficulty whatever in the expression, " The wind 
 bloweth where it listeth." It is common in the Bible to personify 
 unintelHgent things, and to speak of them as having mind and 
 will. Thus our Lord speaks of the " stones crying out." (Luke 
 xix. 40.) And the Psalmist says, " The sun knoweth his going 
 down." (Psalm civ. 19.) See also Job xxxvii. 8, 35. — In addition 
 to this, I see a peculiar beauty in the selection of the wind as an 
 illustration of the work of the Spirit. Not only is the illustration 
 most apt and striking, but it is one which is used in other places 
 in Scripture. See for instance, in the vision of the dry bones, 
 how Ezekiel cries to the " wind" to breathe on the slain, (Ezek. 
 xxxvii. 9.) See also Cant. iv. 16, and Acts ii. 2. — Last, but not 
 least, it seems to me, that Nicodemus' state of perplexity makes 
 it highly probable that our Lord would graciously help his igno- 
 rance by the use of a famihar illustration, like that of the wind. 
 If no illustration at all was used in this verse, it is not quite easy 
 to see how its language would help Nicodemus to understand the 
 doctrine of the new birth. — But if the verse contains a famihar 
 illustration, the whole purpose of our Lord in saying what He 
 did becomes clear and plain. 
 
 JOHN m. 9—21. 
 
 9 Nicodemus answered and said 
 unto him, How can these things be ? 
 
 10 Jesus answered and said un- 
 to him, Art thou a master of Israel, 
 and knowest not these things ? 
 
 1 1 V"erily, verily, I say unto thee. 
 We speak that we do know, and 
 testify that we have seen ; and ye 
 receive not our witness. 
 
 12 If I have told you earthly 
 things, and ye beUeve not, how 
 BhaU ye believe, if I teU you of 
 heavenly Ihings ? 
 
 13 And no man hath ascended 
 up to heaven, but he that came 
 down from heaven, "vtn the Son of 
 man which is in heaven. 
 
 14 And as Moses lifted up the 
 
 serpent in the wilderness, even so 
 must the Son of man be lifted up : 
 
 15 That whosoever belie veth in 
 him should not perish, but have 
 eternal hfe. 
 
 16 For God so loved the world, 
 that he gave his only begotten Son, 
 that whosoever believeth in him 
 should not perish, but have ever- 
 lasting life. 
 
 V\ For God sent not his Son in- 
 to the world to condemn the world ; 
 but that the world through him 
 miglit be saved. 
 
 18 He that beUeveth on him is 
 not condemned: but he that be- 
 lieveth not is condemned already, 
 because he hath not believed in the 
 
140 
 
 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 hateth the light, neither cometh to 
 the light, lest his deeds should be 
 reproved. 
 
 21 But he that doeth truth 
 cometh to the Ught, that his deeds 
 may be made manifest, that they 
 are wrought in God. 
 
 name of the only begotten Son of 
 God. 
 
 19 And this is the condemnation, 
 that light is come into the world, 
 and men loved darkness rather 
 than light, because their deeds 
 were evil. 
 
 20 For every one that doeth evil 
 
 We have in these verses the second part of the conversa- 
 tion between our Lord Jesus Christ and Nicodemus. A 
 lesson about regeneration is closely followed by a lesson 
 about justification ! The whole passage ought always to 
 be read with afiectionate reverence. It contains words 
 which have brought eternal life to myriads of souls. 
 
 These verses show us, firstly, what gross spiritual igno- 
 rance there may he in the mind of a great and learned man. 
 We see a "master of Israel" unacquainted with the first 
 elements of saving religion. Nicodemus is told about the 
 new birth, and at once exclaims, " How can these things 
 be ?" When such was the darkness of a Jewish teacher, 
 what must have been the state of the Jewish people ? It 
 was indeed due time for Christ to appear ! The pastors 
 of Israel had ceased to feed the people with knowledge. 
 The blind were leading the blind, and both were falling 
 into the ditch. (Matt. xv. 14.) 
 
 Ignorance like that of Nicodemus is unhappily far too 
 common in the Church of Christ. We must never be 
 surprised if we find it in quarters where we might reason- 
 ably expect knowledge. Learning, and rank, and high 
 ecclesiastical ofiice are no j^roof that a minister is taught 
 by the Spirit. The successors of Nicodemus, in every age, 
 arft far more numerous than the successors of St. Peter. 
 On no point is religious ignorance so common as on the 
 work of the Holy Ghost. That old stumbling-block, at 
 which Nicodemus stumbled, is as much an ofience to 
 thousands in the present day as it was in the days of 
 Christ. 'The natural man receiveth not the things of 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 141 
 
 the Spirit of God." (1 Cor. ii. 14.) Happy is he who haa 
 been taught to prove all things by Scripture, and to call no 
 man master upon earth. (1 Thess. v. 21 ; Matt, xxiii. 9.) 
 
 These verses show us, secondly, the original source froin 
 which man's salvation springs. That source is the love of 
 God the Father. Our Lord says to Nicodemus, " God so 
 loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that 
 whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have 
 everlasting life." 
 
 This wonderful verse has been justly called by Luther, 
 "The Bible in miniature." No part of it, perhaps, 
 is so deeply important as the first five words, " God so 
 loved the world." The love here spoken of is not that 
 special love with which the Father regards His own 
 elect, but that mighty pity and compassion with which 
 He regards the whole race of mankind. Its object is not 
 merely the little flock which He has given to Christ froti 
 all eternity, but the whole " world " of sinners, withou? 
 any exception. There is a deep sense in which God loves 
 that world. All whom He has created He regards with 
 pity and compassion. Their sins He cannot love ; — but 
 He loves their souls. " His tender mercies are over all 
 His works." (Psal. cxlv. 9.) Christ is God's gracious 
 gift to the whole world. 
 
 Let us take heed that our views of the love of God are 
 Scriptural and well-defined. The subject is one on which 
 error abounds on either side. — On the one hand we must 
 beware of vague and exaggerated opinions. We must 
 maintain firmly that God hates wickedness, and that the 
 end of all who persist in wickedness will be destruction. 
 It is not true that God's love is "lower than hell." It is 
 not true that God so loved the world that all mankind will 
 be finally sa"ved, but that He so loved the world that He 
 gave His Son to be the Saviour of all who believe. His 
 love is offered to all men freely, fully, honestly, and unre- 
 
142 EXPOSITOKY THOUGHTS. 
 
 servedly, but it is only through the one channel cf Christ's 
 redemption. He that rejects Christ cuts himself off from 
 God's love, and will perish evedastingly. — On the other 
 hand, we must beware of narrow and contracted opinions. 
 We must not hesitate to tel] any sinner that God loves him. 
 It is not true that God cares for none but His own elect, or 
 that Christ is not offered to any but those who are ordained 
 to eternal life. There is a " kindness and love" in God 
 towards all mankind. It was in consequence of that love 
 that Christ came into the world, and died upon the cross. 
 Let us not be wise above that which is written, or more 
 systematic in our statements than Scripture itself. God 
 has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. God is not 
 willing that any should perish. God would have all men 
 to be saved. God loves the world. (John vi. 32 ; Titus 
 iii. 4 ; 1 John iv. 10 ; 2 Pet. iii. 9 ; 1 Tim. ii. 4 ; Ezek. xxxiii. 
 
 11.) 
 
 These verses show us, thirdly, the peculiar plan by 
 which the love of God has provided salvation for sinners. 
 That plan is the atoning death of Christ on the cross. Our 
 Lord says to Nicodemus, "As Moses lifted up the serpent 
 in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted 
 I up, that Avhosoever believeth in Him should not perish, 
 I but have eternal life." 
 
 By being " lifted up," our Lord meant nothing less than 
 His own death upon the cross. That death. He would 
 have us know, was appointed by God to be "the life 
 of the w^orld." (John vi. 51.) It was ordained from all 
 eternity to be the great propitiation and satisfaction for 
 man's sin. It was the payment, by an Almighty Substitute 
 and Representative, of man's enormous debt to God. 
 When Christ died upon the cross, our many sins were laid 
 upon Him. He was made " sin" for us. He was made " a 
 curse" for us. (2 Cor. v. 21 ; Gal. iii. 13.) By His death 
 He purchased pardon and complete redemption for sinners. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 143 
 
 The brazen serpent, lifted up in the camp of Isrj^el, brought 
 health and cure within the reach of all who were bitten by 
 serpents. Christ crucified, in like manner, brought eternal 
 life within reach of lost mankind. Chiist has been lifted 
 up on the cross, and man looking to Him by faith may be 
 sayed. 
 
 The truth before us is the very foundation-stone of the 
 Christian religion. Christ's death is the Christian's life. 
 Christ's cross is the Christian's title to heaven. Christ 
 " lifted up" and put to shame on Calvary is the ladder by 
 which Christians "enter into the holiest," and are at 
 length landed in glory. It is true that we are sinners ; — 
 but Christ has suffered for us. It is true that we deserve 
 death ; — but Christ has died for us. It is true that we are 
 guilty debtors ; — but Christ has paid our debts with His 
 own blood. This is the real Gospel ! This is the good 
 news ! On this let us lean while we live. To this let us 
 cling Avh en we die. Christ has been "lifted up" on the 
 cross, and has thrown open the gates of heaven to all 
 believers. 
 
 These verses show us, fourthly, the way in which the 
 benefits of Chrisfs death are made our ow7i. That way 
 is simply to put faith and trust in Christ. Faith is the 
 same thing as believing. Three times our Lord repeats 
 this glorious truth to Nicodemus. Twice He proclaims 
 that "whosoever believeth shall not perish." Once He 
 says, " He that believeth on the Son of God is not con- 
 demned." 
 
 Faith in the Lord Jesus is the very key of salvation. He 
 that has it has life, and he that has it not has not life. 
 Nothing whatever beside this faith is necessary to our 
 complete justification ; but nothing whatever, except this 
 faith, will give us an interest in Christ. We may fast and 
 mourn for sin, and do many things that are right, and ise 
 religions ordinances, and give all our goods to feed the 
 
144 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 poor, and yet remain unpardoned, and lose our souls. — But 
 if we will only come to Christ as guilty sinners, and believe 
 on Him, our sins shall at once be forgiven, and our iniqui- 
 ties shall be entirely put away. Without faith there is no 
 salvation ; but through faith in Jesus, the vilest sinner may 
 be saved. 
 
 If we would have a peaceful conscience in our religion, 
 let us see that our views of saving faith are distinct and 
 clear. Let us beware of supposing that justifying faith is 
 any thing more than a sinner's simple trust in a Saviour, 
 the grasp of a drowning man on the hand held out for his 
 relief. — Let us beware of mingling anything else w^ith faith 
 in the matter of justification. Here we must always 
 remember faith stands entirely alone. A justified man, no 
 doubt, will always be a holy man. True believing will 
 always be accompanied by godly living. But that which 
 gives a man an interest in Christ, is not his living., but his 
 faith. If we w ould know whether our faith is genuine, we 
 do well to ask ourselves how we are living. But if we 
 would know whether we are justified by Christ, there is 
 but one question to be asked. That question is, " Do we 
 believe ?" 
 
 These verses show us, lastly, the true cause of the loss of 
 man^s soul. Our Lord says to Nicodemus, " This is the 
 condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men 
 loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were 
 evil." 
 
 The words before us form a suitable conclusion to the 
 glorious tidings which we have just been considering. They 
 completely clear God of injustice in the condemnation of 
 einners. They show in simple and unmistakeable terms, 
 that although man's salvation is entirely of God, his ruin, 
 if he is lost, will be entirely from himself. He will reap 
 the fruit of his own sowing. 
 
 The doctrine here laid down ought to be carefully re- 
 
145 
 
 membered. It supplies an answer to a common cavil of 
 the enemies of God's truth. There is no decreed reproba- 
 tion, excluding any one from heaven. " God sent not His 
 Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the 
 world through Him might be saved." There is no unwill- 
 ingness on God's part to receive any sinner, however great 
 his eins. God has sent " light " into the world, and if man 
 will not come to the light, the fault is entirely on man's 
 side. His blood will be on his own head, if he makes ship- 
 wreck of his soul. The blame will be at his own door, if 
 he misses heaven. His eternal misery will be the result of 
 his own choice. His destruction will be the work of his 
 ow^n hand. God loved him, and was willing to save him ; 
 but he " loved darkness," and therefore darkness must be 
 his everlasting portion. He would not come to Christ, and 
 therefore he could not have life. (John v. 40.) 
 
 The truths we have been considering are peculiarly 
 weighty and solemn. Do we live as if we believed, them ? 
 — Salvation by Christ's death is close to us to-day. Have 
 we embraced it by faith, and made it our own ? — Let us 
 never rest till we know Christ as our own Saviour. Let us 
 look to Him without delay for pardon and peace, if we 
 have never looked before. Let us go on believing on Him, 
 if we have already believed. " Whosoever," is His own 
 gracious word, — '''-whosoever believeth on Him, shall not 
 perish, but have eternal life." 
 
 Notes. John HI. 9—21. 
 
 9. — [Nicodemus answered. ..Tiow... these things be?] This is the third 
 and last time that Nicodemus speaks during his visit to Christ, 
 BO far as it is reported to us. His question here is a striking and 
 instructive in>tance of the deep spiritual ignorance which may 
 be found in the mind of a learned man. In four different ways 
 our Lord had brought before him one and the same lesson. First, 
 He had laid down the great principle that every man must be 
 "born again." — Secondly, He had repeated the same thing in 
 fuller words, and brought in the idea* of " water/' to .illuatrate 
 
146 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 the work of the Spirit. — Thirdly, he had shown tlie necessity 
 of the new birth, from the natural corruption of man. — Fourthly, 
 He had illustratea the work of the Spirit a second time by tho 
 instance of the " wind." And yet now, after all that our Lord 
 has said, this learned Pharisee seems utterly in the dark, and 
 asks the pitiable question, " How can these things be?" We 
 have no right to be surprised at the vast ignorance of saving 
 religion which we see on all sides, when we consider the history 
 of Nicodemus. We should make up our minds to expect to find 
 spiritual darkness the rule, and spiritual light the exception. 
 Few things in the long run give so much trouble to ministers, 
 missionaries, teachers, and district-visitors, as beginning work 
 with extravagant and unscriptural expectations. 
 
 10. — [Jesus answered and said.] It will be observed, that our 
 Lord does not answer the question of Nicodemus directly, but 
 rebukes him sharply for his ignorance. Yet it ought to be care- 
 fully noted, as Melancthon remarks, that before He conchides 
 what He now begins to say, He supplies a complete answer to 
 His inquirer. He shows him the true root and spring of regene- 
 ration, namely, faith in Himself. He answers his groping in- 
 quiry, " How can these things be ? " by showing him the first 
 step in saving religion, viz., to believe in the Son of God. Ijet 
 Nicodemus begin like a little child, by simply believing on Him 
 who was to be lifted up on the cross, and he would soon under- 
 stand " hoiv " a man could be born again, even in his old age. 
 
 [Art thou a master of Israel] The English version of this 
 question hardly gives the full force of the original. It should 
 be hterally rendered, " Art thou the master of Israel? " i. e., " Art 
 thou the famous teacher and instructor of the Jews?" ''Dost 
 thou profess to be a light of them that sit in darkness, and an 
 instructor of others?" — The expression certainly seems to indi- 
 cate that Nicodemus was a man of established reputation as a 
 • teacher among the Pharisees. When the teachers were so- 
 ignorant, what must have been the state of the taught ? 
 
 [Knowest not these things.] These words unquestionably imply 
 rebuke. The things which our Lord had just mentioned, Nico- 
 demus ought to have known and understood. He professed to 
 be a religious teacher. He professed to know the Old Testament 
 Scriptures. The doctrine, therefore, of the necessity of a new 
 birth ought not to have appeared strange to him. " A clean 
 heart, — circumci'^ion of the heart, — a new heart, — a heart of 
 stone instead of a heart of flesh," were expressions and ideas 
 which he must have read in the prophets, and which all pointed 
 towards the new birth. (Psalm li. 10 ; Jer. iv. 4 ; Ezek. xviii. 31 : 
 xxxvi. 26.) His ignorance conBequently was deserving ol 
 blam^. 
 
147 
 
 The verse before us appears to me to supply a strong argument 
 against the idea that the expression, "born of water and the 
 Spirit" means baptism. I do not see how Nicodemus could 
 possibly have known this doctrine, as it is nowhere revealed in 
 the Old Testament, and even its own advocates confine it to New 
 Testament times. To blame a man for not knowing " things " 
 which he could not possibly know, would be obviously most 
 unjust, and entirely at variance with the general tenor of our 
 Lord's dealings. 
 
 11.. — [We speak that we do know, <frc.] Whom does our Lord mean 
 here when He says "we?" The answers to this question are 
 various. 
 
 (a.) Some think, as Lutntn^, Brentius, Bucer, G-ualter, Aretius, 
 Hutcheson, Musculus, Gomarus, Piscator, and Cartwright, that 
 " we" means, " I and John the Baptist." 
 
 (&.) Some think, as Calvin, Beza, and Scott, that it means, " I 
 and the Old Testament prophets." 
 
 (c.) Some think, as Alcuin, (according to Maldonatus,) and 
 Wesley, that it means, "I and all who are born of the Spirit." 
 
 (d.) Some think, as Chrysostom, Cyril, Rupertus, Calovius, 
 Glassius, Chemnitius, Lampe, Leigh, Nifanius, Cornelius a Lapide, 
 Cocceius, Stier and Bengel, that it means either, " I and the 
 Father,"— or "I and the Holy Ghost, "—or "I and both the 
 Father and the Spirit." 
 
 (e.) Some think, as Theophylact, Zvvingle, Poole, and Dod- 
 dridge, that our Lord only means Himself wnen He says " we," 
 and that He uses the plural number in order to give weight and 
 dignity to what He says, as kings do. So also He says, " Where- 
 unto shall we, liken the kingdom of God? or with what compari- 
 son shall we compare it ? " (Mark iv. 30.) " We," in that text, 
 evidently stands for " I." — In St. John's First Epistle, the first 
 person plural is used instead of the singular repeatedly in the 
 first five verses of the first chapter. 
 
 The last of these five opinions appears to me by far the most 
 probable and satisfactory. — The three first seem to me to be en- 
 tirely overthrown by John the Baptist's words in this chapter, 
 (v. 32,) where he mentions it as a peculiar mark of our Lord's 
 superiority to all other teachers, that " He testifi;;'th what He 
 hath seen and heard." — The fourth opinion appears to me unten- 
 able. The fear of Socinianism must not make us wrest texts 
 in order to apply them to the Trinity. There is a fitness in our 
 Lord's saying, during His earthly mmistry, after His incarnation, 
 "I speak and testily what 1 have known and seen from all 
 eternity with my Father." But there is no apparent fitness in 
 
14:8 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 saying that He and the two other Persons in the Trinity 
 " speak what they have seen." 
 
 The meaning of the sentence appears to be this, *' I declare 
 with authority, and bear witness to truths, which from all 
 eternity I have known and seen, as God in union with the 
 Father and the Holy Ghost. I do not speak (as all merely 
 human ministers must) what I have been taugb.t by others. I 
 do not testify things whiai I have received as God's servant,, as 
 ordinary prophets have, and which I should not have known 
 wi^^hout God's inspiration, I testify what I have seen with my 
 Father, and knew before the world began." It is like the ex- 
 pression, "I speak that which I have seen with my Father." 
 (John viii. 38.) 
 
 Melancthon thinks that our Lord, in this verse, contrasts the 
 uncertain traditions and human inventions which the Pharisees 
 taught, with the sure, certain, and irrefragable truths of God, 
 which he came to preach. 
 
 Bacer remarks that the verse contains a practical lesson for all 
 religious teachers. No man has a right to teach, unless he is 
 thoroughly persuaded of the truth of what he teaches. 
 
 [Ye receive not our witness.] This sentence corresponds so 
 exactly with John the Baptist's words, at verse 32, that it con- 
 firms me in the opinion that our Lord, in this verse, only speaks 
 of Himself. The words before us, as well as those of John the 
 Baptist, must be taken with some qualification : "The greater 
 part of you receive not our testimony." — The object of the verse 
 is to rebuke the unbelief of Nicodemus and all who were like- 
 minded with him among the Jews. The use of the plural num- 
 ber " ye," makes it probable that our Lord in this verse refers 
 not merely to what He had just been saying to Nicodemus, but 
 to all His pubUc teaching at Jerusalem, from the time of His 
 casting out the buyers and sellers in the temple. If we do not 
 adopt this theory, we must suppose Him to mean, '• What I 
 have spoken and testified to you about regeneration, is what I 
 continually say to all who come, like you, to inquire of me; and 
 yet neither you nor they believe what I say. You all alike 
 stumble at this stumbling-stone, the new birth." 
 
 Calvin remarks on this expression, that we ought never to be 
 ourprised at unbehef. If men would not receive Christ's testi- 
 mony, it is no wonder if they will not receive ours. 
 
 [2. [If I have told... earthly., heavenly things?] To see the full force 
 
 of this verse, we should paraphrase it thus. " If ye do not be- 
 lieve what I say when I tell you, as I have done, things that are 
 earthly, how will you beheve if I go on, as I shall do, to tell 
 you of things that are heavenly? If you will not believe when 
 
JOHN, CHAP. lU. 149 
 
 ye hear my first lesson, what will ye do when ye hear my 
 second? If ye are stumbled at the very alphabet of my Q-ospel, 
 what will ye do when I proceed to show you higher and deeper 
 truths?" 
 
 The difi&culty of the verse lies in the two expressions, •' earth- 
 ly things " and " heavenly things." Our Lord does not explain 
 them, and we are therefore left to conjecture their true meaning, 
 — I offer the following explanation with some diffidence, as the 
 most satisfactory one. 
 
 By " t artlily things " I believe our Lord means the doctrine of 
 the "new birth," which He had just been expounding to Nico- 
 demus. By " heavenly things " I believe He means the great 
 and solemn truths which he was about immediately to declare, 
 and which he does declare in rapid succession from this verse 
 down to the end of the conversation. — These truths were His 
 own divinity, — the plan of redemption by His own death on the 
 cross, — the love of God to the whole world, and His consequent 
 provision of salvation, —faith in the Son of God as the only way 
 to escape hell, — and man's wilful rejection of light, the only 
 cause of man's condemnation. 
 
 But why does our Lord call the new birth an " earthly thing ?" 
 I reply that He does so, because it is an " earthly " thing com- 
 pared with His own divinity and atonement. Regeneration is a 
 thing that takes place in man, here upon earth. The atonement 
 is a transaction that was done for man, and of which the special 
 effect is on man's position before God in heaven. In regenera- 
 tion God comes down to man, and dwells in him upon earth. 
 In the atonement Christ takes up man's nature as man's repre- 
 sentative, and as man's forerunner goes up into heaven. — Re- 
 generation is a change of which even the men of this world 
 have pome faint inkling, and which can be illustrated by such 
 earthly figures as water and wind. Almost every one allows, 
 as Bucer remarks, that he is not so good as he should be, and 
 that he heeds some change to fit him for heaven. Christ's di- 
 vinity, and the incarnation,, and the atonement, and justification 
 by faith, are such high and heavenly things that man has no 
 natural conception of them. — Regeneration is so far an " earth- 
 ly " idea that even irreligious men borrow the word, and talk of 
 regenerating nations, and society. Salvation by faith in Christ's 
 blood is so entir^-ly a " heavenly thing," that it is constantly mis- 
 understood, hated, and sneered at by unconverted men. — When 
 therefore our Lord calls the new birth an '■ earthly thing," we 
 must understand that he does so comparatively. In itself the 
 new bu-th is a high, holy, and " heavenly thing." But compared 
 with the doctrine of the incarnation and the atonement, it is m 
 " earthly thing." 
 
150 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 13. — [And no man hath ascended, (£c.] This verse, according to my 
 view, contains the first " heavenly thing " which our Lord dis- 
 plays to Nicodemus. But the sentence is undeniably a difficult 
 one, and commentators differ widely as to its meaning. 
 
 Some think, as Calvin. Masculus, Bullinger, Hutcheson, Poole, 
 Quesnel, Schottgen, Dyke, Lightfoot, Leigh, Doddridge. A. 
 Clarke, and Stier, that our Lord here shows to Nicodemus, ir 
 highly figurative language, the necessity of divine teaching, in 
 order to understand spiritual truth. — " No child of Adam has 
 ever reached the lofty mysteries of heaven, and made himself 
 acquainted with its high and holy truths, by his own natural 
 understanding. Such knowledge is only possessed by the in- 
 carnate Saviour, the Son of man, who has come down from 
 heaven. If you would know spiritual truth, you must sit at His 
 feet, ami learn of Him." This view of the text is supported by 
 Prov. XXX. 34. According to this view, the verse must be taken 
 in close connection with the preceding one, where the ignorance 
 of Nicodemus is exposed. 
 
 Some think, as Zwingle, Melancthon, Brentius, Aretius, Fla- 
 cius, and Ft-rus, that our Lord here shows to Nicodemus, (and 
 again in highly figurative language,) the impossibility of human 
 merit, and the utter inabihty of man justifying himself, and ob- 
 taining an entrance into heaven by his own righteousness. — 
 " No one can possibly ascend into Grod's presence in heaven, and 
 stand perfect and complete before Him, except the incarnate Sa- 
 viour, who has come down from heaven to fultil .all righteous- 
 ness. I am the way to heaven. If you would enter heaven, 
 you must believe on the Son of man, and become a member of 
 His body by faith." — This view of the text appeals for support 
 to Rom. X. 6 — 9. According to this view, the verse must be 
 taken in close connection with the following verse^ in which the 
 way of justification is explained. 
 
 The true view of the text, I venture to think, is as follows. 
 The words of the text are to be taken literally. Our Lord be- 
 gins His list of "heavenly things" by declaring to Nicodemus 
 His own divine nature and dignity. He reminds him that no 
 one has ever ascended literally into that heaven where God 
 dwells. Enoch, and Elijah, and David, for iristance, were doubt- 
 less in a place of bliss, when they left this world, but they had 
 not " ascended into heaven." (Acts ii. 34.) But that which no 
 man, not even the hoUest saint, had attained, was the right and 
 pierogative of Him in whose company Nicodemus was. The 
 Son of man had dwelt from all eternity in heaven, had come 
 down from lieaven, would one day ascend again into heaven, 
 and in His <livine nature was actually in heaven, one with God 
 the Father, at that very moment. — " Know who it is to whom 
 
. JOHN, CHAP. HI. Vj\ 
 
 you are speaking. I am not merely a teacher come from God, 
 as you say. I am the Messiah, the Son of man, foretold b^ 
 Daniel. I have come down from heaven, according to prom so, 
 to save sinners. I shall one day ascend again mto heaven, as 
 the victorious forerunner of a saved people. Above all, I am as 
 God in heaven at this moment. I am He who fills heaven and 
 earth," — I prefer this view of the verse to any other, for two 
 reasons. For one thing, it gives a literal meaning to every word 
 in the text. For another, it seems a fitting answer to the first 
 idea which Nicodemus had put forward in the conversation, viz., 
 that our Lord was only " a teacher come from God." It is the 
 view Tvhich is in the main held by Rollock, Calovius, and Goma- 
 rus, and expounded by them with much ability. 
 
 The Greek word which we render " but," I am inclined to 
 think, ought to be taken in an adversative rather than in an ex- 
 ceptive sense. Instances of this usage will be found in Matt. xii. 
 4 ; Mark xiii. 32 ; Luke iv. 26, 27 ; John xvii. 12 ; Rev. ix. 4 ; 
 xxi. 27. The thought appears to be, " Man has not, and cannot 
 ascend into heaven. But that which man cannot do, I the Son 
 of man can do." 
 
 " Heaven," throughout this verse, must be taken in jae sense 
 of that immediate and pecuhar presence of God, which we can 
 conceive of and express in no other form than by the word 
 " heaven." 
 
 The expression "which is in heaven," deserves particular 
 notice. It is one of those many expressions in the New Testa- 
 ment which can be explained in no other way tiian by the doc- 
 trine of Christ's divinity. It would be utterly absurd and un- 
 true to say of any mere man, that at the very time he was 
 speaking to another on earth he was in heaven ! But it can be 
 said of Christ with perfect truth and propriety. He never ceased 
 to be very God, when He became incarnate. He was ^'' with 
 God and was God." As God He was in heaven while He was 
 speaking lo Nicodemus. 
 
 The expression is one which no Socinian can explain away. 
 If Christ was only a very holy man and nothing more, He could 
 not have used the^a words. The Socinian explanation of the for- 
 mer part of the verse, viz., that Christ was caught up into heaven 
 after His baptism, and there instructed about the Gospel He was 
 to teach, would be of itself utterly absurd, and a mere theory 
 invented to get over a difficulty. But the conclusion of the 
 verse is a blow at the very root of the Socinian system. It is 
 written not only that Christ " came down from heaven," but. 
 that " he is in heaven." 
 
 It admits of a question whether the Greek words which we 
 
152 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 translate " wliicli is," do not, both here and in chap. i. 18, poini 
 to that peculiar name of Jehovah, which was doubtless familiar 
 to jSTicodemus, " The ever existing One ; the Uving One " It is 
 the same phrase which forms part of Christ's name in Revela- 
 tion, 'Him which is." (Rev. i. 4.) 
 
 Much cf the difficulty of the verse is removed by remember- 
 ing that the past tense, "hath ascended," admits of being ren- 
 dered with equal grammatical correctness, " does ascend, can 
 ascend, or will ascend." Pearce takes this view, and quotes in 
 support of it John i. 26 ; iii. 18 ; v. 24 ; vi. 69 ; xi. 27 ; xx. 29. 
 
 Whitby thinks that throughout this verse our Lord has in 
 view a Rabbinical tradition, that Moses had been into heaven 
 to receive the law, — and that He declares the falsehood of this 
 tradition by saying, "no man, not even Moses, has ascended 
 into heaven." 
 
 J 4. — [As Moses lifted.. .serpent. .so must, &c., c&c] In this verse our 
 Lord proceeds to show Nicodemus another " heavenly thing," 
 viz., the necessity of His own crucifixion. Nicodemus probably 
 thought, like most Jews, that when Messiah appeared. He would 
 come with power and glory, to be exalted and honoured by men. 
 Jesus tells him that so far from this being the case, Messiah 
 must be " cut off" at His first advent, and put to an open shame 
 by being hanged on a tree. He illustrates this by a well-known 
 event in the history of Israel's wanderings, the story of the 
 brazen serpent. (Numb. xxi. 9.) "Are you expecting me to take 
 to myself power and to restore the kingdom of Israel ? Cast 
 away such a vain expectation. I have come to do very different 
 work. I have come to suffer, and to offer up myself as a sacri- 
 fice for sin." 
 
 The mention of Moses, of whom the Pharisees thought so 
 much, was eminently Ci.lculated to arrest the attention of Nico- 
 demus. " Even Moses, in whom ye trust, has supplied a most 
 vivid type of my great work on earth — the crucifixion." 
 
 [The Son of Man must he lifledup.] The expression " Son of 
 Man " was doubtless intended to remind Nicodemus of Daniel's 
 prophecy of the Me siah. — The Greek word rendered " must," 
 signifies "it behoveth that," "it is necessary that." It is neces- 
 sary in order that God's promises of a Redeemer may be ful- 
 filled, — the types of the Old Testament sacrifices be accomplish- 
 ed, — the law of God be satisfied, — and a way for God's mo-cy 
 be provided. In order to all this Messiah must suffer in our 
 st'iad. The phrase " lifted up," appears to me most decidedly to 
 mean " lilted up on the cross." For one thing we find it so ex- 
 plained in this Gospel. (John xii. 32, 33.) Por another the il- 
 lus/ration of the brazen serpent makes it absolutely necessary 
 
153 
 
 to explain it so. To apply the phrase, as Calvin and others do, 
 to the " necessity of lifting up and exalting Christ's atonement 
 in Christian teaching," seems to me a mistake. It is needlessly 
 dragging in an idea which the words were not intended to co!i- 
 vey. It is truth no doubt, and truth abundantly taught in Scrip- 
 tare, but not the truth of this text. 
 
 The main points of resemblance in the comparison, — '' Aa 
 Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness," — form a subject 
 which requires careful handling. The lifting up of the serpent 
 of brass for the relief of Israel when bitten by serpents, is evi- 
 dently selected by our Lord as an apt illustration of His own 
 crucifixion for sinners. But how far may we press th's illus- 
 tration ? Where are we to stop ? What are the exact points at 
 which the type and antitype meet ? These questions require 
 consideration. 
 
 Some see a meaning in the " brass" of which the serpent was 
 made, as a shining metal, a strong metal, &c., &c. I cannot see 
 it. Our Lord does not even mention the brass. 
 
 Some see in the " serpent" hanging on the pole, a type of the 
 devil, the old serpent, bruised by Christ's death on the cross, and 
 openly triumphed over on it. (Coloss. ii. 15.) I cannot see tliis 
 at all. It appears to me to confound and mingle up two Scrip- 
 tural truths, which ought to be kept distinct. Moreover, there 
 is something revolting in the idea, that in order to be healed, 
 the Israehte had to look at a figure of the devil. 
 
 Some see in *' Moses" lifting up the serpent, a type of the law 
 of God requiring payment of its demands, and becoming the 
 cause of Christ dying on the cross. On this I will content myself 
 with saying that I am not satisfied that this idea was in Christ's 
 mind. 
 
 The points of resemblance appear to me to be these. — 
 
 (a.) As the Israelites were in sore distress, and dying from 
 the bites of poisonous serpents, so is man in great spiritual 
 danger, and dying from the poisonous effects of sin. 
 
 (&.) As the serpent of brass was lifted up on a pole in the 
 sight of the camp of Israel, so Christ was to be lifted ap on the 
 cross pubhcly, and in the sight of the whole nation, at the 
 Passover. 
 
 (c.) As the serpent, lifted up on the pole, was an imacre of 
 the very thing which had poisoned the Israelites, even so Christ 
 hai in Himself no sin, and yet was made and crucified " in the 
 likeness of sinful flesh," and counted sin. (Rom. viii. 3.) The 
 brazen serpent was a serpent wiihout poison, and Christ was a 
 man without sin. The thing which we should specially see in 
 
 7* 
 
154 EXPOSITOHY THOUGHTS. • 
 
 Christ crucified, is our sin liaid upon Him, and Him counted as a 
 sinner, and treated as a sinner, and punished as a sinner, for 
 our redemption. In fact we see on the cross our sins punished, 
 crucified, borne, and carried by our Redeemer. 
 
 (d.) Finally, as the one way by which Israehtes obtained 
 relief from the brazen serpent, was by looking at it, so the one 
 way to get benefit from Christ, is to look at him by faith. The 
 feeblest look brought cure to an Israelite, and the weakest faith, 
 if true and sincere, brings salvation to sinners. 
 
 It should be carefully noted, that it seems impossible to recor- 
 cile this verse with that modern divinity which can see nothing 
 in Christ's death but a great act of self-sacrifice, and which 
 denies Christ's substitution for us on the cross, and the imputa- 
 tion of our sins to Him. Such divinity withers upsuch a verse 
 as this entirely, and cuts out the life, heart, and marrow of its 
 meaning. Unless words are most violently wrested from their 
 ordinary signification, the illustration before us points directly 
 towards two great truths of the Gospel. One of them is that 
 Christ's death upon the cross was meant to have a medicinal, 
 health-conferring effect upon our souls, and that there was some- 
 thing in it fiir above a mere martyr's example. The other truth 
 is, that when Christ died upon the cross. He was dealt with as 
 our Substitute and Representative, and punished, through the 
 imputation of our sins, in our place. The thing that Israel saw 
 on the pole, and from which thny got health, was an image of the 
 very serpent that bit them. The object that Christians should 
 see on the cross, is a Divine Person, made sin and a curse for 
 them, and allowing that very sin that has poisoned the world to 
 be imputed to Him, and laid upon His head. — It is easy work 
 to sneer at the words " vicarious sacrifice," and " imputed merit," 
 as nowhere to be found in Scripture. But it is not so easy to 
 disprove the fact that the " ideas" are constantly to be met with 
 in the Bible. 
 
 The use of the brazen serpent in this verse, as an ilhistration 
 of Christ's death and its purpose, must not be abused, and made 
 an excuse for turning every incident of the history of Israel in 
 the wilderness into an allegory. It is very important not to 
 attach an allegorical meaning to Bible facts without authority. 
 Such things as the manna, the smitten rock, and the brazen 
 serpent, are allegorized for us by the Holy Ghost. But where 
 the Holy Ghost has not pointed out any allegory, we ought to 
 be very cautious in our as-ertions that allegory exists. Bucer's 
 remarks on this subject deserve reading. 
 
 16. — [That whosoever believeth... not perish.. .life.] In this verse our 
 Lord declares to Nicodemus the great end and purpose for which 
 the Son of man was to be " lifted up" on the cross, and the way 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 155 
 
 in which the benefits of Kis crucifixion become our own. In 
 interpreting the verse, we should carefully remember that the 
 comparison of the serpent lifted up in the wilderness must be 
 carried through to the end of the sentence. The Son of man 
 must be lifted up on the cross, that whosoever believeth on Him, 
 or looks to Him by faith, as the Israelites looked to the brazen 
 serpent, should not perish in hell. 
 
 The expression "whosoever," deserves special notice. It 
 might have been equally well translated " every one." It is 
 intended to show us the width and breadth of Christ's offers of 
 salvation. They are for "every one," without exception, that 
 "believeth." 
 
 The expression " believeth in Him," is deeply important. It 
 describes that one act of man's soul which is needful to give him 
 an interest in Jesus Christ. It is not a mere belief of the head 
 that there is such a Person as Jesus Christ, and that He is a 
 Saviour, It is a belief of the heart and will: When a person, 
 feeling his desperate need by reason of sin, flees to Jesus Christ, 
 and trusts in Him, leans on Him, and commits his soul entirely to 
 Him as his Saviour and Eedeemer, he is said, in the language of 
 the text, to " believe on Him." — The simpler our views of faith 
 are, the better. The more steadily we keep in view the Israelites 
 looking at the brazen serpent, the more we shall understand the 
 words before us. " Believing" is neither more nor less than 
 heart-looking. Whosoever looked at the brazen serpent was 
 made weU, however ill he was, and however feeble his look. 
 Just so, whosoever looks to Jesus by faith, is pardoned, however 
 great his sins may have been, and how^ever feeble his faith. — Did 
 the Israelite look? That was the only question in the matter of 
 being healed from the serpent's bite. — Does the sinner believe ? 
 That is the only question in the matter of being justified and 
 pardoned. — Looking to Moses, or looking to the tabernacle, or 
 looking even to the pole on which the serpent hung, or looking 
 to anything except the brazen serpent, the bitten Israelite would 
 not have been cured. Just so, looking to anything but Christ 
 crucified, however holy the object looked at may be, the sinner 
 cannot be saved. 
 
 The expression, " should not perish, but have eternal life," is 
 pecuharly strong. As the Israelite who looked to the brazen 
 serpent not only did not die of his wounds, but recovered com- 
 plete health, so the sinner who looks to Jesus not only escapes 
 hell and condemnation, but has a seed of eternal life at once put 
 in his heart, receives a complete title to an eternal life of glory 
 and blessedness in heaven, and enters into that life after death. — 
 The salvation of the Gospel is exceedingly full. It is not merely 
 being pardoned. It is being counted completely righteous, and 
 made a citizen of heaven. It is not merely an escape from hell, 
 
.15) EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 but the reception of a title to heaven. It has been well remark- 
 ed, that the Old Testament generally promised only " length of 
 dajs," but the Gospel promises "everlasting life." 
 
 10. — [For God so loved the worldj <fcc.] Our Lord, in this verse, 
 shews Nicodemus another " heavenly thing." — Nicodemus pro- 
 bably thought, like many Jews, that God's purposes of mercy 
 were entirely confined to His chosen people Israel, and that when 
 Messiah appeared. He would appear only for the special benefit 
 of the Jewish nation. Our Lord here declares to him that God 
 loves all the world without any exception, that the Messiah, 
 the only begotten Son of God, is the Father's gift to the whole 
 vfamily of Adam, and that every one, whether Jew or Gentile, 
 who believes on Him for salvation, may have eternal life. — A 
 more startling declaration to the ears of a rigid Pharisee it is 
 impossible to conceive ! A more wonderful verse is not to be 
 found in the Bible I That God should love such a wicked world 
 as this and not hate it, — that He should love it so as to provide 
 salvation — that in order to provide salvation He should give, not 
 an angel, or any created being, but such a priceless gift as His 
 only begotten Son, — that this great salvation should be freely 
 offered to every one that believeth, — all, all this is wonderful in- 
 deed 1 This was indeed a " heavenly thing." 
 
 The words, " God loved the world," have received two very 
 different interpretations. The importance of the subject in the 
 present day makes it desirable to state both views fully. 
 
 Some think, as Hutcheson, Lampe, and Gill, that the " world " 
 here means God's elect out of every nation, whether Jews or 
 Gentiles, and that the " love" with which God is said to love 
 them is that eternal love with which the elect were loved before 
 creation began, and by which their calling, justification, pre- 
 servation and final salvation are completely secured. — This view, 
 though supported by many and great divines, does not appear- 
 to me to be our Lord's meaning. For one thing, it seems to me 
 a violent straining of language to confine the word '' world " to 
 the elect. " The world" is undoubtedly a name sometimes given 
 to the " wicked " exclusively. But I cannot see that it is a name 
 ever given to the saints. — For another thing, fo interpret the 
 word " world " of the elect only is to ignore the distinction 
 which, to my eyes, is plainly drawn in the text between the 
 whole of mankind and those out of mankind who '' believe." 
 If the "world" means only the believing portion of mankind, 
 it would have been quite enough to say, " God so loved the 
 world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that the world sliould 
 not perish." But our Lord does not say so. He says, '' that 
 whosoever believeth, i. e., that whosoever out of the world be- 
 lieveth."— Lastly, to confine God's love to the elect, is taking a 
 
JOHN CHAP III. 157 
 
 harsh and narrow view of God's character, and fairly lays 
 Christiar.ity open to the modern charges brought against it as 
 cruel and unjust to the ungodly. If Grod takes no thought for 
 any but his elect, and cares for none beside, how shall God judge 
 the world ? — I believe in the electing love of God the Father as 
 stro- gly as any one. I regard the special love with which God 
 loves the sheep whom He has given to Christ from all eternity, 
 as a most blessed and comfortable truth, and one most cheering 
 and profitable to beUevers. I only say, that it is not the truth of 
 this text. 
 
 The true view of the words, " God loved the world," I believe 
 to be this. The " world " means the whole race of mankind, 
 both saints and sinners, without any exception. The word, in 
 my opinion, is so used in John i. 10, 29 ; vi. 33, 51 ; viii. 12. — 
 Rom. iii. 19.— 2 Cor. v. 19.— 1 John ii. 2; iv. U. The "love" 
 spoken of is that love of pity aad compassion with which God 
 regards all His creatures, and specially regards mankind. It is 
 the same feehng of "love" which appears in Psalm cxlv. 9, — 
 Ezek. xxxiii. 11 —John vi. 32.— Titus iii. 4.— 1 John iv. 10.— 
 2 Pet. iii. 9. — 1 Tim. ii. 4. It is a love unquestionably distinct 
 and separate from the special love with which God regards His 
 saints. It is a love of pity and not of approbation or complais- 
 ance. But it is not the less a real love. It is a love which 
 clears God of injustice in judging the world. 
 
 I am quite familiar with the objections commonly brought 
 against the theory I have just propounded. I find no weight 
 in them, and am not careful to answer them. Those who con- 
 fine God's love exclusively to the elect appear to me t > take a 
 narrow and contracted view of God's character and attributes. 
 They refuse to God that attribute of compassion with which even 
 an earthly father can regard a profligate son, and can ofifer to him 
 pardon, even though his compassion is despised and his offers 
 refused. I have long come to the conclusion that men may be 
 more systematic in their statements than the Bible, and may be 
 led into grave error by idolatrous veneration of a system. The 
 following quotation from one whom for convenience sake I must 
 call a thorough Calvinist, I mean Bishop Davenant, will show 
 that the view I advocate is not new. 
 
 '' The general love of God toward mankind is so clearly tes- 
 tified in Holy Scripture, and so demonstrated by the manifold 
 effects of God's goodness and mercy extended to every par- 
 ticular man in this world, that to doubt thereof were infidelity, 
 and to deny it plain blasphemy." — Davenanfs Answer to Hoard, 
 p.l. 
 
 "God hateth nothing which Himself created. And yet it is 
 most true that He hateth sin in any creature, and hateth -the 
 
158 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 creature infected with sin, in such manner as hatred may be 
 attributed to Q-od. But for all this He so generally loved man- 
 kind, fallen in Adam, that He hath given His only begotten 
 Son^ that what sinner soever believeth in Him should not perish 
 but have everlasting life. And this everlasting life is so provided 
 for man by God, that no decrees of His can bring any man thither 
 without faith and repentance ; and no decrees of His can keep 
 any man out who repenteth and beheveth. As for the measure 
 of God's love exhibited in the external effect unto man, it must 
 not be denied that God poureth out His grace more abundantly 
 on some men than on others, and worketh more powerfully and 
 effectually in the hearts of some men than of other:?, and that out 
 of His alone will and pleasure. But yet, when this more special 
 love is not extended, His less special love is not restrained to 
 outward and temporal mercies, but reacheth to internal and 
 spiritual blessings, even such as will bring men to an eternal 
 blessedness, if their voluntary wickedness hinders not." — Dave- 
 nanfs Answer to Hoard^ p. 469. 
 
 " No divine of the Reformed Church, of sound judgment, will 
 deny a general intention or appointment concerning the salvation 
 of all men individually by the death of Christ, on the condition 
 if they should believe. For the intention or appointment of 
 God is general, and is plainly revealed in holy Scripture, although 
 the absolute and not to be frustrated intention of God concerning 
 the gift of faith and eternal life to some persons, is special, and 
 limited to the elect alone. So I have maintained and do main- 
 tain." — Davenanfs Opinion on the Gallican Controversy. 
 
 Calvin observes on this text, " Christ brought life, because the 
 heavenly Father loves the human race, and wishes that they 
 should not perish," Again he says, '' Christ employed the uni- 
 versal term whosoever^ both to invite indiscriminately all to par- 
 take of hfe, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers. Such 
 also is the import of the term world. Though there is nothing 
 in the world that is worthy of God's favour, yet He shows Him- 
 self to be, reconciled to the whole world, when He invites all 
 men without exception to the faith of Christ." 
 
 The same view of God's " love" and the " world," in this text, 
 is taken by Brentius, Bucer, Calovius, Glassius, Chemnitius, 
 Musculus. Bullinger, Bengel, Nifanius, Dyke, Scott, Henry, and 
 Man ton. 
 
 The little word " so," in this verse, has called forth many re- 
 marks, on account of its depth of meaning. It doubtless signifies 
 " so greatly, so much, so dearly." Bishop Sanderson, quoted by 
 Ford, observes, "How much that 'so' containeth, no tongue or 
 wit of man cai reach : nothing expresseth it better to the life, 
 than the work .tself doth." 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 159 
 
 [^That he gave his only hegotten Sonl The gift of Christ, be it 
 here noted, is the result of God's love to the world, and not the 
 cause. To say that Go. I loves us because Christ died for us, is 
 wretched theology indeed. But to say that Christ came into the 
 world in consequence of the love of God, is scriptural truth. 
 
 The expression " he gave," is a remarkable one. Christ is God 
 the Father's gift to a lost and sinful world. He was given gene- 
 rally to be the Saviour, the Redeemer, tl^e Friend of sinners, — to 
 make an atonement sufficient for all, — and to provide a re- 
 demption large enough for all. To e£fect this, the Father freely 
 gave Him up to be despised, rejected, mocked, crucified, and 
 counted guilty and accursed for our sakes. It is written that He 
 was " delivered for our offences," and that '' God spared Him not, 
 but delivered him up for us all." (Rom. iv. 25 ; viii. 32.) Christ 
 is the " gift of God," spoken of to the Samaritan woman, (John 
 iv. 10,) and the " unspeakable gift" spoken of by St. Paul. (2 
 Cor. ix. 15.) He Himself says to the wicked Jews, "My Father 
 giveth you the true bread from heaven." (John vi. 32.) This last 
 text, be it noted, was one with which Erskine silenced the 
 General Assembly in Scotland, when he was accused of offering 
 Christ too freely to sinners. 
 
 It should be observed that our Lord calls Himself " the only 
 begotten Son of God" in this verse. In the verse but one before 
 this. He called Himself " the Son of man." Both the names were 
 used in order to impress upon the mind of Nicodemus the two 
 natures of Messiah. He was not only the Son of man but the 
 Son of God. But it is striking to remark that precisely the same 
 words are used in both places about faith in Christ. If we would 
 be saved, we must beheve in Him both as the Son of man and 
 the Son of God. 
 
 [That whosoever believefh, (S)C.,..Jife.] These words are exactly 
 the same as those in the preceding verse. Why our translators 
 should have rendered the same Greek word by "everlasting" 
 in one place, and '* eternal " in the other, it is hard to say. In 
 Matt. XXV. 46, they did just the same. 
 
 The repetition of this glorious saying, "whosoever believeth," 
 is very instructive. For one thing it serves to show that mighty 
 and broad as is the love of God, it will prove useless to every one 
 who does not believe in Christ. God loves all the world, but 
 God will save none in the world who refuse to believe in His 
 only begotten Son, — For another thing it shows us the great 
 point to which every Christian should direct his attention. He 
 must tee to it that he beheves on Christ. It is mere wasfe of 
 time to be constantly asking ourselves whether God loves us, 
 and whether Christ died for us ; and it argues gross ignorance of 
 Scripture to trouble ourselves with such questions. The Bible 
 
160 EXPOSITORY IHOUGHTS. 
 
 never telh men to look at these questions, but commands them 
 to beheve. Salvation, it always teaches, does not turn on the 
 point, " did Christ die for me ?" but on the point, " do I believe 
 on Christ ?" If men do not '^ have eternal life," it is never because 
 God did not love them, or because Christ was not given for them, 
 but" because they do not believe on Christ. 
 
 In leaving this verse, I may remark, that the idea maintained 
 by Erasmus, Olshausen, Wetstein, Rosenmuller, and others, that 
 it does not contain our Lord's words, and that from this verse 
 down to the 21st we have St. John's comments or observations, 
 appears to me utterly destitute of foundation, and unsupported 
 by a single argument worth noticing. That our Lord would not 
 have used the third person in speaking of Himself is no argu- 
 ment. We find Him frequently speaking of Himself in the third 
 person. See, for instance, John v. 19, 29. There is literally no- 
 thing to be gained by adopting the theory, w^iile it contradicta 
 the common belief of nearly all believers in every age of the 
 world. 
 
 Flacius observes that this verse and the two preceding ones 
 comprise all the causes of justification : 1. The remote and 
 efficient cause, Grod's love. 2. The approximate efficient cause, 
 the gift of Grod's Son. 3. The material cause, Christ's exaltation 
 on the cross. 4. The instrumental cause, faith. 5. The final 
 cause, eternal hfe. 
 
 17. — [ God sent not....condemn... .world.'] In this verse our Lord shows 
 Nicodemus another ''heavenly thing." He shows him the main 
 object of Messiah coming into the world. It was not to judge 
 men, but to die for them ; not to condemn, but to save. 
 
 I have a strong impression that when our Lord spoke these 
 words, He had in view the prophecy of David about Messiah 
 bruising the nations with a rod of iron, and Daniel's prophecy 
 about the judgment, where he speaks of the thrones being cast 
 down, and the Ancient of days judging the world. (Psalm ii. 6 — 
 9: Dan. vii. 9—22.) I think that Nicodemus. like most Jews, 
 was filled with the expectation that when Messinh came He 
 would come with power and great glory, and. judge all men. Our 
 Lord corrects this notion in this verse. He declares that Messiah's 
 first advent was not to judge but to save people from their sins. 
 He says in another place. " I came r»ot to judge the world, but 
 to save the world." (John xii. 47.) The Q-reek word for judging 
 and condemning, it must be remembered, is one and the same. 
 Judgment and the condemnation of the ungodly, our Lord would 
 have us know, are not the work of the first advent, but of the 
 second. The special work of the first advent was to seek and 
 save that which was lost. 
 
 [That....iuorld.... through Him. ...saved.] This sentence must 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IIT. 161 
 
 deafly be interpreted with some qualification. It would contra- 
 dict other plain texts of Scripture, if we took it to mean, "God 
 sent His Son into the world, that all the world might finally be 
 saved through Him, and none be lost." In fact, our Lord Him- 
 self declares in the very next verse, " that he that beiieveth not 
 is condemned already." 
 
 The meaning of the sentence evidently is, that " all the world 
 might have a door of salvation opened through Christ, — that 
 salvation might be provided for all the world, — and that so any 
 one in the world beheving on Christ, might be saved." In this 
 view it is hke the expression of St. John, *' The Father sent the 
 Son to be the Saviour of the world." (1 John iv. 14.) 
 
 The expression, " God hath sent," in this verse, ought not to 
 be overlooked. It is very frequently applied, in St. John's Gos- 
 pel, to our Lord. At least thirty-eight times we find Him speaking 
 of Himself as Him " whom God hath sent." It is probably fronc 
 this expression that St. Paul derives the peculiar name whicli 
 he gives to our Lord, " The apostle of our profession." (Heb. iii. 
 1.) The apostle means simply, *' The sent one." 
 
 The readiness of natural man everywhere to regard Christ as 
 a Judge much more than as a Saviour, is a curious fact. The 
 whole system of the Roman Catholic Church is fuU of the idea. 
 People are taught to be afraid of Christ, and to flee to the Virgin 
 Mary ! Ignorant Protestants are not much better. They often 
 regard Christ as a kind of Judge, whose demands they will have 
 to satisfy at the last day, much more than as a present personal 
 Saviour and Friend. Our Lord f«eems to foresee this error, and 
 to correct it in the words of this text. 
 
 Calvin observes on this verse, " Whenever our sins press us, — 
 whenever Satan would drive us to despair, — we ought to hold 
 out this shield, that God is unwiUing that we should be over- 
 whelmed with everlasting destruction, because He has appointed 
 His Son to be the salvation of the world." 
 
 18. — [He that helieveth on JIim....is not condemned.] In this verse 
 our Lord shows Nicodemus another "heavenly thing." He do- 
 clares the privileges of believing, and the peril of not believing 
 in the Son of God. Nico lemus had addressed Him as a " teacher 
 come from Gol." He would have Nicodemus know that He 
 was that high and holy One, to believe on whom was hfe eter- 
 nal, and not to believe on whom was everlasting destruction. 
 Life or death was before men. If they believed and received 
 Him as the Messiah, they would be saved. If they beheved not, 
 they would die in their sins. 
 
 The expression, " He that beiieveth," deserves special notice. 
 It is the third time that our Lord speaks of " believing " on 
 
162 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Himself, and the consequence of believing, within four verses. 
 It shows the immense importance of faith in the sinner's justi- 
 fication. It is that one thing, without which eternal life cannot 
 be had. — It shows the amazing graciousness of the Gospel, and 
 its admirable suitableness to the wants of human nature. — A 
 man may have been the worst of sinners, but if he will only 
 " believe," he is at once pardoned. Last, but not least, it shows 
 the need of clear, distinct views of the nature of saving faith, 
 and the importance of keeping it entirely distinct from works or 
 any kind, in the matter of justification. Faith, and faith only, 
 gives an interest in Christ. The old sentence of Luther's day8 
 is perfectly true, — paradoxical and startling as it may sound, 
 " The faith which justifies is not the faith which includes charity, 
 but the faith which lays hold on Christ." 
 
 The expression, " is not condemned," is equivalent to saying, 
 "he is pardoned, acquitted, justified, cleared from a-l guilt, 
 delivered from the curse of a broken law, no longer counted a 
 sinner, but reckoned perfectly righteous in the sight of God." 
 The presentness of the phrase, if one may coin a word, should be 
 specially noticed. It is not said, that the believer "shall not 
 be condemned at the last day," but that " he is not condemned." 
 The very moment a sinner believes on Christ, his iniquities are 
 taken away, and he is counted righteous. " All that beUeve are 
 justified from all things." (Acts xiii. 39.) 
 
 [ffe....helieveth not... condemned already.] This sentence means 
 that the man who refuses to believe on Christ is in a state of 
 condemnation before God, even while he lives. The curse of a 
 broken law, which we all deserve, is upon him. His sins are 
 upon his head. He is reckoned guilty and dead before God, and 
 there is but a step between him and hell. Faith takes all a 
 man's sins away. Unbelief keeps them all on him. Through 
 faith a man is made an heir of heaven, though kept outside till 
 he dies. Through unbelief a man is already a subject of the 
 devil, though not yet entirely in his power, and within hell. The 
 moment a man believes, all charges are completely wiped away 
 from his name. So long as a man does not believe, his sins 
 cover him over, and make him abominable before God, and the 
 just wrath of God abides upon him. 
 
 Melancthon remarks that the sentence of God's condemnation, 
 which was passed at the beginning, " Thou shalt surely die," 
 remains in full force and unrepealed, against every one who does 
 not believe on Christ. No new condemnation is needful. Every 
 man or woman who does not believe, is under the curse, and 
 condemned already. 
 
 [Because.. ..not believed.. ..name.... Son of God.] This sentence 
 is justly thought to prove that no sin is so great, and so damning 
 
JOHN, CEIAP. IIT. 163 
 
 and ruinous to the soul as unbelief. In one sense it is the only 
 unpardonable sin. All other sins may be forgiven, however many 
 and great, and a man may stand complete before God. But if a 
 man will not believe on Christ, there is no hope for him ; and if 
 he persists in his unbelief he cannot be saved. Nothing is so 
 provoking and offensive to God as to refuse the glorious salvation 
 He has provided at so mighty a cost, by the death of His only 
 begotten Son. Nothing is so suicidal on the part of man as to 
 turn away from the only remedy which can heal his soul. Other 
 sins may be scarlet, filthy, and abominable. But not to believe 
 on Christ is to bar the door in our own way, and to cut off our- 
 selves entirely from heaven. It has been truly remarked that it 
 was a greater sin in Judas Iscariot not to believe on Christ for 
 pardon, after he had betrayed Him, than to betray Him into the 
 hands of his enemies. To betray Him no doubt was an act of 
 enormous covetousness, wickedness, and ingratitude. But not 
 to seek Him afterwards by faith for pardon, was to disbelieve 
 His mercy, love, and power to save. 
 
 The expression " the name," as the object of faith, is explained 
 in chap. i. 12. Here, as frequently, it stands for the attributeg, 
 character, and oflBce of the Son of God. 
 
 Luther, quoted by Brown, remarks, " Henceforward, he who 
 is condemned must not complain of Adam, and his inborn sin. 
 The seed of the woman, promised by God to bruise the head of 
 the serpent, is now come and has atoned for sin, and taken away 
 condemnation. But he must cry out against himself for not hav- 
 ing accepted and believed in the Christ, the devil's head-bruiser 
 and sin-strangler. If I do not beheve the same, sin and condem- 
 nation must continue." 
 
 19. — [This is the condemnation, Sc] In this verse our Lord shows 
 Nicodemus one more " heavenly thing." He unfolds to him the 
 true cause of the ruin of those who are lost. Primarily, I think, 
 our Lord had in view the unbelieving Jews of His own day, 
 and the real reason of their rejection of Himself. It was not 
 that there was any want of evidence of His Messiahship. They 
 had evidence enough and to spare. The real reason was that they 
 had no mind to give up their sins. — Secondarily, I think, our 
 Lord had in view the future history of all Christians, and the 
 true cause of the ruin of all who are not saved in every age. It 
 is not because there is any want of light to guide men to heaven. 
 It is not because God is wanting in love and unwilling to save. 
 The real reason is that men in every age love their own sin&, and 
 will not come to Christ that they may be delivered from them. 
 
 The espression "this is the condemnation," is evidently very 
 elliptical, «,nd the full meaning must be supplied. It is probably 
 equivalent to saying " this is the cause of the condemnation, this 
 
164 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 is the true account of it." The following elliptical expresRiona 
 are somewhat similar, and all found in St. John's 1st Epistle. 
 " This is the promise," " this is the love of Grod," " this is the 
 victory," " this is the confidence." (1 John ii. 25. — t. 4, 14.) 
 
 [That light is come into the world.] It is a question in this 
 sentence whether " light " means Christ Himself, or the light of 
 Christ's Gospel. I am inclined to think that our Lord meant to 
 include both ideas. He has come as a light into the world, and 
 the Gospel that He has brought with Him, is, like its Author, a 
 strong contrast to the ignorance and wickedness of the earth. 
 
 [Men loved darkness rather than lightj] The darkness in this 
 sentence means moral darkness and mental darkness, sin, igno- 
 rance, superstition, and irreligion. Men cannot come to Christ 
 and receive His Gospel without parting with all this, and they 
 love it too well to part with it. 
 
 [Because their deeds were evil.] This sentence means that their 
 habits of life were wicked, and any doctrine which necessitated 
 a change of these habits they naturally hated. 
 
 Throughout this verse I am inclined to think that the past 
 tense " loved," ought to be taken in a present sense, (prolepti- 
 cally, to use a grammarian's phrase,) as is frequently the case in 
 the New Testament. See John xv. 8, and Rom. viii. 30. The 
 meaning will then be, " men have loved, do love, and always 
 will love darkness, in consequence of the corruption of human 
 nature, as long as the world stands." The sentence then becomes 
 a solemn description of a state of things which was not only to 
 be seen among the Jews, while our Lord was on eart!), but 
 would be seen everywhere to the end of time. 
 
 The verse is one which deserves special notice, because of the 
 deep mystery it unfolds. It tells us the true reason why men 
 miss heaven and are lost in hell. The origin of evil we aie not 
 told. The reason why evil men are lest, we are told plainly. 
 There is not a word about any decree of God predestinating men 
 to destruction. Tljere is not a syllable about anything deficient or 
 wanting either in God's love, or in Christ's atonement. On ^he 
 contrary our Lord tells us that "light has come into the world," 
 that God has revealed enough of the wav of salvation to make 
 men inexcusable if thi-y are not saved. But the real aecotmt of 
 the matter is that men have naturally no wiU or inclination to 
 use the light. Tiiey love their own dark and ci rrupt ways more 
 than the ways which God proposes to them. They therefore 
 reap the fruit of their own ways, and wiU have at last what they 
 loved. They loved darkness and they will be cast nto outt-r 
 darkness, they did not like the light and so they \^ill be shut 
 out from light eternally. In short, lost souls will be what they 
 willed to be, and will have what they loved. 
 
•165 
 
 The words, ''because their deeds were evil," are very instruc- 
 tive. They teach ns that where men have no love to Christ and 
 His Gospel- and will not receive them, their lives and their works 
 will prove at last to have been evil. Their habits of life may 
 not be gross and immoral. They may be even compai-atively 
 decent and pure. But the last day will prove them to have been 
 in reality " evil." Pride of intellect, or selfishness, or love of 
 man's applause, or dislike to submission of will, or self-righteoua- 
 ness, or some other false principle will be found to have run 
 through all their conduct. In one way or another, when men 
 refuse to come to Christ, their deeds will always prove to be 
 " evil." Rejection of the Gospel will alwa3^s be found to be con- 
 nected with some moral obliquity. When Christ is refused we 
 may be quite sure that there is something or other in life, or 
 heart, which is not right. If a man does not love light his 
 " deeds are evil." Human eyes may not detect the flaw ; but 
 the eyes of an all-seeing God do. 
 
 The whole verse is a deeply humbling one. It shows the folly 
 of all excuses for not receiving the Gospel, drawn from intel- 
 lectual difficulties, from God's predestination, from our own in- 
 ability to change ourselves, or to see things with the eyes of 
 others. All such excuses are scattered to the winds by this 
 feolemn verse. People do not come to Christ, and do continue 
 unconverted, just because they do not wish and want to come to 
 Christ, They love something else better than the light. The 
 elect of God prove themselves to be elect by '' choosing" the 
 things which are according to God's mind. The wicked prove 
 themselves to be only fit for destruction, by " choosing, loving, 
 and following " the things which must lead to destruction. 
 
 Quesnel says on this verse, " The greatest misfortune of men 
 does not consist in their being subject to sin, corruption, and 
 bhndness ; but in their rejecting the Deliverer, the Physician, 
 and the Light itself." 
 
 20. — [Every one that doeth evil, &c., t&c] This verse and the 
 following one form a practical application of all that our Lord 
 has been saying to Nicodemus, and are also a logical consequence 
 of the preceding verse. Like the preceding verse, these two 
 verses apply primarily to the Jews in our Lord's day, and 
 secondarily to every nation to which the light of the Gospel 
 comes. They are a most remarkaljle appeal to an inquirer's 
 conscience, and supply a most searching test of the sincerity of 
 a man in Nicodemus' state of mind. 
 
 The words '•' eve;y one that doeth evil," mean every uncon- 
 verted person, every one whose heart is not right and honest in 
 God's sight, and whose actions are consequently evil and un- 
 godly. Every such person " hateth the light, neither cometh to 
 
166 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 the light." He cannot really love Christ and the Gospel, and 
 
 will not honestly, and with his whole heart, seek Christ by faith 
 and embrace His Go=^pel, until he is renewed The reason of 
 this is, that every unconverted person shrinks from having his 
 ungodhness exposed. He does not wish his wicked way-* to be 
 discovered, and his utter want of true righteousness and true 
 preparedness for Jeath, judgment, and eternity to be put to 
 shame. He does not "like his deeds to be reproved," and 
 therefore he shrinks from the light, and keeps away from 
 Christ. 
 
 The apphcation of this verse must doubtless be made with 
 caution. In the case of many unconverted persons, its truth is 
 plain as noon-day. They love sin and hate true religion, and 
 get away from the Gospel, the Bible, and religious people as 
 much as they possibly can. In the case of others, its truth 
 is not so apparent at first sight. There are many unconverted 
 persons who profess to like the Gospel, and seem to have no 
 prejudice aa^ainst it, and to hear it with pleasure, and yet remain 
 unconverted. Yet even in the case of those persons the text 
 would be found perfectly true if their hearts were really 
 known. With all their seeming love to the light they do not 
 really love it with all their heart. There is something or other 
 which they love better, and which keeps them back from Christ. 
 There is something or other which they do not want to give up, 
 and do not hke to be discovered and reproved. Man's eyes may 
 not detect it ; but the eyes of God can. The general principle 
 of the text will be found true at last of every hearer of the Gos- 
 pel who dies unconverted. He did not thoroughly love the light. 
 He did not really want to be changed. He did not truly and 
 honestly seek salvation. All this wos true of the Jews in the 
 time of Nicodemus, and it is no less true of all mankind to 
 whom the Gospel comes in the present day. Right hearts will 
 always come to Christ. If a man keeps away from the light, his 
 heart is wrong. He is one who "doeth evil." 
 
 There is a curious difiference between the Greek word trans- 
 lated " doeth" in this verse and the one translated " doeth" in the 
 next verse. Stier and Alford think the difference instructive and 
 meaning. They say that the Greek word used for " doeth evil," 
 means the habit of action without fruit or result. On the con- 
 trary, the Greek word for "doing truth," signifies the true doing 
 of good, good fruit, good that remains. 
 
 21. — [He tJiat doeth truth, &c.] This verse, it is needless to say, 
 is closely connected with the preceding one. The preceding 
 verse describes the unconverted man. The verse before us de- 
 scribes the converted man. 
 
 The expression, " He that doeth truth," signifies, the person 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 167 
 
 whose heart is honest, the man who is truly converted, however 
 weak and ignorant, and whose heart and actions are consequently 
 true and right in the sight of God. Tlie phrase is frequently 
 found in St. Joljn's writings. (S-'e John xviii. 37 ; 1 Tohn i. G— 8; 
 ii. 4; iii. 19; 2 John i. ; 3 Jolm iii. 4.) Every such peison will 
 always come to Christ and embrace His Gospel when it is 
 brought near him. He will have an honest desire that " hia 
 deeds may be made manifest," and that his real character may 
 be discovered to himself and others. He will have an honest 
 wish to know whether his habits of life are really godly, or 
 " wrought in God." 
 
 The principle here laid down is of great importance, and expe- 
 rience shows that the assertion of the text is always confirmed 
 by facts. I believe there was not a truly gpod man among the 
 Jews in our Lord's day, who did not at once receive Christ, and 
 welcome Christ's Gospel, as soon as it was brought before him. 
 Nathanael was an example. He was a man "■ Avho did truth " 
 under the obscure light of the law of Moses, as ministered by 
 Scribes and Pharisees. But the moment the Messiah was brought 
 before him, he received Him and believed. — So also, I beheve, 
 when the Gospel comes into a church, a parish, or a congregation, 
 it is always gladly received and embraced by any whose hearts 
 are true. To be a truly godly man, anl yet to refuse to come 
 to Christ, is an impossibility. He that hears of Christ and does 
 not come to Him, and believe on Him as God's appointed way 
 of salvation, has something fatally wrong about him. He is not 
 really '' doing truth." He is not a converted man. Gospel light 
 is a mighty magnet. If there is any one that has true religion 
 within its sphere, it will attract to itself that person. To be 
 truly religious and not to gravitate towards Him who is the 
 great centre of all light and truth, is impossible. If a man re- 
 fuses Christ, he cannot be a godly man. 
 
 The application of the two last verses to the case of Nicodemus 
 and those Jews who were in the same >tate of mind as Nicode- 
 mus, is plain and obvious. Our Lord leaves on the Pharisee's 
 mir.d a solemn and heart-searching conclusion. " Think not 
 that you can stay away from me after hearing this discourse and 
 be saved. If you are a really earnest inquirer after truth, and 
 your heart is honest and sincere, you must go on, you must 
 come to the light and embrace the light, and you will do so, 
 however great your present ignorance. If on the other hand 
 you are not really desirous to serve God, you will piove it by 
 keeping away from my Gospel, and by not confes.sing me as the 
 Messiah." It is a pleasant reflection, that after events proved 
 that Nicodemus was one who " did truth." He used the light 
 our Lord graciously imparted to him. He came forward and 
 spoke for Christ in the council. And at last, when he boldly 
 
168 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTH. 
 
 helped to bury Christ, he made it manifest to all Israel that " his 
 deeds were wroa-ht in God." 
 
 Let it be noted, that the two verses which conclude our 
 Lord's address to Nicodemus are a most instructive test of the 
 sincer ty and reality of persons who appear anxious inq[uirer3 
 in religion. If they are honest and true they will go on, and 
 come to the full light of Christ. If they are not honest and 
 sincere, but only influenced by temporary excitement, ihey will 
 probably go back from the light, and will certainly not close 
 with Christ and become his disciples. This should be pressed 
 by ministers on all inquirers. " If you are true you will come 
 to the light. If you are not true, you will go back, or stand 
 still ; you will not draw near and close with Christ." The test 
 will never be found to fail. Those who wish to see how ex- 
 ceedingly weak the beginnings of grace may be in a heart, and 
 yet be true, as it proved in the case of Nicodemus, wiil find the 
 matter most skilfully treated in a small Avork of Perkins, little 
 known, called "A Grain of Mustard Seed." A man may have 
 the beginning of regeneration in his heart, and yet be so ignorant 
 as not to know what regeneration is. 
 
 In concluding these long notes, for the length of which the 
 immense importance of the passage must be my apology, I think 
 we should remark that we never hear a word about Nicodemus 
 being baptized ! This fact is a strong incidental evidence to my 
 mind, that the baptism of water was not the subject which our 
 Lord had in view when he told Nicodemus that he must be 1 orn 
 of water and the Spirit. 
 
 One other thing ought to be remarked, in leaving this subject 
 of ()ur Lord's conversation with Nicodemus. That thing is the 
 singular fulness of matter by wliich the whole of our Lord's 
 address is characterized. Within the space of twenty verses we 
 read of the work of all Three Perspns in the Trinity, — the 
 Father's love, the Son's death on the cross, and the Spirit's 
 operation in the new birth of man, — the corruption of man's 
 nature, the nature of regeneration, and the efficacy of faith 
 in Christ, — the way to escape perishing in hell, the true cause 
 of man's condemnation if ^le is lost, and the true marks of 
 sincerity in an inquirer. A fuller sermon was never del'vered 
 than that which was here preached to Nicodemus in one even- 
 ing I There is hardly a single important point in divinity which 
 is I'.ft untouched I 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 
 
 169 
 
 JOHN III. 22—36. 
 
 22 After these tliiDgs came Je- 
 sus and his disciples into the land 
 of Judsea; and there he tarried 
 -with them, and baptized. 
 
 23 And John also was baptizing 
 in ^non near to Salim, because 
 there was much water there: and 
 they came, and were baptized. 
 
 24 For John was not yet cast 
 into prison. 
 
 25 Then there arose a question 
 between some of John's disciples 
 and the Jews about purifying. 
 
 26 And they came unto John, 
 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. 
 
 27 John answered and said, A 
 man can receive notnmg, except it 
 be given him from heaven. 
 
 28 Ye yourselves bear me wit- 
 ness, that I said, I am not the 
 Christ, but that I am sent before 
 him. 
 
 29 He that hath the bride is the 
 bridegroom : but the friend of the 
 bridegroom, which standeth and 
 
 On oue account, this passage deserves the special atten- 
 tion of all devout readers of the Bible. It contains the 
 last testimony of John the Baptist concerning our Lord 
 Jesus Christ. That faithful man of God was the same 
 at the end of his ministry that he was at the beginning 
 — the same in his views of self, — the same in his views 
 of Christ. Happy is that church whose ministers are as 
 steady, bold, and constant to one thing, as John the 
 Baptist ! 
 
 We have, firstly, in these verses, a humhUng example of 
 the petty jealousies and party -spirit which may exist among 
 professors of religion. We are told, that the disciples of 
 John tbe Baptist were offended, because the ministry of 
 
 8 
 
 heareth him, rejoiceth greatly be- 
 cause of the bridegroom's voice: 
 this my joy therefore is fulfilled. 
 
 30 He must increase, but I mvM 
 decrease. 
 
 31 He that cometh from above i& 
 above all : he that is of the earth is 
 earthly, and speaketh of the earth : 
 he that cometh from heaven is 
 above all. 
 
 32 And what he hath seen and 
 heard, that he testifieth; and no 
 man receiveth his testimony. 
 
 33 He that hath received his tes- 
 timony hath set to his seal that 
 God is true. 
 
 34 For he whom God hath sent 
 speaketh the words of God: for God 
 giveth not the Spirit by measure 
 unto him. 
 
 35 The Father loveth the Son, 
 and hath given aU things into his 
 hand. 
 
 36 He that beheveth on the Son 
 hath everlasting life : and he that 
 beheveth not the Son shall not see 
 life ; but the wrath of God abideth 
 on him. 
 
170 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Jesus began to attract more attention than that of their 
 master. " They came unto John, 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." 
 
 The spirit exhibited in this complaint, is unhappily too 
 comn)on in the Churches of Christ. The succession of these 
 compl liners has never failed. There are never wanting 
 religious professors who care far more for the increase of 
 their own party, than for the increase of true Christianity; 
 and who cannot rejoice in the spread of religion, if it 
 spreads anywhere except within their own pale. There is 
 a generation which can see no good doing except in the 
 ranks of its own congregations ; and which seems ready 
 to shut men out of heaven, if they will not enter therein 
 under its banner. 
 
 The true Christian must watch and pray against the 
 spirit here manifested by John's disciples. It is very 
 insidious, very contagious, and very injurious to the cause 
 of religion. Nothing so defiles Christianity and gives the 
 enemies of truth such occasion to blaspheme, as jealousy 
 and party-spirit among Christians. Wherever there is real 
 grace, we should be ready and willing to acknowledge it, 
 even though it may be outside our own pale. We should 
 strive to say with the apostle, " If Christ be preached, I 
 rejoice, yea! and will rejoice." (Phil. i. 18.) If good is 
 done, we ought to be thankful, though it even may not be 
 done in what we think the best way. If souls are saved, 
 we ought to be glad, whatever be the means that God may 
 think fit to employ. 
 
 We have, secondly, in these verses, a splendid pattern 
 of true and godly humility. We see in John the Baptist 
 a very different spirit from that displayed by his disciples. 
 He begins by laying down the great principle, that accep- 
 tance with man is a special gift of God ; and that we must 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 171 
 
 therefore not presume to find fault, when others have more 
 acceptance than ourselves. *' A man can receive nothing 
 except it be given him from heaven." He goes on to 
 remind his followers of his repeated declaration, that one 
 greater than himself was coming ; — " I said, I am not the 
 Christ." He tells them that his office compared to that of 
 Christ, is that of the bridegroom's friend, compared to 
 the bridegroom. And finally, he solemnly affirms, that 
 Christ must and will become greater and greater, and 
 that he himself must become less and less important, until, 
 like a star eclipsed by the rising sun, he has completely 
 disappeared. 
 
 A frame of mind like this, is the highest degree of grace 
 to which mortal man can attain. The greatest saint in the 
 sight of God, is the man who is most thoroughly *' clothed 
 with humility." (1 Peter v. 5.) Would we know the 
 prime secret of being men of the stamp of Abraham, and 
 Moses, and Job, and David, and Daniel, and St. Paul, and 
 John the Baptist ? They were all eminently humble men. 
 Living at different ages, and enjoying very different degrees 
 of light, in this matter at least they were all agreed. In 
 themselves they saw nothing but sin and weakness. To 
 God they gave all the praise of what they were. Let ns 
 walk in their steps. Let us covet earnestly the best gifts ; 
 but above all, let us covet humility. The way to true 
 honour is to be humble. No man ever was so praised by 
 Christ, as the very man who says here, " I must decrease," 
 the humble John the Baptist. 
 
 We have, thirdly, in these verses, an instructive declara- 
 tion of Christ's honour and dignity. John the Baptist 
 teaches his disciples once more, the true greatness of the 
 Person whose growing popularity offended them. Once 
 more, and perhaps for the last time, he proclaims Him as 
 one worthy of all honour and praise. He uses one striking 
 expression after another, to convey a correct idea of the 
 
172 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 majesty of Christ. He speaks of Him as '* the bride- 
 groom" of the Church, — as " him that cometh from above," 
 — as " him whom God hath sent," — as "him to whom the 
 Spirit is given without measure," — as Him " whom the 
 Father loves," and into " whose hands all things are 
 given," — ^to believe in whom is life everlasting, and to 
 reject whom is eternal ruin. Each of these phrases is full 
 of deep meaning, and would supply matter for a long ser- 
 mon. All show the depth and height of John's spiritual 
 attainments. More honourable things are nowhere written 
 concerning Jesus, than these verses recorded as spoken by 
 John the Baptist. 
 
 Let us endeavour in life and death, to hold the same 
 views of the Lord Jesus, to which John here gives expres- 
 sion. We can never make too much of Christ. Our 
 thoughts about the Church, the ministry, and the sacra- 
 ments, may easily become too high and extravagant. We 
 can never have too high thoughts about Christ, can never 
 love Him too much, trust Him too implicitly, lay too much 
 weight upon Him, and speak too highly in His praise. He 
 is worthy of all the honour that we can give Him. He will 
 be all in heaven. Let us see to it, that He is all in our 
 hearts on earth. 
 
 We have, lastly, in these verses, a broad assertion of the 
 nearness and presentness of the salvation of true Chris- 
 tians. John the Baptist declares, " He that believeth on 
 the Son hath everlasting life." He is not intended to look 
 forward with a sick heart to a far distant privilege. He 
 " hath" everlasting life as soon as he believes. Pardon, 
 peace, and a complete title to Heaven, are an immediate 
 possession. They become a believer's own, from the very 
 moment he puts faith in Christ. They will not be more 
 completely his own, if he lives to the age of Methuselah. 
 
 The truth before us, is one of the most glorious privileges 
 of the Gospel. There are no works to be done, no condi- 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 173 
 
 tions to be fulfilled, no price to be paid, no weaving years 
 of probation to be passed, before a sinner can be accepted 
 with God. Let him only believe on Christ, and he is at 
 once forgiven. Salvation is close to the chief of sinners. 
 Let him only repent and believe, and this day it is his 
 own. By Christ all that believe are at once justified from 
 all things. 
 
 Let us leave the whole passage with one grave and 
 heart-searching thought. If faith in Christ brings with it 
 present and immediate privileges, to remain unbelieving is 
 to be in a state of tremendous peril. If heaven is very 
 near to the believer, hell must be very near to the unbeliever. 
 The greater the mercy that the Lord Jesus ofiers, the 
 greater will be the guilt of those who neglect and reject it. 
 " He that believeth not the Son shall not see life ; but the 
 wrath of God abideth on him." 
 
 Notes. John IIL 22—36. 
 
 22. — [Came Jesus...mto...land ofJudcea.] Some have thought, from 
 this expression, that the conversation between Christ and Nico- 
 demus did not take place in Jerusalem or Judaea, but in Galilee. 
 Others have thought that a long interval must be supposed to 
 have elapsed betvv^een the conversation and the events wliich are 
 here narrated. — I can agree with neither view. — I believe the 
 true explanation is, that "the land" here spoken of means the 
 rural part or territory of Judaea, in contradistinction to the 
 capital town of the territory, Jerusalem. The meaning will then 
 be, that Jesus left the city and went into the country districts. 
 The expression, " Thou Bethlehem, in the land of Judaea," is 
 similar. (Matt. ii. 6.) 
 
 [He tarried.] The Greek word so rendered signifies a lengthened 
 stay. It is translated in other places "continued" or "abode." 
 It is note-worthy that many of the events of our Lord's ministry 
 in Jerusalem and the surrounding district, are evidently not 
 recorded in any of the Gospels. 
 
 [And baptized.] That our Lord did not baptize with His own 
 hands, but left the ordinance to be administered by His disci[>les, 
 as work inferior to that of preaching, we may learn firom the 
 next chapter. (John iv. 2.) 
 
 Lightfoot c bserves that " The administration of Christ's ordi* 
 
174: EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 nar.ces by h's ministers, accordinj^ to His institution, is as His 
 own work. The disciples' baptizing is called His baptizing." 
 
 The questions have often been raised, "In what name was 
 this baptism administered?" " Was it a baptism that needed tj 
 be repeated after the day of Pentecost ?" — The most probab'e 
 answer to the first question is, that it was a baptism in the name 
 of Jesus, upon profession of belief that he was the Messiali. 
 The most probable answer to the second question is, that it was 
 certainly not a baptism that required repetition. To suppose 
 that a baptism, administered by our Lord's disciples, under our 
 Lord's own eye, and by our Lord's own command, was not as 
 effectual and profitable an ordinance as any baptism that was 
 ever afterwards administered, is a most improbable supposition. 
 
 It may be remarked here, that there is no ground for the 
 common idea, that it is absolutely necessary that baptism should 
 be administered in the name of the Trinity, in order to be a valid 
 and Christian baptism. In three cases recorded in the Acts we 
 are expressly told that baptism was administered in the name of 
 Jesus Christ, and no mention is made of all three Persons in the 
 Trinity. (See Acts ii. 38; viii. 37; x. 48.) In all these cases, 
 however, it will be remembered, baptism in the name of Christ 
 was practically baptism in the name of the Trinity. It was con- 
 fession of faith in Him whom the Father sent, and who was the 
 giver of the Holy Q-host. 
 
 As a general rule in the Church of Christ, no doubt, baptism 
 ought to be in the name of the Trinity. (Matt, xxviii. 19.) But 
 that our Lord's disciples, in the place now before us, did not 
 baptize in the name of the Trinity is pretty certain, and that 
 baptism in the name of Jesus is vaHd Christian baptism seems 
 clear from the places referred to in Acts. 
 
 Hutcheson remarks, that " Christ's own bodily presence, filled 
 with the Spirit without measure, did not take away the use of 
 external ordinances," such as baptism. The Quaker's opinion, 
 that we need no external ordinances under the Gospel, is hard 
 to reconcile with such a text as this. 
 
 23. — [John also was baptizing.] We can hardly doubt that John 
 baptized all who came to him, at this period of his ministry, in 
 the name of Jesus, upon confession of faith that Jesus was the 
 Messiah. It seems most improbable that after publicly pointing 
 out Jesus Christ as the Lamb of God, and the promised Saviour, 
 he would be content to baptize with the baptism of repentance, 
 which he had administered before Christ appeared. In short, 
 John's baptism at tiiis period, and the baptism administered by 
 Christ's disciples, must have been precisely the same. 
 
 I may remark here, that the opinion maintained by Roman 
 
175 
 
 Catholics, and those who agree with them, that there was an 
 essential diflference between John's baptism and Christian bap- 
 tism, seems to me entirely destitute of foundation. I agree A\ilh 
 Brentius, Lightfoot, and most of the Protestant commentators, 
 that John's baptism and Christian baptism differed only in cir- 
 cumstantials, but were the same in substance, and tliat a person 
 baptized by John the Baptist had no need to be re baptized after 
 the day of Pentecost. — Unless we take this view, I cannot see 
 any evidence that Peter, and Andrew, and James, and John 
 ever received Christian baptism at all. There is not a single 
 word in the Grospel to show that they were ever baptized again 
 after leaving John the Baptist's company, and becoming Chris' 'a 
 disciples. Moreover, we are expressly told that " Jesus himself 
 baptized not." (John iv. 2.) The only baptism that the first 
 apostles received appears to have been John the Baptist's bap- 
 tism. This fact seems to me to prove irresistibly, that John's 
 baptism was essentially of equal value with Christian baptism, 
 and that a person baptized by John had no need to be baptized 
 again. 
 
 The well-known passage in Acts, (Acts xix. 1 — 6,) which is 
 always quoted in opposition to the view I maintain, does not 
 appear to me at all conclusive and decisive upon the question 
 now before us. — For one thing, the persons described in that 
 passage as having only been baptized with John's baptism, seem 
 to have been ignorant of the first principles of Christianity. 
 They said, "we have not so much as heard whether there be 
 any Holy Ghost." That expression shows pretty clearly that 
 they had not been hearers of John the Baptist, who frequently 
 spoke of the Holy Ghost, (Matt. iii. 11,) and had not been 
 baptized by John himself — It is most probable that they were 
 inhabitants of Ephesus, who had only heard Apollos preaching, 
 and knew even less than their teacher. Whether St. Paul might 
 not think it needful to administer baptism to such ignorant 
 disciples as these, who could give no intelligent account of Chris- 
 tianity, is a question I would not undertake to decide. — But 
 beside this, it is by no means certain that these disciples were 
 really baptized again with water at all. Brentius holds that the 
 words, "they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus," 
 mean the baptism of the Spirit. Streso maintains that the words 
 are the concluding sentence of St. Paul's address to these ignorant 
 men. I cannot say that either of these last views is altogether 
 satisfactory. All I say is, that I would infinitely rather adopt 
 either of them, than hold such a monstrous opinion as the Romish 
 one, that John's baptism was not Christian baptism at all, and 
 needed to be repeated. The difficulties in the way of this last 
 view appear to me far greater than the difl&culties in the way of 
 the one which I support. To say that the first five apostles never 
 received any Christian baptism at all is really preposterous. To 
 
176 EXPOSITORY ^fTOUGHTL 
 
 assert that Christ Himself baptized them is tc ct^bert what tht 
 Bible never even hints at. There is not a shadow of proof that 
 Jesus ever baptized a single person. I see no escape from the 
 conclusion that Andrew, John, Peter, Philip, and Nathanael 
 either received John's baptism or no baptism at all. 
 
 Whatever men may think about John's baptism before the 
 time when our Lord appeared, they will never prove that the 
 baptism he administered in the text before us was not Christian 
 baptism. To suppose that John would go on administering an 
 ordinance which he knew was imperfect, while Christian baptism 
 was being administered by Christ's disciples a few miles off, is 
 simply absurd. 
 
 l^non near to Salim.] It is not certainly known where this 
 place was. The probability is that it was somewhere in Judaea. 
 In the list of the cities given to the tribe of Juda, we find 
 together " Shilhim and Ain." (Josh. xv. 32.) It is very possible 
 that these two may be the ''^non and Salim" now before us. 
 The changes which proper names undergo in passing from one 
 language to another, every one knows, are very great. 
 
 [Because there was much wateri] It is frequently assumed from 
 this expression, that John's baptism was immersion and not 
 sprinkling, and that on this account a great supply of water was 
 absolutely needful. It may perhaps have been so. The point is 
 one of no importance. That immersion, however, is necessary to 
 the validity of baptism, and that sprinkling alone is not sufficient, 
 are points that can never be demonstrated from Scripture. So 
 long as water is used, it seems to be left a matter of indifference 
 whether the person baptized is dipped or sprinkled. I should 
 find it very hard to believe that the three thou?and baptized on 
 the day of Pentecost, or the jailor and his family, bapiized at 
 midnight in the Phihppian prison, were all immersed. The 
 Church of England wisely allows either mode of applying wa er 
 to be used. To suppose that dipping is forbidden to English 
 Churchmen is mere ignorance. 
 
 [They came...l)aptized.] This is an elliptical sentence. "We are 
 not told who are meant by " they." It is like " men," in Matt. 
 V. 15, and means generally " people." 
 
 24..— [John... not yet. .prison^ John's diUgence in his Master's 
 work is here pointed out. He doubtless knew that his ministry 
 was fulfilled when Christ appeared, and that the time of his own 
 departure, and violent death under Herod's hands, was at hand. 
 Yet he worked on to the very last. "Blessed is that servant, 
 whom his Lord when he cometh shall find so doing." (Matt 
 xxiv. 46.) 
 
 Tlieophylact thinks that John's early death was permitted la 
 
177 
 
 God's providence, in order to prevent any distraction in people's 
 minds between him and Christ. 
 
 25. — [There arose.. .quefition... disciples. ..Jews.. .purifying.'] The nature 
 and partimlnrs of this dispute must be left to conjecture. We 
 can only form an idea of it from the context. It seems proba- 
 ble that it was a dispute between the unbelieving Jews and the 
 disciples of John the Baptist, about the comparative value of 
 the two baptisms which were being administered in Judea, viz., 
 John's baptism and Christ's. — Which was the most puiifying? 
 Which was the most efficacious? Which was the most valuable 
 of the two? — The Jews probably taunted John's disciples wiih 
 the dechne of their master's popularity. John's disciple^, in 
 ignorant zeal and heat for their master, probably contended that 
 no new teacher's baptism could possibly be more purifying and 
 valuable than their own master's. 
 
 Wordsworth remarks upon the word '' purifying," that St. John 
 never uses the word " baptism," and never calls John the Baptist 
 by his common surname " the Baptist." He says " John was no 
 longer the Baptist, when St. John wrote. His baptism had 
 passed away." 
 
 Musculus, on this verse, observes the excessive readiness of 
 men in every age to raise questions, controversies, and persecu- 
 tions about ceremonies of merely human institution, while about 
 faith, and hope, and love, and humility, and patience, and mor- 
 tification of the flesh, and renewal of the Spirit, they exhibit no 
 zeal at all. 
 
 Controversies about baptism certainly appear to be among the 
 oldest and most mischievous by which the Church has been 
 plagued. 
 
 26. — [They came unto JoJin^ &cl] The language of the whole verse 
 seems intended to show that John's disciples were jealous for 
 their master's ministry, and that its declining popularity, in con- 
 sequence of our Lord's appearance in Judsea as a public teacher, 
 was a cause of annoyance to them. The ver^e is an instructive 
 instance of that littleness and party spirit which are ?o painfully 
 common among Christians when one minister's popularity is 
 interfered with by the appearance of another. 
 
 [He. ..u-ith thee.. ..thou harest witness.] This expression shows 
 the publicity and notoriety of John's testimony to our Lord as 
 the Messiah and the Lamb of God. It was testimony not borne 
 privately in a corner, but in the hearing and full knowledge of 
 all John's disciples. It would seem to have had very little effect 
 on their minds. The words fell on their ears, but went no 
 further. 
 
 [Behold the same baptizeth.] This expression implies partly 
 
178 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 surpiise and partly complaint. In any case it show^s how little 
 the balk of John's disciples understood that Jesus was really the 
 Messiah promised in the prophecies. If they hid und-rstoo 1 it, 
 they would surely neither have been surprised nor annoyed at 
 Him for baptizing and becoming popular. They would rather 
 have expected it and rejoiced at it. It is one among many 
 proofs that ministers may be loved by their hearers, and may 
 tell them the truth faithfully, and yet be utterly unable to make 
 their hearers undei stand or believe. Few are like Andrew, and 
 "follow Jesus," when their minister says, "Behold the Lamb." 
 The most are as though they did not hear at all. 
 
 [All men come to him.] These words must doubtless be taken 
 with qualification. The expression, "al men," only means, 
 " many persons." We know as a fact that not all men came to 
 Christ. Moreover, we must remember, that out of those who 
 did come to Christ, very few believed. John says in his reply 
 to his disciples, "No man receiveth his testimony." — Allowance 
 must be made for the irritation under which John's disciples 
 spoke. When men are vexed in spirit, by seeing their own 
 party diminishing, they are often tempted to use exaggerated 
 and incorrect expressions. 
 
 Hutcheson remarks on this verse, that " Carnal emulation is 
 an old and great sin in the Church, and even among professors; 
 it being the foul fruit of a carnal temper to look on the success 
 of one man's gifts as the debasing of another's who is faithful, 
 and to count the thriving of G-od's work in one minister's hand 
 the disgracing of another who is not so much flocked to." 
 
 Cyril remarks on this verse, how admirably God can bring 
 good out of apparent evil. Here, as in many cases, a carnal and 
 unkind saying of John's disciples gives occasion to John's ad- 
 mirable testimony about Christ. 
 
 27. — [John answered.. ..a man can receive nothing, &c.] This sentence 
 is the statement of a general truth in religion. Success, promo- 
 tion, and growth of influence are gifts which God keeps entirely 
 in His own hands. If one faithful minister's popularity wanes, 
 while another's popularity and influence over men's hearts in- 
 crease, the thing is of God, and we must submit to His appoint- 
 ment. (Psalm Ixxv. 6.) 
 
 The application of the sentence is not to Christ, as Chrysostom 
 thought, but to John the Baptist himself, as Augustine thought. 
 They are meant to imply, " I cannot command continued success 
 in my ministry. I can only receive what God gives me. If He 
 thinks fit to give any one more acceptance with men than myself, 
 I cannot prevent it, and have no right to complain. All success 
 is of God. All that I have had, at any period of my ministry, 
 has been received, and none deserved." — To apply the sentence 
 
179 
 
 to our Lord, seems to me an unsatisfactory iaterpreta'ioa, and 
 derogatory to the dignity of Christ's minis'ry. Those who take 
 this view, would probably prefer the marginal reading of the 
 word "receive," and would render it, "No man can take to 
 himself anything." The sentence would then be like St, Paul's 
 words to the Hebrews, " No man taketh this honour unro him- 
 self, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron." (Heb. v. 4.) 
 But the translation, " receive," and the application to John the 
 Baptist, appear to me more agreeable to the context, and the 
 general spirit of John's reply. And although the word, a " man," 
 ought not to have much s:ress laid upon it, I cannot help think- 
 ing that John uses it intentionally, in order to point to himself. 
 "A mere man like me can receive nothing but what is given him 
 from heaven." 
 
 Lightfoot thinks that the Greek word rendered " receive " 
 means " perceive," or "apprehend," and that John meant, " I see 
 by this instance of yourselves, that no man can learn or under- 
 stand anything, unless it be given him from heaven." He 
 re'jards the sentence as John's rebuke to his disciples for incre- 
 dulity and stupidity. I doubt myself whether the Greek word 
 will bear the sense Lightfoot would put on it. 
 
 The expression " from heaven," is equivalent to saying " from 
 God." See Dan. iv. 26; Luke xv. 21. 
 
 The whole verse is a most useful antidote to that jealousy 
 which sometimes springs up in a minister's mind, when he sees 
 a brother's ministry prospering more than his own. 
 
 28, — [le yourselves hear me witness^....! said, c&c] John here re- 
 minds his disciples that he had repeatedly told them that he 
 was not the Christ, and that he was only a forerunner sent 
 before Him. They ought to have remembered this. If they had 
 done so, they would not have been surprised at the rise and pro- 
 gress of Christ's ministry, but would rather have expected Him 
 10 outshine and surpass their master, as a matter of course. 
 
 The verse is an instructive illustration of the forgetfulness of 
 heareis. John's testimony to the dignity of Christ and His 
 superiority to himself had been constantly repeated. But it had 
 been all thrown away on his disciples, and when Christ began to 
 receive greater honours than their master, and their own party 
 began to grow smaller than that of Christ's disciples, they were 
 offended. People soon forget what they do not like. 
 
 29. — [^He that hath....bride....hridegroom, (fee] In this verse John the 
 Baptist explains the relative positions occupied by himself and 
 Christ by a famihar illustration. In tracing it out, it is of great 
 importance not to press the points of resemblance too far. Tho 
 
180 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 illustration is one which specially requires to be handled wilti 
 reverence, decency, and discretion. 
 
 The "bride," in the ver^e, signifies the whole company of 
 believers, the Lamb's wile. (Rev. xxi. 9.) The " bridegroom " ia 
 the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. The "friend of the bridegroom'' 
 means John the Baptist, and all other faithful ministers of Christ. 
 According to the marriage-customs of the Jews, there were cer- 
 tain persons called the bridegroom's /rienc^s, who were the means 
 of communication between him and the bride before the mar- 
 riage. Their duty was simply to set forwatd and promote the 
 bridegroom's interests, and to remove all obstacles, as far as pos- 
 sible, to a speedy union of the parties. To accomplish this end 
 and promote a thoroughly good understanding between the 
 bride an I brid groom was their sole office. If they saw the 
 bridegroom's suit prospering, and at last saw him received 
 favourably and gladly by the bride, their end was accomplished 
 and their work was done. To all this John the Baptist makes 
 allusion in the verse now before us. He tells his disciples that 
 his sole work was to set forward and promote a good under- 
 standing between Christ and men. If he saw that work pros- 
 periiig he was thankful and would rejoice, even though the result 
 was that his own personal importance was diminished. He 
 would have his disciples know that the growing popularity of 
 Christ which oflfended them, was the very thing which he longed 
 to see. He had no greater joy than to hear of the voice of Christ, 
 the bridegroom, being listened to by believers, the bride. It was 
 the very thing for which he had been preaching and ministering, 
 His " joy was fulfilled." 
 
 The word " hath " means " possesses as his own." Possession 
 of the bride, as " bone of his bones and flesh of his flesh," is the 
 peculiar prerogative of the bridegroom. (Gen. ii. 23.) With this 
 his friends have nothing to do. 
 
 The expression " standeth," must probably not be pressed too 
 far. • Some think that it is taken from the position occupied by 
 the bridegroom's friends on the day when the bridegroom was 
 first formally introduced to the bride. They stood at a respect- 
 ful distance and looked on. The expression certainly implies 
 inferiority. St. Paul says that the Jewish priests ^^ stand" daily 
 ministering, but Christ ^'sat down" on the right hand of God. 
 (Heb. X. 12.) 
 
 The expression *' heareth the bridegroom's voice," like the last, 
 is one that must not be pressed too far. It is a part of the 
 drapery of the illustration. When report was brought to John 
 the Baptist, that Jesus Christ's ministry was accepted by some, 
 and that He found favour with many disciples, then was fulfilled 
 what is here miant. John ''heard the bridegroom's voice," and 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 181 
 
 saw the successful progress of his mission, and seeing and hear- 
 ing this "rejoiced." 
 
 The whole verse is a most instructive picture of a true minis- 
 ter's work and character. He is a friend of Christ, and is ordained 
 in order to promote a union between Christ and souls. (2 Cor. ii. 
 2.) He must rigidly adhere to that office, and must never take 
 to himself that which does not belong to him. The minister who 
 allows honour to be given to himself which only belongs to Jesus, 
 and exalts his own office into that of a mediator and priest, is 
 treacherously usurping a position which is not his but his Mas- 
 ter's. The professing Christian who treats ministers as if they 
 were priests and mediators, is dishonouring Jesus Christ, and 
 basely giving that honour to the Bridegroom's friends which 
 belongs exclusively to the Bridegroom Himself. 
 
 The expression " this my joy is fulfilled," is a very instructive 
 one for ministers. It shows that the truest happiness of a minis- 
 ter should consist in Christ's voice being heard by souls. " Now 
 we live," says St. Paul, " if ye stand fast in the Lord." (1 Thess. 
 iii. 8,) &c. 
 
 It deserves notice that when our Lord at another period of His 
 ministry expressly speaks of Himself as " the bridegroom," in 
 His reply to the disciples of John the Baptist (Matt. ix. 15), He 
 seems purposely to remind them of tbeir master's words. 
 
 Musculus, on this verse, observes, " The day of the Lord will 
 declare what kind of zeal that is in our Popish bishops, who 
 profess to be influenced by zeal for the love of the church, which 
 is Christ's bride, against Christ's enemies. The day will declare 
 whether a zeal which makes them shed innocent blood and per- 
 secute the members of Christ, is the zeal of true friends of the 
 Bridegroom, or of treacherous suitors of the bride." 
 
 30. — [He must increase...!.. .decrease.] In this sentence John the 
 Baptist tells his complaining disciples that it is right and proper 
 and necessary that Christ should grow in dignity, and that he 
 himself should be less thought of. He was only the servant ; 
 Christ was the Master. He was only the forerunner and am- 
 bassador, Christ was the King. He was only the morning star; 
 Christ was the Sun. The idea implied appears to be that of the 
 stars gradually fading away, as the sun rises, after the break of 
 day. The stars do not really perish or really become less, bat 
 they pale and become invisible before the superior brightness of 
 the great centre of light. The sun does not really become 
 larger, or really increase in brightness, but it becomes more fully 
 visible, and occupies a position in which it more completely fills 
 our vision. So was it with John the Baptist and Christ. — Every 
 faithful minister ought to be like-minded with John. He must 
 be content to be less thought of by his beheving hearers, in pro* 
 
182 EXPOSITOKY THOUGHTS, 
 
 portion as they grow in knowledge and faith, and se( Christ Him- 
 self more clearly. As churches decay and fall awaj , they think 
 less of Christ and more of their ministers. As churches revive 
 and receive spiritual life, they think less of ministers and more of 
 Christ. To a decaying church the sun is going down, and the 
 stars are beginning to appear. To a reviving church the stars 
 are waning, and the sun appearing. 
 
 31. — [IIe...cometh...ahove... above 021.1 -^"^ ^^^^ sentence John Ihe 
 Baptist asserts the infinite superiority of Christ over himself oi 
 any other child of Adam, whatever office he may fill. Christ is 
 " from above." He is not merely man, but Cod. He came from 
 heaven when He took our nature on Him, and was born. As God, 
 He is as far above all His ministers and servants as the Creator 
 is above the creature. He is " far above all principality, and 
 power, and every name that can be named." He is " Head over 
 ail things to the church," and richly deserves all the honour, and 
 dignity, and respect, and reverence that man can give. (Ephes. 
 i. 21, 22.) 
 
 [He that is of the earth... earthly. ..speaketh...earth.] In this sen- 
 tence John the Baptist expresses in strong language the compara- 
 tive inferiority to Christ of himself or of any other minister. 
 " All who like me," he seems to say, " are only men, mere dust 
 and clay, descended from a father who was made out of the dust 
 of the ground^ are comparatively earthly. The weakness and 
 feebleness of our origin pervade all our doings. By nature 
 eaj-thly, our works are earthly, and our speaking and preaching 
 earthly." — In short, there will be a savour of humanity about the 
 ministry of every one who is naturally engendered of the seed 
 of Adam. 
 
 The difficulty that some see in John the Baptist calling his own 
 ministry " earthly," is quite needlessly raised. It is evident that 
 he calls it so " comparatively." Compared to the teaching of 
 Scribes and Pharisees it was not earthly but heavenly. Com- 
 pared to the teaching of Him who came from heaven it was 
 earthly. A candle compared to darkness is light. But the same 
 candle compared to the sun is a poor dim spark. 
 
 [He that cometh. ..heaven. ..above aV.'\ Tliis sentence is only a 
 repetition of the beginning of the verse. It is a second assertion 
 of Christ's greatness and superiority over any mere man, in order 
 to impress the matter more deeply on those who heard it. 
 " Mark what I tell you," John the Baptist seems to say to his 
 disciples, "I repeat emphatically that Christ having come from 
 heaven, and being by nature God as well as man, is far above me 
 and all othei- ministers, who are only men and nothing more." 
 
 Some think, as Erasmus, Bengel, Wetstein, Olshausen, and 
 Tholuck, that John the Baptist's words end with the verse pre- 
 
JOHN, CHAP. TIL 183 
 
 ceding the one now before us, and that the words "He that 
 Cometh from above" begin the comment of John toe EvangeHst. 
 I cannot for a moment admit this idea to be correct. I see no 
 necessity for it. The whole passage runs on naturally, a.^ the 
 language of John the Baptist, to the end of the chapter, i see 
 nothing unsuitable to John the Baptist in the concluding verses. 
 They contain no truth which he was not likely to know. I sec 
 nothing gained by this idea. It throws no new light on the 
 passage, and is an awkward break which would never occur to 
 a simple reader of the Bible. 
 
 32. — [W}iat...seen..Jieard...testiJiefh.'\ In this sentence John the 
 Baptist shows the divinity of Christ, and His consequent superi- 
 ority over himself in another point of view. He says that Christ 
 bears witness to truths which he has " seen and heard." He ia 
 not like mere human ministers who only declare what they have 
 been taught by the Holy Spirit, and inspired to communicate to 
 others. As G-od, He declares with authority truths which Ho 
 had seen, and heard, and known from all eternity with the Father. 
 (John 7. 19, 30 ; viii. 38.) 
 
 Some draw a distinction between what our Lord has seen ana 
 what He has heard. They think that what Christ has " seen,' 
 means what He has seen as one with Grod the Father in essence, 
 and what Christ has " heaid," means what He has heard as a 
 distinct person in the Trinity. — Or else they think that what 
 Christ has " seen," means what He has seen with the Father as 
 Grod, and what He has " heard," what He has heard from the 
 Father as man. — I doubt the correctness of either view. I think 
 it more probable that the expression '' seen and heard," is only a 
 proverbial way of signifying perfect knowledge, such as a person 
 has intuitively or at first hand. 
 
 Euthymius thinks, that the expression " seen and heard," was 
 purposely used, because of the weakness of John's hearers ; and 
 that such expressions were necessar}', in order to give such hear- 
 ers any adequate idea of Christ's divine nature. 
 
 The word " testifieth " deserves notice, as an expression pecu- 
 liarly characteristic of Christ's ministry. He told Pilate, "I 
 came into the world that I should bear witness unto the truth." 
 (John xviii. 27.) 
 
 \And no man receiveth his testimony.] The expression "no 
 man " in this sentence, must evidently, from the following verses, 
 be taken with qualification. It must mean " very few." Andrew, 
 Peter, Philip, and others, had received Christ's testimony. The 
 sentence seems intended to rebuke the complaint uttered by 
 John's disciples, " All men come unto him." John seems to say, 
 " However many persons come to hear Je3us, you will yet see 
 
184 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 that very few believe on him. Great as he is, and deserving c/f 
 far more reverence than myself, you have yet to learn, that e\ei 
 he is really beheved on by few'. The crowds who follow him are. 
 unhappily, not true believers. The temporary popularity Avhich 
 attends his ministry, is as worthless as that which attended my 
 own." 
 
 Pearce thinks, that the Greek word rendered "and," would 
 have been better translated, " and yet," as in John vii. 19, and 
 ix. 30. 
 
 The notion of Augustine's, that "no man," in this sentence 
 means, " none of the wicked," seems very untenable and unsa- 
 tisfactory. 
 
 33. — [He hath received, &c.'\ In this verse John shows the great 
 importance of receiving Christ's testimony. So far from being 
 offended by the crowd which attended Christ's ministry. John's 
 disciples should be thankful that so many heard Him, and that 
 Bome few received His teaching into their hearts. 
 
 [Hath set to his seal.'] This expression is peculiar, and found 
 nowhere else in the New Testament, in the same sense. Of 
 course it does not mean any literal sealing. It only means, 
 ''hath formally declared his belief, — hath publicly professed his 
 conviction," — just as a man puts his seal to a document, as a testi- 
 mony that he consents to its contents. In ancient days, when 
 few comparatively could w^rite, to afl&x a seal to a paper, was a 
 more common mode of expressing assent to it, than to sign a 
 name. — The sentence is equivalent to saying, " He that receives 
 Christ's testimony, has set down his name as one who beUeves 
 that God is true." 
 
 [That Ood is true.] These words may be taken two ways. 
 According to some they mean, "He that receives Christ, declares 
 his belief, that it is the true God who has sent Christ ; and that 
 Christ is no impostor, but the Messiah, whom the true God of 
 the Old Testament prophets promised to send." — According to 
 others they mean, " He that receives Christ, declares his belief, 
 that God is true to his word, and has kept the promise that he 
 made to Adam, Abraham, and David." That the Greek word 
 rendered " true," will bear this last meaning, seems proved by 
 the expression, " Let God be true, but every man a liar." (Rom. 
 iii. 4.) Either view makes good sense and good divinity ; but 
 on the whole, I prefer the second one. It seems to me strongly 
 confirmed by the expression in St. John's 1st Epistle: "He that 
 believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believetb 
 not the record that Ged gave of his Son." (1 John v. 10.) 
 
 Some have thought that the sentence may mean, "He that 
 receives Christ, declares his belief, that Christ is the true God." 
 
185 
 
 ai.d tliat it is parallel to 1 John v. 20, " This is the true God/' — 
 But I do not- think the Greek words will admit of the interpre- 
 tation. If they would, the Greek fathers would never have 
 overlooked this text in writing against the Arians. Maldonatus 
 seems to favour this opinion, and says that Cyril holds it. But 
 it certainly does not clearly appear in Cyril's commentary on the 
 place. 
 
 Si. — [He ivhom God hath sent] In this verse John the Baptist 
 shows the dignity of Christ, and His superiority over all other 
 teachers, by another striking declaration about Him. He begins 
 by giving Him the well-known epithet which was peculiarly 
 applied to Messiah, " He whom God hath sent, the sent One, — 
 the One whom God has sent into the world according to 
 promise." 
 
 [Spea/teth the words of God.] This sentence means that Christ's 
 words were not the words of a mere man, like John himself or 
 one of the prophets. They were nothing less than the words 
 of God. He who heard them heard nothing less than God 
 speaking. The unity of the Father and the Son is so close that 
 he who hears the teaching of the Son hears the teaching of the 
 Father also. (Compare John vii. 16 ; v. 19 ; xiv. 10, 11 ; viii. 28 ; xii. 
 49.) When John the Baptist spoke, he spoke merely human 
 words, however true, and good, and scriptural. But when 
 Christ ?poke, He spoke divine words, even the words of God 
 Himself. As Quesnel says, ''He spoke by the Holy Ghost, who 
 is His own Spirit, who inseparably dwelleth in Him, and by 
 the possession of whose fulness He receives His unction and 
 consecration." 
 
 Theophylact remarks on this sentence and others like it in St. 
 Swim's Gospels, that we must not suppose that Christ needed to 
 be taught by God the Father what to speak, because whatever 
 ♦^'•c Father knows the Son also knows, as consubstantial with 
 Him. So also when we read of the Son being " sent," we must 
 think of Him as a ray sent from the sun, which is not in reality 
 separate from the sun, but a part of the sun itself. 
 
 Some think that the expression, " speaketh the words of God," 
 in this place, has special reference to the promise given to Moses 
 about Messiah, " I will put my words in His mouth." (Deut. 
 xviii. 18.) 
 
 [For God giveth not... Spirit hy measure... Htm.] The expression 
 "by measure," in this sentence, means "partially, — scantily, — 
 stintedly, — in small degree." It is the opposite to "fully, — com- 
 pletely, — in unmeasured abundance." Thus we read in Ezekiel's 
 descriptic n of a time of scarcity at Jerusalem, " They shall drink 
 water by measure." (Ezek. iv. 16.) 
 
186 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 The whole sentence is peculiar, and requires careful interpieta- 
 tion. The object of John the Baptist is to show once more the 
 infinite superiority of the Lord Jesus over himself or any other 
 man. To all others, even to the most eminent prophets and 
 apostles, God gives the Holy Spirit " by measure," Their gifts 
 and graces are both imperfect. As St Paul says, they " know in 
 part and prophesy in part." (1 Cor. xiii. 9.) But with Him 
 whom Grod hath sent, it is very different. To Him the Holy 
 Ghost is given without measure, in infinite fulness and complete- 
 ness. In His human nature the gifts and graces of the Spirit are 
 present without the sUghtest shadow of imperfection. As man, 
 Jesus of Nazareth was anointed with the Holy Ghost, and fitted 
 for His ofi&ce as our Priest, and Prophet, and King, in a way and 
 degree never granted to any other man. (Acts x. 38.) 
 
 All this is undoubtedly true, but it is not, in my opinion, the 
 whole truth of the sentence. I believe that John the Baptist 
 points not only to our Lord's human nature but to His divinity. 
 I believe his meaning to be, " He whom God hath sent, is One 
 far above prophets and ministers, to whom the Spirit is only 
 given by measure. He is One who is Himself very God. In 
 Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. He is One 
 who, as a Person in the Trinity, is eternally and ineffably united 
 with God the Holy Spirit. From Him the Holy Spirit proceeds 
 as well as from the Father, and is the Spirit of Christ and the 
 Spirit of the Son. As God, it is impossible that He can be 
 separated from the Holy Spirit. To Him therefore the Spirit is 
 not given by measure, as if He were only a man. He is God as 
 well as man, and as such He needeth not that the Spirit should 
 be given to Him. He has the Spirit without measure, because in 
 the divine essence, He, and the Spirit, and the Father, are One, 
 and undivided." 
 
 I am incHned to hold the view just stated, because of the 
 verse which follows. The object cf John the Baptist, in this last 
 testimony to Christ, appears to be to lead his disciples step by 
 step to the highest view of Messiah's dignity. He would have 
 them recognize in Him One who was very God as well as very 
 man. The view of the sentence before us which is commonly 
 adopted, appears to me of an unsafe tendency. That the Spirit 
 was given to our Lord as man, and given without measure, is 
 doubtless true. But we must be very careful that we never forget 
 a truth of no less importance. That truth is, that our Lord Jesus 
 Christ never ceased to be God as well as man, and that as God 
 He was never separate from the Spirit, As Henry says, " The 
 Spirit dwelt in Him, not as in a vessd, but as in a fountain, as iu 
 a bottomless ocean." 
 
 It deserves remark, that the concluding words of the verse, 
 " unto Him," are not found in the original Greek. This has led 
 
JOHN, CHAP. III. 187 
 
 some to maintain that the second clause of the verse is only a 
 general statement, " God is not a God who gives the Spirit by 
 mea ure." But all the best commentat(jrs, from Augustine down- 
 wards, hold the view of our translators, that it is Christ who 
 is signified, and that " unto Him" ought to be supplied in any 
 translation, 
 
 Chemnitius thinks that this verse specially refers to Isaiah xi. 
 2, where it is predicted that the seven-fold gifts of the Spirit 
 shall rest on Messiah. 
 
 35. — {The Father hveth...Son...given alL.hand.'] There is something, 
 at first sight, abrupt and elliptical in this verse. The full mean- 
 ing of it, I beheve to be as follows. " He whom God hath sent 
 is One far above me or any other prophet. He is the eternal Son 
 of God, whom the Father loved from all eternity, and into whose 
 hands all things concerning man's salvation have been given and 
 committed by an everlasting covenant. He is no mere man, as 
 you, my disciples, ignorantly suppose. He is the Son, of whom 
 it is written, ' Kiss the Son lest He be angry, and so ye perish 
 from the way.' He is the Son to whom the Father has snid, *I 
 will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the utter- 
 most parts of the earth for thy possession.' (Psalm ii. 7 — 9.) 
 Instead of being jealous of his present popularity, you should 
 serve Him with fear, and rejoice before Him with trembling." 
 
 The " love of the Father toward the Son," here spoken of, is 
 a subject far too deep for man to fathom. It is an expression 
 graciously accommodated to man's feeble understanding, and 
 intended to signify that most intimate and inetfable union which 
 exists between the First and Second Persons in the blessed 
 Trinity, and the entire approbation and complacency wiih which 
 the Father regards the work of redemption undertaken by the 
 Son. It is that love to which our Lord refers in the words, 
 " Thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world," (John 
 xvii. 24,) and which the Father expressly asserted at the begin- 
 ning of the Son's earthly ministry, " This is mj beloved Son, in 
 whom I am well pleased." (Matt. iii. 17.) 
 
 When it says that " the Father hath given all things into the 
 Son's hand," we must understand that mediatorial kingdom 
 which in the eternal counsels of the Trinity has been appointed 
 to Christ. By the terms of the everlasting covenant, the Father 
 has given to the Son power over all flesh, to quicken whom He 
 will — to justify, to sanctify, to keep, and to glorify His people, — 
 to judge, and finally punish the wicked and unbelieving, — and at 
 last to take to Himself a kingdom over all the world, and put 
 down every enemy under His teet. These are the " all things/' 
 of which cfoiin speaks. Christ, he would have us know, has the 
 
188 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 keys of death and hell in His hand, and to Him a' one men must 
 go, if they want anything for their souls. 
 
 Calvin observes on this verse, " The love here spoken of is 
 that peculiar love of God, which beginning with ihe Son flowa 
 from Him to all the creatures. For that love, with which, 
 embracing His Son, He embraces us also in Him, leads Him to 
 communicate all His benefits to us by His hand." 
 
 Quesnel remarks, " God loved the prophets as His servants, 
 out He loves Christ as His only Son, and communicates Himself 
 to Him in proportion to His love." — " The prophets had only 
 particular commissions, limited to a certain time and certain pur- 
 poses ; but Christ has full power given Him as the general 
 disposer of all His Father's works, the executor of His 
 designs, the head of His Church, the universal High Priest 
 of good things to come, the steward and disposer of all His 
 graces." 
 
 Chemnitius, on this verse, remarks the infinite wisdom and 
 love of God in giving the management of our souPs affairs into 
 Christ's hand. We are all naturally so weak and feeble, that h 
 anything was left in our hands we should never be saved. We 
 should lose al', even sooner than Adam did in Paradi-e. But 
 Christ will take care of all committed to His charge, and our 
 wisdom is to commit all things to Him, as St. Paul did. (2 Tim. 
 L12.) 
 
 ije.— [-Se that heUeveth...Son...Jiath..Mfe.] In this verse John the 
 Baptist concludes his testimony to Christ, by a solemn decla ation 
 of the unspeakable importance of believins: on Him. Wiiether 
 his disciples would receive it or not," he tells them that life or 
 death, heaven or hell, all turned on believing in this Jesub vv^io 
 had " been with him beyond Jordan." 
 
 The excellence of faith should be noted here. Like his divine 
 Master, John teaches that " believing on the Son," is the princi- 
 pal thing in saving religion. Believing is the way to heaven, and 
 not believing the way to hell. 
 
 The " presentness" of the salvation which is in Christ should 
 be here noted. Again, like his divine Master, John teaches that 
 a believer " hath" everlasting life. Pardon, peace, and a title to 
 heaven are at once and immediately a man's possession, the very 
 moment that he lays his sins on Jesus, and puts his trust in 
 Him. 
 
 [Re that believeth not.. .not see life] The Greek word here ren- 
 dered "believ3th not," is quite different from the one translated 
 "beheveth" at the beginning of the verse. It means somethiig 
 much stronger than " not trusting." It would be more hterally 
 
189 
 
 rendered " He that does not obey, or is disobedient to." It is 
 the same word so rendered in Rom. ii. 8 ; x. 21 ; 1 Pet. ii. 8 ; iii. 
 1. 20. 
 
 The expression, " shall not see life," must of course mean, 
 " shall not see life, if he continues impenitent and unbelieving, 
 and dies in that state." The phrase " to see life," most probably 
 means "to taste, enter, enjoy, possess life," and must not be 
 literally interpreted as seeing either with bodily or mental eyes 
 
 [Tlie lurath of God abideth on him.] This concluding sentence 
 of John the Baptist's testimony, is again very like his Master's 
 teaching, " He that believeth not is condemned already." The 
 meaning of the sentence is, that so long as a man is not a be- 
 liever in Christ, the just wrath of Grod hangs over him, and he 
 is under the curse of God's broken law. We are all by nature 
 born in sin, and children of wrath; and our sins are all upon us, 
 unpardoned, unforgiven, and untaken away, until that day when 
 we believe on the Son of God and are made children of grace. 
 
 The sentence is a very instructive one, and especially SO in the 
 present day. I see in it an unanswerable reply to some grievous 
 errors which are very prevalent in some quarters. 
 
 (a.) It condemns the notion, upheld by some, that under the 
 Gospel there is no more anger in God, and that he is only love, 
 mercy, and compassion, and nothing else. Here we are plainly 
 told of " the wrath of God." It is clear that God hates sin. 
 There is a hell. God can be angry. Sinners ought to be afraid. 
 
 (h.) It condemns the notion, maintained by some, that the 
 elect are justified from all eternity, or justified before they be- 
 lieve. Here we are plainly told that if a man believe not on the 
 Son, God's wrath abideth on him. We know nothing of any 
 one's justification until he beheves. Those whom God predes- 
 tinates, God calls and justifies in due season. But there is no 
 justification until there is faith. 
 
 (c.) It condemns the modern idea, that Christ by His death, 
 justified all mankind, and removed God's wrath from the whole 
 seed of Adam ; and that all men and women are justified in 
 reality, though they do not know it, and will all finally be saved. 
 This idea sounds very amiable, but is flatly contrary to the text 
 before us. Hei-e we are plainly told, that until a man '' believeth 
 on the Son of God, the wrath of God abideth on him." 
 
 {d.) Finally, it condemns the weak and false charity of those 
 who say, that preachers of the Gospel should never speak of 
 God's wrath, and should never mention hell. Here we find that 
 the last words of one of Christ's best servants consist of a 
 solemn declaration of the danger of unbeUef. "The wrath of 
 
190 
 
 EXPOSIl'ORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 God" is John's last thought. To warn men of God's wrath, 
 and of their danger of hell, is not harshness, but true charity. 
 Many will go to hell, because their ministers never told them 
 about hell. 
 
 In leaving the passage, the variety of expressions used by John 
 the Baptist concerning our Lord Jesus Christ, is very worthy of 
 notice. He calls Him the Christ, — the bridegroom, — Him that 
 cometh from above, — Him that testifieth what He hath seen and 
 heard, — Him whom God hath sent, — Him who has the Spirit 
 without measure, — Him whom the Father loves, — Him into 
 whose hands all things are given, — Him in- whom to believe ia 
 everlasting life. To talk of John the Baptist's knowledge of di- 
 vine things as meagre and scanty, in the face of such a passage 
 as thi-;, is, to say the h ast, not wise, and argues a very slight 
 acquaintance with Scripture. To suppose, as some do, that the 
 man who had such clear views oi our Lord's nature and ofl&ce, 
 could afterwards doubt whether Jesus was the Christ, is to sup- 
 pose what is grossly improbable. The message that John sent to 
 Jesus when he was in prison, was for the sake of his disciples, 
 and not for his own satisfaction. (Matt. xi. 3, &c.) 
 
 JOHN lY. 1—6. 
 
 1 When therefore the Lord knew 
 how the Pharisees had heard that 
 Jesus made and baptized more dis- 
 ciples than John, 
 
 2 (Though Jesus himself bap- 
 tized not, but his disciples,) 
 
 3 He left Judaea, and departed 
 again into GaUlee. 
 
 4 And he must needs go through 
 Samaria. 
 
 5 Then cometh he to a city of 
 Samaria, which is called Sychar, 
 near to the parcel of ground that 
 Jacob gave to his son Joseph. 
 
 6 Now Jacob's well was there. 
 Jesus therefore, being wearied with 
 his journey, sat thus on the 
 well : and it was about the sixth 
 hour. 
 
 There are two sayings in these verses which deserve par- 
 ticular notice. They throw light on two subjects in reli- 
 gion, on which clear and well defined opinions are of great 
 importance. 
 
 We should observe, for one thing, what is said about 
 haptism. We read that " Jesus himself baptized not, but 
 his disciples." 
 
 The expression here used is a very remarkable one. In 
 reading it we seem irresistibly led to one instructive con- 
 
191 
 
 elusion. That conclusion is, that baptism is not the prin- 
 cipal part of Christianity, and that to baptize is not the 
 principal work for which Christian ministei'S are ordained. 
 Frequently we read of our Lord preaching and praying. 
 Once we read of His administering the Lord's supper. 
 But we have not a single instance recorded of His ever 
 baptizing any one. And here we are distinctly told, that 
 it was a subordinate work, which He left to others. Jesus 
 " himself baptized not, but his disciples." 
 
 The lesson is one of peculiar importance in the present 
 day. Baptism, as a sacrament ordained by Christ Himself, 
 is an honourable ordinance, and ought never to be lightly 
 esteemed in the churches. It cannot be neglected or de- 
 spised without great sin. When rightly used, with faith 
 and prayer, it is calculated to convey the highest blessings. 
 But baptism was never meant to be exalted to the position 
 which many now-a-days assign to it in religion. It does 
 not act as a charm. It does not necessarily convey the 
 grace of the Holy Ghost. The benefit of it depends 
 greatly on the manner in which it is used. The doctrine 
 taught, and the language employed about it, in some quar- 
 ters, are utterly inconsistent with the fact announced in 
 the text. If baptism was all that some say it is, we should 
 never have been told, that " Jesus himself baptized not.'* 
 
 Let it be a settled principle in our minds that the first 
 and chief business of the Church of Christ is to preach 
 the Gospel. The words of St. Paul ought to be constantly 
 remembered, — " Christ sent me not to baptize, but to 
 preach the Gospel." (1 Cor. i. 17.) When the Gospel of 
 Christ is faithfully and fully preached we need not fear 
 that the sacraments will be undervalued. Baptism and 
 the Lord's supper will always be most truly reverenced in 
 those churches where the truth as it is in Jesus is most 
 fully taught and known. 
 
 We should observe, for another thing, in this passage, 
 
192 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 what is said about our JOord^s human nature. We read 
 that Jesus was " weaned with his journey." 
 
 We learn from this, as well as many other expressions 
 in the Gospels, that our Lord had a body exactly like our 
 own. When " the Word became flesh," He took on Him 
 a nature like our own in all things, sin only excepted. 
 Like ourselves. He grew from infancy to youth, and from 
 youth to man's estate. Like ourselves. He hungered, 
 thirsted, felt pain, and needed sleep. He was liable to 
 every sinless infirmity to which we are liable. In all things 
 His body was framed like our own. 
 
 The truth before us is full of comtort for all who are 
 true Christians. He to whom sinners are bid to come for 
 pardon and peace, is one who is man as well as God. He 
 had a real human nature when He was upon earth. He 
 took a real human nature with Him, when He ascended up 
 into heaven. We have at tbe right hand of God a High 
 Priest who can be touched with the feeling of our infirmi- 
 ties, because He has suffered Himself being tempted. 
 When we cry to Him in the hour of bodily pain and weak- 
 ness. He knows well what we mean. When our prayers 
 and praises are feeble through bodily weariness. He can 
 understand our condition. He knows our frame. He has 
 learned by experience what it is to be a man. To say that 
 the Virgin Mary, or any one else, can feel more sympathy 
 for us than Christ, is ignorance no less than blasphemy. 
 The man Christ Jesus can enter fully into everything that 
 belongs to man's condition. The poor, the sick, and the 
 suffering, have in heaven One who is not only an almighty 
 Saviour, but a most feeling Friend. 
 
 The servant of Christ should grasp firmly this great 
 truth, that there are two perfect and complete natures in 
 the one Person whom he serves. The Lord Jesus, in whom 
 the Gospel bids us believe, is, without doubt, almighty 
 God, --equal to the Father in all things, and able to save 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 193 
 
 to the uttermost all those that come unto God by Him. 
 But that same Jesus is no less certainly perfect man, — able 
 to sympathize with man in all his bodily sufferings, and 
 acquainted by experience with all that man's body has to 
 endure. Power and sympathy are marvellously combined 
 in Him- who died for us on the cross. Because He is God 
 we may repose the weight of our souls upon Him with un- 
 hesitating confidence. He is mighty to save. — Because He 
 is man, we may speak to Him with freedom, about the 
 many trials to which flesh is heir. He knows the heart of 
 a man. — Here is rest for the weary ! Here is good news ! 
 Our Redeemer is man as well as God, and God as well as 
 man. He that believeth on Him, has everything that a 
 child of Adam can possibly require, either for safety or for 
 peace. 
 
 Notes. John TV. 1 — 6. 
 
 1. — [When therefore the Lord Tcneiv, <&c.] The connection between 
 this chapter and the last will be found at the 25th verse of the 
 last chapter. The controversy between John's disciples and the 
 Jews was the means of calling pubHc attention to our Lord's 
 ministry. It became a subject of common conversation, and 
 attracted the notice of the principal religious teachers of the 
 Jews, viz., the Pharisees. They had already been disturbed 
 by the ministry of John the Baptist, and the crowds which 
 attended it. (John i. 19—28.) The deputation which they sent 
 to John had been distinctly told by him that One greater than 
 himself w'^s about to appear. When therefore " the Pharisees 
 heard" mat Jesus was actually baptizing more disciples, and 
 attracting more attention than John, we can well imagine that 
 their minds would be even more disturbed than before. A vague 
 uncomtortable feeUng would arise in their hearts, that this mys- 
 terious person, who had cast out of the temple the buyers and 
 sellers in so miraculous a manner, and was now baptizing so 
 many disciples, might possibly be -the Christ. And then would 
 come the attendant feeling, that if this was the Christ, He was 
 not the Christ tliey either expected or wanted. The result of 
 both feehngs would probably be a bitter enmity against our 
 Lord, and a secret determination, if possible, to settle all doubta 
 by putting Hun to death. 
 
 In what manner our Lord '' knew '* what the Pharisees had 
 9 
 
194 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 heard, we need not be careful to inquire. Possibly He knew it 
 from information obtained by His disciples. We can hardly 
 doubt that some of them kept up intercourse with their old 
 master, John the Baptist, and so learned what was going on 
 at ^non. — It is more probable that He knew it from His om- 
 niscience as God. We are frequently told that " He knew the 
 thoughts " of His enemies, and acted and spoke accordingly. It 
 is good for us all to remember that nothing is spoken, talked of, 
 or reported among men, however secretly, which Christ does not 
 know. 
 
 2. — {^Though Jesus himself baptized not. c&c] The fact that our 
 Lord did not actually administer baptism with His own hands, 
 is only mentioned here in the Gospels, and is noteworthy. It 
 shows, at any rate, that what is done by Christ's ministers, at 
 Christ's command, in the administration of ordinances, is regarded 
 as done by Christ Himself. The preceding verse says that " Jesus 
 baptized," while the present one says, that He '^ baptized not." 
 Lightfoot remarks, "It is ordinary, bath in Scripture phrase and 
 in other language, to speak of a thing as done by a man himself, 
 which is done by another at his appointment. So Pharaoh's 
 daughter is said to 'nurse Moses,' and Solomon is said to 'build 
 the temple and his own house.' So David ' took Saul's spear and 
 cruse,' meaning Abishai by David's appointment," (1 Sam, 
 xxvi. 12.) 
 
 The reasons assigned for our Lord's not administering baptism 
 with His own hands, are various. Lightfoot mentions four. 
 
 1. " Because he was not sent so much to baptize as to preach. 
 
 2. Because it might have been taken as a thing somewhat im- 
 proper for Christ to baptize in His own name. 3. Because the 
 baptizing tliat was most proper for Christ to use, w^as not with 
 Avater, but with the Holy Ghost. 4. Because he would prevent 
 all quarrels and disputes among men about their baptism, which 
 might have risen if some had been baptized by Christ, and others 
 only by His disciples.'' 
 
 To these reasons we may add another of considerable import- 
 ance. Oar Lord would show us that the effect and benefit of 
 baptism do not depend on the person w^ho administers it. We 
 carniot doubt that Judas Iscariot baptized some. The intention 
 of the minister does not affect the vahdity of the sacrament. 
 
 One thing seems abundantly clear, and that is, that baptism 
 is not an ordinance of primary, but of subordinate importance 
 in Christianity. The high-flown and extravagant language used 
 by some divines about the sacrament of baptism and its effects, 
 is quite irreconcilable with the text before us, as well as with the 
 general teaching of Scripture. (See Acts x. 48; 1 Cor. i. 17.) 
 
 3. — [He Itft Jvdoea^ &c.'\ The context of the preceding verses seems 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 195 
 
 to sLowthat this movement was intended to avciu the vlesicrns of 
 the Pharisees against our Lord. If he had rcmaiue I in Judaea, 
 He would have been cut off, and pat to death before the ap- 
 pointed time. He therefore withdrew into the province of Gali- 
 lee, where He was further off from Jerusalem, and where His 
 ministry would attract less public notice. 
 
 Our Lord's conduct on this occasion shows us that it is not 
 obligatory on a Christian to await danger to life and person, 
 when he sees it coming, and that it is not cowardice to use ai' 
 reasonable means to avoid it. We are not to court martyrdom, 
 or needlessly to throw our lives awav. There is a time for all 
 things, — a time to live and work, as well as a time to suffer and to 
 die. Whether some of the primitive martj'-rs would have acted 
 as our Lord did here may be questioned. Their zeal for martyr- 
 dom seems sometimes to have paitaken of the character of 
 fanaticism. 
 
 i. — [He must needs go through Samaria.'] Many pious and pro- 
 fitable remarks have been made on this expression. It ha<* been 
 thought to teach that our Lord went purposely, and out of the 
 regular road, in order to save the soul of the Samaritan woman. 
 It admits of grave question whether this opinion is well-founded. 
 — There was no other way by which a person could conveniently 
 go from Judaea to Galilee, excepting through Samaria. — The" 
 expression, therefore, is probably nothing more than a natural 
 introduction to the story of the Samaritan woman. The first in 
 the train of circumstances which led to her conversion, was the 
 circumstance that Jesus was obligeil to pass through Samaria, 
 on His journey towards Gahlee. This accounted for His meeting 
 with a Samaritan woman. 
 
 5. — [Then cometh....city... .called Sychar.] The common opinion is, 
 that the city here spoken of is the same as Siehem or Shechem. 
 (Gen. xxxiii. 18, 19.) Few places in Palestine, afcer Jerusalem, 
 have had so much of Bible history connected with them. Here 
 God first appeared to Abraham. (Gen. xii. 6.) Here Jacob dwelt 
 when he first relurned from Padan-aram, and heie the disgraceful 
 history of Dinah, and the consequent murder (-f the Shechemites 
 took place. (Gen. xxxiv. 2, &c.) Here Jo.^epli's bretliren fed 
 their flocks when Jacob sent him to them, little thinking he 
 would never see him again for many years. (Gen. xxxvii. 12.) 
 Here, when Israel took possess' on of the land of Canaan, was 
 one of the cities of refuge. (Josh. xx. 7,8.) Here Joshua gathered 
 all the tribes when he addressed them for the last time. (Josh, 
 xxiv 1.) Here the bones of Joseph were buried, and all the 
 patriarchs were interred. (Josh. xxiv. 32 ; Acts, vii. 16.) Here 
 the principal events in the history of Abimelech took place. 
 (Judges ix. 1, &c.) Here Rehoboam met the tribes of Israel after 
 
196 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Solomor's death, and jrave the answer which rent his kingdoir, 
 in two. (1 Kings, xii. 1.) Here Jeroboam first dwelt, when he 
 was made king of Israel. (1 Kings xii. 25.) And finally, close 
 bv Shechem was the city of Samaria itself, and the two hills of 
 Ebal and Gerizini, where tlie solemn blessings and cur-ings were 
 recited, after Israel entered Canaan. (Josh. viii. 33.) A more 
 interesting neighbourhood it is difficult to imagine. Whichever 
 way the eye of a wearied traveller looked, he would see some- 
 thing to remind him of Israel's history. 
 
 It is only fair to say that one of the latest travellers in Pales 
 tine (Dr. Thomson, author of " The Land and the Book,") doubts 
 whether Sychar and Shechem really were the same place. He 
 grounds his doubt on the fact that the well now called Jacob's 
 well is two miles from the ruins of Shechem, and that close to 
 these ruins are beautiful fountains of water. He thinks it highly 
 improbable that a woman of Shechem would go two miles to 
 draw water, if she could find it close by. He therefore thinks it 
 more likely that a place now called Aschar, which is close to 
 Jacob's well, must be the ancient Sychar, and that Sychar and 
 Shechem were two different places. 
 
 The subject is one on which it is impossible to attain a conclu- 
 sive decision. Whether the ruins now called the ruins of Shechem 
 are really on the site of ancient Shechem, — whether the well 
 now called Jacob's well is really the well spoken of in this 
 chapter, — whether ancient Shechem may not have been nearer 
 the well than it now appears, — are all points on which, after 
 eighteen hundred years have passed away, it is impossible to 
 fpeak positively. It ought, however, to be remembered, that 
 the opinion of most competent judges is almost entirely against 
 Dr. Thomson's theory. Moreover, it is worth noticing that the 
 Samaritan woman's words, '' Neither come hither to draw," seem 
 to imply that she had to come some distance to Jacob's well 
 when she drew water. 
 
 [A^ea7\...pa7xel....ground....Jacol),... Joseph.] The ground here 
 spoken of seems to consist of two parts. One part was bought 
 by Jacob of Hamor, Shechem's father, for a hundred pieces of 
 silver. (Gen. xxxiii. 29.) The other seems to have been his by 
 conquest, when his sons slew the Shechemites for dishonouring 
 Dinah. (Gen. xxxiv. 28, and xlviii. 22.) 
 
 Let it be carefully noted that St. John here speaks of Jacob 
 and Joseph and the events of their lives, as if the history con- 
 tained in Genesis was all simple matter of fact. It is always 
 so in the New Testament. The modern theory, that the histories 
 of the Old Testament are only fables, destitute of any foundation 
 in fact, is a mere baseless invention, without a single respectabla 
 argument to be adduced in its favour. 
 
197 
 
 6. — [JacoVs well] It is not known how or when this well received 
 its name. In Genesis Ave find mention of Abraham and Isaac 
 diggino: wells, but not of Jacob doing so. All we know about it 
 is what we read in the chapter before us, 
 
 A well called Jacob's well is still shown to all travellers in 
 Palestine, near the ruins of Shechem, and is commonly supposed 
 to be one of the oldest and most genuine remains of ancitut 
 times in the Ho'y Land. In fact there seems no reason for dis- 
 puting the common belief, that it is the veiy identical well at 
 which our Lord sat and held the conversation recorded in thi3 
 chapter. It is in good preservation, and about thirty yards deep, 
 
 [ Wearied with Ms journey^ This expression deserves notice. 
 It shows the reality of our Lord's human nature. He had a 
 body hke our own, subject to all the conditions of flesh and 
 blood. — It shows our Lord's infinite compassion, humility, and 
 condescension, when He became flesh, and came on earth to live 
 and die for our sins. Though He was rich He became poor. He 
 who had made the world, and whose were "the cattle on a thou- 
 sand hills," was content to be a weary traveller on foot, in order 
 to provide eternal redemption for us. We never read of Jesus 
 travelling in a carriage, and only once of His riding on a beast. 
 — It supplies the poor with the strongest argument for content- 
 ment. If Christ was willing to be poor, we may surely be willing 
 to submit to poverty. Men need not be ashamed of poverty, 
 if they have not brought it on themselves by misconduct. It is 
 disgraceful to be profligate and immoral. But it is no sin to be 
 poor. — Finally, it shows believers what a sympathizing Saviour 
 Christ is. He knows what it is to have a weak and weary 
 body. He can be touched with the feeling of our infirmities. 
 When our work wearies us, though we are not weary of our 
 work, we may confidently tell Jesus, and ask Him for help. He 
 knows the heart of a weary man. 
 
 l^Sat thus on the well.] The general meaning of these words 
 is, that our Lord sat down on the stones, which, according to 
 Eastern custom, formed a wall or battlement round the mouth 
 of the well. The particular meaning of the word " thus " in the 
 sentence, is a point that has perplexed commentators in every 
 age, and will perhaps never be settled. 
 
 Some think, as De Dieu, A. Clarke, and Schleusner, that 
 "thus" is a pleonasm, or elegant expletive and redundancy in 
 the Greek original, and that although a Greek would see a 
 meaning in it, as giving a finish to the sentence, it has no spe- 
 cial meaning that can be attached to it in the English transla- 
 tion. 
 
 Some think, as Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius, Muscu-. 
 lus, Bengel, Glassius, and Wordsworth, that ''thus" means "just 
 
198 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 as He was," without any regular scat, without looking for any 
 convenient position, without any pride or formality, not upon a 
 throne, not upon a cushion, but simply upon the ground. 
 
 Some think, as Doddridge, that " thus " means immediately, 
 and find a parallel for it in Acts xx. 11. 
 
 Some think, as Calvin, Lightfoot, Dyke, Bullinger, Beza, 
 Parkhurst, Stier, Alford, and Burgon, that " thus " refers to the 
 weariness just mentioned. Jesus, being wearied, sat down on 
 the well accordingly, after the manner and according to the 
 fashion that any weary person would sit. He was weary, and 
 so He sat on the well. 
 
 The question is one that I feel unable to settle. The last 
 meaning seems to me, on the whole, the most probable one, 
 though it fiails to carry complete conviction with it. The use of 
 the word "so," in Acts vii. 8, is somewhat like it. The Greek 
 word for " so " in that case is the same as the one here rendered 
 " thus." 
 
 Burgon remarks on this sentence, " that Jacob and Moses each 
 found his future wife beside a well of water ; and here it is seen 
 that One greater than they, their divine Antitype, the Bride- 
 groom takes to Himself His alien spouse, the Samaritan Church, 
 at a well likewise." 
 
 Quesnel remarks, " The rest of Jesus Christ is as mysterious 
 and full of kindness and beneficence as His weariness. — It is a 
 great matter for a man to learn how to rest Himself without 
 being idle, and to make his necessary repose subservient to the 
 Glory of God." 
 
 '[It ivas about the sixth hour.] What time of the day was this, 
 according to our calculation of time ? — By far the most common 
 opinion is, that the sixth hour here means twelve o'clock, the 
 hottest and sultriest time of the day. It is notorious that the 
 ■ Jewish day began at six o'clock in the evening. Our seven 
 o'clock was tlieir one o'clock, and their sixth hour would be our 
 twelve o'clock. 
 
 It is however only just and right to say, that some commenta- 
 tors, as Wordsworth and Burgon, maintain strongly that in St. 
 John's Gospel the Jewish mode of reckoning the hours of the 
 day is not observed. They say that, writing later than the other 
 Evangelists, and in Asia Minor, St. John uses the Roman or 
 Asiatic mode of reckoning time, and that the Roman mode w ;8 
 like our own. They say, therefore, that when the disciples f )!• 
 lowed Jesus, (John i. 39,*^) at the tenth hour, it wns ten o'.;lock in 
 the morning, and when the fever left the ruLr's ?on at the 
 seventh hour, it was seven o'clock in the evening. (John iv. 52.) 
 They say that when Pilate brought f rih Jesus to the Jews, on 
 
JOHN, CHAP. TV. 199 
 
 the day of the crucifixion, at the sixth hour, (John xix. 14,) it 
 was six o'clock in the morning. And finally, they saw thit when 
 Jesus, in the passage before us, sat wearied on flie well a' the 
 sixth hour, it means six o'clock in t!ie evening. Moreover, they 
 plead in support of their view, that it is inhn't ly more likely 
 that a woman would come to a well to draw water at S'x o'clock 
 in the evening than at twelve o'clock ia the day. In Gen sis it 
 is dis inctly said that the "evening" is the " time that women 
 go out to draw water." (Gen. xxiv. 11.) 
 
 These arguments are undoubtedly weighty and ingenious, and 
 the matter is one that admits of doubt. Nevertheless, for several 
 reasons, I am disposed to think that the common view of the 
 question is the correct one, and that the sixth hour in this place 
 means twelve o'clock in the day. I purposely omit the con- 
 sideration of the other places where St. John mentions hours in 
 his Gospel. None of them seem to me to present any difficulty, 
 except the " sixth hour," in St. John's account of the crucifixion'. 
 That difficulty I shall be prepared to examine in its proper place. 
 I think then that the " sixth hour " in the text before us, means 
 twelve o'clock, for the following reasons : 
 
 (a.) It seems exceedingly improbable that St. John would 
 reckon time in a manner different to the other three Gospel- 
 writers. 
 
 (J.) It is by no means clear that the Romans did reckon time 
 in our way, and not in the Jewish way. When the Roman poet 
 Horace describes himself as lying late in bed in a morning, he 
 says, " I lie till the fourth hour." He must surely mean ten 
 o'clock, and not four in the afternoon. — When the Roman poet 
 Martial describes the Roman day, he says, " The first and second 
 hours are employed by clients in attending levees, and the third 
 hour exercises the advocates in the law-courts." — He surely can- 
 not mean that Roman law-courts did not open till two o'clock 
 in the afternoon. About the custom of the Asiatics I offer no 
 opinion. It is a doubtful point. 
 
 (c.) It is entirely a gratuitous assumption to say that no 
 woman ever came to draw water except in the evening. There 
 must surely be exceptions to every rule. The fact of the woman 
 coming alone, seems of itself to indicate that she came at an 
 unusual hour, and not in the evening. 
 
 {d.) Last, but not least, it seems far more probable that our 
 Lord would hold a conversation alone with such a person as the 
 Samaritan woman at twelve o'clock in the day, than at six 
 o'clock in the evening. The conversation was not a very short 
 one. Ihere is little or no twilight in Eastern countries. The 
 night soon comes on. And yet, on the theory I oppose, our 
 Lord ])egins a conversation about six o'clock, and carries it on 
 
200 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 till the woman is converted. Then the froman goes away to the 
 city and tells the men what has happened, and they all come out 
 to the well to see Jesus. Yet by this time, in all reasonable pro- 
 bability, it would be quite dark, and the night would have begun. 
 And yet, after all this, our Lord says to the disciples, " Lift up 
 your eyes, and look on the fields." (iv. 35.) 
 
 This last reason weighs very heavily in my mind, :ii forming 
 a conclusion on the subject. Oar Lord appears to me t) have 
 reached a resting-place for the mid(ile of the day, according to 
 the Eastern custom in travelUng, and to have intended staying 
 by the well for a short time, till the heat of the day was past. 
 The arrival of the Samaritan woman at this hour of the day gave 
 ample time for the conversation, for her rapid return to the city, 
 and for the coming of the inhabitants to the well. 
 
 I must say that I see a peculiar beauty and fitness in the men- 
 tion of the sixth hour, if it means twelve o'clock, which I should 
 not see so strongly if it meant six in the evening. To my eyes 
 there is a special seemliness and propriety in the fact that our 
 Lord held His conversation with such a person as this Samaritan 
 woman at noon day. When He talked to Nicodemus, in the 
 preceding chapter, we are told that it was at night. But when 
 He talked to a woman of impure life, we are carefully told that 
 it was twelve o'clock in the day. I see in this fact a beautiful 
 carefulness to avoid even the appearance of evil, which I should 
 entirely miss if the sixth hour meant six o'clock in the evening. 
 I see even more than this. I see a lesson to all ministers and 
 teachers of the Gospel about the right mode of carrying on the 
 work of trying to do goo-d to souls like that of the Samaritan 
 woman. Like their Master, they must be careful about times 
 and hours, and specially if they work alone. If a man will try 
 to do good to a person like the Samaritan woman, alone and 
 without witnesses, let him take heed that he walks in his Mas- 
 ter's footsteps, both as to the time of his proceedings as well as 
 to the message he delivers. — I believe there was a deep mean- 
 ing in the little sentence, " it was about the sixth hour." 
 
 Augustine thinks that "the sixth hour" here was meant to 
 represent, allegorically, the sixth age of the world. He says 
 that the first hour was from Adam to Noah, the second from 
 Noah to Abraham, the third. from Abraham to David, the fcurth 
 from David to the Babylonian captivity, the fifth fronr. the cap- 
 tivity to the baptism of John, and the sixth the time of the Lord 
 Jesus. I can see no foundation lor these things in the text. If 
 such interpretations of Scripture are correct, it is easy to make 
 the Bible mean anything 
 
201 
 
 JOKN" lY. 7—26. 
 
 T There ccmeth a woman of Sa- 
 maria to draw water: Jesus saith 
 unto her, Give me to drink. 
 
 8 (For his disciples were gone 
 away unto the city to buy meat.) 
 
 9 Then saith the woman of Sa- 
 maria unto him, How is it that 
 thou, being a Jew, askest drink of 
 me, which am a woman of Samaria ? 
 for the Jews have no deaUngs with 
 the Samaritans. 
 
 10 Jesus answered and said un- 
 to 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 thee living 
 water. 
 
 11 The woman saith unto him. 
 Sir, thou hast notliing to draw with, 
 and the well is deep : from whence 
 then hast thou that Hving water ? 
 
 12 Art thou greater than our fa- 
 ther Jacob, which gave us the well, 
 and drank thereof himself, and his 
 children, and Ms cattle ? 
 
 13 Jesus answered and said unto 
 her, Whosoever drinketh of this 
 water shall thirst again ; 
 
 14 But whosoever drinketh of 
 the 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 springing up 
 into everlasting hfe. 
 
 15 The woman saith unto him, 
 Sir, give me this water, that I thirst 
 not, neither come hither to draw. 
 
 16 Jesus saith unto her. Go, call 
 thy husband, and come hither. 
 
 IT Tlie woman answered and 
 said, I have no husband. Jesus 
 said unto her, Thou hast well said, 
 1 have no husband : 
 
 18 For thou hast had five hus- 
 bands ; and he whom thou now 
 hast is not thy husband: in that 
 saidst thou truly. 
 
 19 The woman saith unto him, Sir, 
 I perceive that thou art a prophet. 
 
 20 Our fathers worshipped in 
 this mountain ; and ye say, that in 
 Jerusalem is the place where men 
 ought to worship. 
 
 21 Jesus saith unto her. Woman, 
 beheve me, the hour cometh, when 
 ye shall neither in this mountain, 
 nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the 
 Father. 
 
 22 Ye worship ye know not what . 
 we know what we worship ; for 
 salvation is of the Jews. 
 
 23 But the hour cometh, and now 
 is, when the true worshippers shall 
 worship the Father in spirit and in 
 truth : for the Father seeketh such 
 to worship him. 
 
 24 God is 8l Spirit : and they that 
 worship him must worship him in 
 spirit and in truth. 
 
 25 The woman saith unto him, I 
 know that Messias cometh, which 
 is called Christ : when he is come, 
 he will tell us all things. 
 
 26 Jesus saith unto her, I that 
 speak unto thee am Jie. 
 
 The history of the Samaritau woman, contained in these 
 verses, is one of the most interesting and instructive pas- 
 eages in St. John's Gospel. St John has shown us, in the 
 case of Nicodemus, how our Lord dealt with a self-right- 
 eous formalist. He now shows us how our Lord dealt 
 with an ignorant, carnal-minded woman, whose moral 
 character was more than ordinarily bad. There are les- 
 
 9* 
 
202 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Bons in tLe passage for ministers and teachers, which they 
 would do well to ponder. 
 
 We should mark, firstly, the mingled tact and condescen* 
 sion of Christ in dealing icith a careless sinner. 
 
 Our Lord was sitting by Jacob's well when a woman 
 of Samaria came thither to draw water. At once He 
 Bays to her, " Give me to drink." He does not wait for 
 her to speak to Him. He does not begin by reproving 
 her sins, though He doubtless knew them. He opens 
 communication by asking a favour. He approaches the 
 woman's mind by the subject of " water," which was 
 naturally uppermost in her thoughts. Simple as this re- 
 quest may seem, it opened a door to spiritual conversation. 
 It threw a bridge across the gulf which lay between her 
 and Him. It led to the conversion of her soul. 
 
 Our Lord's conduct in this place should be carefully 
 remembered by all who want to do good to the thought- 
 less and spiritually ignorant. It is vain to expect that 
 such persons will voluntarily come to us, and begin to 
 seek knowledge. We must begin with them, and go 
 down to them in the spirit of courteous and friendly 
 aggression. It is vain to expect that such persons will 
 be prepared for our instruction, and will at once see and 
 acknowledge the wisdom of all we are doing. We must 
 go to work wisely. We must study the best avenues to 
 their hearts, and the most likely way of arresting their 
 attention. There is a handle to every mind, and our 
 chief aim must be to get hold of it. Above all, we must 
 be kind in manner, and beware of showing that we feel 
 conscious of our own superiority. If we let ignorant 
 people fancy that we think we are doing them a great 
 favour in talking to them about religion, there is little 
 hope of doing good to their souls. 
 
 We should mark, secondly, Christ^s readiness to give 
 mercies to careless sinners. He tells the Samaritan woman 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 203 
 
 that if she had asked, " He would have given her living 
 water." He knew the character of the person before 
 Him perfectly well. Yet He says, "If she had asked, 
 He would have given," — He would have given the living 
 water of grace, mercy, and peace. 
 
 The infinite willingness of Christ to receive sinners ia 
 a golden truth, which ought to be treasured up in our 
 hearts, and diligently impressed on others. The Lord 
 Jesus is far more ready to hear than we are to pray, and 
 far more ready to give favours than we are to ask them. 
 All day long He stretches out His hands to the disobedient 
 and gainsaying. He has thoughts of pity and compassion 
 towards the vilest of sinners, even when they have no 
 thoughts of Him. He stands waiting to bestow mercy 
 and grace on the worst and most unworthy, if they will 
 only cry to Him. He will never draw back from that 
 well-known promise, "Ask and ye shall receive: seek and 
 ye shall find." The lost will discover at the last day, 
 that they had not because they asked not. 
 
 We should mark, thirdly, the priceless excellence of 
 Christ's gifts whe7i compared with the things of this loorld. 
 Our Lord tells the Samaritan woman, " He that drinketh 
 of this water shall thirst again, but he that drinketh of 
 the water that I shall give him shall never thirst." 
 
 The truth of the principle here laid down may be seen 
 on every side by all who are not blinded by prejudice or 
 love of the world. Thousands of men have every temporal 
 good thing that heart could Avish, and are yet weary and 
 dissatisfied. It is now as it was in David's time,—" There 
 be many that say who will show us any good." (Psalm 
 iv. 6.) Riches, and rank, and place, and power, and 
 learning, and amusements, are utterly unable to fill the 
 soul, He that only drinks of these waters is sure to 
 thirst again. Every Ahab finds a Naboth's vineyard hard I 
 by his palace, and every Haman sees a Mordecai at the \ 
 
204 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 gate. There is no heart satisfaction in this world, until 
 ♦^^e believe on Christ. Jesus alone can fill up the empty 
 places of our inward man. Jesus alone can give solid, 
 lasting, enduring happiness. The peace that He imparts 
 is a fountain, which, once set flowing within the soul, 
 flows on to all eternity. Its waters may have their ebbing 
 seasons ; but they are living waters, and they shall never 
 be completely dried. 
 
 We should mark, fourthly, the absolute necessity of con- 
 viction of sin before a soul can be converted to God. The 
 Samaritan woman seems to have been comparatively un- 
 moved until our Lord exposed her breach of the seventh 
 commandment. Those heart-searching words, " Go, call 
 thy husband," appear to have pierced her conscience like 
 an arrow. From that moment, however ignorant, she 
 speaks like an earnest, sincere inquirer after truth. And 
 the reason is evident. She felt that her spiritual disease 
 was discovered. For the first time in her life she saw her- 
 self. 
 
 To bring thoughtless people to this state of mind should 
 be the principal aim of all teachers and ministers of the 
 Gospel. They should carefully copy their Master's ex- 
 ample in this place. Till men and women are brought 
 to feel their sinfulness and need, no real good is ever done 
 to their souls. Till a sinner sees himself as God sees him, 
 he will continue careless, trilling, and unmoved. By all 
 means we must labour to convince the unconverted man 
 of sin, to prick his conscience, l;0 open his eyes, to show 
 him himself. To this end we must expound the length 
 arid breadth of God's holy law. To this end we must 
 cien ounce every practice contrary to that law, however 
 fashionable and customary. This is the only way to do 
 good. Never does a soul value the Gospel medicine until 
 it feels its disease. Never does a man see any beauty in 
 C3hri§t as a Saviour, until he discovers that he is himself 
 
205 
 
 a lost and ruiued sinner. Ignorance of sin is invariably 
 attended by neglect of Christ. 
 
 We should mark, fifthly, the uselessness of any religion 
 which only consists of formality. The Samaritan woman, 
 when awakened to spiritual concern, started questions 
 about the comparative merits of the Samaritan and 
 Jewish modes of w^orshipping God. Our Lord tells her 
 that true and acceptable worship depends not on the 
 place in which it is offered, but on the state of the wor- 
 shipper's heart. He declares, " The hour cometh when 
 ye shall neither in this place nor at Jerusalem worship the 
 Father." He adds that " the true worshippers shall wor- 
 ship in spirit and in truth." 
 
 The principle contained in these sentences can never be 
 loo strongly impressed on j^rofessing Christians. We are 
 all naturally inclined to make religion a mere matter of out- 
 ward forms and ceremonies, and to attach an excessive 
 importance to our own particular manner of worshipping 
 God. We must beware of this spirit, and especially when 
 w^e first begin to think seriously about our souls. The heart 
 is the principal thing in all our approaches to God. " The 
 Lord looketh on the heart." (1 Sam. xvi. V.) The most 
 gorgeous cathedral-service is offensive in God's sight, if all 
 is gone through coldly, heartlessly, and without grace. The 
 feeblest gathering of three or four poor believers in a cot- 
 tage to read the Bible and pray, is a more acceptable sight 
 to Him who searches the heart than the fullest congregation 
 which is ever gathered in St. Peter's at Rome. 
 
 We should mark, lastly, Chrisfs gracious willingness to 
 reveal Simself to the chief of sinners. He concludes His 
 conversation with the Samaritan woman by telling her 
 openly and unreservedly that He is tho Saviour of the 
 world. "I that speak to thee," He says, "am the Mes- 
 siah." Nowhere in all the Gospels do we find our Lord 
 making such a full avowal of His nature and office as He 
 
206 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 does in this place. And this avowal, be it remembered, 
 was made not to learned Scribes, or moral Pharisees, but 
 to one who up to that day had been an ignorant, thought- 
 less, and immoral person ! 
 
 Dealings with sinners, such as these, form one of the 
 grand peculiarities of the Gospel. Whatever a man's past 
 life may have been, there is hope and a remedy for him in 
 Christ. If he is only willing to hear Christ's voice and 
 follow Him, Christ is willing to receive him at once as a 
 friend, and to bestow on him the fullest measure of mercy 
 and grace. The Samaritan woman, the penitent thief, the 
 Philip2)ian jailor, the publican Zacchaeus, are all patterns 
 of Christ's readiness to show mercy, and to confer full and 
 immediate pardons. It is His glory that, like a great phy- 
 sician. He will undertake to cure those who are apparently 
 incurable, and that none are too bad for Him to love and 
 heal. Let these things sink down into our hearts. What- 
 ever else we doubt, let us never doubt that Christ's love 
 to sinners passeth knowledge, and that Christ is as willing 
 to receive as He is almighty to save. 
 
 What are w^e ourselves ? This is the question, after all, 
 which demands our attention. We may have been up to 
 this day careless, thoughtless, sinful as the w^oman whose 
 story we have been reading. But yet there is hope. He 
 who talked with the Samaritan woman at the well is yet 
 living at God's right hand, and never changes. Let us 
 only ask, and He will " give us living water." 
 
 Notes. John IY. 7—26. 
 
 7. — [Then cometh... woman.. .draw water.] The scarcity of water in 
 the hot climates of the East makes drawing water from the near- 
 est well an important part of the daily business of an Eastern 
 household. We learn from other parts of Scripture that it was 
 a work ordinarily done by women. (G-en. xxiv. 11. 1 Sam. ix. 
 11.) A well became naturally a common meeting-place for the 
 inhabitants ol a neighbourhood, and especially for the young 
 
IV. ^ 207 
 
 people. (Judges v. 11.) The insinuation, however, of some 
 writers, as Schottgen, that the Samaritan woman's motives in 
 coming to the well were possibly immoral, seems destitute of any 
 foundation. Bad as her moral character evidently was, we have 
 no right to heap upon her more blame than is warranted by 
 facts. 
 
 Augustine regards this woman as a type of the Gentile Church, 
 " not now justified, but even now at the point to be justified." 
 I doubt whether we were meant by the Holy Ghost to take thia 
 view. There is great danger in adopting such allegorical inter- 
 pretations. They insensibly draw away the mind from the plain 
 lessons of Scripture. 
 
 Musculus remarks what a wonderful instance it is of sovereign 
 grace, that our Lord should turn away from learned Scribes, 
 Pharisees, and Priests, to converse with and convert such a per- 
 son as this woman, to all appearance so utterly unworthy of 
 notice. He also observes how singularly our least movements 
 are overruled by God's providence. Like Eebecca and Rachel, 
 the Avoman came to the well knowing nothing of the importance 
 of that day's visit to her soul. 
 
 \Je8us saitli...give me to drinh.'] In this simple request of our 
 Lord there are four things deserving notice, (a.) It was a gra- 
 cious act of spiritual aggression on a sinner. He did not wait 
 for the woman to speak to Him, but was the first to begin con- 
 versation. (6..) It was an act of marvellous condescension. He 
 by whom all things were made, the Creator of fountains, brooks, 
 and rivers, is not ashamed to ask a draught of water I'rom the 
 hand of one of his sinful creatures, (c.) It was an act full of 
 wisdom and prudence. He does not at once force religion on 
 the attention of the woman, and rebuke her for her sins. He 
 begins with a subject apparently indifferent, and yet one of 
 which the woman's mind was doubtless fall. He asks her for 
 water, {d.) It was an act fall of the nicest tact, and exhibiting 
 perfect knowledge of the human mind. He asks a favour, and 
 puts Himself under an obligation. No hne of proceeding, it is 
 well known to all wise people, would be more likely to concihate 
 the woman's feelings towards Him, and to make her willing to 
 hear His teaching. Simple as the request was, it contains prin- 
 ciples which deserve the closest attention of all who desire to do 
 good to ignorant and thoughtless sinners. 
 
 The idea of Euthymius, that our liovd pretended thirst in order 
 to introduce conversation, is unworthy of notice. — Cyril thinks 
 that Oar Lord intended to make a practical protest against the 
 exclusiveness of the Jews, by asking drink of a Samaritan wo- 
 man, and to show her that He disapproved the custom of Hia 
 nation. 
 
208 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 8. — [His disciples...gone...huy meat] This verse is an insfance of 
 our Lord's general rule not to work a miracle in order to supply 
 his own wants. He who could feed five thousand with a few 
 loaves and fishes when He willed, was content to buy food, like 
 any other man. — It is an instance of His lowly-mindedness. The 
 Creator of all things, though rich, for our sakes became poor. — 
 It ought to teach Christians that they are not meant to be so 
 spiritual as to neglect the management of money, and a reason- 
 able use of it for the supply of their wants. God could feed His 
 children, as He fed Elijah, by a daily miracle. But He knows 
 it is better for our souls, and more likely to call grace into exer- 
 cise, not to feed them so, but to make them think, and use means. 
 There is no real spirituahty in being careless about money. 
 Jesus Himself allowed His disciples to " buy." 
 
 The word rendered " meat" means nothing more than " food 
 or nourishment," and must not be confined to " flesh." Out of 
 the sixteen places where it is used in the New Testament, there 
 is not one where it necessarily signifies " flesh." The meat ofier- 
 ing of the Old Testament consisted of nothing but flour, oil, and 
 incense. (Lev. ii. 1, 2.) The meaning of the word " meat," in 
 tlie English language, has evidently changed since the last revi- 
 sion of the English Bible. 
 
 The whole verse is an instance of one of those short, paren- 
 thetical, explanatory comments, which are common in St. John's 
 Gospel. Its object is to explain the circumstance of our Lord 
 being alone at the well, and the fact that He did not ask a dis- 
 ciple to give Him water. 
 
 9. — [Then saith...woman...how is it. .a Jew... Samaria.] This ques- 
 tion implies that the woman was surprised at our Lord speaking 
 to her. It was an unexpected act of condescension on His part, 
 and as such arrested her attention. Thus one point, at any rate, 
 was gained. It is a great matter if we can only get a careless 
 sinner to give us a quiet hearing. We shall soon see how our 
 Lord improved the opportunity. 
 
 How the woman knew our Lord to be a Jew, is matter of 
 conjecture. Some think that she knew it by the dialect that He 
 spcke. Some think that she knew it by the fringe upon His 
 dress, which he probably wore, in conformity to the Mosaic law, 
 (Num. XT 38, 39,) and which the Samaritans very hkely ne- 
 glected. One thing is very clear. There was nothing in our 
 Lord's personal appearance, when He was a man upon earth, to 
 distinguish Him from any other Jewish traveller who might 
 have been found sitting at a well. There was notliing eccentric 
 cr pecuUar about his dress. He looked hke other men. 
 
 I venture the opinion that in the woman's question stress 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 209 
 
 ehould be laid ou the word " woman." She was not only sur- 
 prised that a J ewish man asked drink of a Samaritan, but also 
 that he asked it of a woman. 
 
 [The Jeivs have no dealings.. .Samaritans^] This sentence is 
 generally thought, with much reason, to be the explanatory 
 comment of St. John, and not the words of the Samaritan 
 woman. It certainly seems more natural to take it so. The 
 sentence should then be read as a parenthesis. Calvin thinks it 
 is the woman's words, but his reasons are not convincing. 
 
 The enmity between the Jews and Samaritans, here referred 
 to, no doubt originated in the separation of the ten tr.bes under 
 Jeroboam, and the establishment of the kingdom of Israel. It 
 was exceedingly increa-ed after the ten tribes were carried into 
 captivity by the Assyrians, by the fact that the Samaritans 
 became mingled with foreigners, whom the king of Assyria sent 
 to Samaria from Babylon and other places, and so lost their right 
 to be called pure Jews. (2 Kings xvii. 1, &c.) It was further 
 aggravated by the opposition which the inhabitants of Samaria 
 made to the re-building of Jerusalem, after the return from the 
 captivity of Babylon, in the days of Ezra. (Ezra iy. 10, &c.) In 
 the days of our Lord the Jews seem to have gone into the 
 extreme of regarding the Samaritans as entirely foreigners, and 
 aliens from the commonwealth of Israel. When they told our 
 Lord that He was " a Samaritan and had a devil," they meant 
 the expression to convey the bitterest scorn and reproach. (John 
 viii. 48.) It is clear, however, from the conversation in th's 
 chapter, that the Samaritans, however mistaken on many points, 
 were not ignorant heathens. They regarded themselves as 
 descended from Jacob. They had a kind of Old Testament reli- 
 gion. They expected the coming of Messias. 
 
 The bitter and exclusive spirit of the Jews towards all other 
 nations, referred to in this verse, is curiously confirmed by the 
 language used about the Jews by heathen writers at Eome. 
 Exclusiveness was noted as one among their pecuHarities. — The 
 immense difficulty with which even the apostles got over this 
 exclusive feehng, and went forth to preach to the G-entiles, is 
 noticeable both in the Acts and Epistles. (Acts x. 28; xi 2 ; 
 Gal. ii. 12 ; 1 Thess. ii. 16.) 
 
 The uttrr absence of real charity and love among men in the 
 days when our Lord was upon earth, ought not to be overlooked. 
 Well would it be if men had never quarrelled about religio.i 
 after He left the world ! Quarrels among the crew of a sinking 
 ship are not more hideous, unseemly, and irrational than the 
 majority of quarrels among professors of religion. An historian 
 night truly apply St. John's words to many a period in Church 
 history, and say, " The Romanists have no dealings with tha 
 
210 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Proi.estants," — or "the Lutherans have no dealings with the 
 Calvinists," — or " the Calvinists have no deahngs with the 
 Arminians," — or " the Episcopahans have no deahngs with the 
 Presbyterians,'' — or " the Baptists have no deahngs with those 
 who baptize mfants," — or " the Plymouth Brethren have no 
 deahngs with anybody who does not join their company." " These 
 things ought not so to be. They are the scandal of Christianity, 
 the joy of the devil, and the greatest stumbling-block to the 
 spread of the Gospel. 
 
 The Greek words translated " have no dealings," mean literally 
 *'use not anything together with" the Samaritans Pearce says, 
 " The Jews would not eat or drink with the Samaritans, would 
 not drink out of the same cup, or eat of the same dish with 
 them." This fact throws much light on the woman's surprise at 
 our Lord's request, " Give me to drink." 
 
 10. — [Jesus answered, &c.] In this verse our Lord proceeds to uso 
 the opportunity which the woman's question affords Him. He 
 passes over for the present her expression of surprise at a Jew 
 speaking to a Samaritan. He begins by exciting her curiosity 
 and raising her expectations, by speaking of something within 
 her reach which He calls " living water." The first step to take 
 with a careless sinner after his attention has been arrested, is to 
 produce on his mind the impression that we can teU him of 
 something to his advantage within his reach. Tliere is a certain 
 vagueness in our Lord's words which exhibit His consummate 
 wisdom. A systematic statement of doctrinal truth would have 
 been thrown away at this stage of the woman's feeUng. The 
 general and figurative language which our Lord employed, was 
 exactly calculated to arouse her imagination, and to lead her on 
 to further inquiry. 
 
 [The gift of God.] This expression is variously explained. 
 Some think, as Augustine, Rupertus, Jansenius, Whitby, and 
 Alford, that it means " the Holy Spirit," that pecuhar gift which 
 it was the Messiah's special office to impart to men in greater 
 abundance than it had before been imparted. (Acts ii. 38; x. 45.) 
 
 Some think, as Brentius, Bucer, Musculus, Calovius, Grotius, 
 and Barradius, that it means '' the gracious opportunity which 
 God is graciously giving to thee." If thou didst but know what 
 a door of life is close to thee, thou wouldst joyfully use it. 
 
 Some thi ak, as Euthymius, Toletus, Bulhnger, Gualter, Hook- 
 er, Beza, RoUock, Lightfoot, Glassius, Dyke, Hildersam, and Gill, 
 that it means " Christ Himself," God's gracious gilt to a sinful 
 world. If thou didst but know that God has actually given Hia 
 only-begoten Son, according to promise, and that He has come 
 into the world, and that it is He who is speaking to theq, thou 
 wouldst at once ask of Him hving water. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 211 
 
 Some think that it means " God's gift, and especial!}^ His gift 
 of grace," which is now being proclaimed and made manifest 
 to the world by the appearing on earth of His Son. (See Eom. 
 V. 15.) This seems to be the view of Cyril, Lampe, Theophylact, 
 Zwingle, and Calvin. 
 
 Of these four views the last seems to me, on the whole, the 
 most probable and satisfactory. The first sounds strange and 
 unlike the usual teaching of Scripture. " If thou knewest the 
 Holy Spirit, thou wouldst have asked," is an expression we can 
 hardly expect at this period of our Lord's ministry, when the 
 mission of the Comforter had not yet been explained. — The 
 second view seems hardly more natural than the first. — Th3 
 third view is undoubtedly recommended by the fact that Christ 
 is frequently spoken of as God's great gift to the world. If 
 the woman had really known anything aright about Messiah, 
 and had known that He was before her, she would have asked of 
 Him living water. Nevertheless, it is a strong objection to 
 this view, that it makes our Lord apparently say the same thing 
 twice over. " If thou knewest Christ, and that it is Christ who 
 speaks." 
 
 The last view makes the first clause general, " If thou knewest 
 the grace of God," and the second particular, " If thou also 
 knewest that the Saviour Himself was with thee.'' Thus both 
 clauses receive a meaning. 
 
 [Living water.'] The meaning of this expression, like "the 
 gift of God," is variously explained. Some, as Calovius and 
 Chemnitius, seem to think it means the doctrine of God's mercy, 
 pardon, cleansing, and justification. Others, as Chrysostom, 
 Augustine, Cyril, Theophylact, Calvin, Beza, Gualter, Musculus, 
 and Ferus, think it means the Holy Spirit, renewing, and 
 sanctification. 
 
 I doubt whether either view is quite correct. I am inclined, 
 with Bullinger and Rollock, to regard the expression as a general 
 figurative description of everything which it is Christ's office to 
 bestow on the soul of man, — pardon, peace, mercy, grace, justi- 
 fication, and sanctification. As water is cleansing, purifying, 
 cooling, refreshing, thirtt-satisfying to man's body, so are Christ's 
 gifts to thei soul. I think everything that a sinful soul needs is 
 purposely included under the general words, " living water." It 
 comprises not only the justifying " blood which cleanses from all 
 sin," but the sanctifying grace of the Spirit, by which we 
 " cleanse ourselves from all filthiness,"— not only the inward 
 peace which is the result of pardon, but the sense of inward 
 comfort, which is the companion of renewal of hearts. 
 
 The idea of " water," we should remember, is specially brought 
 forward in some of the Old Testamert promises of good things 
 
212 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 to come. (S<3e Isai. xii. 3 ; xliv. 3 ; Ezek. xlvii. 1, &c. ; Zech. xiii. 
 1 ; xiv. 8.) A sprinkling of clean water was particularly men- 
 tioned as one of the things Messiah was to give. (Isai. lii. 15 ; 
 Ezek. xxxvi. 25.) To an intelligent reader of the Old Testament 
 the mention of " living water," would at once raise up the idea 
 of Messiah's times. 
 
 The word "living," applied here to water, must not be pressed 
 too far. It does not necessarily mean anything more than fresh, 
 running waters. Thus it is said that Isaac's servant "found a 
 well of living waters." (G-en. xxvi, 19. See also Num. xix. 17; 
 Gant. iv, 15.) There was undoubtedly a deep meaning in our 
 Lord's words, and a tacit reference to the verse in Jeremiah, 
 where God speaks of Himself as " the fountain of living waters." 
 (Jer. ii. 13.) Nevertheless, the first idea that the words would 
 convey to the woman's mind, would probably be no more than 
 this, that he who sat before her had better, fresher, and more 
 valuable water than that of the well. The fact is, that our Lord 
 purposely used a figurative, general expression, in order to lead 
 the woman's mind gently on. If He had said, " He would have 
 given thee grace and mercy," she would have been unprepared 
 for such purely doctrinal language, and it would have called forth 
 prejudice and dislike. 
 
 There is a vast quantity of deep truth contained in this verse. 
 It is rich in first principles, linked together in a most instructive 
 chain. (1.) Christ has living water to give to men. (2.) If men 
 would only ask, Christ would at once give. (3.) Men do not 
 ask because they are ignorant. — The verse condemns all who 
 die unpardoned. They have not because they ask not. They 
 ask not because they are blind to their condition. To remove 
 this blindness and ignorance must be the first object we should 
 
 The notion of Ambrose, Cyprian, and Rupertus, that " living 
 water" here means baptism, is too monstrous to require refuta- 
 tion. It is only a sample of the preposterous views of some of 
 the Fathers and their followers about the sacraments. 
 
 Bengel remarks on this verse our Lord's readiness to draw 
 lessons of spiritual instruction from every object near Him. To 
 the Jews desiring bread, He spoke of the bread of life. (John vi. 
 33.) To the people at Jerusalem at break of day. He speaks of 
 the light of the world, referring probably to the rising sun. 
 (John viii. 2, 12.) To the woman coming to draw water, He 
 speaks of living water. 
 
 U. — [The woman saith, cfx] The words of the woman in this and 
 the folk wing verse, imply surprise, curiosity, and perhaps a 
 slight sneer. At any rate tliey show that her attention waa 
 
213 
 
 arrested. A stranpre Jew at a well suddenly speaks to her about 
 "living water." What could He mean? Was He in earnest or 
 not? With a woman's curiosity she desires to know. 
 
 [Sir.] The Greek word so rendered is generally translated 
 "Lord" This leads some, as Chrysost«jm, to think, that the wo- 
 man's heart was so far impressed now, that sh^ purposely used 
 a term of respect and reverence. We must not, however, lay 
 too much stress on the word. It is certainly translated "Sir," 
 in other places, where inferiors speak to superiors Matt, xiii 
 27; xxi. 30; xxvii. 63. John iv. 49; v. 7 ; xii. 21; xx. 15. 
 Rev, vii. 14. Yet it is difficult to see what other word the 
 woman could have used in addressing a strange man, without 
 rudeness and discourtesy. 
 
 [Nothing to draw with.] — The Greek expression here is simply 
 a substantive, meaning " an instrument for drawing water." 
 What it was we are lefc to conjecture. Schleusner suggests from 
 Nonnus that it must mean a cup fastened to a rope. 
 
 [The well is deep.] These words, according to the universal 
 testimony of travellers at this day, are still literally true. The 
 well is at least thirty yards deep, and to a person not provided 
 with a rope, as the woman doubtless saw was our Lord's case, 
 the water would be inaccessible. 
 
 [ Whence then....that living water.] The Greek word here 
 rendered " that" is simply the article commonly translated " the." 
 It is like " that prophet." (John i. 21.) 
 
 The ignorance of the woman in thinking of nothing but material 
 water, naturally strikes us. Yet it is nothing more than we see 
 in many other instances in the Gospels. Nicodemus could not see 
 any but a carnal meaning in the new birth. The disciples could 
 not understand our Lord's having "meat to eat," unless it was 
 literal meat. The Jews thought the " bread from heaven " was 
 hteral bread. (John iii. 4 ; iv. 33 ; vi. 34.) The natural heart of 
 man always tries to put a carnal and material sense on spiritual 
 expressions. Hence have arisen the greatest errors about the 
 sacraments. 
 12.— [Art thou greater.] This question exhibits the woman's curiosity 
 to know who the stranger before her could be. Who art thou 
 that speakest of hving water? — It also savours of a sneer and 
 incredulity. Dost thou mean to say that thou canst give me 
 better and more abundant supplies of water, than a well which 
 the patriarch Jacob found sufficient for himself and all his nume- 
 rous company? Dost thou pretend to know of a better well? 
 Art thou, a poor weary traveller in nppearance, so great a perion 
 that thou dost possess a better well than Jacob possessed ? 
 
 [Our father Ja^ob....gave us the well] Let it be noted that 
 
214 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 the woman carefully claimed relationship with Jacob, and called 
 him our father, though after all the intermixture of the Samaritan3 
 with heathen nations, the relationship was not very easy of proof. 
 But it is common to find people shutting their eyes to difficulties, 
 when they want to prove a connection or relationship. The 
 advocates of an extreme view of apostolical succession seldom 
 condescend to notice difficulties when they assert that episcopally 
 ordained ministers can trace their order up to the apostles. 
 
 When it says that "Jacob gave" the well, there is probably a 
 reference to the grant which Jacob made to his son Joseph of 
 the district near the well. From Joseph came the tribe of 
 Ephraim, to which, no doubt, the Samaritan woman claimed to 
 belong. (Qen xlviii. 22.) 
 
 [DrinJcJiimself.... children... .cattle.] These words were doubt- 
 less said to show the goodness and abundance of the water. Did 
 the stranger at the well really mean to say that he could give 
 any better water ? 
 
 Bucer on this verse, remarks how the Samaritans prided 
 themselves on their relationship to Jacob, and the possession of 
 his well, while they made no eflfort to imitate his goodnese, and 
 points out the tendency of superstition to the same thing, in 
 every age. "True piety," he says, "does not consist in having 
 Jacob's well and Jacob's land, but Jacob's spirit, — not in keeping 
 the bones of the saints, but in imitating their lives." 
 
 ]3, — [Jesus answered, &c.] In this and the following verse our Lrrd 
 proceeds to raise the desires of the woman by exalting the value 
 of the living water of which He had spoken. He still refrains 
 from distinct statements of doctrinal truth. He still adheres to the 
 figurative expression, " water." And yet He makes an advance, 
 and leads on the woman gently and almost imperceptibly to 
 glorious spiritual things. Now, for the first time, He begins to 
 speak of " everlasting life." 
 
 [Whosoever drinketh....this water.. ..thirst again.] It will be 
 noted, that our Lord does not answer the woman's questions 
 directly. He keeps steadily to the one point He desiies to fasten 
 on her mind, viz.: the infinite excellence of a certain "living 
 water " which He had to give. And first He reminds her of what 
 she knew well by laborious experience. The water of Jacob's 
 well might be good and plentiful. But still he who diank of it 
 was only satisfied fur a few hours. He soon thirsted again. 
 
 We cannot doubt that there was a deep latent thought in our 
 Lord's words, in this sentence. He would have us know that 
 the waters of Jacob's well are typical of all tenjporal and materia* 
 good things They cannot satisfy the soul. They have no power 
 
215 
 
 to fill the heart of an immortal creature like man. He who only 
 drinks of them is sure to thirst again. 
 
 Some have thought that there is a tacit reference in these words 
 to the woman's insatiable love of sin. 
 
 The similarity ought to be noticed between our Lord's line of 
 argument in tbis verse, and the line He adopts in recommending 
 to tbe Jews the bread of life in the sixth chapter. He showed 
 the Jews the superiority of the bread of life over the m'anna by 
 the words "your fathers did eat manna, and are dead." (John vi. 
 49.) Just so in this place, He shows the inferiority of the water 
 of Jacob's well to the hving water, by saying " He that drinks 
 of this water shall thirst again." The two passages deserve a 
 careful comparison. 
 
 14. — [ Whosoever drinJceth.... never thirst] These words contain a 
 precious promise, and declare a glorious truth of the Go-pel. The 
 benefits of Christ's gifts are promised to every one who is willing 
 to receive them, whosoever and whatsoever he may be. He may 
 have been as bad .'is the Samaritan woman. But the promise Ls 
 for him as well as for her, "whosoever drinketh, shall never 
 thirst." — The declaration " shall never thirst" does not mean, 
 " shall never feel any spiritual want at all." It simply asserts the 
 abiding and enduring nature of the benefits which Christ gives. 
 He that drinks of the living water which Christ gives, shall never 
 entirely and completely lose the cleansing, purifying, and soul- 
 refreshing effects which it produces. 
 
 Our English translation of this sentence hardly gives thb full 
 sense of the G-reek. Literally rendered, it would be, " shall never 
 thirst unto eternity." The same expression is used frequently 
 hi St. John's Gospel. See John vi. 51 — 58; viii. 51; x. 28; xi. 
 26; xiv. 16. 
 
 [The wafer. ...I.... give.. ..well....everlasting life.'] To see the full 
 meaning of this figurative sentence, it must be paraphrased. The 
 meaning seems to be something of this kind. " The gift of grace, 
 mercy, and peace which I am ready to give, shall be in the heart 
 of him who receives it an everflowing source of comfort, satis- 
 faction, and spiritual refreshment, continuing and flowing on, not ^ "^- 
 only through this life, but unto life eternal He that receives vJ 
 my gift of living water has a fountain opened in his soul of spiritual \\-^ 
 satisfaction, which shall neither be dried up jn this fife or the life 'C^ 
 to come, but shall flow on to all eternity." ;_ . _• ■ . ,,.... '"'- ■•■''^''^ v 
 
 Let it be noted that the whole verse is a strong argument ia 
 I fav>;ur of the doctrine of the perpetuity of grace, and the consequent 
 I perseverance in the faith of behevers. It is ditficult to understand 
 how the Arminian doctrine of the possibility of believers com 
 
216 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 pleiely falling- away, and being lost, can be reconciled with any 
 natural interpretation of this verse. 
 
 Zwingle thinks, with much probability, that the words " a 
 fountain in him," point to the benefits which grace once received 
 makes a man impart to others, as well as enjoy himself. See 
 John vii. 38. 
 
 Rollock remarks on this verse, " Let me say in a word what I 
 feel. "You will find nothing either in heaven or in earth, with 
 which you will be satisfied and feel supplied, except Jesus Christ 
 alone, with all that fulness of the Godhead which dwells in Him 
 bodily." 
 
 Poole says, " He who receiveth the Holy Spirit and the grace 
 thereof, though he will be daily saying give, give, and continually 
 desiring further supplies of grace, yet he shall never wholly want, 
 never want any good thing that shall be needful for him. The 
 seed of God shall abide in him, and His water shall be in him a 
 spring supplying him until he comes to heaven." 
 
 15. — [The woman saith^ c!:c.] In this verse, I think, we see the first 
 sparks of good in the woman's soul. Our Lord's words aroused 
 a desire in her heart for this living water of which He had spoken. 
 She does what our Lord said she ought to have done at first. She 
 "ajiks" Him to give her the water. 
 
 \_Give me this water.. ..that....thirst not....draw.] The motives of 
 the woman in making this request are variously explained. 
 
 Some think, as Musculus, Calvin, Bucer, Brentius, Gualter, 
 Lightfoot, Poole, and Dyke, that the request was made in a 
 sarcastic and sneering spirit, as though she would say " Truly 
 this water would be a fine thing, if we could get it 1 Give it me, 
 if you have it to give." 
 
 Some think, as Augustine, Cyril, Bullinger, Rollock, Hilder- 
 sam, Jansenius, and Nifanius, that the request was only the lazy, 
 indolent wish of one who was weary of this world's labour, and 
 yet could see nothing but the things of this world in our Lord's 
 sayings, like the request of the Jews, " Evermore give us this 
 bread." (John vi. 34.) It is as though she would say, " Anything to 
 save me the trouble of coming to draw water would be a boon. 
 If you can do that for me, do it." As Bengel says, " She wished 
 to have this living fountain at her own house." 
 
 Some think, as Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Euthj'-miui?, that 
 the request was really the prayer of an anxious soul, aroased to 
 gome faint spiritual desires by the mention of eternal life. "Hast 
 thou eternal life to bestow ? Give it to me." 
 
 I venture to think that none of these three views is quite 
 
217 
 
 correct. The true motive of the request was probably a vague 
 feeling of desire thab the woman herself could hardly have defined. 
 It is useless to analyze and scrutinize too closely the first languid 
 and imperfect desires that arise in suuls when the Spirit begins 
 His work of conversion. It is folly to say that the first movings 
 of a heart towards Grod must be free from all imperfect motives 
 and all mixture of infirmity. The woman's motives in saying 
 *' Give me this water," were probably mixed and indefinite 
 Material water was not out of her thoughts, and yet she had 
 probably some desires after everlasting life. Enough for us. to 
 know, that she asked and received, she sought and found. Our 
 great aim mu-^t be to persuade sinners to apply to Jesus, and to 
 say to Him, " Give me to drink." If we forbid them to ask 
 anything until they can prove that they ask in a perfect spirit, we 
 should do no good at all. It would be as foolish to scrutiinze the 
 grammatical construction of an infant's cries, as to analyze the 
 precise motives of a soul's first breathings after God. If it breathes 
 at all and says, " Give," we ought to be thankful. 
 
 16. — [Jesus saith. ...go... .call. ..hushand... hither.] This verse begins 
 an entirely new stage in the history of the woman's conversion. 
 From this point we hear no more of " living water." Figurative 
 language is dropped entirely. Our Lord's Avords become direct, 
 personal, and plain. The woman had asked at last for " hving 
 water." At once our Lord proceeds to give it to her. 
 
 Our Lord's reasons for bidding the woman to call her husband, 
 have been variously interpreted. Some think that he only meant 
 her to understand that He had spoken long enough to her, a 
 solitary woman; and that before He proceeded further, she must 
 call her husband to be a witness of the conversation, and to partake 
 of the benefits He was going to confer. This seems the view of 
 Chrysostom and Theophylact. — Others think, with far more 
 probability, in my judgment, that our Lord's main object in naming 
 the woman's husband, was to produce in her mind conviction of 
 sin, and to show her His own divine knowledge of all things. He 
 knew that she had no husband, and He purposely named him in order 
 to touch her conscience. He always knew the thoughts of those 
 to whom He spoke ; and He knew in the presmt case, what the 
 effect of'H'S words would be. It would bring to light the woman's 
 besetting sin. — It is as though He said, " Thou dost ask me for 
 living water. Thou dost at last express a desire for that great 
 spiritual gift which I am able to bestow. Well,- then, I begin by 
 bidding thee know thyself and thy sinfulness. I will shov/ thee 
 that I know thy spiritual disease, and can lay my finger on the 
 most dangerous ailment of thy soul. Go, call thy husband, and 
 come hither." 
 
 Let it be noted that the first draught of living water which 
 10 
 
/; 
 
 218 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 our Lord gave to the Samaritan woman was conviction of sin. 
 That fact is a lesson for all who desire to benefit ignorant and 
 careless sinners. The first thing to be taught to such persons, 
 when once we have got their attention, is tlieir own sinfulness, 
 and their cons(^quent need of a Saviour. No one values the 
 physician until he feels his disease. 
 
 Augustine thinks that when our Lord said, " Call thy hus- 
 band," He meant, " Cause thine understanding to be forthcom- 
 ing. Thy understanding is not with thee. I am speaking after 
 the spirit, and thou nearest after the flesh ! " I can see no wis- 
 dom in this fanciful idea. 
 
 1 7. — [The woman answered.. .no husband.'] These words were an 
 honest and truthful confession, so far as they went. Whether 
 the woman wished it to be supposed that she was a widow, it 
 would perhaps be hardly fair to inquire. Theophylact and 
 Euthymius suggpst that she did wish to deceive our Lord. The 
 way in which our Lord receives her declaration, makes it proba- 
 ble that she did not profess to be a widow, and very likely her 
 dress st.owed that she was not. In this point of view the ho- 
 nesty of iier confession is noteworthy. There is always more 
 hope of one who honestly and bluntly confesses sin, than of a 
 smooth-tongued hypocrite. 
 
 [Jesus said.. .thou hast well said...hufihand.'] Our Lord's com- 
 mendation of the woman's honest confession deserves notice. 
 It teaches ns that we should make the best of an ignorant sin- 
 ner's words. An unskilful physician of souls would probably 
 have rebuked the woman sharply for her wickedness, if her 
 words led him to suspect it. Our Lord on the contrary says, 
 " Thou hast well said." 
 
 18. — [Thou hast had Jive husbands.] Many foolish and unseemly 
 things have been written about this sentence, which it is not 
 worth while to bring forward. Of course it is utterly improba- 
 ble that the woman had lost five husbands by death, and had 
 been five times a widow. The more likely explauiition is that 
 she had been divorced and put away by several husbands in suc- 
 cession. Divorces were notoriously common among the Jews, 
 and in all probability among the Samaritans, for very trivial 
 causes. In tiie case, however, of the woman before us, the 
 second clause of the verse before us makes it hkely that she had 
 been justly divorced for adultery. 
 
 Augustine regards these five husbands as significant of '' the 
 five senses of the body," which are as five husbands by which 
 the soul of the natural mar, is ruled 1 I cannot think oua-t our 
 Lord m ant anything of the kind. — Euthymius mentioixr, another 
 allegoricjil view, making the woman to typify human nature, and 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 219 
 
 the five husbands five different dispensations, and him with 
 whom she now lived the Mosaic Law I This seems to me simply- 
 absurd. Origen says much the same. It is well to know what 
 patristic interpretation is I 
 
 [He luhom... hast. .not thy husband.'] These words show plainly 
 that the Samaritan woman was living in adultery up to the very 
 day when our Lord spoke to her. 
 
 Our Lord's perfect knowledge of the woman's past and present 
 life is very noteworthy. It ought ti remind us how perfectly 
 He is acquainted with every transaction of our own lives. From 
 Him no secrets are hid. 
 
 [In that saidst thou truly.] There is a kindness very worthy 
 of notice in these words. Wicked and abandoned as this Sama- 
 ritan woman was, our Lord deals gently and kindly with her, 
 and twice in one breath commends her confession: " Thou hast 
 well said. — In that thou saidst truly." Kindness of manner like 
 this will always be found a mo-it important point in dealing Avith 
 the ungodly. Scolding and sharp rebuke, however well-deserved, 
 have a tendency to harden and shut up hearts, and to make 
 people bolt their doors. Kindness, on the contrary, wins, softens, 
 conciliates, and disarms prejudice. An unskilful soul-i)hysician 
 would probably have ended his sentence by saying, " Thou art 
 a wicked woman ; and if thou dost not repent, thou wilt be 
 lost." All this would have been true no doubt. But how dif- 
 ferent our Lord's grave and gentle remark, " Thou saidst truly I" 
 
 19. — [The ivoman saith...I perceive... prophet.] I think we see in 
 this verse a great change in the Samaritan woman's mind. She 
 evidently confesses the entire truth of what our Lord had just 
 said, and turns to Him as an anxious inquirer about her soul. It 
 is as though she said, "I perceive at last that thou art indeed no 
 common person. Thou hast told me what thou couldst not have 
 known, if thou wert not a prophet sent from God. Thou hast 
 exposed sins which I cannot deny, and aroused spiritual concern 
 which I would now fain have reheved. Now give me instruc- 
 tion." 
 
 Let it be noted that the thing which first struck the Samaritan 
 woman, and made her call Jesus '• a prophet," was the same that 
 struck Nathanael, viz., our Lord's perfect knowledge. — To call 
 our Lord " a prophet " at first sight may seem not much. But 
 it must be remembe-ed tljat even after His resurrection, the two 
 disciphs going to Emmaus, only described Jesus as a "prophet 
 mighty in deed and word." (Luke xxiv. 19.) A clear know- 
 ledge of the divine nature of Messiah seems to have been one 
 of the points on which almost the whole Jewish nation was 
 ignorant. Et en the learned Scribes could not explain how Mes- 
 
220 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 siah was to be David's Lord and also David's Son. (Mark 
 xii. 37.) 
 
 "20. — [Our fathers worshipped, tfrc.] To see the full dtiffc of tliia 
 ver.-e, we must carefuKy remember the state of the Samaritan 
 woman's mind at this moment. I think that she spoke under 
 spiritual anxiety. She was alarmed by having her sins suddenly 
 exposed. She found herself for the first time in the presence of 
 a prophet. She felt for the first time the necessity of religion. 
 But at once the old question between the Jews and Samaritans 
 aro?e before her mind. How was she to know what was truth ? 
 What was t^he to believe ? Her own people said that the Sa- 
 maritan mode of worshipping Grod was coirect. The Jews said 
 that Jerusalem was the only pace where men ought to worship. 
 Between these two conflicting opinions what was she to do ? 
 
 The natural ignorance of almost all unconverted people, when 
 first nr(jused to thought about religion, appears strikingly in the 
 woman's words. Man's first idea is to attach great importance 
 to the outward mode of worshipping God. The first refuge of 
 an awakened conscience is strict adherence to some outward 
 form, and zeal for the external part of religion. 
 
 The woman's readiness to quote " the fathers " and their cus- 
 toms, is an instructive instance of man's readiness to make cus- 
 tom and tradition his only rule of faith. " Our fathers did so," is 
 one of the natural man's favourite arguments. Calvin's com- 
 ments on the expression "fathers " in this verse are very useful. 
 He remarks, among other things, " None should be reckoned 
 Fathers but those who are manifestly the sons of God." 
 
 When the woman spoke of "this mountain," she doubtless 
 meant the hill on which the rival temple of Samaria was built, 
 to the bitter annoyance of the Jerusalem Jews. It is said rhat 
 this temple was first built in the days of Nehemiah by San- 
 ballat, and that his son-in-law, the son of Joiada, whom Nehe- 
 miah " chased from him," was its first high-priest. (Neh. xiii. 
 29.) Some have gone so far as to maintain that the hill Gerizim 
 at Samaria was the hill on which Abraham offered up Isaac, 
 and that the words of the woman refer to this. The more com- 
 mon opinion is that Mount Moriah at Jerusalem was the place. 
 
 When the woman says, " Ye say," she doubtless includes th^ 
 whole Jewish nation, of whom she regards our Lord as a repre- 
 sentative. 
 
 Musculus, Baxter, Scott, and Barnes, think that tlie woman, 
 in this verse, desired to turn away the conversation from her 
 own sins to a subject of pubhc controversy, and in this way to 
 change the subject. I am not however sati-fied that this view 
 is correct. I prefer the view of Brentius, which I have already 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 221 
 
 set forth, that she was truly impres-ed by oar Lord's exposure 
 of her wickedness, and made a serious inquiry about the things 
 needfal to salvatioc . She was aroused to seriousness, and asked 
 what was true religion. Her own nation said one thing. The 
 Jews said another. What was truth ? In short, her words 
 were only another form of the jailor's question, " What shall I 
 do to be taved?" 
 
 21. — [Jesus saith, Woman, believe me.] The calmness, gravity, and 
 solemnity of these opening words are very noteworthy. "I tell 
 you a great truth, which I ask you to credit and believe." 
 
 Jansenius thinks that our Lord uses the expression " beliere 
 me," because the truth he was about to impart was so new and 
 strange, that the vroman would be apt to think it incredible. 
 
 Stier remarks that this is the only time our Lord ever uses 
 this expression " believe me " in the Gospels. 
 
 [The hour cometh.] The hour, or time here spoken of, means 
 the time of the Gospel, the hour of the Christian dispensation. 
 
 [Ye shall neither... this mounfain... Jerusalem.. .worship, &ci\ Our 
 Lord here declares that under the Gospel there was to be no 
 more distinction of places like Jerusalem. The old dispensation 
 under which men were bound to go up to Jerusalem three times 
 a year, to attend the feasts and worship in the temple, was about 
 to pass away. All questions about the superior sanctity of Sa- 
 maria or Jerusalem would soon be at an end. A church was 
 about to be founded, whose members would find access to the 
 Father everywhere, and would need no temple-service, and no 
 priests or sacrifices or altars in order to approach God. Ir was 
 therefore mere waste of time to be disputing about the compara- 
 tive claims of either Samaria or Jerusalem. Under the Gospel 
 all places would soon be alike. 
 
 It seems far from imp:^obable that our Lord referred in this 
 verse to the prophecy of Malachi, "In every place incense shall 
 be offered to my name." (Mai. i. 11.) 
 
 The utter passing away of the whole Jewish system seems 
 clearly pointed at in this verse. To bring into the Christian 
 Church holy places, sanctuaries, altars, priests, sacrifices, gorgeous 
 vestments, and the like, is to dig up that which has been long 
 buried, and to turn to candles for light under the noon-day sun. 
 The favourite theory of the Irvingites that we ought as far aa 
 possible ir. our public worship, to copy the Jewish temple ser- 
 vices and 3eremonial, seems incapable of reconciUation with this 
 verse. 
 
 Calvin says, " By calling God the Father in this verse, Christ 
 seems indirectly tc contrast Him with the ' fathers' whom the 
 
222 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 woman had mentioned, and to convey this instruction, that God 
 will be a common Father to all, so that He will be generally 
 worshipped without distinction of place or nation." 
 
 22. — [Ye ivorship...know not what] In this verse our Lord unhesi- 
 tatingly condemns the religious system of the Samaritans, aa 
 compared with that of the Jews. The Samaritans could show 
 no Scriptural authorit}^ no revelation of God, commanding and 
 sanctioning their worship. Whatever it was, it was purely an 
 invention of man, which Grod had never formally authorized or 
 accredited. They had no warrant for belie\ ng that it was 
 accepted. They had no right to feel sure that their prayers, 
 praises, and ofi'erings were received. In short, all was uncer- 
 tainty. They were practically worshipping an "unknown 
 God." 
 
 Mede remarks that the Samaritan woman overlooked the 
 object of worship in her question about the place. " You inquire 
 concerning the place of worshipping. But a far more important 
 question is at issue between us, viz., the Being to be worshipped, 
 respecting whom you are ignorant." 
 
 [We know what we tuorship.] In contrast to the Samaritan 
 rehgious system, our Lord declares that the Jews at any rate 
 could show divine warrant and Scriptural authority for all they 
 did in their religion. They could render a reason of their hope. 
 They knew whom they approached in their religious services. 
 
 [Sdvation is of the Jews.] Our Lord here declares that God's 
 promises of a Saviour and Redeemer specially belong to the 
 Jerusalem Jews. They were the descendants of the tribe of 
 Judah, and to them belonged the house and hneage of David. 
 On this point at any rate the Samaritans had no right whatever 
 to claim equahty with 'the Jews. Granting that the Sama -itans 
 had any ri.^ht to be called Israelites, they were of the tribe of 
 Ephraim, from which it was nowhere said that Messiah should 
 spring. And in troth the Samaritans were of such mixed origin, 
 that they had no right to be called Israehtes at all. 
 
 I believe with Olshausen, that " salvation," in this verse, was 
 really intended to mean " the Saviour" Himself. The use of 
 the article in the Greek is striking. It is literally " the salva- 
 tion." Does not the saying to Zacchaeus point the same way? 
 " This day is salvation come to this house." (Luke xix. 9.) 
 
 The expression " we" in this verse is very interesting. It is 
 a wonderf \\ instance of our Lord's condescension, and one that 
 stands almost alone. He was pleased to s-ieak of Himself, just 
 in the light that He appeared to the woman, as one of the Jew- 
 ish nation. " I and all other Jews know w^hat we worship." 
 
 Tlie folly of supposing that ignorance i" to be praised and 
 
JOHN, CHAP. TV. 223 
 
 commei ded in religion, as the mother of devotion, is strongly 
 condemned in this verse. Christ would have Christians " know 
 what they worship." 
 
 The testimony borne to the general truth of the religious sys- 
 tem of the Jews in this place is very striking. Corrupt and 
 wicked as Scribes and Pharisees were, Jesus declares that the 
 Jewish religion was true and Scriptural. It is a mournful proof 
 that a church may retain a sound creed, and yet be on the high 
 road to destruction. 
 
 Hildersam has along note which is well worth reading on the 
 words " salvation is of the Jews." Considering the times in 
 which he lived, it shows singularly clear views of God's con- 
 tinual purposes concerning the Jewish nation. He sees in the 
 words the great truth that all God's revelations to man in every 
 age have been made through the Jews. 
 
 23. — [The hour cometh and now is.] These words mean that the 
 times of the Gospel approach, and indeed have already begun. 
 *' They have begun by the preaching of the kingdom of God. 
 They will be fully brought in by my death and ascension, and 
 the estabhshment of the New Testament church." 
 
 [T>'ue luorshippers ..worship. ..spirit and.. .truth.] Our Lord here 
 declares who alone would be considered true worshippers in the 
 coming dispensation of the Gospel. They would not be merely 
 those who worshipped in this place or in that place. They 
 w^ould not be exclusively Jews, or exclusively Gentiles, or exclu- 
 sively Samaritans. The external part of the worship would be 
 of no value compared to the internal state of the worshippers. 
 They only would be counted true worshippers who worshipped 
 in spirit and in truth. 
 
 The words "in spirit and in truth" are variously interpreted, 
 and much has been written about them, I believe the simplest 
 explanation to be this. The wprd " spirit" must not be taken 
 to mean the Holy Spirit, but the intellectual or mental part of 
 man in contradistinction to the material or carnal part of man. 
 This distinction is clearly marked in 1 Cor. vii. 34, "Holy in 
 body and in spirit." — " Worship in spirit" is heart-worship in 
 contradistinction to all formal, material, carnal worship, consist- 
 ing only of ceremonies, ofFeiings, sacrifices, and the like. When 
 a Jew offered a formal meat-ofiering, with his heart far away, 
 it was worship after the flesh. When David offered in prayer 
 a bioken and a contrite heart, it was worship in spirit. — " Wor- 
 ship in truth," means worship through the one true way of 
 access to God, without the medium of the sacrifices or priest- 
 li0(^d, which were ordained till Christ died on the cross. When 
 the veil was '-ent, and the way into the holiest made manifest by 
 
224 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Christ's deafb, then, and not till then, men "worshipped in 
 truth." Before Christ, they worshipped throush types, and 
 shadows, and figures, and emblems. After Christ they wor- 
 shipped in truth. — Spirit is opposed to " flesh ;" truth to *' sha- 
 dow." " Spirit," in short, is heart-service, contrasted with lip 
 worship and formal devotion. " Truth" is the full light of the 
 Christian dispensation contrasted with the twilight of the law cf 
 Moses. 
 
 The view I have endeavoured to give is substantially that of 
 Chrysoatom and Euthymius. 
 
 Caryl, quoted by Ford, says, "In spirit regards the inward 
 power, in truth the outward form. The first strikes at hypocrisy, 
 the second at idolatry." 
 
 [^TJie Father seeTceth such...ivorsMp him.'] This is a remarkable 
 sentence. I believe it to mean that " the hour is come, in which 
 the Father has ordained from eternity that He will gather out 
 of the world a company of true and spiritual worshippers. He 
 is even now seeking out and gathering in such worshippers." — 
 The expression " seeketh" is peculiar. There is something like 
 it in the sentence, '' The Son of man is come to seeh and to 
 save that which is lost." (Luke xix. 10.) It seems to show 
 the exceeding compassion of the Father, and His infinite will- 
 ingness to save souls. He does not/merely wait for men to 
 come to Him. He ''seeks" for them. — It also shows the wide 
 opening of God the Father's mercy under the Grospel. He no 
 longer confines His grace to the Jews. He now seeks and de- 
 sires to gather in everywhere true worshippers out of every 
 ration. 
 
 The clause appears to me specially intended to encourage the 
 Samaritan woman. Let her not trouble herself with difficulties 
 about the comparative claims of the Samaritan and Jewish sys- 
 tems. Was she willing to be a spiritual worshipper ? That was 
 the one question which deserved her attention. 
 
 Trapp observes, " How should this fire up our hearts to spiri- 
 tual worship ! That God seeks for such worshippers I" 
 
 24. — [God is a Spirit.] Our Lord here declares to the Samaritan 
 woman the true nature of God. Let her cease to think that God 
 was such an one as man, and that He couLl not be found, or 
 approached, or addressed, like a mere earthly monarch, except at 
 one particular place. Let her leain to have higher, nobler, and 
 more exalted views of the Being with whom smners have to do. 
 Let her know this day that God was a Spirit. 
 
 The declaration before us is one of the most lofty and definite 
 sayings about God's nature which is to be found in the whole 
 
225 
 
 Bible. That such a declaration should have been made to such 
 a person as the Sainaiitaii woman is awonde;fal instance of 
 Christ's condescension! To define precisely the full nieaninjj of 
 the expression is past man's understanding. The leading idea 
 most probably is, that "God is an immaterial being, that He 
 dwelleth not in temples made with hand.<, and that He is not, like 
 ourselves, therefore, absent from one place when He is present 
 at anothei-." These things are all true, but how little we can 
 realize them 1 
 
 Cornelius d Lapide gives an excellent summary of the opinions 
 of heathen philosophers on the nature of God, in his commentary 
 on this verse. 
 
 [They... .worship. ...mitst...worship... .spirit.... truth.'] Our Lord 
 draws this broad conclusion from the statement of God's nature 
 which He has just made. If " God is a Spirit" it behoves those 
 who M^ould worship Him acceptably, to worship in spirit and in 
 truth. It is unreasonable to suppose that He can like any wor- 
 ship which does not come from the heart, or can be so Avell 
 pleased with worship which is offered through types and cere- 
 monies, as with worship offered through the true way which He 
 has provided, and is now revealing. 
 
 The importance of the great principle laid down in this and 
 the preceding verse, can never be overrated. Any rehgious 
 teaching which tends to depreciate heart-worship, and to turn 
 Christianity into a mere formal service, or which tends to bring 
 back Jewish shadows, ceremonies, and services, and to introduce 
 them into Christian worship, is on the face of these remarkable 
 verses most unscriptural and deserving of reprobation. 
 
 Of course we must not admit the idea, that in this and the 
 preceding verse. Jesus meant to pour contempt on the ceremonial 
 law, which God Himself had given. But He plainly teaches that 
 it was an imperfect dispensation, given because of man's igno- 
 rance and infirmity, as we give pictures to children in teaching 
 them. It wa-, in fact, a schoolmaster to Christ. (Gal. iii, 24.) 
 To want men to return to it is as absurd as to bid grown up peo- 
 ple begin learning the alphabet by pictures in an infant school. — 
 On the other hand, as Beza remarks, we must not run mto the 
 extreme of despising all ordinances, sacraments, and outward 
 ceremonies in religion. The?e things have their use and value, 
 however much they may be abused. 
 
 25. — [The ivoman saitJi, IJcnow...Messias... Christ,, Sc] This verse is 
 an intt're-ting one. It sIjows the woman at last brought to the 
 very state of mind in which she would be prepared to welcome 
 a revelation of Chiist. She had been told of " living water," and 
 had expressed a desire for it. She had been told her own sin, 
 and had been unable to deny it. She had been told the useless- 
 
 10* 
 
226 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 ness of resting on any formal membership of the Samaritan 
 Church, and the necessity of spiritual and heart-worshiji of God. 
 And now what can she say ? It is all trae, she feels, — she cannot 
 gainsay it. But what can she do? To whom is she to go? 
 Whose teaching can she follow? All she can do is to say that 
 " she knows Messias is one day coming, and that He will make 
 all things clear and plain." It is evident that she wishes for 
 Him. She is uncomfortable and sees no relief for her newly- 
 raised perplexiiles, unless Messias should appear. 
 
 The mention of Messias in this verse, makes it clear that the 
 Samaritans were not altogether ignorant of the Old Testament, 
 and that there was an expectation of a Kedeemer of some kind 
 among them, as well as among the Jews. The existence of a 
 general expectation of this sort throughout the East, at the time 
 when our Lord appeared on earth, is a fact to which even 
 heathen writers have testified. 
 
 When the woman says, '' He will tell us all things," we must 
 probably not inquire too closely into what she meant. It is very 
 likely that she had only a vague feeling that Messias would 
 remove all doubts and show all things needful to salvation. 
 
 Chrysostom remarks on this verse, "The woman was made 
 dizzy by Christ's discourse, and fainted at the sublimity of what 
 He said, and in her trouble saith, I know that Messias cometh." 
 
 Wordswortli observes, that the Samaritan woman had a clearer 
 knowledge of Messiah's office than the Jews generally showed. 
 She looked for Him as a Teacher. They looked for Him as 
 a conquering King. 
 
 Beza and A. Clark think, that the words, "which is called 
 Christ," in this verse, are St. John's parenthetical explanation of 
 the word Messias. It is certainly rather unlikely that the woman 
 would have used them in addressing a Jew. Yet most commen- 
 tators think that they were her words. 
 
 26. — [Jesus saith. ..I...spea7c...am He.] These words are the fullest 
 declaration which our Lord ever made of His own Messiahship, 
 which the Gospel writers have recorded. That such a full 
 declaration should be made to such a person as the Samaritan 
 woman is one of the most wonderful instances of our Lord's 
 grace and condescension related in the New Testament! At 
 last the woman obtained an answer to one of her first questions, 
 "Art thou greater than our father Jacob ? " When the answer 
 came it completely converted her soul. 
 
 Rollock remarks on this verse, how ready and willing Christ is 
 to reveal Himself to a sinner's soul. The very moment that this 
 woman expressed any desire for Messiah, He at once revealed 
 H-mself tohe-— "lamHe." 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 227 
 
 Quesnel observes, " It is a great mistake to suppose that the 
 knowledge of the mysteries of religion ought not to be imparted 
 to women by the reading of Scripture, considering this instance 
 of the great confidence Christ reposed in this woman by His 
 manifestation of Himself. The abuse of the Scriptures and the 
 sin of heresies, did not proceed from the simplicity of women, 
 but from the conceited learning of men." 
 
 In leaving the whole passage, there are several striking points 
 which ought never to be forgotten. («.) Our Lord's mercy is 
 remarkable. That such an one as He should deal so graciou-ly 
 with such a sinner is a striking fact. (&.) Our Lord's wisdom is 
 remarkable. How wise was every step of His way in deahng 
 with this sinful soul! (c.) Our Lord's patience is remarkable. 
 How He bore with the woman's ignorance, and what trouble He 
 took to lead her to knowledge ! (d) Our Lord's power is re- 
 markable. What a complete victory He won at last! How 
 almighty must that grace be which could soften and convert such 
 a carnal and wicked heart! 
 
 We must never despise any soul, after reading this passage. 
 Noue can be worse than this woman. But Christ did not despise 
 her. 
 
 We must never despair of any soul, after reading this passage. 
 If this woman was converted, any one may be converted. 
 
 Finally, we must never contemn the use of all wise and 
 reasonable means in dealing with souls. There is a " wisdom 
 which is profitable to direct " in approaching ignorant and un- 
 godly people, which must be diligently sought. 
 
 JOHN lY. 27—30. 
 
 2*1 And upon this came his dis- 
 ciples, and marvelled that he talked 
 with the woman ; yet no man said, 
 What seekest thou ? or Why talk- 
 esfc thou with her? 
 
 28 The woman then left her 
 waterpot, and went her way 
 
 into the city, and saith to the 
 
 men, 
 
 29 Come, see a man, which told 
 me all things that ever I did: is 
 not this the Christ ? 
 
 30 Then they went out of the 
 city, and came unto him. 
 
 These verses continue the well-known story of the Sama- 
 ritan woman's conversion. Short as the passage may 
 appear, it contains points of deep interest and importance. 
 The mere worldling, who cares nothing about experimental 
 
228 EXPOSITOEY THOUGHTS. 
 
 religion, may see nothing particular in these verses. To 
 all who desire to know something of the experience of a 
 converted person, they will be found full of food for 
 thought. 
 
 We see, firstly, in this passage, how marvellous in the 
 eyes of man are ChrisVs dealings with soids. We are told 
 that the disciples "marvelled that he talked with the 
 woman." That their Master should take the trouble to 
 talk to a woman at all, and to a Samaritan woman, and to 
 a strange woman at a well, when He was wearied with 
 His journey, — all this was wonderful to the eleven disci- 
 ples. It was a sort of thing which they did not expect. 
 It was contrary to their idea of what a religious teacher 
 should do. It startled them and filled them with surprise. 
 
 The feeling displayed by the disciples on this occasion, 
 does not stand alone in the Bible. When our Lord 
 allowed publicans and sinners to draw n^ar to Him and be 
 in His company, the Pharisees marvelled. They exclaimed, 
 " This man receiveth sinners and eateth with them." (Luke 
 XV. 2.) — When Saul came back from Damascus, a converted 
 man and a new creature, the Christians at Jerusalem were 
 astonished. " They believed not that he wa-s a disciple." 
 (Acts ix. 26.) — When Peter was delivered from Herod's 
 prison by an ajigel, and brought to the door of the house 
 where disciples were praying for his deliverance, they were 
 so taken by surprise that they could not believe it was 
 Peter. " When they saw him they were astonished." 
 (Acts xii. 16.) 
 
 But why should we stop short in Bible instances ? The 
 true Christian has only to look around him in this world iu 
 order to see abundant illustrations of the truth before us. 
 IIow much astonishment every fresh conversion occasions I 
 What surprise is expressed at the change in the heart, life, 
 tastes, and habits of the converted person ! What wonder 
 is felt at the power, the mercy, the patience, the compas- 
 
JOHN", CHAP. IV. 229 
 
 sion of Christ ! It is now as it was eighteen hundred years 
 ago. The dealings of Christ are still a marvel both to the 
 Church and to the world. 
 
 If there was more real faith on the earth, there would 
 be less surprise felt at the conversion of souls. If Chris- 
 tians believed more, they would expect more, and if they 
 understood Christ better, they would be less startled and 
 astonished when He calls and saves the chief of sinners. 
 We should consider nothing impossible, and regard no 
 sinner as beyond the reach of the grace of God. The 
 astonishment expressed at conversions is a proof of the 
 weak faith and ignorance of these latter days. The thing 
 that ought to fill us with surprise is the obstinate unbelief 
 of the ungodly, and their determined perseverance in the 
 way to ruin. This was the mind of Christ. It is written 
 that He thanked the Father for conversions. But He mar- 
 velled at unbelief. (Matt. xi. 25 ; Mark vi. 6.) 
 
 We see, secondly, in this passage, hoio absorbing is the 
 influence of grace^ when it first comes into a believer's 
 heart. We are told that after our Lord had told the 
 woman He was the Messiah, " She left her water-pot and 
 went her way into the city, and saith to the men. Come, 
 see a man which told me all things that ever I did." She 
 had left her home for the express purpose of drawing 
 water. She had carried a large vessel to the well, intend- 
 ing to bring it back filled. But she found at the well a 
 new heart, and new objects of interest. She became a 
 new creature. Old things passed away. All things be- 
 came new. At once everything else was forgotten for the 
 time. She could think of nothing but the truths she had 
 heard, and the Saviour she had found. In the fulness of 
 her heart she "left her water-pot," and hastened away to 
 express her feelings to others. 
 
 We see here the expulsive power of the grace of the 
 Holy Ghost. Grace once introduced into the heart drives 
 
230 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS 
 
 out oUl tastes and interests. A converted person no longer 
 cares for what he once cared for. A new tenant is in the 
 house. A new pilot is at the helm. The whole world 
 looks different. All things have become new. It was so 
 with Matthew the publican. The moment that grace came 
 into his heart he left the receipt of custom. (Matt. ix. 9.) 
 — It was so with Peter, James, and John, and Andrew. 
 As soon as they were converted they forsook their nets 
 and fishing-boats. (Mark i. 19.) — It was so with Saul the 
 Pharisee. As soon as he became a Christian he gave up 
 all his brilliant prospects as a Jew, in order to preach the 
 faith he had once despised. (Acts ix. 20.) — The conduct 
 of the Samaritan woman was precisely of the same kind. 
 For the time present the salvation she had found com- 
 pletely filled her mind. That she never returned for 
 her water-pot would be more than we have a right 
 to say. But under the first impressions of new spiri- 
 tual life, she went away and " left her water-pot " 
 behind. 
 
 Conduct like that here described is doubtless uncom- 
 mon in the present day. Rarely do we see a person s© 
 entirely taken up with spiritual matters, that attention to 
 this world's affairs is made a secondary matter, or post- 
 poned. And why is it so ? Simply because true conver- 
 sions to God are uncommon. Few really feel their sins, 
 and flee to Christ by faith. Few really pass from death 
 to life, and become new creatures. Yet these few are 
 the real Christians of the world. These are the people 
 whose religion, like the Samaritan woman's, tells on 
 others. Happy are they who know something by expe- 
 rience of this woman's feelings, and can say with Paul, 
 *'I count all things but loss for the excellency of the 
 knowledge of Christ!" Happy are they who have given 
 up everything for Christ's sake, or at any rate have 
 altered the relative importance of all things in their 
 
JOHN, CHAP. lY. 231 
 
 minds! "If thine eye be single thy whole body shall 
 be full of light." (Philipp. iii. 8 ; Matt. v. 22.) 
 
 We see, lastly, in this passage, how zealous a truly 
 converted person is to do good to others. We are told that 
 the Saraaritan woman " went into the city, and said to 
 the men, Come, see a man which told me all things 
 that ever I did : is not this the Christ ?" In the day 
 of her conversion she became a missionary. She felt so 
 deeply the amazing benefit she had received from Christ, 
 that she could not hold her peace about Him. Just as 
 Andrew told his brother Peter about Jesus, and Philip 
 told Nathanael that he had found Messiah, and Saul, 
 when converted, straightway preached Christ, so, in the 
 same w^ay, the Samaritan woman said, "Come and see 
 Christ." She used no abstruse arguments. She attempted 
 no deep reasoning about our Lord's claim to be the Messiah. 
 She only said, " Come and see." Out of the abundance 
 of her heart her mouth spoke. 
 
 That which the Samaritan woman here did, all true 
 Christians ought to do likewise. The Church needs it. 
 The state of the world demands it. Common sense 
 points out that it is right. Every one who has received 
 the grace of God, and tasted that Christ is gracious, 
 ought to find words to testify of Christ to others. Where 
 is our faith, if we believe that souls around us are perish- 
 ing, and that Christ alone can save them, and yet hold 
 our peace? Where is our charity if we can see others 
 going down to hell, and yet say nothing to them about 
 Christ and salvation? — We may well doubt our own love 
 to Christ, if our hearts are never moved to speak of Him. 
 We may well doubt the safety of our own souls, if we 
 feel no concern about the souls of others. 
 
 What are we ourselves ? This is the question, after all, 
 which demands our notice. Do we feel the supreme 
 importance of spiritual things, and the comparativa 
 
232 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 nothingness of the things of the world ? Do we ever talk 
 to others about God, and Christ, and eternity, and the 
 soul, and heaven, and hell ? If not, what is the value of 
 our faith ? Where is the reality of our Christianity ? Let 
 us take heed lest we awake too late, and find that we are 
 lost for ever, a wonder to angels and devils, and, above all, 
 a wonder to ourselves, because of our own obstinate blind- 
 ness and folly. 
 
 Notes. John IV. 27—30. 
 
 27. — [ Upon this^ The true idea contained in this expression seems 
 to be, "At this point, at this critical juncture in the conversation 
 between our Lord and the woman." — What the woman would 
 have said next after our Lord's marvellous discovery of Himself, 
 we are left to conjecture. But just as our Lord said, ''I am the 
 Me-siah," the disciples retnrned from buying food, and their 
 appearance stopped the conversation. The woman's heart v/"as 
 probably too full, and her mind too much excited to say more in 
 the presence of witnesses, and especially of strangers. Therefore 
 no more was said, and she withdrew. The soul, in the beginning 
 of a work of grace, shrinks from discovering its workings before 
 strangers. 
 
 [Marvelled...talked with the woman.] I am inclined tt> think 
 that these words would have been more correctly rendered, 
 "Talked with a woman." There is no article in "the original 
 Greek. The wonder of the disciples was excited, not so much 
 by our Lord talking to this woman, as by His talking to a wonrian 
 at a'l. It is clear from Rabbinical writings, that thero. was a 
 common opinion among the Jews that both in understanding 
 and religion women were an inferior order of beings to men. 
 This ignorant prejudice had most likely leavened the minds of 
 the discipL'S, and is probably referred to in this place. Of the 
 woman's moral character it is not clear that the disciples could 
 know anything at all. 
 
 Rupertus thinks that our Lord, by conversing openly with a 
 Samaritan woman, wished to show His disciples by an example, 
 that the wall between Jews and other people was to be broken 
 down by the Gospel, just as He taught Peter the same lesson 
 afrer His ascension, by the vision of tho sheet full of clean and 
 unclean beasts. (Acts x. 11 — 15.) He thinks that, the wonder 
 of the disciples arose from the same Jewish prejudice against 
 intercourse with uncircumcised Gentiles which appeared so 
 strongly in after times. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 233 
 
 Lightfoot, Schottgen, and Tholuck quote proverbial sayings 
 from Rabbinical writeis, showing the Jewish feeling about 
 women. The following are instances — "He who instructs his 
 daughter in the law plays the fool." '• Do not multiply discourses 
 wiih a Woman." "Let no one talk with a woman in the street, 
 no not with his own wife." — Whitby also says, from Buxtorf, 
 that the Rabbins say that '' talking with a woman is one of the 
 six things which make a disciple impure." 
 
 [JVo man said, What seekest..why talkest, &c.'\ We are left to 
 conjecture M'hether both these questions apply to our Lord, cr 
 whether the first applied to the woman, " What seekest thou of 
 Him ?" and the second to our Lord, " Why talkeso thou with 
 her ?" The point is of no particular importance. To me, how- 
 ever, it appears that both questions apply to Christ. — " No man 
 said, 'What art thou sacking from her? Why art thou taking 
 with her ?' " 
 
 Grotius suggests that the disciples supposed our Lord might 
 have been seeking meat or drink from the Samaritan woman, 
 and meant, " Why seekest thou any meat or drink from her ?" 
 
 I venture to doubt whether both questions had not better have 
 been translated ahke, " What art thou seeking from her ? What 
 art thou talking about with her? " The Greek word is the same 
 which our translators have rendered " what " in the first question, 
 and " why " in the second. 
 
 The expression, "No man said," seems to imply that no man 
 ventured to ask any question what was our Lord's reason for 
 talking with the woman. It is not very clear why the sentence 
 is introduced. The object probably is, as Cyril and Chrysostom 
 remark, to show us the deep reverence and respect with which 
 the disciples regarded our Lord and all His actions, even at this 
 early period of His ministry. — It also shows us that they some- 
 times thought things about Him to which they dared not give 
 expression, and saw deeds of His which they could not under- 
 stand, but were content silently to wonder at them. There is a 
 lesson for us in their conduct. When we cannot understand the 
 reason of our Lord's dealings with souls, let us hold our peace, and 
 try to beheve that there are reasons which we shall know one 
 day. A good servant in a great house must do his own duty, 
 and ask no questions. A young student of medicine must take 
 many things on trust. 
 28. — [^The woman.. .left. .ivater-pot] The Greek word here rendered 
 " water-pot " is the same that is used in the account of the miracle 
 at Cana in Galilee. (John ii. 6.) It does not mean a small drink- 
 ing-vessel, but a large jar, such as a woman in Eastern countries 
 would carry on her head. We can therefore well understand 
 that if the woman wished ^d return in haste to the city she 
 
234 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 would leave her water-pot. So large a vessel could not be carried 
 quickly, whether empty or full. 
 
 The mind of the woman in leaving her water-pot seems to mf» 
 clear and unmistakeable. She was entirely absorlDed in the things 
 which she had heard from our Lord's mouth. She was anxious 
 to tell them without delay to her friends and neighbours. She 
 therefore postponed her business of drawing water, for which she 
 had left her house, as a matter of secondary importance, and 
 hurried off to tell others what she had been told. The sentence 
 is deeply instructive. 
 
 Lightfoot thinks, beside this, that the woman left her water-pot 
 out of kindne-s to our Lord, " that Jesus and ITis disciples might 
 have wherewithal to drink." 
 
 [Went her way., city.] The Greek word rendered "went her 
 way," means simply, " departed " or " went." The city must of 
 course mean " Sychar." 
 
 [Saith to the men.] We must not suppose that the woman 
 spoke to th> men only, and not to her own sex. But it is pro- 
 bable that the " men " of the place would be 'the first persons she 
 woul'i see, and that the women would not be in the streets, but 
 at home. Moreover it is not unlikely that the expression is 
 meant to show us the woman's zeal and anxiety to spread the 
 good tidings. She did not hesitate to speak to men, though she 
 well knew that anything a woman might say about religion was 
 dot likely to command attention. 
 
 Cyril, on this verse, remarks the power of Christ's grace. He 
 feegan by bidding the womnn to go and " call her husband." The 
 end of the conversation which ensued was her going and calling 
 all the men of the city to come and see Clu-ist. 
 
 *^. — [Come, see a maw.] The missionary spirit of the woman, in 
 this verse, deserves special notice. Having found Christ herself, 
 she invites others to come and be acquainted with Him. Origen 
 calls her " the apostle of the Samaritans." 
 
 Let it be noted that her words are simple in the extreme. She 
 enters into no argument. She only asks the men to " come and 
 see." This, after all, is often the best way of dealing with souls. 
 A bold invitation to come and make trial of the Gospel often 
 produces more eflect than the most elaborate arguments in sup- 
 port of its doctrines. Most men do not want their reason con- 
 vinced so much as their will bent, and their conscience aroused. 
 A simple-minded, hearty, unlearned young disciple will often 
 touch hearts that would hear an abstruse argument without being 
 moved. — This fact is most encouraging to all hehevers who try 
 to do good. All cannot argue. But all believers may say, 
 
235 
 
 " Come and see Ch' ist. If you would only look at Him and see 
 Him, you would soon believe." 
 
 Barradius remarks what a practical illustration ihe woman 
 affords of one of the concludmg sentences of Revelation, " Let 
 him that heareth say, Come." (Rev. xxii. 17.) The Samaritan 
 woman having heard, said " Come," and the result was that manj 
 souls came and took the water of life freely. 
 
 Cyril remarks the difference between the woman's conduct 
 and that of the servant who buried his talent in the ground. 
 She received the talent of the good tidings of the Gospel, and at 
 once put it o. ' at interest. 
 
 Chrysostom remarks the wisdom of the woman. " She did 
 not say, Come, helieve, but Come, see, a gentler expression than 
 the other, and one which more attracted them." 
 
 \^Told me all things. ..ever I did^ These words must be taken 
 with some qualification?. Of course they cannot mean that our 
 Lord had literally told the woman " all things that ever she did 
 in her life." This would have been physically impossible in th6 
 space of a single afternoon. — The probable meaning is, "He has 
 told me all the principal sins that I have committed. He has 
 shown a perfect knowledge of the chief events of my life. He 
 has shown such thorough acquaintance with my history, that I 
 doubt not He could have told me anything I ever did." 
 
 Some allowance must probably be made for the warm and 
 excited feehngs of the woman when she spoke these words. She 
 used hyperbolical and extravagant language, under the influence 
 of these feelings, which she would probalDly not have used in a 
 calm state of mind, and v/hich we must therefore not judge too 
 strictly. Moreover, as Poole remarks, it admits of doubt 
 whether our Lord may not have spoken of other things 
 in the conversation, which St. John has not been inspired to 
 record. 
 
 Let it be noted, that the Samaritan woman, in saying that 
 " our Lord had told her all things she had ever done," very 
 probably referred to the common opinion about Messiah's om- 
 niscience. The Rabbinical writers, according to Lightfoot, 
 specially applied to Messiah the words of Isaiah, " He shall 
 make him of quick understanding in the fear of the Lord. He 
 shall not judge by the sight of his eyes." (Isai. xi. 3.) Her 
 words, therefore, were a well-known argument, that our Lord 
 must be the Christ, and her object in using them would be 
 the roughly understood. 
 
 [/s not this the Christ ?] The Greek words so rendered would 
 be translated with equal correctness, "Is this the Christ? Can 
 
236 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 this be the Christ?" A similar form of interrosfative sentence is 
 found in thirteen other places in the New Testament. In twelve 
 of them the interrogative is used without " not," viz., Matt. vii. 
 16; xxvi. 22, 26] Mark iv. 21; xiv. 9; Luke vi. 39; John vii. 
 31 ; viii. 22; xviii. 35; Acts x. 47 ; 2 Cor. i. 17; James iiL 11. 
 — In only one place is the interrogative used with " not," Matt. 
 xii. 23. I am inchned, on the whole, to think that " not" would 
 have been better omitted in the sentence before us. Euthymiua 
 takes this view. 
 
 The value of questions, if we want to do good to souls, is 
 well illustrated in this verse. A question often sets working a 
 mind which would be utterly unmoved by an atfirmation. It 
 drives the mind to exertion, and by a gentle compulsion arouses 
 it to think. Men are far less able to go to sleep under religious 
 teaching, when they are invited to answer a question. The 
 number of questions in the New Testament is a striking and 
 instructive fact. Had the woman said, " This is the Christ !" 
 she might have excited prejudice and dislike. By asking, " la 
 this the Christ ?" she got the men to inquire and judge for them- 
 selves. 
 30. — [Then they went out of the city.'] This sentence is full of 
 encouragement to aU who try to do good to souls. The words 
 of one single woman were the means of arousing a whole city 
 to go forth and inquire about Christ. We must never despise 
 the smallest and meanest efforts. We never kn()W to wliat the 
 least beginnings may grow. The grain of mustard seed at Sychar 
 was the word of a feeble woman, "Come and see." 
 
 Specially we ought to observe the encouragement the verse 
 affords to the efforts of women. A woman may be the means, 
 undiT Gor], of founding a Church. Tlie first person baptized by 
 Paul in Europe was not a man but a woman, Lydia, the seller of 
 purple. — Let women never suppose that men only can do good. 
 Women also, in their way, can evangehze as really and truly as 
 men. Every believing woman who has a tongue can speak to 
 others about Christ. — The Samaritan woman was far less learned 
 than Nicodemus. But she was far bolder, and so did far more 
 good. 
 
 \^And came unto him.] Perhaps the sentence would be more 
 literally rendered, " were coming," or " began to come to Ilim." 
 It was while they were coming that the conversation which 
 immediately follows, between Christ and His disciples, took place, 
 and perhaps it was the sight of the crowd coming which madd 
 our Lord say some of the things that He did. 
 
 Calvin remarks on this part of the woman's history, that some 
 may think her blameable, in that "while she is still ignoi-ant and 
 imperfectly taught, she goes beyond the limits of her faith. I 
 
237 
 
 reply that she would have acted inconsiderately if she had 
 assumed the offt)e of a teacher; but Avhen she desires nothing 
 more than to excite her fellow-citizens to hear Christ speaking, 
 we will not say that she forgot herself, or proceeded further 
 than she had a right to do. She merely does the office of a 
 trumpet or a bell, to invite others to come to Christ." 
 
 The concluding verse shows us most forcibly that ministera 
 and teachers of religion ought never to be above taking pains 
 and trouble with a single soul. A conversation with one person 
 was the means of leading a whole city to come and hear Christ, 
 and resulted in the salvation of many souls. 
 
 Cornelius ^ Lapide, at this point of his commentary, gi-avely 
 informs us that the name ot the Samaritan woman was Pliotina, 
 — that after her conversion she preached the Grospel at Cartljage, 
 and that she suffered martyrdom there on the 20th of March, on 
 which day the Romish Marty rology makes special mention of 
 her name ! He also tells us that her head is kept as a relic at 
 Rome, in the BasUica of St. Paul, and that it was actually shown 
 to him there ! — It is well to know what ridiculous and lying 
 legends the Church of Rome palms upon Roman Catholics as 
 truths, while she withholds from them the Bible ! 
 
 JOHN IV. 31—42. 
 
 31 In the mean while his dis- 
 ciples prayed him, saying, Master, 
 eat. 
 
 32 But he said unto them, I have 
 meat to eat that ye know not of. 
 
 33 Therefore said the disciples 
 one to another, Hath any man 
 brought him ought to eat ? 
 
 34 Jesus saith unto them, My 
 meat is to do the will of him that 
 sent me, and to finish his work. 
 
 35 Say not ye. There are yet 
 four months, and then cometh har- 
 vest ? behold, I say unto you. Lift 
 up your eyes, and look on the 
 fields; for they are white already 
 to harvest. 
 
 3G And he that reapeth receiveth 
 wages, and gatliereth fruit unto life 
 eternal : that both he that soweth 
 and he that reapeth may rejoice 
 together. 
 
 37 And herein is that saying true, 
 One sowetli, and another reapeth. 
 
 38 I sent you to reap that where- 
 on ye bestowed no labour: other 
 men laboured, and ye are entered 
 into their labours. 
 
 39 And many of the Samaritans 
 of that city behoved on him for the 
 saying of the woman, which testi- 
 fied. He told me all that ever I did. 
 
 40 So when the Samaritans were 
 come unto him, they besought him 
 that he would tarry with them: 
 and he abode there two days. 
 
 41 And many more believed be- 
 cause of his own vord ; 
 
 42 And said unto the woman, 
 Now we believe, not because of thy 
 saying : for we have lieard him our- 
 selves, and know that this is in- 
 deed ihc Christ, the Saviour of the 
 world. 
 
288 EXPOSITOKY THOUGHTS. 
 
 We have, for one thing, in these verses, an instructive pat- 
 tern of zeal for the good of others. We read, that our 
 Lord Jesus Christ declares, " My meat is to do the will 
 of him which sent me, and to finish his work." To do 
 good was not merely duty and pleasure to Him. He 
 counted it as His food, meat and drink. Job, one of the 
 holiest Old Testament saints, could say, that he esteemed 
 God's word " more than his necessary food." (Job xxiii. 
 15.) Tlie Great Head of the New Testament Church went 
 even further. He could say the same of God's work. 
 
 Do w^e do any work for God ? Do we try, however 
 feebly, to set forward His cause on earth, — to check that 
 which is evil, to promote that which is good ? If we do, 
 let us never be ashamed of doing it with all our heart, 
 and soul, and mind, and strength. Whatsoever our hand 
 finds to do for the souls of others, let us do it with our 
 might. (Eccles. ix. 10.) The world may mock and sneer, 
 and call us enthusiasts. The world can admire zeal in any 
 service but that of God, and can j^raise enthusiasm on any 
 subject but *that of religion. Let us work on unmoved. 
 Whatever men may say and think, w6 are walking in the 
 steps of our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 Let us, beside this, take comfort in the thought that 
 Jesus Christ never changes. He that sat by the well of 
 Samaria, and found it "meat and drink" to do good to an 
 ignorant soul, is always in one mind. High in heaven at 
 God's right hand. He still delights to save sinners, and 
 still approves zeal and labour in the cause of God. The 
 work of the missionary and the evangelist may be despised 
 and ridiculed in many quarters. But while man is mock- 
 lug, Christ is well pleased. Thanks be to God, Jesus la 
 the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever. 
 
 We have, for another thing, in these verses, strong en- 
 couragement held out to those who labour to do good to 
 souls. We read, that our Lord described the world as a 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 239 
 
 "field white for the harvest;" and then f^ aid to His dis- 
 ciples, " He that reapeth, receiveth wages, and gathereth 
 fruit unto life eternal." 
 
 Work for the souls of men, is undoubtedly attended by- 
 great discouragements. The heart of natural man is very 
 hard and unbelieving. The blindness of most men to their 
 own lost condition and peril of ruin, is something past 
 description. " The carnal mind is enmity against GoJ." 
 (Rom. viii. 7.) No one can have any just idea of the 
 desperate hardness of men and women, until he has tried 
 to do good. No one can have any conception of the small 
 number of those who repent and believe, until he has per- 
 sonally endeavoured to " save some." (1 Cor. ix. 22.) To 
 suppose that everybody will become a true Christian, who 
 is told about Christ, and entreated to believe, is mere 
 childish ignorance. " Few there be that find the narrow 
 way !" The labourer for Christ will find the vast majority 
 of those among whom he labours, unbelieving and impeni- 
 tent, in spite of all that he can do. "The many" will not 
 turn to Christ. These are discouraging facts. But they 
 are facts, and facts that ought to be known. 
 
 The true antidote against despondency in God's work, 
 is an abiding recollection of such promises as that before 
 us. There are " wages " laid up for faithful reapers. 
 They shall receive a reward at the last day, far exceeding 
 anything they have done for Christ, — a reward propor- 
 tioned not to their success, but to the quantity of their 
 work. — They are gathering "fruit," which shall endure 
 w^hen this world has passed away, — fruit, in some souls 
 saved, if many will not believe, and fruit in evidences 
 of their own faithfulness, to be brought out before assem- 
 bled worlds. Do our hands ever hang down, and our 
 knees w^ax faint ? Do we feel disposed to say, " my labour 
 is in \ain and my words without profit." Let us lean back 
 at such seasons on this glorious promise. There are 
 
2tl:0 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 " wages " yet to be paid. There is " fruit " yet to be 
 exhibited. " We are a sweet savour of Christ, both in 
 thorn that are saved and in them that perish." (2 Cor. ii. 
 15.) Let us work on. "He that goeth forth and weep- 
 eth, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again with 
 rejoicing, bringing his sheaves with him." (Psa. cxxvi. 6.) 
 One single soul saved, shall outlive and outweigh all the 
 kingdoms of the world. 
 
 We have, lastly, in these verses, a most teaching instance 
 of the variety of ways by which men are led to believe 
 Christ. We read that " many of the Samaritans believed 
 on Christ for the saying of the woman." But this is not 
 all. We read again, "Many more believed because of 
 Christ's own word." In short, some were converted 
 through the means of the woman's testimony, and some 
 were converted by hearing Christ Himself. 
 
 The words of St. Paul should never be forgotten, " There 
 are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which 
 worketh all in all." (1 Cor. xii. 6.) The way in which the 
 Spirit leads all God's people is ahvays one and the same. 
 But the paths by which they are severally brought into 
 that road are often widely different. There are some in 
 whom the work of conversion is sudden and instantaneous. 
 There are others in whom it goes on slowly, quietly, and 
 by imperceptible degrees. Some have their hearts gently 
 opened, like Lydia. Others are aroused by violent alarm, 
 like the jailor at Philippi. All are finally brought to repen- 
 tance toward God, faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 and holiness of conversation. But all do not begin with 
 the same experience. The weapon which carries convic- 
 tion, to one believer's soul, is not the one which first pierces 
 another. The arrows of the Holy Ghost are all drawn 
 from the same quiver. But He uses sometimes one and 
 sometimes another, according to His own sovereign will. 
 
 Are we converted ourselves ? This is the one point to 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 241 
 
 which our attention ought to be directed. Our experience 
 may not tally with that of other believers. But that is 
 not the question. Do we feel sin, hate it, and flee from 
 it ? Do we love Christ, and rest solely on Him for sal- 
 vation ? Are we bringing forth fruits of the Spirit in 
 righteousness and true holiness ? If these things are so 
 wo may thank God, and take courage. 
 
 Notes. John IV. 31 — 42. 
 
 31. — {In the mean while.] This expression means " during the time 
 when the Samaritans were coming out of the city to the well," 
 between the time when the woman went her way, and the time 
 when her fellow-countrymen, aroused by her testimony, appear- 
 ed at the well. It is highly probable that they were already in 
 sight. 
 
 [Prayed.] The Greek word so rendered is remarkable. It is 
 frequently used to convey the idea of '' asking, or making in- 
 quiry." It is a curious fact that it is not used in describing any 
 person's address to God in prayer, except in the case of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ. (John xiv. 16 ; xvi. 26 ; xvii. 9, 15, 20.) There is 
 one remarkable instance where it seems to be used in describing 
 a believer's prayer. (1 John v. 16.) But this instance stands so 
 entirely alone that it is probable the meaning is not "pray," but 
 " make curious inquiry." 
 
 [Master, eat] The difference between our Lord and His dis- 
 ciples appears here in a striking manner. Their weak minds 
 were preoccupied with the idea of food and bodily sustenance. 
 His heart was filled with the great object of His ministry, " do- 
 ing good to souls." It is a striking illustration of a difference 
 that may frequently be seen between a believer of great grace 
 and a believer of little grace. The latter, with the best possible 
 intentions, will oflen attach an importance to bodily and tem- 
 poral things, with which the strong behever will feel no sym- 
 pathy. 
 32. — [I have meat, &c.] The meaning of our Lord's words in this 
 verse must evidently be figurative. He had soul-nourishment 
 and soul-sustenance of which His disciples were ignorant. He 
 fi.und such refreshment in doing good to ignorant souls that for 
 the time present He did not feel bodily hunger. 
 
 There is no neces-ity for supposing that our Lord referred to 
 any miraculous supply of His bodily wants in this pl;'ce. His 
 words appear to me only to indicate that He found such delight 
 and comfort in doing good to souls, that it was as good as meat 
 
 11 
 
242 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 and drink to Him. Many of His holiest servants in every age, 
 I believe, conld testify much the same. The joy and happiness 
 of spiiitual success has for the time lifted thf-m above all bodily 
 wants, and supplied the place of material meat and drink. I see 
 no reason why this may not have been the case with our Lord. 
 He had a body in all respects constituted like our own. 
 
 The idea of some writers that these words show that our 
 Lord's " thirst " was only simulated and pretended, seems to mo 
 utterly unworthy of notice. 
 
 The application of the words which every believer ought to 
 endeavour to make to himself, is familiar to every well-instructed 
 Christian. He has supplies of spiritual nourishment and sup- 
 port, which are hidden and unknown to the world. These sup- 
 plies he ought to use at all times, and specially in times of sorrow 
 and trial. 
 
 33. — [Therefore said.. .one to another, &c.'\ These words seem to 
 have been spoken privately, or whispered one to another, by the 
 disciples. Their inability to put any but a carnal sense on their 
 Master's words, has been already remarked. In slowness to see 
 a spiritual sense in His language they do not appear at all unlike 
 Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman. " What wonder is it," 
 says Augustine, '' if the woman could not understand our Lord, 
 speaking about living water, when the disciples could not under- 
 stand Him speaking about meat ?" 
 
 The original Greek of the expression " hath any man brought 
 him ought to eat," is remarkable. There is a negative left out in 
 our translation. It seems to show that the question of the wo- 
 man, at verse 29, would have been better rendered, " Is this the 
 Cljrist ? Can this be the Christ ?" 
 
 34. — [Jesus saith, cfec] The leading idea of this verse is, " that do- 
 ing G-od's wiU, and finishing God's work, was so soul-refreshing 
 and pleasant to our Lord that He found it equivalent to meat 
 and drink." 
 
 The Greek expression rendered " to do," and " to finish," 
 would have been more literally rendered, " that I should do," 
 and, " that I should finish." But there can be little doubt, as 
 Winer remarks, thiit the language is intended to have an infini- 
 tive sense. Precisely the same construction is employed in ano- 
 ther remarkable place, John xvii. 3. It seems matter of regret 
 that our translators did not render that verse as they have ren- 
 dered the verse before us. It should have been, " this is life 
 eternal to know thee, &c." 
 
 The " will of God," which it was Christ's meat to " do," must 
 mecui God's will, that salvation by faith in a Saviour should be 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IT. 248 
 
 proclaimed, and a door of mercy set wide open to the cliief of 
 sinners. " It is my meat," says our Lord, " to do that will, and 
 to proclaim to every one with whom I speak that whosoever be- 
 lieveth on the Son shall not perish." The view that it simply 
 means, " my meat is to obey God's commandments and do what 
 He has told me to do," appears to me to fall short of the full 
 meaning of the expression. The leading idea seems to me to be 
 specially God's will about proclaiming salvation by Christ. Com- 
 pare John vi. 39, 40. 
 
 The " work of God," which it was Christ's meat to " finish," 
 must mean that work of complete fulfilment of a Saviour's office 
 which Christ came on earth to perform, and that obedience to 
 God's law which He came to render. " It is my meat," says our 
 Lord, '' to be daily doing that great work which I came into the 
 world to do for man's eoul, to be daily preaching peace, and daily 
 fulfilling all righteousness." Compare John xvii. 4. 
 
 The utter unlikeness between Christ and all ministers of the 
 Gospel who perform their duties in a mere prefanctory way, and 
 care more for the world, and its pleasures or gains, than for sav- 
 ing souls, is strikingly brought out in this and the preceding 
 verse. How many professing teachers of religion know nothing 
 whatever of the spirit and habits of mind which our Lord here 
 displays ! It can never be said of hunting, shooting, ball-going, 
 card-playing, farming clergymen, that it is their meat and drink 
 to do God's will and finish His work! With what face wdl they 
 meet Christ in the day of judgment ? 
 
 Cyril says, on this verse, " We learn from hence how great is 
 the love of God towards men. He caRs the conversion of lost 
 people His meat." 
 
 35. — [Say not ye, &c.] This saying is interpreted in two different 
 ways. 
 
 Some think, as Origen, Rupertus, Brentius, Beza, Jansenius, 
 Cyril, Lightfoot, Lampe, Suicer, and many others, that our Lord 
 really meant that there were four literal months to harvest, at 
 the time when He spoke ; and that as the harvest began about 
 May, He spoke in February. The sense would then be, " Ye say 
 at this time of the year that it wiU be harvest in four months. 
 I3ut I tell you there is a spiritual harvest already before you, if 
 you will only lift up your eyes and see it." 
 
 Others think, as De Dieu, Maldonatus, Calovius, Whitby, 
 Schottgen, Pearce, Tittman, Stier, Alford, Barnes, and Tholuck, 
 that our Lord only meant that it was a proverbial saying among 
 the Jews, — " four months between seed time and harvest," and 
 that He did not mean the words to be literally taken. The sense 
 would then be, '^Ye havt a common saying that it is four 
 
244 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 montLs from seed time to harvest. But I tell you that in spiri 
 tiial works the harvest lipens far more quickly. Behold those 
 Samaritans coming out already to hear the word, the very day 
 that seed has been sown among them. The fields are already 
 white for harvest." 
 
 Either of the above views make good sense and good divinity. 
 Yet on the whole I prefer the second view, viz. : that our Lord 
 quoted a proverb. To suppose that He really meant that there 
 were literally four months to pass away before harvest, appears 
 to me to involve serious chronological difficulties. It necessitates 
 the assumption that at least thiee quarters of a year had passed 
 away since the passover, when our Lord puritied the temple. 
 (John ii. 23.) No doubt this possibly may have been the case. 
 But it does not appear to me probable. — In addition we must 
 remember that our Lord, on another occasion, referred to a pro- 
 verbial saying about the weather, beginning much as He does 
 hi-re, " Ye say." Matt. xvi. 3. Moreover, in this very passage 
 He quotes a proverb about " one sowing and another reaping," 
 within two verses. The expression therefoie, "say not ye," 
 seems to me to point to a proverbial saying much more than to 
 a fact. The antithesis to it is the " I say," which immediately 
 follows. 
 
 Calvin says, "By this expression, do not ye say? Clirist in- 
 tended indirectly to point out how much more attentive the 
 minds of men are to earthly than to heavenly things, for they 
 burn with so intense a desire of harvest that they carefully 
 reckon up months and days, while it is astonishing how drowsy 
 and indolent they are in gathering the heavenly wheat." 
 
 Cornelius d Lapide conjectures that the disciples had been talk- 
 ing to one another about the prospects of liarvest, as they came 
 to the well, and that our Lord knowing the conversation, referred 
 to it by the words, "do not ye say ?" 
 
 [^Lift up. ..eyes. .look.. .JieJds.. .white.. .harvest] There can be little 
 doubt that this saying must be interpreted figuratively. The 
 sense is, " There is a harvest of souls before you ready to be 
 gathered in." The same figure is used elsewhere. (Matt. ix. 37. 
 Luke X. 32.) 
 
 Some think, as Chrysostom, that when our Lord said, " Be 
 hold.. ..lift up your eyes.. .look," He spoke with especial reference 
 to the crowd of Samaritans whom He saw coming from the 
 city to the well. If this be so, it is hard to suppose that He 
 first, began conversation with the woman at six o'clock in the 
 evening. 
 
 Others think, thnt our Lord spoke these words Avilh reference 
 to the whole world, and special!}- the Jewish nation, at the time 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 245 
 
 of His ministr}. They were so ready and prepared for the 
 preaching- of the Gospel, that they were hke a field white for 
 harvest. The expression, " lift up your eyes," is used elsewhere 
 in Scripture, when mental attention is being called to something 
 rem irkable. See Isai. xlix. 18 ; Ix. 4 ; Gen. xiii. 14, 15. 
 
 I am disposed to think that both views are correct. Our Lord 
 wished His disciples to notice that both at Samaria and else- 
 where the minds of men were everywhere ready to receive the 
 mes-age of the Gospel in an unusual degree. Let them mark 
 how willing the multitude was everywhere to listen to the truth. 
 Let them know that everywhere, as in the apparently hopeless 
 field of Samaria, they would find a harvest of souls ready to be 
 reaped, if only they would be reapers. 
 
 Chrysostom, on this verse, remark?, " Christ leads His disciples, 
 as His custom is, from low things to high. Fields and harvests 
 here express the great number of souls which are ready to receive 
 the word. The ei/es are both spiritual and bodily ones, for they 
 saw a great multitude of Samaritans now approaching. This 
 expectant crowd He calls, very suitably, white fields. For as 
 the corn, when it grows white, is ready for harvest, so were 
 those ready for salvation. But why does He not say all this in 
 direct language ? Because by making use of the objects around 
 them He gave great vividness and power to His words, and also 
 caused His discourse to be more pleasant and sink deeper into 
 their memories." 
 
 36. — [He that reapeth, &c^ This verse seems to me to show thai 
 our Lord is speaking generally of the field of this world, and of 
 the whole work which His apostles would have to do in it, not 
 only in Samaria, but to the ends of the earth. The verse is a 
 general promise for the encouragement of all labourers of Christ. 
 The full meaning of it can hardly be brought out without a para- 
 phrase. "The reaper of the spiritual harvest has a far more 
 honourable and satisfactory office than the reaper of the natural 
 harvest. He receives wages and gathers fruit not for this life 
 only, but for the life to come. The wages that he receives are 
 eternal wages, a crown of glory that fadeth not away. (1 Pet. 
 V. 4.) The fruit that he gathers is eternal fruit, souls plucked 
 from destruction and saved for evermore." See Daniel xii. 3; 
 John XV. 16; and 1 Cor. ix. 17. 
 
 Burkitt, and several other writers, call attention to the fact that 
 the harvestman's wages are much more than the wages of any 
 o^:h'^r labourer, and hence draw the conclusion that no Christian 
 will receive so glorious a reward as the man who labours to win 
 souls to Christ. 
 
 [That loth 7ie..,^oweth...reajpeih...rejoice together.] These wo:;ds 
 
246 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 appeal Id me to refer to the common joy that there will be in 
 heaven among all who have laboured for Christ, when the whole 
 harvest of saved souls is finally gathered in. The Old Testament 
 prophets and John the Baptist, who sowed, will all rejoice toge- 
 ther with the apostles, who reaped. — The results of the spiritual 
 harvest are not like those of the natural harvest, temporal, but 
 eternal, so that a day will come when all who have laboured for 
 it in any way, either by sowing or reaping, will sit down and 
 rejoice together to all eternity. Here in this world the sower 
 sometimes doe-i not live to see the fruit of his labour, and the 
 reaper who gathers in the harvest rejoices alone. But work done 
 in the spiritual harvest is eternal work, and consequently both 
 sowers and reapers are sure at last to "rejoice together," and to 
 see the fruit of their toil. 
 
 Let it be noted, that in heaven there will at last be no jealousy 
 and envy among Christ's labourers. Some will have been sowers 
 and some will have been reapers. But all will have done that 
 part of the work allotted to them, and all will finally "rejoice 
 together." Envious feelings will be absorbed in common joy. 
 
 Let it be noted, that in doing work for Christ, and labouring 
 for souls, there are sowers as well as reapers. The work of the 
 reaper makes far more show than the work af the sower. Yet 
 it \a perfectly c'ear that if there was no sowing there would be 
 no reaping. It is of great importance to remember this. The 
 Church is often disposed to give an excessive honour to Christ's 
 reapers, and to overlook the labours of Christ's sowers. 
 
 87. — [Herem...fhat saying true, &c. tfec] Our Lord here quotes a 
 proverbial saying, which appears to me to confirm the view I 
 have already maintained, that the expression of the 35th verse, 
 " Say not ye there are yet four months," &c., refers to a proverb. 
 
 The phrase " herein" means literally, " in this," and seems to me 
 to refer to the verse which immediately follows. " That common 
 saying, one soweth and another reapeth, is made good in this 
 way, — is fulfilled by this circumstance, — is verified in the follow- 
 ing manner, viz., I sent you to reap," &c. 
 
 The meaning of the proverb is plain. " It is a common saying 
 among men that it often falls to one to sow the field and to 
 another to reap it. The sower and the reaper are not always 
 the same person." 
 
 The fi equent use of proverbial sayings in the New Testament 
 deserves notice. It shows the value of proverbs, and the import- 
 ance of teaching them to children and young people. A pointed 
 proverb is often remembered when a long moral lesson is for- 
 gotten. 
 
247 
 
 38. — [I ifcnf you to reap, <&c.] Our Lord here states the manner in 
 which the proverbial saying of the preceding verse is true. He 
 tells the apostles that they were sent to reap a spiritual harvest 
 on which they had bestowed no labour. Other men had laboured, 
 viz., the prophets of the Old Testament and John the Baptist. 
 They had broken up the ground. They had sown the seed. The 
 result of their labour was that the minds of men in the apostles' 
 times were prepared to expect the Messiah, and the apostles had 
 oniy to go forth and proclaim the glad tidings that Messiah was 
 come. 
 
 Pearce maintains the strange notion that our Lord, in this 
 verse, only means, " I sent you away into the city to buy meat. 
 While you were absent I sowed spiritual seed in the heart of a 
 Samaritan woman. She is now gone to call others. These and 
 many more will be the harvest which you will reap, without 
 having bestowed any labour on it." This interpretation seems 
 to me quite untenable. 
 
 The past tense in this verse, " I have sent," is used, as a gram- 
 marian would say, proleptically. It means, "I do send you." 
 Such a use of the past tense is common in Scripture, and espe- 
 cially when G-od speaks of a thing about to be done. With God 
 there is no uncertainty. When He undertakes a thing, it may 
 be regarded as done and finished, because in His counsels it is 
 certain to be finished. Our Lord's meaning is, "I send you 
 throughout Samaria, Galilee, and Judaea, to reap the fruit of the 
 labours of the prophets and John the Baptist. They have sowed, 
 and you have now only to reap." 
 
 Some think, as Stier and Alford, that when our Lord said, 
 " other men have laboured," He referred rather to Himself than 
 to the prophets. I am unable to see this. It appears to me a 
 forced and unnatural interpretation. I hold decidedly with Chry- 
 sostom, Cyril, Theophylact", Calvin, Zvvingle, Melancthon, Bren- 
 tius, Lampe, and Poole, that it applies principally to the law and 
 prophets. — "If the prophets were not the sowers," saith Augus- 
 tine, "whence had that saying come to the woman, I know that 
 Messias cometh?" — Origen says, "Did not Moses and Elias, the 
 sowers, rejoice with the reapers, Peter, James, and John, when 
 they saw the glory of the Son of God at the transfiguration ?" 
 
 Theophylact sees in this verse a strong argument against the 
 heretical view of the Marcionites, Manichees, and others, that 
 the New Testament is contrary to the Old. Here the prophets 
 and apostles are spoken of together as labourers under one com- 
 mon Master, in one common field. 
 
 The idea propounded by Bucer, that our Lord alludes here to 
 the heathen philosophers as well as the prophets, seems to me 
 unwarrantable and unsafe. 
 
248 EXPOSITORS THOUGHTS. 
 
 %9.— [Many... Samaritans... believed.] About the exact nature of the 
 belief mentioned here and in the 41st verse, we have no mate- 
 rials for forminpr an opinion. Whether it was only an intellec 
 tual belief that Christ was the Messiah, or whether it was that 
 true faith of the heart which justifies a sinner betore Grod, we are 
 left to conjecture. The more probable opinion appears to be that 
 it was true faith, though very weak and unintelligent, like that 
 of the apostles themselves. It is a strong confirmation of this 
 view, that when Philip, after the day of Pentecost, went down 
 to Samaria and preached Christ, his preaching was received with 
 joy, and many were baptized, both men and women. (Acts viii. 
 5 — 12.) The Gospel was received without prejudice, and em- 
 braced at once as an acknowledged truth. 
 
 [For....saying... .woman... testified, c&c] These words show the 
 importance of merely human testimony to Christ's Gospel. The 
 word of one weak woman was made the instrumental means of 
 behef to many souls. There was nothing remarkable in the 
 woman's word. It contained no elaborate reasoning, and no 
 striking eloquence. It was only a hearty, earnest testimony of 
 a believing heart. Yet God was pleased to use it to the conver- 
 sion of souls. We must never despise the use of means. If 
 the woman had not spoken, the Samaritans would not have been 
 converted. — Above all, we must never despise means because 
 of their apparent weakness, feebleness, and inaptness to do good. 
 God can make the weakest instruments powerful to pull down 
 the strongholds of sin and Satan, just as He made David's sling 
 and stone prevail over Goliah. 
 
 Theophylact points out that the Samaritan woman's past wicked 
 life was well known to her fellow-citizens, and that their atten- 
 tion must have been aroused by her publicly proclaiming that she 
 had found One who knew her former life, although a stranger. 
 They rightly concluded that He must be no common person. 
 
 Melancthon remarks that the belief which resulted from the 
 testimony of a woman in this case, is a clear proof that it is not 
 absolutely necessary to have regular ministerial orders, in order 
 to do good to souls, and that episcopal orders are not absolutely- 
 needful in order to give effect to the word when spoken. 
 
 iO. — [So ivhen... Samaritans... come.. .besought.Jarry, cfec] The desire 
 nf the Samaritans for instruction is shown in this verse, and the 
 willingness of Christ to assist inquirers is strikingly exhibited. 
 He waits to be entreated. If we have Him not abiding with us, 
 it is because we do not ask Him. The two disciples journeying 
 to Emmaus would have missed a great privilege if they had not 
 said, " Abide with us." (Luke xxiv. 29.) 
 
 Ferus on this verse remarks the wide difference between the 
 Samaritans and the Gergesenes. The Gergesenes prayed our 
 
JOHN, CHAP. ly. 249 
 
 Lord to " depart " from them, the Samaritans to " tarry " with 
 them. (Matt. viii. 34.) 
 
 [He abode.. .two days.] We can only suppose that these two 
 days were spent m teaching and preaching the G-ospel. One 
 would like to know all that was thought and said in those two 
 days. But it is an instance of the occasional " silences " of 
 Scripture, which every attentive Bible-reader must have noticed. 
 The first thirty years of our Lord's life at Nazareth, — the way in 
 which St. Paul speut his time in Arabia, — and his employment 
 during his two years' imprisonment in Cassarea, are similar 
 silences. (G-al. i. 17 ; Acts xxiv. 27.) 
 
 It is an interesting fact which has been observed by some 
 writers, that at this very day, Nablous and its neighbourhood, 
 occupying the site of Samaria and Sychar, are in a more flourish- 
 ing and prosperous condition than almost any place in Palestine. 
 While Capernaum, and Chorazin, and Bethsaida, which rejected 
 Christ, have almost entirely passed away, Samaria, which believed 
 and received Him, flourishes still. 
 
 il. — [Mamj more believed.. ..own luord.] This verse shows the 
 sovereignty of Grod in saving souls. One is called in one way 
 and another in another. Some Samaritans believed when they 
 heard the woman testify. Others did not beheve till they he^ird 
 Christ Himself. — We must be careful that we do not bind down 
 the Holy Ghost to one mode of operation. The experience of 
 saved souls ofien differs widely. If people are brought to re- 
 pentance and faith in Christ, we must not be stumbled because 
 they are not all brought in the same way. 
 
 Olshausen remarks on this verse, " Here is a rare instance in 
 which t'le ministry of the Lord produced an awakening on a 
 lai ge scale. Ordinarily we find that a few individuals only were 
 aroused b}^ Him, and that these, like grains of seed, scattered 
 here and the. e, became the germs of a new and higher order of 
 things among the people at large." 
 
 42. — [Ax»w; we beIieve....not....thy saying.] The Greek words so 
 rendered would be translated more literally, "Not any longer 
 because of thy saying do we believe." 
 
 Calvin thinks that the Greek word here rendered " saying," 
 means literally, " talk or talkativeness," and that " the Samari- 
 tans appear to boast that they have now a stronger foundation 
 than a woman's tongue." In the only other three places where 
 it is used, it is translated "speech." (Matt. xxvi. 73; Mark xiv. 
 70; John viii. 43.) 
 
 [This is indeed.... Christ... Saviour.. ..world.] The Greek words 
 BO rendered would be translated more literally, ''This is the 
 Sayiour of the world, the Christ." 
 
 11* 
 
250 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 The singular fulness of the confession made by these Samari' 
 tans deserves special notice. A more full declaration of our 
 Lord's office as " Saviour of the world " is nowhere to be found in 
 the G-ospels. Whether the Samaritans clearly understood what 
 they meant when they spoke of our Lord as " the Saviour," may 
 be reasonably doubted. But that they saw with pecahar clear- 
 ness a truth which the Jews were specially backward in seeing 
 that He had come to be a Redeemer for all mankind, and no* 
 for the " Jews " only, seems evident from the expression '' the 
 world." That such a testimony should have been borne to 
 Christ, by a mixed race, of seini-heathen origin, like the Sama- 
 ritans, and not by the Jews, is a remarkable instance of the 
 grace of Grod. 
 
 The inference drawn by Calvin from this verse, that '' within 
 two days the sense of the Gospel was more plainly taught by 
 Christ at Samaria than he had hitherto taught it at Jerusalem," 
 seems both unwarrantable and needless. Ought we not rather 
 to fix our eyes on the dijfference between the Jews and Samari- 
 tans? Christ's teaching was the same, but the hearts of His 
 hearers were widely different. The Jews were hardened. The 
 Samaritans believed. 
 
 Chemnitius, on this verse, thinks that an emphasis is meant to 
 be laid on the Greek word rendered " indeed." Literally it is 
 " truly." He thinks it was used of our Lord in contradistinction 
 to the false Christs and Messiahs who had appeared before Him, 
 as well as to the typical Messiahs and Saviours, such as the 
 Judges. 
 
 In leaving the passage we may well wonder that so many 
 '! Samaritans " should at once have believed on our Lord, when 
 so few "Jews" ever beUeved. Our wonder may well be in- 
 creased, when we consider that our Lord worked no miracle on 
 this occasion, and that the woi'd was the only instiument used 
 to open the Samaritans' hearts. — We see, for one thing, the entire 
 sovereignty of the grace of God. The last are often first and 
 the first last. The most ignorant and unenhghtened believe 
 and are saved, while the most learned and enlightened continue 
 unbelieving and are lost. — We see, for another thing, that it is 
 not miracles and privileges, but grace, which converts souls. 
 The Jews saw scores of mighty miracles worked by our Lord, 
 and heard Him preach for weeks and months, and yet with a 
 few rare exceptions remained impenitent and hardened. The 
 Sarnarifans saw no miracles worked at all, and only had our 
 Lord among (hem for two days, and yet many of them believed. 
 If ever there was clear proof that the grace of the Holy Spirit 
 is the chief thing needed in order to procure the conversion of 
 soul?, we have it in the verses wc are now leaving. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 
 
 251 
 
 The allegorical and typical meanings which some writera 
 assign to the Samaritan woman and her history, as related in 
 this cliapter, are hardly worth recounting. Some regard the 
 woman as a type of the Jewish synagogue, slavishly bound to 
 the five books of the law, and drawn finally by Christ to drink 
 the living water of the Grospel. — Some regard the woman as a 
 typo of the Gentile nations, for five thousand years committing 
 fornication with heathen idols, and at length purged by Christ,, 
 and casting away their empty water-pots in obedience to Chris- 
 tianity, — Some go even further, and regard the woman as a 
 prophetical type of things yet to come. They consider her as a 
 type of the Greek Church, which is yet to be brought into the 
 true faith of Christ I These views appear to me at best only 
 fanciful speculations, and more Ukely to do harm than good, 
 by drawing men away from the plain practical lessons which the 
 passage contains. 
 
 JOHN lY. 43—54. 
 
 43 Now after two days he de- 
 parted thence, and went into Gali- 
 lee. 
 
 44 For Jesus himself testified, 
 that a prophet hath no honour in 
 his own country. 
 
 45 Then when he was come into 
 Galilee, the Galilaeans received him, 
 having seen all the things that he 
 did at Jerusalem at the feast : for 
 they also went unto the feast. 
 
 46 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 Judsea 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 death. 
 
 48 Then said Jesus unto him, 
 Except ye sec signs and wonders, 
 ye will not beUeve. 
 
 49 The nobleman saith unto 
 him, Sir, come dovni, ere my child 
 die. 
 
 50 Jesus saith unto him, Go thy 
 way ; thy son hveth. And the man 
 beUeved the word that Jesus had 
 spoken unto him, and he went his 
 way. 
 
 51 And as he was now going 
 down, his servants met him, and 
 told him, saying. Thy son liveth. 
 
 52 Then enquired he of them the 
 hour when he began to amend. 
 And they said unto him, Yester- 
 day at the seventh hour the fever 
 left Mm. 
 
 53 So the father knew that it 
 was at the same hour, in the wliich 
 Jesus said unto him, thy son liv- 
 eth: and himself beheved, and his 
 whole house. 
 
 54 This is again the second 
 miracle thai Jesus did, when he 
 was come out of Judaea into Ga» 
 lilee. 
 
 Four great lessons stand out boldly on the face of this 
 
252 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 passage. Let ns fix them in our memories, aud use ihem 
 continually as we journey through life. 
 
 We learn, firstly, that the rich have afflictions as well as 
 the poor. We read of a nobleman in deep anxiety because 
 his son was sick. We need not doubt that every means 
 of restoration was used that money could procure. But 
 money is not almighty. The sickness increased, and the 
 nobleman's son lay at the point of death. 
 
 The lesson is one which needs to be constantly im- 
 pressed on the minds of men. There is no more common, 
 or more mischievous error, than to suppose that the lich 
 have no cares. The rich are as liable to sickness as the 
 poor ; and have a hundred anxieties beside, of which the 
 poor know nothing at all. Silks and satins often cover 
 very heavy hearts. The dwellers in palaces often sleep 
 more uneasily than the dwellers in cottages. Gold and 
 silver can lift no man beyond the reach of trouble. They 
 may shut out debt and rags, but they cannot shut out 
 care, disease, and death. The higher the tree, the more 
 it is shaken by storms. The broader its branches, the 
 greater is the mark which it exposes to the tempest. 
 David w^as a happier man when he kept his father's sheep 
 at Bethlehem, than when he dwelt as a king at Jerusalem, 
 and governed the twelve tribes of Israel. 
 
 Let the servant of Christ beware of desiring riches. 
 They are certain cares, and uncertain comforts. Let him 
 pray for the rich, and not envy them. How hardly shall 
 a rich man enter the kingdom of God ! Above all, let 
 him learn to be content with such things as he has. He 
 only is truly rich, who has treasure in heaven. 
 
 We learn, secondly, in this passage, that sickness and 
 death come to the young as loell as to the old. We read of 
 a son sick unto death, and a father in trouble about him. 
 We see the natural order of things inverted. The elder 
 is obliged to minister to the younger, and not the younger 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 253 
 
 to the elder. The child draws nigh to the grave before 
 the parent, and not the parent before the child. 
 
 The lesson is one which we are all slow to learn. We 
 are apt to shut our eyes to plain facts, and to speak and 
 act, as il young people, as a matter of course, never died 
 when young. And yet the grave-stones in every church- 
 yard would tell us, that few people out of a hundred ever 
 live to be fifty years old, while many never grow up to 
 man's estate at all. The first grave that ever was dug 
 on this earth, was that of a young man. The first person 
 who ever died, was not a father but a son. Aaron lost 
 two sons at a stroke. David, the man after God's own 
 heart, lived long enough to see three children buried. 
 Job was deprived of all his children in one day. These 
 things were carefully recorded for our learning. 
 
 He that is wise, will never reckon confidently on long 
 life. "We never know what a day may bring forth. The 
 strongest and fairest are often cut down and hurried away 
 in a few hours, while the old and feeble linger on for many 
 years. The only true wisdom is to be always prepared to 
 meet God, to put nothing off which concerns eternity, and 
 to live like men ready to depart at any moment. So living, 
 it matters little whether we die young or old. Joined to 
 the Lord Jesus, we are safe in any event. 
 
 We learn, thirdly, from this passage, what benefits afflic- 
 tion can confer on the soul. We read, that anxiety about 
 a son led the nobleman to Christ, in order to obtain help 
 in time of need. Once brought into Christ's company, he 
 learned a lesson of priceless value. In the end, " he 
 believed, and his whole house." All this, be it remembered, 
 liinged upon the son's sickness. If the nobleman's son 
 had never been ill, his father might have lived and died in 
 his sins. 
 
 Affliction is one of God's medicines. By it He often 
 teaches lessons which would be learned in no other way. 
 
25-1 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 By it He often draws souls away from sin and the worlds 
 which would otherwise have perished everlastingly. Health 
 is a great blessing, but sanctified disease is a greater. 
 Prosperity and worldly comfort, are what all naturally 
 desire ; but losses and crosses are far better for us, if they 
 lead us to Christ. Thousands at the last day, will testify 
 with David, and the nobleman before us, " It is good for 
 me that I have been afflicted." (Psa. cxix. 71.) 
 
 Let us beware of murmuring in the time of trouble. 
 Let us settle it firmly in our minds, that there is a meaning, 
 a needs'be, and a message from God, in every sorrow that 
 falls upon us. There are no lessons so useful as those 
 learned in the school of affliction. There is no commentary 
 that opens up the Bible so much as sickness and sorrow. 
 " No chastening for the present seeraeth to be joyous, but 
 grievous : nevertheless afterward it yieldeth peaceable 
 fruit." (Heb. xii. 11.) The resurrection morning will 
 prove, that many of the losses of God's people were in 
 reality eternal gains. 
 
 We learn, lastly, from this passage, that Christ'' s word 
 is as good as Chrisfs presence. We read, that Jesus did 
 not come do^\'n to Capernaum to see the sick young man, 
 but only spoke the word, "Thy son liveth." Almighty 
 power went with that little sentence. That very hour the 
 patient began to amend. Christ only spoke, and the cure 
 was done. Christ only commanded, and the deadly disease 
 Btood fast. 
 
 The fact before us is singularly full of comfort. It gives 
 enormous value to every promise of mercy, grace, and 
 peace, which ever fell from Christ's lips. He that by faith 
 has laid hold on some word of Christ, has got his feet upon 
 a rock. What Christ has said, He is able to do ; and what 
 He has undertaken. He will never fail to make good. The 
 einner who has really reposed his soul on the word of the 
 Lord Jesus, is safe to all eternity. He could not be safer. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 255 
 
 il' he saw the book of life, and his own name written in it. 
 If Christ has said, "Him that cometh to me, I will in 
 nowise cast out," and our hearts can testify, "I have 
 come," we need not doubt that we are saved. In the 
 things of this world, we say that seeing is believing. But 
 in the things of the Gospel, believing is as good as seeing ' 
 Christ's word is as good as man's deed. He of whom 
 Jesus says in the Gospel, " He liveth," is alive for ever- 
 more, and shall never die. 
 
 And now let us remember that afflictions, like that of the 
 nobleman, are very common. They will probably come to 
 our door one day. Have we known anything of bearing 
 affliction ? Would we know where to turn for help and 
 comfort when our time comes ? Let us fill our minds and 
 memories betimes with Christ's words. They are not the 
 words of man only, but of God. The words that he speaks 
 are spirit and life. (John vi. 63.) 
 
 Notes. John IV. 43 — 54. 
 
 43. — [After two day si] The G-reek words here would be more 
 hteraily rendered, " After the two days," i. e., after the two days 
 mentioned in the preceding verse. 
 
 [Departed thence.'] Quesnel remarks, " It is an instance of self- 
 denial wliich is very uncommon, to leave those who respect and 
 applaud us, that we may go to preach among others from whom 
 we have reason to expect a quite different treatment." 
 
 44. — [.For Jesus himself testified.. Ms oivn country^ This verse has 
 much perplexed commentators. What is meant by the expi-es- 
 sion, ''His own country?" If it means Gahlee, as most sup- 
 pose, how are we to reconcile it with the words which follow, 
 "the Galileans received him?" — And again, what is the connec- 
 tion between the verse before us and the one which precedes it ? 
 Why should our Lord go into Galilee, when it was a place where 
 He had no honour? And finally, how are we to reconcile the 
 statement that our Lord had n) "honour" in Galilee with the 
 undeniable fact that nearly all His disciples and adherents were 
 Galileans ? All these points have given rise to much speculation 
 and conjecture. 
 
 (o.) Some, as Origen and Maldonatus, get over the difficult/ 
 
256 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 in the following manner. They say that the words, " His own 
 country," mus^t mean Jadasa, and Bethlehem, where Christ was 
 born. The sense will then be, '' alter two days Jesus departed 
 from Samaria, and went into Galilee, and not into Judiea, ba 
 cause in Judoea He received no honour, and was not believed.* 
 This solution seems to me unnatural and unsatisfactory. Our 
 Lord's going to Galilee was a premeditated journey, and not a 
 sudden plan decided on during His stay at Samaria. Beside this, 
 there is no proof whatever that our Lord was not received and 
 believed in Judaea. On the contrary. He "made and baptized" 
 so many disciples in Judgea, that it attracted the notice of 
 the Pharisees, and made it necessary for Him to " depart into 
 Guhlee." 
 
 (b.) Augustine holds that " His own country" means Galilee, 
 and seems to attach the following sense to the verse, " And yet 
 Jesus testified that a prophet hath no honour in his own country, 
 for when he came into Galilee no one believed on Him, except 
 the nobleman and his house," This appears to me a far-fetched 
 and unnatural interpretation. Tittman and Blomfield take 
 much the same view, and render it, " Although Jesus had testi- 
 fied, ' &c. 
 
 (c.) Chrysostom and Euthymius think that " His own coun- 
 try" means Capernaum. This interpretation also seems to me 
 improbable. We find Capernaum elsewhere called our Lord's 
 " own city," but nowhere else " His own country." (See Matt, 
 ix. 1.) 
 
 (d.) Theophylact suggests that the verse before us is inserted 
 in order to explain " why our Lord did not always abide and 
 continue in Galilee, but only came there at intervals. The reason 
 was that He received no honour there." This also seems to me 
 an unsatisfactory interpretation. 
 
 (e.) Alford aays, " The only true and simple view is, that thia 
 verse refers to the next following, and indeed to the whole nar- 
 rative which it introduces. It stands as a preliminary explana- 
 tion of ' Except ye see signs and wonders ye will not believe,' 
 and indicates the contrast between the Samaritans, who believed 
 on Him for His own word, and His own countrymen, who 
 only received Him because they had seen the miracles which 
 He did at Jerusalem." This view of the text seems to me as 
 fai-fetchevi and unsatisfactory as any of those I have mentioned 
 Moreover I doubt much whether the Greek word rendered 
 ''for," is ever used in the sense Alford puts on it, in the New 
 Testament. 
 
 (/.) Tlie following explanation appears to me by far the most 
 probable one. The words, " His own country," mean neither 
 Galilee nor Judaea, but "Nazareth." The sense is, "Jesus de- 
 
JOHN, ciJ.vp. IV. 257 
 
 parted f;om Samaria into Galilee, but not to His own country 
 Nazareth, bccaute He lestilied, both now and on other occasions, 
 that a prophet has no honour in his own country." — In contir- 
 mation of the view I have maintained, it deserves notice, that 
 in tlie six only places in which the Greek word here rendered 
 "country" is found in the Gospels, beside the one before us, it 
 always meaDS the town of Nazareth, and not the district in which 
 Nazaieth is situated. (Matt. xiii. 54, 57 ; Mark vi. 1, 4 ; Luke iv. 
 23, 24.) The view I have supported is that of Cyiil, CalTin, 
 Calovius, Lampe, Poole, De Dieu, Pearce, Doddridge, Dyke, and 
 Olshausen. 
 
 Our Lord's use of a proverb in this verse is again worthy of 
 notice. It is another proof of the value of proverbial sayings. 
 
 The lesson of the proverb is a very instructive one. It is one 
 of the most melancholy proofs of man's fallen and corrupt state, 
 that he never values what he is familiar with, and that familiarity 
 breeds contempt. Ministers of the Gospel discover this by pain- 
 ful experience, when they have resided many years in the same 
 parish, and ministered long in the same congregation. Those 
 who have the most abundant supply of Gospel privileges are 
 often the people who value them least. " The nearer the church 
 the further from God," is often found to be hterally true. Those 
 who hve furthest off, and are obliged to deny themselves most 
 in order to hear the Gospel, are often the very persons who take 
 most pains to hear it. 
 
 One grain of comfort, however, may be extracted from this 
 painful verse. A minister must not despair, and accuse himself 
 of unfaithfulness, because the Gospel he preaches is not honoured 
 in his own congregation, and many remain hardened and unbe- 
 lieving, after he has preached to them many years. Let him 
 remember thnt he is sharing his Master's lot. He is drinkino- the 
 very cup of which Christ drank. Christ had no honour in Naza- 
 reth, and faithful ministers have often less honour among their 
 own people than they have elsewhere. 
 
 Pellican thinks that our Lord " testified " the truth contained 
 in this verse in reply to some one who asked Him why He did 
 not go to Nazareth. I prefer the opinion that it simply means 
 our Lord " always did testify, and made a practice of testifying." 
 
 i5. — [Galilceans received him.'] The word "received" probably 
 means no more than that they "received Him with respect and 
 reverence," as One who was no common person. There is no 
 warrant for supposing that they all received Him with true faith, 
 and experimentally believed on Him as the Saviour of their 
 souls. 
 
 [Having seen....things....Jerusalem....fea&:^ This expression con- 
 
258 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 firms tlie vitw already maintained (Jolm ii. 23), that our Lord 
 did many otlier miracles at Jerusalem at the first passover, when 
 He was there, beside casting the buyers and sellers out of the 
 temple, It is probable that the miracles recorded in the four 
 Gospels are only a selection out of the number that Christ 
 worked. 
 
 Here, as elsewhere, we see the special use of miracles. Thev 
 served to arrest men's attention, and gave the impression that 
 He who wrought them deserved a hearing. The Galileans were 
 ready to receive Christ respectfully, because they had seen His 
 miracles. 
 
 {They also went.... feast.] This sentence is a useful proof of the 
 universality of the Jewish custom of attending the great feasts at 
 Jerusalem, and especially the feast of the Passover. Even those 
 who lived furthest off from Jerusalem, in Galilee, made a point 
 of going to the Passover It serves to show the publicity of our 
 Lord's ministry, both in life and death. When He was crucified 
 at the Passover, the event happened in the presence of myi iads 
 of witnesses from every part of the world. The overruling pro- 
 vidence of God ordered things so that the facts of Christ's life 
 and death could never be denied. " This thing was not done in 
 a corner." (Acts xxv. 26.) 
 
 4-G. — [Jestis came again.... Can a.] The circumstance of our Lord 
 going twice to Cana may be accounted for by remembering the 
 fact that one of His disciples, " Nathanael," belonged to Cana, 
 and that His mother, Mary, in all probability had relatives there. 
 (See note on John iil 1.) 
 
 [A certain nobleman.] The Greek word rendered " nobleman " 
 is only found here in this sense, as a substantive, in the New 
 Testament. The marginal reading, " courtier or ruler," hardly 
 makes it more clear. Some have conjectured that the nobleman 
 must have been some one attached to Herod's court, and is 
 therefore called " a royal person," which is the literal meaning of 
 the word. Some, as Luther, Cliemnitins, Lightfoot, and Pearce, 
 have also conjectured that " Chuza, Herod's steward," whose 
 wife Joanna became one of our Lord's disciples, and "ministered 
 unto Him," (Luke viii. 3,) must have been this nobleman. This 
 is no doubt possible, and would be an interesting fact if it could 
 be proved. But there is no authority for it, except conjecture. 
 Lightfoot adds a conjecture, that if not Chuza it might have been 
 Manaen. (Acts xiii. 1.) 
 
 The rarity of a nobleman and a person connected with a royal 
 court seeking Christ under any circumstances, is observed by 
 Glassins and others. It shows us that Christ will hive trophies 
 of the power of His grace out of every rank, clas.s, and condition. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 259 
 
 In the first chapter of St. John's Grospel we see fishermen con- 
 verted ; in the third, a self-righteous Pharisee; in the beginning 
 of the fourth, a fallen Samaritan woman ; and in the end, a noble- 
 man out of a king's court. 
 
 Pearce thinks that the nobleman was one of the class called 
 Herodians. (Matt. xxii. 16.) 
 
 [Son was sick at Capernaum^ "We should always nofice thii 
 number and greatness of miracles which our Lord worked at 
 Capernaum, and the dignity of the persons at whose instance 
 they were worked. Here He healed the Centurion's servant. 
 (Matt. viii. 5.) Here, in all probability, He restored to life the 
 daughter of Jairus, the ruler of the synagogue. (Mark v. 21.) 
 And here, in the present instance, He healed the nobleman's 
 son. Three distinct and leading classes had, each of them, a 
 mighty miracle wrought among them. Tiie Centurion wa^ a 
 Gentile soldier. The ruler of the synai;ogue was a Jew of high 
 ecclesiastical position. The nobleman was connected with the 
 highest civil authorities. The consequence no doubt was that 
 the name and power of Christ be<'ame known to every leading 
 family in Capernaum. No wonder that our Lord say^, '• Thou 
 Capernaum that art exalted unto heaven." (Matt. xi. 23.) No 
 place was so privileged as this city. 
 
 The idea entertained by some that this " nobleman " was the 
 same as the Centurion in Matt. viii. 5, and that the miracle here 
 recorded is only the same miracle differently reported, seems to 
 me entirely destitute of foundation. The details of the two mir- 
 acles are entirely different. The miracle before us is nowhere 
 else reported in the Gospels. 
 
 47. — [Heard that Jesus was come, &c.'\ This verse shows how 
 widely spread was the fame of the miracle wrought at Can a 
 upon the occas'on of our Lord's former visit, and how great was 
 the report of our Lord's miracles at Jerusalem, brought back by 
 the Galileans who went to the feast. In no other way can we 
 account for the nobleman going to our Lord and beseeching Him 
 to come and heal his son. Our Lord must have got the reputa- 
 tion of being One who was both able and willing to work such 
 cures. 
 
 Museulus remarks on this verse, how much more love descends 
 than ascends. In all the Gospels we never read of any sons or 
 * daughters coming to Christ on behalf of their parents. 
 
 Dyke observes, " Some crosses drive men to Christ, especially 
 in our children. This was the cross that subdued Egypt: and to 
 great men, such as this ruler, who have much to leave their chil- 
 dren, this cross is the greatest." 
 
 48. — [ Then said Jesus^ Except ye see, d;c.} Our Lord in this verse 
 
260 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 appears to refer to the common desire expressed by the Jews to 
 see miracles and signs, as a proof of His Messiahship. " Cannot 
 you believe unless you actually see with your own eyes a miracle 
 worked ? Is your faith so small, that except you see something 
 you cannot believe ?" — No doubt our Lord knew the heart of the 
 man before Him. He wished to test his faith, and to draw out 
 from him more earnest desires after the mercy that he wanted. 
 The resemblance between our Lord's first answer to the noble- 
 man and His first answer to the woman of Canaan, who came 
 to Him about her daughter, deserve comparison. (Matt. xv. 24.) 
 
 Chrysostom remarks, " Christ's meaning is, Ye have not yet 
 the right faith, but still feel towards me as only a prophet. He 
 r6buketh the state of mind wiih which the nobleman had come 
 to Him, because that before a miracle he believed not strongly. 
 Thus too He drew him on the more to belief — That the noble- 
 man came and entreated was nothing wonderful, for parents in 
 their great affection are wont to resort to, and talk with physi- 
 cians. But that he came without any strong purpose appears from 
 this, that he only came to Christ when Christ came into Galilee, 
 whereas, if he had firmly believed, he would not have hesitated, 
 when his child was at the point of death, to go into Judaea." 
 
 Glassius thinks that our Lord, in these words, intends to con- 
 trast the faith of the Samaritans with the unbelief of the Gali- 
 leans. The Samaritans believed without having seen any signs 
 or wonders at all. 
 
 Chemnitius thinks that our Lord, in this verse, spoke with spe- 
 cial reference to the state of mind in which He found the inhabi- 
 tants of Cana upon His second visit. He thinks that He found 
 them aroused to a state of expectation and curio.^ity, by H s 
 miracle of changing water into wine, but still destitute of any 
 real saving faith. 
 
 Poole compares the nobleman to Naaman, who had faith 
 enough to come to Elisha's door to be healed of his leprosy, but 
 was stumbled because Elisha did not put his hand on the diseased 
 place, but only sent him a message. (2 Kings v. 11.) 
 
 id. — [The nobleman saith, t&c] This verse shows the earnestness 
 of the nobleman's desire for relief, quickened and sharpened by 
 the apparent rebuff contained in oin- Lord's reply to his fiist 
 application. Yet it was a saying exhibiting much ignorance. It 
 is dear that he did not discover what our Lord hinted at, that 
 possibly he might be helped without His coming down to S3e hia 
 sick son. He neither denies the iruth of our Lord's words, nor 
 enters into argument. He only knew that he felt in grievous 
 distress, and begged our Lord to "come down ere his child died." 
 That our Lord could heal him he did not doub\ Bat that He 
 
JOHN, CHAP. IV. 261 
 
 conld heal him at a distance, without even seeing him, was some- 
 thing that he could not yet understand. 
 
 Chrysostom says, " Observe how thes3 very words show the 
 weakness of (he man. When he ought, after Christ had rebuked 
 his state of mind, to have imagined something great concerning 
 Him, even if he did not before, listen how he drags along the 
 ground! Pie speaks as though Christ could not raise his son 
 after death, and as though He knew not in what state the child 
 was." 
 
 Brenti'is remarks that the nobleman did not bring to Christ 
 faith, but merely a spark of faith. 
 
 50. — {Jesus saith vnto Am, d'c] Three things are very deserving of 
 notice in this verse, (a.) We should observe our Lord's mar- 
 vellous Idndness and compassion. He takes no notice of the 
 nobleman's^vveak faith and slowness of understanding. He 
 freely grants his request, and gives his son life and health with- 
 out delay. (&.) We should observe our Lord's ajmighty power. 
 He simply speaks the words, " Thy son liveth," and at once a 
 sick person, at several miles' distance, is cured and made well. 
 He spake and it was done, (c.) We should observe, not least, 
 the unhesitating confidence which the nobleman reposed in our 
 Lord's power. He asked no more questions after he heard the 
 words, '• Thy son Uveth." At once he believed that all would be 
 well, and went his way. 
 
 Cyri! observes on this verse, that onr Lord here healed two 
 persons at one time by the same words. " He brought the 
 nobleman's mind to faith, and delivered the body of the young 
 man from disease." 
 
 Chrysostom remarks, '■ What can be the reason why in the 
 case of the Centurion Christ undertook voluntarily to come and 
 heal, while here, though invited, he came not ? Because in the 
 case of the Centurion faith had been perfected, and therefore He 
 undertook to go, that we might learn the right-mindedness of 
 the man; but here the nobleman was imperfect. When there- 
 fore he continually urged Him, saying. Come down, and knew 
 not clearly that even when absent He could heal. He showeth 
 that even this was possible unto Him, in order that this man 
 might gain, from His not going, that knowledge which the Cen- 
 turion had of himself." 
 
 Bishop Ha 1 observes, " The ruler's request wa=:, Come and 
 heal. Christ's answer was, ' Go thy way: thy son hveth.' Our 
 merciful Saviour meet^ those in the end whom He crosses in the 
 way. How sweetly doth He correct our prayers ; and while He 
 doth not give us wlia!: we asked, gives us better than we asked." 
 
 51. — [As he teas now going down.]. The relative posit'ons of Caua 
 
262 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 and Capernaum are not precisely known at the present day. 
 The exact site of Capernaum is matter of dispute among travel- 
 lers and geographers. All we can glean from the expression 
 before us is, that Cana was probably in the hill country, and 
 Capernaum on the lake of Galilee. Hence a person leaving Cana 
 for Capernaum would " go down." 
 
 \_Thy son liveih.] The meaning of this expression must evi- 
 dently be, '' Thy son is so much better, that he is comparatively 
 alive from the dead. He was as one dead. He is now alive." 
 
 52. — [Then inquired he the hour.] This man's mind seems at once 
 to have laid hold on the nature of the miracle, and to have 
 acknowledged the power of Christ's word. 
 
 [He began to amend] The G-reek expression so rendered is a 
 very peculiar one, and only found in this place. It is hterally, 
 " Had himself better, in more elegant order." — Let it be noted, 
 that here, as elsewhere, we find an expression which is only used 
 once in the New Testament. This shows that it is no valid 
 argument against the inspiration of any text or passage, that it 
 contains Creek expressions nowhere else used. 
 
 [Yesterday at the seventh hour.] This expression has been 
 differently interpreted — according to the view which commenta- 
 tors take of St. John's mode of reckoning time. Those who 
 think that he numbered hours in the same way that we do, main- 
 tain that it means, '' at seven o'clock in the evening." Those, 
 on the contrary, who maintain that St. John observed the Jew- 
 ish mode of computation, say that it means " at one o'clock in 
 the afternoon." 
 
 I have already given it as my decided opinion, that John 
 obsei'ves the Jewish mode of reckoning time ; and I therefore 
 hold with those who think, that " the seventh hour" means one 
 o'clock. The arguments of those who say that, if ii had been 
 one o'clock, the nobleman would never have taken till the next 
 day to reach home, appear to my mind quite inconclusive. For 
 one thing, we know nothing accurately of the distance from 
 Cana to Capernaum. — For another thing, we fjrget the slow rate 
 at which people travel in Eastern countries, on bad roads, in a 
 hilly country. — For another thing, it is entirely an assumption 
 to suppose that the nobleman had nothing else to do at Cana, 
 when he came to Jesus about his son. For anything we know, 
 he had, as a nobleman, business of various kinds, which male it 
 impossible for him to reach home in the afternoon nfter Jesns 
 had said, '^Thy son liveth." — Last, but not least, it seems hardly 
 probable that the nobleman would have asked our Lord to come 
 down to Capernaum at so late an hour as seven o'clock in the 
 evening ; or would have set off on his own return ai that hour, 
 and met his servants in the night. 
 
JOHX, CHAP. IV. 263 
 
 [The fever left him.] Trench remarks, that the words seem to 
 indicate, that there was no^ merely an abatement of the lexer, 
 but that it suddenly fur.sook him. Compaie Luke iv, 9. 
 
 53. — [Himself believed.] Beda remarks, on the matter of the noble- 
 man's believing, that "there are three degrees of faith, — the 
 beginning, the increase, and the perfect- on. There was a begin- 
 ning in this man, when he first came to Christ; an inurease, \\ hen 
 our Lord told him that his son lived; and a perfection, whei. he 
 found him to have recovered at that very time." 
 
 [His whole house.] This expression probably mean?, " his 
 whole family," — including children and servants. We have no 
 right whatever to exclude children from the sense of the words. 
 Remembering this, we shall better understand what is meant, 
 when it is written, St. Paul baptized " the household of Stepha- 
 nas : " or when it is related, that the house of Lydia was baptized. 
 (1 Cor. i. 16 ; Acts xvi. 15.) 
 
 There seems no reason for doubting that the nobleman, from 
 this time forth, became a thorough, true-hearted, beUever in 
 Christ. If, as some suppose, he is the same as Chuza, Herod's 
 steward, we may perhaps date the conversion of Joanna his wite, 
 to the period of the verse now before us. 
 
 Bishop Hall remarks on this verse, " G-reat men cannot want 
 clients. Their example sways some : their authority more. 
 They cannot go to either of the other worlds alone. In vain do 
 they pretend power over others, who labour not to draw their 
 famihes to Grod." 
 
 54. — [The second miracle that Jesus did.] The plain meaning of these 
 words is, that our Lord had worked no other miracle in Galilee 
 before this one, excepting that of turning the w-ater into wine at 
 Cana. It appears likely that many of our Lord's earhest miracles 
 were wrought in Judaea and Jerusalem; although we have no re- 
 cord of them, except in the second chapter of St. John's GospeL 
 (John ii. 23.) This fact is note-worthy, because it throws Hght 
 on the wickedness of the Jews at Jerusalem, where at last Christ 
 was condemned and crucified. 
 
 Chrysostom remarks, " The word ' second' is not added with- 
 out cause, but to exalt yet more the praises of the Samaritans, 
 by showing that even when a second miracle had been wrought, 
 they who beheld it had not yet reached so high as those who 
 had not. seen one." 
 
 Origen says, " Mystically the two journeys of Christ into 
 G-alilee signify His two advents. At the first He makes us His 
 guests at supper, and gives us wine to drink. At the second He 
 raises up the nobleman's son at the point of death, — ke., the 
 
26^ EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Jewish people, who after the fulness of the Gentiles attain salva- 
 tion. The sick son is the Jewish people fallen from the true 
 religion. — This is patristic interpretation ! Allegoiical expositions 
 like this destroy the whole value of God's word. At this rate 
 the Bible niay be made to mean anything. 
 
 Chemnitius thinks, that with this chapter ends the first year 
 of our Loi d's public ministry, and gives a useful summary of the 
 principal events comprehended within it. These are the Lord's 
 baptism, — the calling" of the first disciples, — the miracle at Cana, 
 — the miracle of casting out of the temple the buyers and sell- 
 «?rs, — the conversation with Nicodemus, — the tarrying in Judaea 
 and baptizing, — the testimony of John the Baptist, — the journey 
 through Samaria, — the arrival in Gralilee, — and the healing of the 
 nobleman's son. Epiphanius, he observes, calls it the " acceptable 
 year" of our Lord's ministry, because it was the most quiet and 
 peaceful. 
 
 Bengel, in closing this chapter, observes, that St. John seems 
 to arrange our Lord's miracles in threes. He relates three in 
 Galilee, — the first at the marriage in Cana, the second on the 
 nobleman's son, the third in feeding five thousand men (John 
 vi.) ; — three in Judaea, — the first at Bethesda at pentecost (ch. v.), 
 the second after the feast of tabernacles, on the bhnd man (ch. 
 ix.), the third on Lazarus before the passover (ch. xi.). — So also 
 after the ascension, he describes three appearances of our Lord 
 to His disciples. (John xxi. 14.) 
 
 Dyke observes how God keeps account of all the gracious 
 means He affords men for their good. " The second miracle ia 
 specified to aggravate the infidelity of the Jews ; that though 
 Christ had now done another and a second miracle, yet only the 
 ruler and his household beheved. Two miracles wrought, and 
 one household converted 1 God takes account not only how 
 many men are won by a sermon, (Acts ii. 41,) but of how many 
 sermons are lost by men." 
 
 JOHN Y. 1—15. 
 
 1 After this there was a feast of 
 the Jews; and Jesus went up to 
 Jerusalem. 
 
 2 Now there is at Jerusalem by 
 the sheep market a pool, which 
 is called in the Hebrew tongue 
 BeUtic^sda, having five porch ^js. 
 
 3 In these lay a great multitude 
 of impotent folk, of blind, halt, 
 withered, waiting for the moving of 
 the water. 
 
 4 For an angel went down at a 
 certain season into the pool, and 
 troubled the water : whosoever 
 
265 
 
 then arst after the troubling of the 
 water stepped in was made whole 
 of whatsoever disease he had. 
 
 5 And a certain man was there, 
 which had an infirmity thirty and 
 eight years. 
 
 6 When Jesus saw Mm lie, and 
 knew that he had been now a long 
 timo in that case, he saith unto 
 him, "Wilt thou be made whole ? 
 
 7 The impotent man answered 
 him, Sir, I have no man, when the 
 water is troubled, to put me into 
 the pool: but while I am coming, 
 another steppeth down before me. 
 
 8 Jesus saith unto him, Rise, 
 take up thy bed, and walk. 
 
 9 And immediately the man was 
 made whole, and took up his bed, 
 and walked : and on the same day 
 was the sabbath. 
 
 10 The Jews therefore said unto 
 
 1 him that was cured. It is the sab- 
 ' bath day : it is not lawful for thee 
 to carry thy bed. 
 
 11 He answered them, He that 
 made me whole, the same said unto 
 me. Take up thy bed, and walk. 
 
 12 Then asked they him. What 
 man is that which said unto thee 
 Take up thy bed, and walk ? 
 
 13 And he that was healed wist 
 not who it was : for Jesus had con- 
 veyed himself away, a multitude 
 being in that place. 
 
 14 Afterward Jesus findeth him 
 in the temple, and said unto him, 
 Behold, thou art made whole : sin 
 no more, lest a worse thing como 
 unto thee. 
 
 15 The man departed, and told 
 the Jews that it was Jesus, which 
 had made him whole. 
 
 We have in this passage one of the few miracles of Christ, 
 which St. John records. Like every other miracle in this 
 Gospel, it is described with great minuteness and particu- 
 larity. And like more than one other miracle it leads on 
 to a discourse full of singularly deep instruction. 
 
 We are taught, for one thing, in this passage, what 
 misery sin has brought into the world. We read of a man 
 who had been ill for no less than thirty-eight years ! For 
 eight-and-thirty weary summers and winters he had endured 
 pain and infirmity. He had seen others healed at the waters 
 of Bethesda, and going to their homes rejoicing. But for 
 him there had been no healing. Friendless, helpless, and 
 hopeless, he lay near the wonder-working waters, but 
 derived no benefit from them. Year after year passed 
 away, and left him still un cured. No relief or change for 
 the better seemed likely to come, except from the grave. 
 
 When we read of cases of sickness like this, we should 
 remember how deeply we ought to hate sin ! Sin was the 
 original root, and cause, and fountain of every disease in 
 
 12 
 
266 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 the world God did not create man to be full of aches, and 
 pains, and infirmities. These things are the fruits of the 
 Fall. There would have been no sickness, if there had 
 heen no sin. 
 
 No greater proof can be shown of man's inbred un- 
 belief, than his carelessness about sin. " Fools," says the 
 wise man, "make a mock at sin." (Pro. xiv. 9.) Thou- 
 sands delight in things which are positively evil, and run 
 greedily after that which is downright poison. They love 
 that which God abhors, and dislike that which God loves. 
 They are like the madman, who loves his enemies and 
 hates his friends. Their eyes are blinded. Surely if men 
 would only look at hospitals and infirmaries, and think 
 what havoc sin has made on this earth, they would never 
 take pleasure in sin as they do. 
 
 Well may we be told to pray for the coming of God's 
 kingdom ! Well may we be told to long for the second 
 advent of Jesus Christ! Then, and not till then, shall 
 there be no more curse on the earth, no more sufiTering, 
 no more sorrow, and no more sin. Tears shall be wiped 
 from the faces of all who love Christ's appearing, when 
 their Master returns. Weakness and infirmity shall all 
 pass away. Hope deferred shall no longer make hearts 
 sick. There will be no chronic invalids and incurable 
 cases, when Christ has renewed this earth. 
 
 We are taught, for another thing, in this passage, hoic 
 great is the mercy and compassion of Christ. He " saw" 
 the poor sufferer lying in the crowd. Neglected, over- 
 looked, and forgotten in the great multitude, he was 
 observed by the all-seeing eye of Christ. *' He knew " full 
 well, by His Divine knowledge, how long he had been 
 *' in that case," and pitied him. He spoke to him unex- 
 pectedly, with words of gracious sympathy. He liealed 
 him by miraculous power, at once and without tedious 
 delay, and sent him home rejoicing. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. V. 267 
 
 This is just one among many examples of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ's kindness and compassion. He is full of 
 undeserved, unexpected, abounding love towards man. 
 "He delighteth in mercy." (Micah vii. 18.) He is far 
 more ready to save than man is to be saved, far more 
 willing to do good than man is to receive it. 
 
 No one ever need be afraid of beginning the life of a 
 true Christian, if he feels disposed to begin. Let him 
 not hang back and delay, under the vain idea that Christ 
 is not willing to receive him. Let him come boldly, and 
 trust confidently. He that healed the cripple at Bethesda 
 is still the same. 
 
 We are taught, lastly, the lesson that recovery from 
 sickness ought to impress upon us. That lesson is contained 
 in the solemn words which our Saviour addressed to the 
 man He had cured : " Sin no more, lest a worse thing come 
 unto thee." 
 
 Every sickness and sorrow is the voice of God speaking 
 to us. Each has its peculiar message. Happy are they 
 who have an eye to see God's hand, and an ear to hear 
 His voice, in all that happens to them. Nothing in this 
 world happens by chance. 
 
 And as it is with sickness, so it is with recovery. 
 Renewed health should send us back to our post in the 
 world with a deeper hatred of sin, a more thorough 
 watchfulness over our own ways, and a more constant 
 purpose of mind to live to God. Far too often the excite- 
 ment and novelty of returning health tempt us to forget 
 the vows and intentions of the sick-room. There are 
 spiritual dangers attending a recovery ! Well would it be 
 for us all after illness to grave these words on our hearts, 
 " Let me sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto me." 
 
 Let us leave the passage with grateful hearts, and bless 
 God that we have such a Gospel and such a Saviour as 
 the Bible reveals. — Are we ever sick and ill? Let us 
 
268 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 remember that Christ sees, and knows, and can heal J 
 He thinks fit. — Are we ever in trouble? Let us heai 
 in our trouble the voice of God, and learn to hate sin 
 more. 
 
 Notes. John Y. 1—15. 
 
 1. — [AJier this.] Literally translated, this would be, "aftei these 
 things." Some think that when St. John is telling some event 
 which follows immediately after the last thing narrated, be uses 
 the expression, " after this thing " (as John ii. 12), but that 
 wiien there has been an interval of time he uses the expression, 
 " after these things." — If this be correct, we must suppose that 
 some space of time elapsed between the healing of the noble- 
 man's son and the visit to Jerusalem, recorded in this chapter. 
 
 [A feast of the Jews.] Tliere is nothing to show what feast 
 this was. Most commentators think it was the passover. Many 
 however think it was the feast of pentecost. Some few say it 
 was the feast of tabernacles, some the feast of purim, and some 
 the feast of the dedication. Each view has its advocates, and 
 the question will probably never be settled. An argument in 
 favour of the passover is the f ict that none of the five Jewish 
 feasts were so regularly attended by devout Jews as the pass- 
 over. An argument against it is the fact that on three other 
 occasions, when the feast of the passover is mentioned in St. 
 John, he carefully specifies it by name; and one would naturally 
 expect that it would be named here. 
 
 The matter is really of no peculiar importance. In one point 
 of view only it is interesting. — If the "feast" was the passover, 
 it proves that there were four passovers during the period of our 
 Lords ministry on earth. St. John mentions three by name, — 
 beside this '* feast." (John ii. 23; vi. 4; xii. I.) This would 
 m.ike it certain that our Lord's ministry lasted three full years, 
 or at any rate must have begun with a passover, and ended Avith 
 a passover. — If the "feast" was not the passover, we have no 
 pioof that His ministry lasted longer than between two and 
 three years. (See notes on John ii. 13.) 
 
 The expression, "a fea-t of the Jews," is one of many inci- 
 dental evidences that St. John wrote specially for the use of 
 Gentile converts, and that he thought it needful for their benefit 
 to explain Jewish ordinances. 
 
 [Jesus went up.] The f equency of our Lord's attendance at 
 Jewish feasts, and the respect He showed for ^losaic ordinances, 
 should always be noticed. They were appointed by God. and 
 8o long as they lasted, He gave them honour. It is an important 
 
269 
 
 proof t3 us, that the unworthiness of minist'^rs is no reason for 
 neglectin/^ God's ordinances, such as bapti-m and the Lord'a 
 Supper The benefit we receive from ordinances and sacraments 
 does not depend on the character of those who administer them, 
 but on ihe state of our own souls. The pries's and officers of 
 the Tei iple. in our Lord's time, were probably very unworthy 
 per.-ons. But that did not p: event our Lord hunou iog the 
 Temple ordinances and feasts. — It does not however foilow !'rom 
 this thf t we should be justified in habitually going to hear false 
 doctrine preached. Our Lord never did this.- 
 
 Let it be noted, that none of the four Gospel-writers speak 
 80 much of our Lord's doings in Judaea and Jerusalem as St. 
 John does. 
 
 2. — [There is at Jerusalem^ These words, it is thought, show 
 that Jerusalem was yet standing, and not taken and destroyed 
 by the Romans, when John wrote his Gospel. Otherwise, it is 
 argued, he would have said, " There was at Jerusalem." 
 
 [By the sheep-marJcef a pool] Nothing certain is known about 
 this pool, or its precise situation. Modern travellers have p'O- 
 fessed to point out where it was. But there is lirtle groun 1 for 
 determining the matter, except conjecture and tradition. After 
 all the changes of eighteen centuries, points like these are almost 
 incapable of a satisfactory solution. There is no place in the 
 world, perhaps, where it is so difficult to settle anything decid- 
 edly about ancient buildings and sites as ' Jerusalem. S jme 
 propose to render the expression " sheep-market '' the " sheep- 
 gate," because of Nehemiah iii. 1. But we really have no cer- 
 tain ground for either expression. 
 
 [Cal.ed in the Huhrew tongue Bethesda.] The word "Bethesda," 
 according to Cruden, means " house of effusion," or " house of 
 pity or mercy." It is not mentioned anywhere else in the Bible. 
 The mention of the " Hebrew tongue," shows again that John 
 did not write for Jews so much as Gentiles. 
 
 [Raving Jive porches.] These porches were probably covered 
 arcades, piazzas, colonnades, or verandas, open at one side to 
 the air, but protected against the sun or rain over-head. la a 
 hot country hke Palestine, such buildings are very necessary, 
 
 3. — [In the^e lay a great multitude.] The context seems to show 
 tliat the multituile were assembled at this particular feast in this 
 place, expecting a certain miracle to be wrought, which only 
 took place at tliis particular time of the year. 
 
 [ Impotent folk ] This expression evidently does not mean 
 paralytic people, but merely people who were sick and ilL Tha 
 mention of " blind, halt, withered," shows this. 
 
270 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 [Moving of the luater.] This " moving " must have been some- 
 thing that could be seen and observed by persons standing by 
 or looking on. There was no virtue or healing element in the 
 water, until the movement took place. 
 
 4. — [For an angel went down, &c.] The thing we are here told is 
 very curious. There is nothing like it in the Bible, Josephu^, 
 the Jewish writer, does not mention it. The simplest view is 
 that it was a standing miracle wrought once every year, as Cyril 
 says, or at any rate at sonie special season only, by God's ap- 
 pointment, to keep the Jews in mind of the wonderful works 
 that had been done for them in time past, and to remind them 
 that the God of miracles was unchanged. — But when this singu- 
 lar miracle first began, — on what occasion it began, — why we 
 never hear anything else about it, — in what way the angel 
 came down, — are questions which cannot be answered. — That 
 angels did interpose in a miraculous manner in the days of the 
 New Testament, is perfectly clear fi-om many instances in the 
 Gospels and Acts. That the Jews themselves had strong faith 
 in the interposition of angels on certain occasions, is clear from 
 the account of the vision of Zacharias, when we are simply told 
 that the people "perceived that he had seen a vision in the 
 temple."' (Luke i. 22.) That from the days of Malachi, when 
 inspiration ceased, God may have seen it good to keep up in the 
 Jewish mind a faith in unseen things, by the grant of a standing 
 miracle, is a very probable opinion. The wisest course is to 
 take the passage as we find it, and to befieve though we cannot 
 explain. 
 
 All other attempts to get over the difficulties of the passage 
 are thoroughly unsatisfactory. To condemn the passage as not 
 genuine, is a lazy way of cutting the knot, and not at all clearly 
 warranted by the authority of manuscripts. — To say that St. 
 John only used the popular language of tlie Jews in describing 
 the miracle, and did not really believe it himself, is, to say the 
 least, irreverent and profane. — To suppose, as Hammond and 
 others have done, that the "angel" only means a common 
 human "messenger" sent by the priests, and that the healing 
 efl&cacy of the water arose from the blood of the many sacrifices 
 which drained into the pool of Bethe.^da at the pa'^sover feast; — • 
 or to suppose, as others, that Bethesda was a p.iol where sacri- 
 fices were washed before they were offered, are all entirely gra- 
 tuitous assumptions, and do not get over the main difficulty. 
 There is no proof that the blood of the sacrifices did drain into 
 the pool. There is no proof that the blood would give the water 
 any healing virtue. There is no proof, as Liuht^oot shows, that 
 sacrilices were waahed at all. (See Light foot's Exeroitations on 
 John, on this passage.) Moreover, this hypothesis would not 
 account for only one person being healed every time the waters 
 
JOHN, CHAP. V. 271 
 
 were " tro ibled," or for St. John's mention of tlie " angel trou- 
 bling " the waters. Here, as in many other instances, the sim- 
 plest view, and the one which involves the fewest difficulties, is 
 to take the passage as we find it, and to interpret it as narrating 
 an actual fact, — viz. : a standing miracle which actually was 
 literally wrought at a certain season, and perhaps every year. 
 
 After all there is no more real difficulty iti the account before 
 us, than in the history of our Lord's temptation in the wilder- 
 ness, the various cases of Satanic possession, or the release of 
 Peter from prison by an angel. Once admit the existence of 
 angels, their ministry on earth, and the possibiUty of their inter- 
 position to carry out God's designs, and there is nothing that 
 ought to stumble us in the passage. The true secret of some of 
 the objections to it, is the modern tendency to regard all miracles 
 as useless lumber, which must be thrown overboard, if possible, 
 and cast out of the Sacred Narrative on every occasion. Against 
 this tendency we must watch and be on our guard. 
 
 Rollock remarks, " The Jewish people at this time was in a 
 state of great confusion, and the presence of God was in great 
 measure withdrawn from it. The prophets whom God had been 
 accustomed to raise up for extraordinary purpose^, were no 
 longer given to the Jews. Therefore God, that He might not 
 appear altogether to cast off His people, was willing to heal 
 some miraculously, and in an extraordinary way, in order that 
 He might testify to the world that the nation was not yet en- 
 tirely rejected." Brentius and Calvin say much the same. 
 
 Poole thinks that this miracle only began a little before the 
 birth of Christ, "as a figure of him being about to come, who 
 was to be a fountain opened to the house of David." Lightfoot 
 takes the same view. 
 
 [Troubled the water.] This means, no doubt, " disturbed, agi- 
 tated, stirred up," the water of the pool. There is no reason foi 
 supposing that the angel visibly appeared in doing this. It is 
 enough to suppose that at a certain hour there was a sudden stir 
 and agitation of the waters, immediately after which tliey pos- 
 sessed the miraculous virtue of healing, — just as Ihe waters at 
 Marah became sweet i:amediately after Moses cast the tree into 
 them. (Exod. xv. 25.) 
 
 [ WTiosoever then first. \ This shows that the whole affair was mi- 
 raculous. On no other supposition can we account for only one 
 person, being healed after the troubling of the water. That only 
 " one" was healed, is plain, I think, from the wording of the passage 
 
 [Of whatsoever dismse he had.] These words would be more 
 literally translated, " with whatsoever disease he was held." 
 
 Bengel thinks that the use of the past t(ms3 throughout; this 
 
272 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 verse shows that the miracle had ceased when John wrote. He 
 "used to go down,"— ''used to trouble the waters," &c. Ter- 
 tullian declares expressly that the miracle ceased from the timo 
 that the Jews rejected Christ. 
 
 5. — [^Infirmity thirty and eight years.'] This means the length of 
 time during which the sick man had been ilL How old he was 
 we do not know. 
 
 Baxter remarks, " How great a mercy is it to live eight and 
 thirty years under God's wholesome discipline ! my Grod, I 
 thank Thee for the hke disciphne of eight and fifty years. How safe 
 a life is this compared to one spent in full prosperity and pleasure !" 
 
 Those who see typical and abstruse meanings in all the least 
 details of the narratives of Scriptures, observe that thirty-eight 
 years was the exact time of Israel's wanderings in the wilderness. 
 They see in the sick man, — helpless and hopeless till Christ 
 came, — a type of the Jewish Church. The pool of Bethesda is 
 Old Testament religion. The smaU benefit it conferred, — viz. : 
 only healing one at a time, represents the narrow and limited 
 benefit which Judaism conferred on mankind. The merciful 
 interference of Christ on the sick man's behalf, represents the 
 bringing in of the Gospel for all the world. These are pious 
 thoughts, but it may well be doubted whether there is any 
 warrant for them. 
 
 The notions that the pool of Bethesda was a type of baptism, 
 and the five porches typical of the five books of the law, or the 
 five wounds of Christ, appear to me mere ingenious inventions 
 of man, without any solid foundation. Yet Chrysostom, Augus- 
 tine, Theophylact, Euthymius, Burgon, Wordsworth, ar:d many 
 others, maintain them. Those who wish to see a fuU reply to the 
 theory, that the miracle at the pool of Bethesda is a typical proof 
 of the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, will find it in Gomarus, 
 the Dutch divine. He takes up Bellarmine's argument on th« 
 subject, and anwers him completely. 
 
 6. — [When Jesus saw. ..knew.. Jong time^^ We need not doubt that 
 our Lord knew this man's history by that divine knowledge 
 which, as God, He possesses of all things in heaven and earth. 
 To suppose that He ascertained by inquiry the state of his case 
 before speaking to him, is a weak, meagre, and frigid interpre- 
 tation. As a practical truth, it is a most comfortable doctrine that 
 Jesus knows every sickness and disease, and all its weary history. 
 Nothing is hid from Him. 
 
 [He said unto him.'] This is an example of our Lord being the 
 first to speak and begin conversation, as He did with the woman 
 of Samaria. (John iv, 7.) Unasked, unsolicited, unexpectedly, 
 He mercifully addressed the sick man. No doubt He always 
 
JOHN CHAP, y, 273 
 
 begins in man's heart .before man begins with Him. But He 
 does all things, as a Sovereign, according to His own will; and 
 it is not always that we see Him taking the first step so entirely 
 of Himself, as we do here. 
 
 [Wilt thou be made whole?] The English language here fails 
 to give the fuU force of the Greek. It means, "Hast thou a 
 will? Dost tho.1 wish? Dost thou desire to be made whole?" 
 The question was perhaps meant to awaken desire and expecta- 
 tion in the man, aad to prepare him in some sense for the bless- 
 ing about to be bestowed on him. 
 
 Is not this, to take a spiritual view, the very language that 
 Christ is continually addressing to every man and woman who 
 hears His Gospel ? He sees us in a wretched, miserable, sin-sick 
 condition. The one thing He asks us is, " Hast thou any 
 wish to be saved ? " 
 
 7. — [The impotent man ansiuered^ him, Sir.] The word rendered 
 "Sir" is the same that is more commonly rendered "Lord." It 
 is the same that is rendered " Sir " aJl through the fourth chap- 
 ter, in the history of the Samaritan woman. 
 
 [/ have no man... .put me into the pool.] This is no doubt 
 mentioned as an intentional proof of the heartlessness and un- 
 kindness of human nature. Think of a poor invalid waiting for 
 years by the water, and having not a single friend to help him! 
 The longer we live on earth the more we shall find that it is a 
 selfish world, and that the sick and afflicted have few real friends 
 in time of need. " The poor is hated even of his neighbour." 
 (Prov. xiv. 20.) Christ is the only unfailing friend of the friend- 
 less and helper of the helpless. 
 
 B. — [Rise, taJce up thy bed and walk.] Here, as in other similar cases, 
 it is evident that miraculous healing power went forth with the 
 words of our Lord. Thus, " Stretch forth thy hand " (Mark iii. 
 5) ; " Go show yourselves to the priests " (Luke xvii. 14). Com- 
 mands like these tested the faith and obedience of those to 
 whom they were given. How could they possibly do the things 
 commanded, if impotent, like the man before us ? Where the 
 use of doing them, if stili covered with leprosy, like the ten 
 lepers? But it was precisely in the act of obedience that the 
 blessing came. The whole power is Christ's. But He loves to 
 make us exert ourselves, and show our obedience and faith. 
 
 - Augustine finds in the command, " Take up thy bed," au 
 exhortation to the love of our nei^-hbours, because we are to bear 
 one another's burdens; and in the command, " walk," an exhor- 
 tatio.i to love God ! Such allegorizing appears to me very un- 
 warrantable, and calculated to bring the Bible into contempt^ 
 as a book that can be made to mean anything. 
 12*^ 
 
274 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 9. — [Immediately.... made whole,.. ..ivalked.] Here we see the reality 
 of the miracle wrought. Nothing but Divine power could enable 
 one who had been a cripple for so many years to move his limbs 
 znd carry a burden all at once. But it was as easy to our Lord 
 to give immediate strength as it was to create muscles, nerves, 
 and sinews in the day that Adam was made. 
 
 When we are told that the man " took up his bed," we must 
 remember that this probably was nothing more than a light 
 mattress, carpet, or thick cloth, such as is commonly used in hot 
 countries for sleeping on. 
 10. — [The Jews.] Here, as in many places in St. John's Gospel, 
 the expression, " the Jews," when used of the Jews at Jerusalem, 
 means the leaders of the people, — elders, ruleis, and scribes. 
 It does not mean vaguely the "Jewish crowd" around our Lord, 
 but the representatives of the whole nation, — the heads of Israel 
 at the time. 
 
 [It is not lawful.... carry hed.] In support of this charge of 
 
 unlawfulness, the Jews would allege not merely the general law 
 of the fourth commandment, but the special passages in Nehemiah 
 and Jeremiah, about " bearing no burden " on the Sabbath day. 
 (Neh. xiii. 19 ; Jer. xvii. 21.) But they could not have proved that 
 these passages appHed to the case of the man before them. — For 
 a man to carry merchandise and wares on the Sabbath was one 
 thing. For a sick man, suddenly and miraculously healed, to walk 
 away to his home, carrying his mattress, was quite another. — To 
 forbid the one man to carry his burden was Scriptural and lawful. 
 To forbid the other was cruel, and contrary to the spirit of the law 
 of Moses. — The act of the one man was unnecessary. The act 
 of the other was an act of necessity and mercy. — It might per- 
 haps be urged in defence of the Jews, that they only saw a man 
 carrying off a burden, and knew nothing of his previous illness 
 or his cure. But when we remember the many instances re- 
 corded in the Gospels of their extreme and harsh interpretation of 
 the fourth commandment, it is doubtful whether this plea will stand. 
 
 11. — [He that made me whole the same said, etc.] The answer of the 
 man seems simple. But it contains a deep principle. " He that 
 has done so great a thing to me was surely to be obeyed, when 
 He told me to take up my bed. If He had authority and power 
 to heal, He was not likely to lay upon me an unlawful command. 
 I only obeyed him who cured me." If Christ has really healed 
 our souls, should not this be our feeling toward Him ? — '' Thou 
 hast healed me. What thou commandest I will do." 
 
 12. — [ What man is he which said,...Talce vp thy hed, etc.] Ecolampa- 
 dius, Grotius, and many others, remark what an example this 
 question is of the malevolent and malicious spirit of the Jews. 
 Instead of asking, " who healed thee ?" they asked " who told 
 
JOHN, CHAP. V. 275 
 
 thee to carry thy bed ?" They cared not for knowing what they 
 might admire as a work of mercy, but what they might make 
 ihe ground of an accusation. How many arc hke them ! They 
 are always looking out for something to find fault with. 
 
 13. — [Wist not who it was.] It is most probable that the cripple 
 really knew not who it was that had healed him, and had only 
 seen our Lord that day for the first time. He was ignorant of 
 His name, and only knew Him as a kind person, who came up 
 and said suddenly, " Wilt thou be made whole ?" and, after 
 curing him miraculously, suddenly disappeared in the crowd. 
 
 [Conveyed himself away.] The Greek word so rendered ia 
 peculiar, and only found in this place. Parkhurst thinks that it 
 simply means " departed, or went away." Schleusner says that 
 the root of the idea is, " swimming out, or escaping by swim- 
 ming," and that the meaning here is, "withdrew himself secretly 
 from the crowd that was in the place." If so, it is not improba- 
 ble that, as in Luke iv. 30, at Nazareth, and John x. 39, in the 
 Temple, our Lord put forth a miraculous power in passing or 
 gliding through the crowd without being observed or stopped. 
 l-t. — [Afterward.. ..temple.] It is not clear how long a time elapsed 
 before our Lord found the man whom He had healed in the 
 Temple. If the theory be correct to which I adverted in the 
 note on the first verse, there must have been an interval. The 
 word " afterwards " is literally " after these things." 
 
 Chrysostom thinks that the circumstance of the man being 
 found " in the temple " is an indication of his piety. 
 
 [Behold thou art made whole : sin no more, etc.] These words 
 appear to point at something more than meets the eye. They are 
 a solemn caution. One might fancy that our Lord knew that 
 some sin had been the beginning of the man's illness, and that 
 he meant to remind him of it. It certainly seems very unlikely 
 that our Lord would say broadly and vaguely, " sin no more," 
 unless he spoke with a significant reference to some sin which 
 had been the primary cause of this man's long illness. (See 1 Cor. 
 xi. 30.) There are sins wliich bring their own punishments on 
 men's bodies ; and I am strongly disposed to think that it may 
 have been the case with this man. The expression, " a worse 
 thing," would then come out with more force. It would be " a 
 heavier visitation," — a worse judgment, — even than this thirty- 
 eight years' illness. A sick bed is a sorrowful place, but hell is 
 much worse. 
 
 Besser remarks, — "It is a dreadful thing, when the correction 
 and mercy of Divine love wearies itself with a man in va'n. You 
 that are sick, write over your beds, when you rise up from them 
 in renewed health, — ' Behold thou art made whole ; sin no more, 
 lest a worse thing come unto thee.' " Brentius says much the same, 
 
276 
 
 EXPOSIVORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 If sin was the cause of this man's disease, and he had been ill 
 from the effects of it thirty and eight years, it is plain that it must 
 have been committed before our Lord was born ! It is an instance, 
 in that case, of our Lord's perfect and Divine knowledge of all 
 things, past as well as future. 
 15. — [Departed and told the Jews.'] There is no proof that the man 
 did this with anj evil design. Born a Jew, and taught to rever- 
 ence his rulers and elders, he naturally wished to give them the 
 information they desired, and had no reason to suppose, for any- 
 thing we can see, that it would injure his Benefactor. 
 
 JOHN Y. 16—23. 
 
 16 And therefore did the Jews 
 persecute Jesus, and sought to slay 
 him, because he had done those 
 things on the sabbath day. 
 
 17 But Jesus answered them, My 
 Father worketh hitherto, and I work. 
 
 18 Therefore the Jews sought 
 the more to kill him, because he not 
 only had broken the sabbath, but 
 said also that God was his Father, 
 making lumself equal with God. 
 
 19 Then answered Jesus and said 
 unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto 
 you, the Son can do nothing of him- 
 self, but what he seeth the Father 
 do : for what things soever he doeth, 
 these also doeth the Son hkewise. 
 
 20 For the Father loveth the 
 Son, and sheweth him all things that 
 himself doeth : and he will shew him 
 greater works than these, that ye 
 may marvel. 
 
 21 For as the Father raiseth up 
 the dead, and quickeneth/Aem; even 
 so the Son quickeneth whom he 
 will. 
 
 22 For the Father judgeth no 
 man, but hath committed all judg- 
 ment unto the Son : 
 
 23 That all men should honour 
 the Son, even as they honour the 
 Father. He that honoureth not the 
 Son honoureth not the Father which 
 hath sent him. 
 
 These verses begin one of the most deep and solemn pas- 
 gages in the four Gospels. They show us the Lord Jesus 
 asserting His own Divine nature, His unity with God the 
 Father, and the high dignity of His office. Nowhere does 
 pur Lord dwell so fully on these subjects as in the chapter 
 before us. And nowhere, we must confess, do we find out 
 60 thoroughly the weakness of man's understanding ! There 
 is much, we must all feel, that is far beyond our compre- 
 hension in our Lord's account of Himself. Such knowledge, 
 in short, is too wonderful for us. *' It is high : we cannot 
 attain unto it." (Psalm cxxxix. 6,) How often men say 
 that they want clear explanations of sueh doctrines as the 
 
JOHN, CHAP. V. 277 
 
 Trinity. Yet here we have our Lord handling the subject 
 of His own Person, and, behold ! we cannot follow Him. 
 We seem only to touch His meaning with the tip of our 
 fingers. 
 
 We learn, for one thing, from the verses before us, that 
 there are some works which it is lawful to do on the Sabbath 
 day. 
 
 The Jews, as on many other occasions, found fault be- 
 cause Jesus healed a man who had been ill for thirty-eight 
 years, on the Sabbath. They charged our Lord with a 
 breach of the fourth commandment. 
 
 Our Lord's reply to the Jews is very remarkable. " My 
 Father," he says, " worketh hitherto, and I also work." 
 It is as though He said : — " Though my Father rested on 
 the seventh day from His work of creation, He has never 
 rested for a moment from His providential government of 
 the world, and from His merciful work of supplying the 
 daily wants of all His creatures. Were He to rest from 
 such work, the whole frame of nature would stand still. 
 And I also work works of mercy on the Sabbath day. I 
 do not break the fourth commandment when I heal the 
 sick, any more than my Father breaks it when He causes 
 the sun to rise and the grass to grow on the Sabbath." 
 
 We must distinctly understand, that neither here nor 
 elsewhere does the Lord Jesus overthrow the obligation of 
 the fourth commandment. Neither here nor elsewhere is 
 there a word to justify the vague assertions of some 
 modern teachers, that " Christians ought not to keep a 
 Sabbath," and that it is " a Jewish institution which has 
 passed away." The utmost that our Lord does, is to place 
 the claims of the Sabbath on the right foundation. He 
 clears the day of rest from the false and superstitious 
 teaching of the Jews, about the right way of observing it. 
 He shows us clearly that works of necessity and works of 
 mercy are no breach of the fourth commandment. 
 
278 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 After all, the errors of Christians on this subject, in 
 these latter days, are of a very different kind from those 
 of the Jews. There is little danger of men keeping the 
 Sabbath too strictly. The thing to be feared is the dispo- 
 sition to keep it loosely and partially, or not to keep it at 
 all. The tendency of the age is not to exaggerate the 
 fourth commandment, but to cut it out of the Decalogue, 
 and throw it aside altogether. Against this tendency it 
 becomes us all to be on our guard. The experience of 
 eighteen centuries supplies abundant proofs that vital 
 religion never flourishes when the Sabbath is not well kept. 
 
 We learn, for another thing, from these verses, the 
 dignity and greatness of our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 The Jews, we are told, sought to kill Jesus because He 
 said " that God was his Father, making himself equal with 
 God." Our Lord, in reply, on this special occasion, enters 
 very fully into the question of His own Divine nature. In 
 reading His words, we must all feel that we are reading 
 mysterious things, and treading on very holy ground. But 
 we must feel a deep conviction, however little we may 
 understand, that the things He says could never have been 
 said by one who was only man. The Speaker is nothing 
 less than " God manifest in the flesh. (1 Tim. iii. 16.) 
 
 He asserts His own unity with God the Father. No 
 other reasonable meaning can be put on the expressions, 
 — " The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth 
 the Father do : for what things soever he doeth, these also 
 doeth the Son likewise. — The Father loveth the Son, and 
 showeth him all things that himself doeth." Such lan- 
 guage, however deep and high, appears to mean that in 
 operation, and knowledge, and heart, and will, the Father 
 and the Son are One, — two Persons, but one God. Truths 
 such as these are of course beyond man's power to explain 
 particularly. Enough for us to believe and rest upon them. 
 
 He asserts, in the next place. His own Divine power to 
 
JOHN, CHAP V. 279 
 
 gi» e life. He tells us, "The Son qiiickeneth whom he will." 
 Lir^ is tlie highest and greatest gift that can be bestowed. 
 It is precisely that thing that man, with all his cleverness, 
 can neither give to the work of his hands, nor restore when 
 taken away. But life, we are told, is in the hands of the 
 Lord Jesus, to bestow and give at His discretion. Dead 
 bodies and dead souls are both alike under His dominion. 
 He has the keys of death and hell. In Him is life. He is 
 the life. (Jolin i. 4. Rev. i. 18.) 
 
 He asserts, in the last place. His own authority to judge 
 the world. " The Father," we are told, " has committed 
 all judgment unto the Son." All power and authority 
 over the world is committed to Christ's hands. He is the 
 King and the Judge of mankind. Before Him every knee 
 shall bow, and every tongue shall confess that he is Lord. 
 He that was once despised and rejected of man, condemned 
 and crucified as a malefactor, shall one day hold a great 
 assize, and judge all the world. " God shall judge the 
 secrets of man by Jesus Christ.'' (Rom. ii. 16.) 
 
 And now let us think whether it is possible to make too 
 much of Christ in our religion. If we have ever thought 
 so, let us cast aside the thought for ever. Both in His Own 
 nature as God, and in His ofiice as commissioned Mediator, 
 He is worthy of all honour. He that is one with the 
 Father, — the Giver of life, — the King of kings, — the 
 coming Judge, can never be too much exalted. " He that 
 honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father that 
 sent him." 
 
 If we desire salvation, let us lean our whole weight on 
 this mighty Saviour. So leaning, we never need be afraid. 
 Christ is the rock of ages, and he that builds on Him shall 
 never be confounded, — neither in sickness, nor in death, 
 nor in the judgment-day. The hand that was nailed to the 
 cross is almighty. The Saviour of sinners is *' mighty to 
 save." (Isaiah Ixiii. 1.^ 
 
280 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Notes. John V. 16—23. 
 
 \Q,—-{^Thi>ref ore... Jews persecute^ etc.] The verbs in this verse are 
 all in the imperfect tense. It may be doubted whether the mean- 
 ing is not, strictly speaking, something of this kind : — " The Jewa 
 from this time began to persecute Jesus, and vi^ere always seek- 
 ing to Siay Him, because He made a habit of doing these things 
 on the Sabbath day." It is some confirmation of this view that 
 our Lord at a much later period refers to this very miracle at 
 Bethesda, as a thing which had specially angered the Jews of 
 Jerusalem, and for which they hated Him and sought still to kill 
 Him. It was long after the time of this miracle when He said, — 
 *' Are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit 
 whole on the Sabbath day ? " (John vii. 23.) 
 
 17. — [But Jesus answered.] This seems to have been the first reply 
 which our Lord made wheo charged with breaking the fourth 
 commandment. It was a short, simple justification of the law- 
 fulness of doing works of mercy on the Sabbath. There seems 
 to have been an interval between this reply and the long argu- 
 mentative defence which begins in the 19th verse. 
 
 [^fy Father worJceth hitherto, and I also work.] The words 
 rendered "hitherto," are, literally, "until now," — that is, from 
 the beginning of creation up to the present time. 
 
 I can only see one meaning in this pithy sentence: — "My 
 Father in heaven is continually working works of mercy and 
 kindness in His providential government of the world, in supply- 
 ing the wants of all His creatures, in maintainmg the whole 
 fabric of the earth in perfection, in giving rain from heaven and 
 fruitful seasons, in preserving and sustaining life. All this He 
 does on Sabbaths, as well as week days. Were He to cease from 
 such works, the whole world would be full of confusion. When 
 He rested from His works of creation He did not rest from His 
 works of providence. I also, who am His beloved Son, claim the 
 right to work works of mercy on the Sabbath. In working 
 such works I do not break the Sabbath any more than My Fa- 
 ther does. My Father appointed the fourth commandment to be 
 honoured, and yet never ceased to cause the sun to rise and the 
 grass to grow on the Sabbath. I also, who claim to be One with 
 the Father, honour the Sabbath, but I do not abstain from works 
 of mercy upon it." 
 
 Two things should be observed in this sentence. One is the 
 plain practical lesson that the Sabbath w^as not meant to be a 
 day of total idleness, and of entire cessation from all kinds and 
 sorts of work. " The Sabbath was made for man," — for his 
 benefit, comfort, and advantage. Works of mercy and of real 
 
JOHN, CHAP. V. 281 
 
 necessity to man's life and animal existence on the Sabbath day, 
 were never intended to be forbidden. — The other thing to be 
 observed is our Lord's assertion of His own Divinity and equality 
 with God the Father. When He said, " My Father worketh, 
 and I also work/' He evidently meant much more than bringing 
 forward His Fatlier's example, though that of course is con- 
 tained in His argument, and justifies all Christians in doing 
 works of mercy on Sundays. What He meant was, '' I am the 
 beloved Son of God : I and My Father are one in essence, 
 dignity, honour, and authority ; whatever He does I also do, 
 and have right to do. He works and I also work. He gave you 
 the Sabbath, and it is His day. I too, as one with Him, am 
 Lord of the Sabbath." That the Jews saw this to be the 
 meaning of His words seems clear from the next verse. 
 
 Chrysostom remarks on this verse : — " If any one say, ' How 
 doth the Father ivorh, who ceased on the seventh day from all 
 His works ? ' let him learn the manner in which He worketh. 
 What is it ? He careth for, He holdeth together all that hath 
 been made. When thou beholdest the sun rising, and the moon 
 running in her path, the lakes, the fountains, the rivers, the 
 rains, the course of nature in seeds, and in our own bodies and 
 those of irrational beings, and all the rest, by means of wliich 
 this universe is made up, then learn the ceaseless working of 
 the Father." (Matt. v. 45 ; vi. 30.) 
 
 Schottgen quotes a remarkable saying of Philo Judaeus, — 
 " God never ceases to work. Just as it is the property of fire to 
 burn and of snow to be cold, so is it the property of God to 
 work." 
 
 Ferus remarks on the great variety of arguments used by our 
 Lord on various occasions, in reply to the superstitious views of 
 the Jews about the Sabbath. One time He adduces the example 
 of David eating the shew-bread, another time the example of 
 the priests working in the Temple on the Sabbath, another time 
 the readiness of the Jews to help an ox out of a pit on the Sab- 
 bath. All these arguments were used in defence of works of 
 necessity and mercy. Here He takes higher ground still, — the 
 example of His Father. 
 18. — [Therefore the Jews sought the more to Jcill him.] This short de- 
 fence which our Lord made seems to have rankled in the minds 
 of the Jews, and to have made them even more bitter against 
 Him. What length of time is covered by this verse is not very 
 plain. I am inclined to think that it implies some little pause 
 between the 17th and 19th verses. Here again, as in the 16th 
 verse, we have the imperfect tense all the way through. It must 
 surely pomt at something of habit, both in the designs of the 
 Jews itgainst our Lord, and in our Lord's conduct, and in. Hia 
 language about His Father. 
 
282 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 [Said God...his Father. ..equal with God.^ It is clear that our 
 Lord's words about His Son ship struck the Jew5 in a far more for- 
 cible way than ihey seem to strike us. In a certain sense all 
 believers are " sons of God." (Rom, viii. 14.) Bat it is evident 
 that they are not so in the sense that our Lord meant when He 
 talked of God as His Father, and Himself as God's Son. The 
 Greek undoubtedly might be translated more clearly, "said that 
 God was His own particular Father." (Compare Rom. viii. 32). 
 The Jews at any rate accepted the words as meaning our Lord 
 to assert His own peculiar Sonship, and His consequent entire 
 equality with God the Father. Their charge and ground of anger 
 against Him amounted to this : — " Thou callest God Thine own 
 particular Father, and claimest authority to do whatsoever He 
 does. By so doing Thou makest Thyself equal with God." And 
 our Lord seems to have accepted this charge as a correct state- 
 ment of the case, and to have proceeded to argue that He had 
 a right to say what He had said, and that He really was equal 
 with God. As St. Paul says, — " He thought it not robbery to 
 be equal with God." (Phil. ii. 6.) 
 
 Augustine remarks, — " Behold the Jews understood what the 
 Arians would not understand." 
 
 Whitby remarks that the Jews never accused our Lord of 
 blasphemy for saying that he was the Messiah, but for saying 
 that He was the Son of God, because they did not beUeve that 
 Messiah when He appeared was to be a Divine Person. 
 
 Ferus remarks that the Jews probably took notice of our Lord 
 calling God " My Father," and not " our Father." — CartwrJght 
 also thinks that there is much weight in the expression *'my," 
 and that the Jews gathered from it that Christ claimed to be the 
 only -begotten Son of God, and not merely a Son by adoption 
 and grace. 
 
 19 — [Then answered Jesus and said unto them.'] This verse begins 
 a long discourse, in which our Lord formally defends himself 
 from the charge of the Jews of laying claim to what He had no 
 right to claim. (1.) He asserts His own Divine authority, com- 
 mission, dignity, and equaHty with God His Father. (2.) He 
 brings forward the evidence of His Divine commission, which 
 the Jews ought to consider and receive. (3.) Finally, He tells 
 the Jews plainly the reason of their unbelief, and charges home 
 on their consciences their love of man's praise more than 
 God's, and their inconsistency in pretending to honour Moses 
 while they did not honour Christ. It is a discourse almost un- 
 rivalled in depth and majesty. 
 
 There are few chapters in the Bible, perhaps, where we feel 
 our own shallowness of understanding so thoroughly, and dis- 
 
JOHN, CHAP. V. 283 
 
 cover so completely the insufficiency of all human language to 
 express ^' the deep things of God." Men are often saying they 
 wnnt explanations of the mysteries of the Christian faith, the 
 Trinity, the Incarnation, the person of Christ, and the like. 
 Let them just observe, when we do find a passage full of expla- 
 natory statements on a deep subject, how much there is that 
 we have no line to fathom and no mind to take in. " I want 
 more light," says proud man. God gives him his desire in this 
 chiipter. and Hfts up the veil a little. But behold 1 we are daz- 
 zled by the very light we wanted, and find we have not eyes to 
 take it in. 
 
 It has always been thought by many commentators that this 
 solemn discourse of our Lord's was delivered before the Sanhe- 
 drim, or general Ecclesiastical Assembly of the Jews. They 
 regard it as a formal defence of His Divinity and Messiahship, 
 and a statement of evidence why He should be received, before 
 a regularly constituted ecclesiastical court. — It may be so. Pro- 
 babilities seem in favour of the idea. But it must be remem- 
 bered that we have noth'ng but internal evidence in favour of 
 the theory. There is not a word said to show that our Lord 
 was formally brought before the Sanhedrim, and made a formal 
 defence. — Some writers lay much stress upon the opening words 
 of the 19th verse, — " Then answered Jesus and said," — and con- 
 sider that these words imply a formal charge in court, and a 
 formal reply from our Lord. It may be true. But we must 
 remember that it is only a conjecture. 
 
 One thing only is certain. Nowhere else in the Gospels do 
 we find our Lord making such a formal, systematic, orderly, 
 regular statement of His own unity with the Father, His Divine 
 commission and authority, and the proofs of His Messiahship, 
 as we find in this discourse. To me it seems one of the deepest 
 things in the Bible. 
 
 [Verily, verily, I say unto you.'] Here, as elsewhere, the re- 
 mark applies, that this form of expression always precedes some 
 statement of more than ordinary depth and importance. 
 
 [The Son can do nothing of himself, &c.] This opening verse 
 declares ihe complete unity there is between God the Father 
 and God the Son. The Son, from His very nature and relation 
 to the Father, "can do nothing" independently or separately 
 from the Father. It is not that He lacks or luants the power 
 to do, but I hat He unU not do. (Compare Gen. xix. 22.) When 
 the angel said, " I cannot do anything till thou be come thither;" 
 it means of course "'I will not do." — "Of himself" dees not 
 mean without help, or unassisted, but "from himself," from His 
 own independent will. He can only do such things as, from His 
 unity with the Father, and consequent ineffable knowledge, He 
 
284 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 *' seeth" tLs Father doing. For the Father and the Son are so 
 united, — one God though two Persons, — that whatsoever the 
 Father does the Son does also. The acts of the Son therefore 
 are not His own independent acts, but the acts of His Father also. 
 
 The Greek word which we render "likewise" must not be 
 supposed to mean nothing more than '' also, as well." It is 
 literally " in like manner." 
 
 Bishop Hall paraphrases this saying of our Lord thus: — "1 
 and the Father are one indivisible essence, and our acts are no 
 less inseparable. The Son can do nothing without the will and 
 act of the Father ; and, even as He is man, can do nothing but 
 wliat He seeth agreeable to the will and purpose of His heavenly 
 Father." 
 
 Barnes remarks, — " The words ' what things soever ' are with- 
 out limit ; all that the Father does, the Son likewise does. This 
 is as high an assertion as possible of His being equal with God. 
 If one does all that another does, or can do, then there is proof 
 of equality. If the Son does all that the Father does, then, like 
 Him, He must be almighty, omniscient, all-present, and infinite 
 in every perfection ; or, in other words, He must be God." 
 
 Augustine remarks, — " Our Lord does not say, whatsoever the 
 Father doeth the Son does other things like them, but the very 
 same things. ...1{ the Son doeth the same things, and in Hke man- 
 ner, then let the Jew be silenced, the Chri-tian believe, the 
 heretic be convinced ; the Son is equal with the Father." 
 
 Hilary, quoted in the ^' Catena Aurea" remarks, — " Christ is 
 the Son because He does nothing of Himself He is God because 
 whatsoever things the Father doeth, He doeth the same. They 
 are One because They are equal in honour. He is not the Father 
 because He is sent." 
 
 Diodati remarks, — "The phrase, 'what He seeth the Father 
 do,' is a figurative term, showing the inseparable communion of 
 will, wisdom, and power, between the Son and the Father in 
 the internal order of the most holy Trinity." 
 
 Toletus remarks, — " When it is said ' the Son can do nothing 
 of Himself,' thi-^ does not maan want of power, bnt the highest 
 pcwer. Just as it is a mark ot omnipotence not to be able to die, 
 or to be worn out, or to be annihilated, because there is nothing 
 that cm injure omnipotence, so, likewise, 'to be unable to do 
 anything oi' Himself is no mark of impotence, but of the 
 highest power. It means nothing less than having one and the 
 same power with the Father, so that nothing can be done by tho 
 One which is not equally done by the Other." 
 
 20. — ^The Father loveth the Son, c&c.] This verse carries on the 
 
JOHN, CHAP. V. 285 
 
 thought begun in the preceding verse, — tne unity of the Father 
 and the Son. When we read the words, " The father loveth " 
 and the "Father showeth," we must not for a moment suppose 
 them to imply any superiority in the Father, or any inferiority 
 in the Son, as to their Divine nature and essence. — The " love " 
 is not the love of an earthly parent to a beloved child. The 
 "sliowing" is not the showing of a teacher to an ignorant 
 Bcbolar. The " love " is meant to show us that unspeakable unity 
 of heart and affection (if such words may be reverently used) 
 which eternally existed and exists between the Father and the 
 Son. The "showing" means that entire confidence and co- 
 operation which there was between the Father and the Son as to 
 all the works which the Son should do when He came into the 
 world, to fill the ofl&ce of Mediator, and to save sinners. — The 
 "greater works,'' which remained to be shown, were evidently 
 the works specified in the two following verse>;, — the works of 
 quickening and of judging. That the Jews did "marvel," and 
 were confounded at the works of "quickening," we know from 
 the Acts of the Apostles. That they will "marvel" even more 
 at our Lord's work of judgment we shall see when Christ comes 
 again to jadge the heathen, to restore Jerusalem, to gather Israel, 
 to convince the Jews of their unbelief, and to renew the face of 
 the earth. 
 
 Both in this, and the preceding verse, we must carefully re- 
 member the utter inability of any human language, or human 
 ideas, to express perfectly such matters as our Lord is speaking 
 of. Language is intended specially to express the things of man. 
 It fails greatly when used to express things about God. In the 
 expressions "seeth the Father do," — "loveth the Son," — "show- 
 eth him all things," — " will show him greater works," — we must 
 carefully bear this in mind. We must remember that they are 
 expressions accommodated to our weaker capacities. They are 
 intended to explain the relation between two divine Beings, 
 who are one in essence, though two Persons, — cue in mind and 
 will, though two in manifestation, — equal in all things as touch- 
 ing the Grodhead, though the Son is inferior to the Father as 
 touching His manhood. There must needs be immense difficulty 
 in finding words to convey any idea of the relation between 
 these two Ptrsons. Hence the language used by our Lord must 
 be cautiously handled, with a constant recollection that we are 
 not reading of an earthly father and son, but of God the Father 
 and God the Son, who though one in essence as God, are at 
 the same time two distinct Persons. 
 
 Augustine wisely remarks, " There are times when speech is 
 deficient, even when the understanding is proficient. How much 
 more doth speech suffer defect, when the understanding hath 
 nothing perfect I " 
 
286 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Auofustine and Bernard both remark, that it is far " greater 
 work" to repair ruined human nature, than to make it at first, 
 and to re-create it, than to create it. 
 
 21, 22. — [As the Father raiseth up the dead, &c.'\ Our Lord here 
 proceeds to tell the Jews one of His mighty works which He 
 had come to do, in proof of His divine nature, authority, and 
 commission. Did they find fault with Him for making Himself 
 equal wiin God ? Let them know that He had the same power 
 as God tiie Father to give "life" and quicken the dead. Let 
 them know furthermore, that all "judgment" was committed to 
 Him. Surely He who had in His hand the mighty prerogatives 
 of giving life and judging the world, had a right to speak of 
 himself as equal with God 1 
 
 When we read "the Father raiseth up the dead, and quick- 
 eneth them," we must either understand the words to refer 
 generally to God's power to raise th3 dead at the last day, — 
 which the Jew would allow as an article of faith, and a special 
 attribute of divinity, — or else we mu^t understand it to apply 
 to the power of spiritually quickening men's souls, which God 
 had from the beginning exercised in calling men from death to 
 life, — or else we must simply take it to mean that to give life, 
 whether bodily or spiritual, is notoriously the peculiar attribute 
 of God. The last view appears to me the most probable one, 
 and most in harmony with what follows in after verses. 
 
 When we read " the Son quickeneth whom he wills," we have 
 a distinct assertion of the Son's authority to give life at His will, 
 either bodily or spiritual, with the same irresistible power as the 
 Father. The highest of all gifts He has but to " will " and to 
 bestow. The Greek word translated " quickeneth," is very 
 strong. It is, literally, " makes alive," and seems to imply the 
 power of making life of all kind, both bodily and spiritual. 
 
 Burkitt remarks, that it is never said of any prophet or apostle, 
 that he did mighty works "at his will." 
 
 When we read " the Father judgeth no man, but hath com- 
 mitted all judgment to the Son," we must understand that in the 
 economy of redemption, the Father hL.s honoured the Son by 
 devolving on Him the whole office of judging the world. It 
 cannot of course mean that judgment is work with which the 
 Father from His nature hath nothing to do, but that it is work 
 which He has completely and entirely committed to the Son's 
 hands. He that died for sinners, is He that will judge them. 
 Thus it is written, — '• He will judge the world in righteousnesa 
 by that man whom he hath ordained," (Acts xvii. 31.) 
 
 Burgon remarks, " There is an origiuMl, supreme, judicial power; 
 and there is also a judicial power derived, given by commission. 
 
287 
 
 Christ, p^ God, hath the first together with the Father : Christ, as 
 man, hath the second from the Father," 
 
 I think it highly probable that the " all judgment committed 
 to the Son," includes not merely the final judgment of the last 
 day, but the whole work of ordering, governing, and deciding 
 the afi'airs of G-ods kingdom. "To judge" is an expression 
 constantly used in the Old Testament in the sense of " to rule." 
 The meaning then would be, that the Father has given to the 
 Son the office of King and Judge. The whole administration of 
 the Divine government of the world is put into the hands of the 
 Son, Christ Jesus. Everything connected with the rule of the 
 church and world, as well as the last judgment, is placed in the 
 Son's hands. 
 
 We should carefully mark the distinction between " quicken- 
 ing " and "judging" in the language of these two verses. 
 
 (a.) It is not said that " the Father quickeneth no man," but hath 
 committed the power of giving life to the Son. Had this been 
 said, it would have contradicted the texts "no man can come 
 unto Me except the Father draw him," and "the Spirit giveth 
 life." (John vi. 44 ; 2 Cor. iii. 6.) Quickening is the work of all 
 three Persons in the Trinity, of one as much as another. 
 
 (b). It is said that judgment is the special work of the second 
 Person of the Trinity. It is not the pecuhar office either of the 
 Father, or the Spirit, but of the Son. There seems a fitness in 
 this. He who was condemned by an unjust judgment, and died 
 for sinners, is He whose office it will be to judge the world. 
 
 (c.) It is said that " the Son quickeneth whom he will " The 
 power of giving life is as much the prerogative of the Son as of 
 the Father, or of the Spirit. Surely this teaches us that to place 
 the election of God the Father, or the work of the Spirit, before 
 men, as the first and principal thing they should look at, is not 
 good theology. Christ, after all, is the meeting-point between 
 the Trinity and the world. It is His office to quicken as well as 
 pardon. No doubt He quickeneth by the Spirit whom He sends 
 into man's heart. But it is His prerogative to give life as well 
 a^ peace. This ought to be remembered. There are some in this 
 day who in a mistaken zeal put the work of the Father and the 
 Spirit before the work of Christ. 
 
 23. — [That all men should honour the Son, <&€.] By these words 
 our Lord teaches us that the Father would have the Son to 
 receive equal honour with Himsel£ We are to understand dis- 
 tinctly that there is no inferiority in the Son to the Father. He 
 is equal to Him in dignity and authority. He is to be worshipped 
 with equal worship. If any man fancies that to honour the Son 
 equally with the Father, detracts from the Father's honour, our 
 
288 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Lord declares that such a man is entirely mistaken. On the con- 
 tary, " He that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father 
 t'lat se!!t him." It was the mind and intenlion of the Father 
 that the Son, as the Mediator between God and man, should 
 receive honour from all men. The glory of His beloved Son is 
 part of the Father's eternal counsels. Whenever therefore any 
 one through ignorance or pride, or unbelief, neglects Christ, but 
 professes at the same time to honour God, he is committing a 
 mighty error, and 59 far from pleasing God, is greatly displeasing 
 Him. The more a man honours Christ, and makes much of Him, 
 the more the Father is pleased. 
 
 Evangelical Christians should mark the doctrine of this verse, 
 and remember it. They are sometimes taunted with holding new 
 views in religion, because they bring forward Christ so much 
 more prominently than their fathers or grandfathers did. Let 
 them see here that the more they exalt the Son of God and His 
 office, the more honour they are doing to the Father who sent 
 Him. 
 
 To the Deist and Socinian, the words of this verse are a strong 
 condemnation. Not honouring Christ, they are angering God 
 the Father. The Fatherhood of God, out of Christ, is a mere 
 idol of man's invention, and incapable of comforting or saving. 
 
 Alford remarks, "Whosoever does not honour the Son with 
 equal honour to that which he pays to the Father, however he 
 may imagine that he honours or approaches God, does not 
 honour Him at all ; because he can only be known by us as 
 'the Father who sent his Son.'" — Barnes remarks, "If our 
 Saviour here did not intend to teach that He ought to be wor- 
 shipped and esteemed equal with God, it would be difficult to 
 teach it by any language." 
 
 Rollock remarks, " The Jews and Turks in the present day 
 profess to worship God earnestly, not only without the Son, but 
 even with contempt of the Son Jesus Christ. But the whole of 
 such worship is idolatrous, and that which they worship is an 
 idol. There is no knowledge of the true God except in the face 
 of the Son." 
 
 Wordsworth remarks, " They who profess zeal for the one 
 God do not honour Him aright, unless they honour the Son as 
 they honour the Father. This is a warning to those who claim 
 the title of Unitarians, and deny the divinity of Christ. No one 
 can be said to believe in the Divine Unity who rejects the doctrine 
 of the Trinity." 
 
 The entire unity of the three Persons in the Trinity, is a 
 subject that needs far more attention than many give to it. 
 It may be feared that many well-meaning Christians are tritheists 
 
JOHX, CHAP. V. 
 
 289 
 
 or worshippers of three distinct Gods, witliout knowing it. They 
 talk as if God the Father's mind towards sinners was one thing-, 
 and God the Son's another, — as if the Father haied man, and 
 the Son loved him and protected him. Such persons would do 
 well to study this part of Scripture, and to mark the unity of the 
 Father and the Sou. 
 
 After all, that deep truth, " the eternal generation " of God the 
 Son, whatever proud man may say of it, is the foundation 
 ti'uth which we must never forget in trying to understand a 
 passage like that before us. In the Trinity " none is afore or 
 after other. The Father is eternal : the Son eternal : the Holy 
 Ghost eternal. The Father is God : the Son is God : the Holy 
 Ghost is God. And yet there are not three eternals, but one 
 eternal : not three Gods, but one God." — As Burgon remarks, 
 '•' There never was a time when any one of the three Persons 
 Avas not ;" and it might be added, there never was a time when 
 the three Persons were not equal. And yet the Son was begot- 
 ten of the Father from all eternity, and the Holy Ghost proceed- 
 ed from all eternity from the Father and the Son. 
 
 JOHN V. 24—29. 
 
 27 And hath given him author- 
 ity to execute judgment also, be- 
 cause he is the Son of man. 
 
 28 Marvel not at this : for the 
 hour is coming, in the which all 
 that are in the graves shall hear his 
 voice, 
 
 29 And shall come forth ; they 
 that have done good, unto the re- 
 surrection of life; and they that 
 have done evil, unto the resurreo 
 tion of damnation. 
 
 24 Verily, verily, I say unto 
 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. 
 
 25 Verily, 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 they that 
 hear shall live. 
 
 26 For as the Father hath hfe in 
 himself; so hath he given to the 
 Son to have life in himself; 
 
 The passage before us is singularly rich in weighty truths. 
 To the minds of Jews, who were familiar with the writ- 
 ings of Moses and Daniel, it would come home with 
 peculiar power. In the words of our Lord they would 
 not fail to see fresh assertions of His claim to be received 
 as the promised Messiah. 
 
 13 
 
290 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 We see in these verses that the salvation of our souls db- 
 fends on hearing Christ. It is the man, we are told, 
 who " hears Christ's word," and believes that God the 
 Father sent Him to save sinners, who " has everlasting 
 life." Such " hearing " of course is something more 
 than mere listening. It is hearing as a humble scholar, 
 --hearing as an obedient disciple, — hearing with faith 
 and love, — hearing with a heart ready to do Christ's 
 will, — this is the hearing that saves. It is the very- 
 hearing of which God spoke in the famous prediction of 
 a " prophet like unto Moses :" — " Unto him shall ye 
 hearken." — " Whosoever will not hearken unto my words 
 which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of 
 him." (Deut. xviii. 15—19.) 
 
 To " hear " Christ in this way, we must never forget, is 
 just as needful now as it was eighteen hundred years ago. 
 It is not enough to hear sermons, and run after preach- 
 ers, though some people seem to think this makes up the 
 whole of religion. We must go much further than tliis : 
 we must " hear Christ." To submit our hearts to Christ's 
 teaching, — to sit humbly at His feet by faith, and learn of 
 Him, — to enter His school as penitents, and become His 
 believing scholars, — to hear His voice and follow Him, — 
 this is the way to heaven. Till we know something ex- 
 perimentally of these things, there is no life in us. 
 
 We see, secondly, in these verses, how rich and full are 
 the privileges of the true hearer and believer. Such a man 
 enjoys a present salvation. Even now, at this present 
 time, he " hath everlasting life." — Such a man is com- 
 pletely justified and forgiven. There remains no more 
 condemnation for him. His sins are put away. "He 
 shall not come into condemnation." — Such a man is in an 
 entirely new position before God. He is like one who has 
 moved from one side of a gulf to another : " He is pass* 
 ed from death unto life." 
 
291 
 
 The privileges of a true Christian are greatly underrated 
 by many. Chiefly from deplorable ignorance of Scripture, 
 they have little idea of the spiritual treasures of every 
 believer in Jesus. These treasures are brought together 
 here in beautiful order, if we will only look at them. One 
 of a true Christian's treasures is the " presentness " of his 
 salvation. It is not a far distant thing which he is to have 
 at last, if he does his duty and is good. It is his own in 
 title the moment he believes. He is already pardoned, 
 forgiven, and saved, though not in heaven. — Another of a 
 true Christian's treasures is the " completeness " of his 
 justification. His sins are entirely removed, taken away, 
 and blotted out of God's book, by Christ's blood. He may 
 look forward to judgment without fear, and say, "who is 
 he that condemneth?" (Rom. viii. 34.) He shall stand 
 without fault befbre the throne of God. — The last, but not 
 the least, of a true Christian's treasures, is the entire change 
 in his relation and position toward God. He is no longer 
 as one dead before Him, — dead, legally, like a man sen- 
 tenced to die, and dead in heart. He is " alive unto God." 
 (Rom. vi. 11.) "He is a new creature. Old things are 
 passed away, and all things are become new." (2 Cor. v. 
 17.) Well would it be for Christians if these things were 
 better known ! It is want of knowledge, in many cases, 
 that is the secret of want of peace. 
 
 We see, thirdly, in these verses, a striking declaration 
 of ChrisPs power to give life to dead souls. Our Lord 
 tells us that " the hour is coming and now is, when the 
 dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God ; and they that 
 hear shall live." It seems most unlikely that these words 
 were meant to be confined to the rising of men's bodies, 
 and were fulfilled by such miracles as that of raising 
 Lazarus from the grave. It appears far more probable that 
 what om* Lord had in view was the quickening of souls, — 
 the resurrection of conversion. (Ephes. ii. l ; Colos. ii. 13.) 
 
292 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 The words were fulfilled in not a few cases, durino: our 
 Lord's own niinistiy. They were fulfilled far more com- 
 pletely after the day of Pentecost, through the ministry of 
 the Apostles. The myriads of converts at Jerusalem, at 
 Antioch, at Ephesus, at Corinth, and elsewhere, wore all 
 examples of their fulfilment. In all these cases, " th© 
 voice of the Son of God" awakened dead hearts to 
 spiritual life, and made them feel their need of salvation, 
 repent, and believe. — They are fulfilled at this very day, in 
 every instance of true conversion. Whenever any men or 
 women among ourselves awaken to a sense of their soul's 
 vahie, and become alive to God, the words are made good 
 before our eyes. It is Christ who has spoken to their 
 hearts by His Spirit. It is " the dead hearing Christ's voice, 
 and living." 
 
 We see, lastly, in these verses, a most solemn prophecy 
 of the final resurrection of all the dead. Our Lord tells 
 us that " the hour is coming when all that are in the grave 
 shall hear his voice, and shall come forth ; they that have 
 done good to the resurrection of life, and they that have 
 done evil to the resurrection of damnation." 
 
 The passage is one of those that ought to sink down 
 very deeply into our hearts, and never be forgotten. All 
 is not over when men die. Whether they like it or not, 
 they will have to come forth from their graves at the last 
 day, and to stand at Christ's bar. None can escape His 
 summons. When His voice calls them before Him, all 
 must obey. — When men rise again, they will not all rise in 
 the same condition. There will be two classes — two 
 parties — two bodies. Not all will go to heaven. Not all 
 will be saved. Some will rise again to inherit eternal life, 
 but some will rise again only to be condemned. These are 
 terrible things! But the words of Christ arc plain and 
 unmistakeable. Thus it is written, and thns it must be. 
 
 Let us make sure that we hear Christ's quickening voice 
 
293 
 
 now^ and are numbered among His true disciples. Let us 
 know the privileges of true believers, while we have life 
 and liealth. Then, when His voice shakes heaven and 
 earth, and is calling the dead from their gi-aves, we shall 
 feel confidence, and not be " ashamed before Him at his 
 coming." (1 John ii. 28.) 
 
 Notes. John Y. 24 — 29. 
 
 24. — [Verily, verily, 1 say."] Here, as in other places, these words 
 are the preface to a saying of more than ordinary solemnity and 
 importance. 
 
 [He that hearetli my word.'] The " hearing" here is much more 
 than mere hstening, or hearing with the ears. It means hearing 
 / with the heart, hearing with faith, hearing accompanied by 
 obedient discipleship. He that so hears the doctrine, teaching, 
 or '' word " of Christ, hath life. It is such hearing as that of the 
 true sheep : " My sheep hear my voice," (John x. 27,) or as 
 that spoken of by St, Paul: "Ye have not so learned Christ, if 
 so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him." 
 (Eph. iv. 21.) 
 
 [Believeth on Him that sent Me.] This must not be supposed to 
 mean that a vague faith in G-od, such as the Deist professes to 
 have, is the way to everlasting life. The belief spoken of is a 
 believing on God in Christ, — a believing on God as the God who 
 sent Christ to save sinners, — a believing on God as the God and 
 Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has planned and provided 
 redemption by the blood of His Son. He who so believes on 
 God the Father, is the same man that beheves in God the Son. 
 In this sense the Father is just as much the- object of saving faith 
 as the Son. Thus we read, " It shall be imputed if we believe 
 on him who raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead." (Rom. 
 iv. 24.) And again, " Who by him do believe in God, that raised 
 him up from the dead, and gave him glory, that your faith and 
 hope might be in God." (1 Pet. i. 21.) He that rightly believes 
 on Christ as his Saviour, with the same faith believes in God as 
 his reconciled Father. The Gospel that invites the sinner to 
 believe in Jesus as his Redeemer and Advocate, invites him at 
 the same time to believe in the Father, who is " well pleased " 
 with all who trust in His Son. 
 
 Henry remarks, "Christ's design is to bring us to God. (1 
 Pet. iii. 18.) As God is the first original of all grace, so is He 
 the ultimate object of all faith. Christ is our way, and God ia 
 our rest. We must believe on God as having sent Jesus Clmist, 
 
294 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 and reef mmended Himself to our faith and love, by manifesting 
 His glory in the face of Jesus Christ." 
 
 Lightfoot remarks, "■ He doth most properly centre the ultimate 
 fixing and resting of belief in God the Father. For as from Him, 
 as from a fountain, do flow all those things that are the object of 
 faith, — namely free grace^ the gift of Christ, the way of redemp- 
 tion, the gracious promises, — so unto Him as to that fountain 
 doth faith betake itself in its final resting and repose, — namely to 
 God in Chri^.' 
 
 Chemnitius i^emarks, that the expression " believe on Him who 
 sent me," shows " that true faith embraces the word of the Gos- 
 pel, not as something thought out by Christ alone, but as some- 
 thing decreed in the secret counsel of the whole Trinity." 
 
 [Hdth everlasting life.'] This means that he possesses a com- 
 plete title to an everlasting life of glory hereafter, and is reckoned 
 pardoned, forgiven, justified, and an heir of heaven, even now 
 upon earth. His soul is delivered from the second death. — The 
 *' presentness " of the expression should be carefully noticed. 
 Everlasting life is the present possession of every true believer, 
 from the moment he believes. It is Hot a thing he shall have at 
 last. He has it at once, even in this world. " All that believe 
 are justified." — " Being justified by faith we have peace with 
 God." (Acts xiii. 39 ; Rom. v. 1.) 
 
 [ShaU not come into condemnation.] The Greek word for 
 " come " is in the present tense, and it would be more literally 
 rendered " does not come." The meaning is, there is no con- 
 demnation for him. His guilt is removed even now. He has 
 nothing to fear in looking forward to the judgment of the last 
 day. " There is therefore now no condemnation to them which 
 are in Christ Jesus." — "He that believeth on Him is not con- 
 demned." (Rom. viii. 1 ; John iii. 18.) 
 
 I cannot see in these words any warrant for the notion held 
 by some, that the saints of God shall not be judged at the last 
 day in any way at aU. The notion itself is so utterly contra- 
 dictory to some plain texts of Scripture (2 Cor. v. 10 ; Rom. xiv. 
 10; Matt. XXV. 31), that I cannct understand any one holding 
 it. But even in the text before u-, it seeos to me a violent 
 straining of the words to apply them to the judgment-day. The 
 thing our Lord is speaking of is the present privilege of a 
 believer. The tense He uses, as Chemnitius bids us specially 
 observe, is the present and not the future. And even supposing 
 that the words do apply to the judgment-day, the utmost that 
 can be fairly made of them is, that a believer has no condem- 
 iLation to fiar at the last da}^ Judged according to his works 
 he shall be. Condemned he may certainly feel assured he shall 
 
295 
 
 not be. From the day he beUeves, all his condemnation is taken 
 away. 
 
 Ecolampadius remarks how irreconcileable this verse is with 
 the Romish doctrine of purgatory. 
 
 [But is passed from death to Ufe.] This means that a believer 
 has passed from a state of spiritual death to a state of spiritual 
 life. Before he believed, he was dead legally, — dead as a guilty 
 criminal condemned to die. In the day that he beheved he 
 received a free and full pardon. His sentence was reversed and 
 put away. Instead of being legally dead, be became legally 
 alive. — But this is not all. His heart, which was dead in sins, 
 is now renewed, and alive unto Grod. There is a change in his 
 character as well as in his position toward Grod. Like the 
 prodigal son, he " was dead and is alive." (Luke xv. 24.) 
 
 We should mark carefully the strong language of Scrip- 
 ture in describing the immense difference between the posi- 
 tion of a man who believes, and the man who does not believe. 
 It is nothing else than the difference between hfe and death, — 
 between being dead and being alive. Whatever some may think 
 fit to say about the privileges of baptism, we must never shrink 
 from maintaining, that so long as men do not hear Christ's voice 
 and believe, — so long they are dead, whether baptized or not, 
 and have no life in them. Faith, not baptism, is the turning- 
 point. He that has not yet believed is dead, and must be born 
 again. When he believes, and not till then, he will pass from 
 death to life. 
 
 Ferus remarks, " Although it seems very easy to believe, and 
 many think they do believe when they have only heard the 
 name of believing, — supposing that to believe is the same as to 
 understand, to remember, to know, to think, — yet this beheving 
 is in truth a hard and difficult thing. It is easy to fast, to say 
 prayers, to go on pilgrimage, to give alms and the like ; but to 
 believe is a thing impossible to our strength. Let superstitious 
 people learn that God requires of us a far higher and more 
 difi&cult kind of worship than they imagine. Let pious people 
 learn to seek faith more than anything, saying, — Lord, increase 
 our faith." 
 
 25. — [Verily, verily, I say unto you] This emphatic - preface here 
 
 begins a prophecy of the wonderful things that should yet be 
 done by the Son of G-od. Did the Jews of Jerusalem desire to 
 know what proofs of Divine power and authority the Son of God 
 would give ? Let them hear what he would do. 
 
 [The hour is coming and now is.] This meant that a time was 
 coming, and in fact had already begun. 
 
 iThe dtad shall hear His voice and live.] It is thought by some 
 
296 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 that these words apply to the hteral raising again of dead persons, 
 such as Lazarus at Bethany. I cannot think it I beheve that 
 the " dead " liere spoken of are the spiritually dead. I believe 
 that the " hearing the voice of the Son of God," means the 
 hearing of faith. I believe that the "living" spoken of means 
 the rising out of the death of sin to spiritual newness of life. 
 And I believe that the whole verse is a prediction of the many 
 conversions of dead sinners that were to take place soon, and had 
 begun in some measure to take place already. The prediction 
 was fulfilled when dead souls were converted during our Lord's 
 own ministry, and was much more fulfilled after the day of Pen- 
 tecost, when He was preached by His apostles to the Gentiles, 
 and "believed on in the world." (1 Tim. iii. 16.) 
 
 To confine the words to th@ few cases of miraculous raising 
 of dead bodies which took place in the time of our Lord and His 
 apostles, appears to supply a very inadequate interpretation, and 
 to be rendered unnecessary by the succeeding verse. 
 
 Let it be noted that it is only those who " hear," or " have 
 heard " with faith the voice of Christ, that live. Spiritual life 
 turns on believing. "Ye also trusted, after that ye heard the 
 word of truth." (Eph. i. 13.) 
 
 Ferus and Cocceius think that the calling and conversion of 
 the Gentiles was the principal thought in our Lord's mind when 
 He spoke these words. 
 
 26. — [For as the Father^ etc ] The first part of this verse needs no 
 explanation. It is an admitted principle that God is the Author 
 and Source of all life. He " hath life in himself." When it 
 says further that " he hath given to the Son to have life in him- 
 self," we must not suppose it means that He has bestowed it on 
 His Son, in the same way that He gives gifts to mere men, such 
 as prophets and apostles. It rather means that in His everlasting 
 counsels concerning man s redemption. He has appointed that 
 the Second Person of the Trinity, — His beloved Son, — 
 should be the Dispenser and Giver of life to all mankind. 
 " God has given to us eternal fife, and this life is in his Son." (1 
 John V. 11.) 
 
 Both here and in the following verse we must remember that 
 "giving" does not imply any inferiority in the Son to the Father, 
 so far as concerns His Divine essence. The things " given" to 
 the Son were things solemnly appointed, deputed, and laid upon 
 Him when He assumed the office of Mediator, in virtue of His 
 office. 
 
 Burgon remarks, — " Both the Father and the Son have the 
 same life; both have it in themselves; both in the same 
 degree ; as the on<» so the other ; but only with this difference, 
 
297 
 
 — the Father from all eternity giveth it, the Son from all eternity 
 receiveth it." 
 
 27. — [And hath given him authority ^ etc.] This means that in virtue 
 of His Mediatorial ofi&ce the Second Person of the Trinity ia 
 specially appointed to be the Judge of all mankind. In the 
 couiLsels of God concerning man, "judgment" is assigned to the 
 Son, and not to the Father, or to the Holy Spirit. It is undoubt- 
 edly true that God is " the Judge of all." (Heb. xii. 23.) But 
 it is also true that it is God the Son who will execute judgment^ 
 and sit on the throne at the last day. 
 
 [Because he is the Son of man.] These words seem to imply 
 that there is a connection between our Lord's incarnation and 
 His filling the oflQce of the Judge. It is because He humbled 
 Himself to take our nature on Him, and be born of the Virgin 
 Mary, that he will at length be exalted to execute judgment at 
 the last day. It appears to be the same thought that St. Paul 
 expresses when he tells the Philippians that because of Christ's 
 humiliation, " God also hath highly exalted him, and given him 
 a name which is above every name," etc. (Phil. ii. 9.) 
 
 Burgon remarks, — " Because of His alliance with man's natrire, 
 because of His sense of man's infirmities, because of all He did 
 and suffered for man's sake as the Son of man, the Son is that 
 Person of the Trinity who is most fit, as well as most worthy, to 
 be man's judge." 
 
 The expression, " The Son of man," would be rendered more 
 literally, " a Son of man," or, " Son of man," Campbell remarks 
 that the absance of the article " the" before the words " Son of 
 man," occurs novyhere in the Gospels except in this passage. 
 
 Both in this and the preceding verse we should observe an 
 example of the great truth, that " order is heaven's first law." 
 Even the Second Person in the Trinity, one with the Father, 
 very and eternal Gol, does not take on Himself the office of 
 giving life and executing judgment, but receives it through the 
 solemn appointment of God the Father. Just as it is written, — 
 " Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest, but he 
 that said unto him, Thou art my .Son " (Heb. v. 5), so we find it 
 written here, that in taking on Him the office of Mediator, it 
 was ^^ given ^ to Him to have life in Himself, and "authority 
 given to him" to judge. Those who take on th«.<Qselves offices 
 Avithout either divine or human commission are very unlike our 
 Lord. 
 
 Toletus quotes a remarkable passage from Athanasius, in 
 
 which he points o it that such expressions as, '^ given to the Son 
 
 by the Father," ' received by the Son fi-om the Father," are 
 
 purposely used in order to prevent the Sabellian heresy of sup- 
 
 13* 
 
298 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 posing that the Father and the Son are one and the same Person. 
 — Such expressions are an unanswerable proof that the Fathef 
 and the Son are two distinct Persons, though one God. We 
 must never forget the words of the Athanasian creed,— 
 " Neiuier confounding the Persons nor dividing the substance." 
 
 28, 29. — [Afarvel not at this.] These words imply that the hearers 
 of our Lord were astonished at the things He had spoken con- 
 cerning His Divine commission to give life and to judge. He 
 proceeds to tell them that they have not yet heard all. If they 
 wondered at what they had already heard, what would they 
 think when He told them one thing more ? 
 
 [The hour is coming.] This means the last day. To use the 
 present tense of a time so distant as this is characteristic of one 
 who is very God, to whom time past, time present, and time to 
 come, are all alike, and a thousand years are as one day. 
 
 [All that are in the graves shall hear his voice..,come forth... dam- 
 nation, etc.] These words are singularly like those in Daniel xii. 
 2. They contain one of the most distinct statements in Scrip- 
 ture of that great truth, — the resurrection of the dead. — It shall 
 be universal, and not confined to a few only. "AH "in the 
 graves shall come forth, whether old or young, rich or poor. — It 
 shall take place at Christ's command and bidding. His " voice" 
 shall be the call that shall summon the dead from their graves.-^ 
 There shall be a distinction of those who rise again, into two 
 classes. Some shall rise to glory and happiness, — to what is 
 called a " resurrection of life," Some shall rise to be lost and 
 ruined for ever, — to what is called a " resurrection of damnation." 
 — The doings of men shall be the test by which their final state 
 shall be decided. " Life" shall be the portion of those tliat have 
 " done good," " damnation" of those that " have done evil," in 
 the resurrection-day. 
 
 (a.) This passage condemns those who fancy that this world is 
 all, and that this life ends everything, and that the grave is the 
 conclusion. They are awfully mistaken. There is a resurrection 
 and a life to come. 
 
 (6.) This passage condemns those who try to persuade us in 
 the present day that there is no future punishment, no hell, no 
 condemnation for the wicked in the world to come, — that the 
 love of God is lower than hell, — that God is too merciful and 
 compassionate to punish any one. There is a " resurrection," 
 we are told, "of damnation." 
 
 (c.) This passage condemns those who try to make out that 
 resurrection is the peculiar privilege of believers and saints, and 
 that the wicked will be punished by complete annihilation. Both 
 heie and in Acts xxiv. 15 we are distinctly told that both bad 
 
299 
 
 and good shall rise again. In St. Paul's famous chapter about 
 the resurrection (1 Cor. xt.), the resurrectioii of behevers only 
 is treated of. 
 
 (d.) This passage condemns those who try to make out that 
 men's lives and conduct are of little importance so long as they 
 profess to have faith and to believe in Christ. Christ himself 
 tells us expressly that the '' doings " of men, whether good or 
 evil, will be the evidence that shall decide whether they rise 
 again to glory or condemnation. 
 
 Musculus remarks that the goodness which God requires of us 
 is not such as only begins in the next world, after the resurrec- 
 tion. We must have it now, and it must precede the time of 
 iudgment. It is not said, '' some shall rise again that they may 
 be made good and partakers of life," but, " they that have done 
 good shall come forth to a resurrection of life." We should take 
 care to be such in this hfe as we desire to be found in the day 
 of judgment. — He also remarks that our Lord does not say, 
 *' those who have known or talked what is good," but, " those 
 who have actually done good " shall come forth to a resurrection 
 of life. Those only will be found to have " done good " who are 
 Grod's elect, born again, and true believers. Nothing but true 
 faith will bear the fruit of good works. 
 
 Calvin remarks that our Lord is not here speaking of the 
 cause of salvation, but of the marks of the saved, and that one 
 great mark which distinguishes the elect from the reprobate, is 
 good doing. 
 
 There are two different Greek words used to express the Eng- 
 lish words " they that have done," and it is difficult to say 
 why. Precisely the same difference exists in John iii. 20, 21. 
 The attempts made to explain the distinction between the two 
 words do not appear to me very successful. For instance, — 
 Wordsworth remarks : " Good made and done has permanence 
 for ever. Evil is practised, but produces no fruit for eternity." 
 Yet I doubt whether this remark will apply to Rom. i. 32, aud 
 ii. 3, where both the two Greek words for " doing " are used 
 together, and applied to the same clasa of persons, viz., the 
 wicked. 
 
 It is thought by some that this passage supports the doctrine 
 of the first resurrection as the peculiar privilege of the saints. 
 (Rev. XX. 5.) But it must in fairness be remembered that there 
 is nothing said here about distinction of time in the resurrection 
 of the good and bad. 
 
 As to the manner in which Christ's " voice " will be heard by 
 the dead ^' in the graves " we are told nothing. It is remark- 
 able that there are two other places beside this in which a 
 
300 
 
 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 "voice" or sound is mentioned as accompanying the resurrec- 
 tion. In Corinthians we read of the " last trumpet." (L Cor. xv. 
 52.) In Thessalonians we are told of " a shout," of the '" voice 
 of the archangel," and the " trump of God." (I Thess. iv. 16.) 
 Nothing, however, but conjecture can be brought forward about 
 the subject. No doubt the latent thought is that the dead bodies 
 of men are sleeping, and need to be awakened, as sleepers are 
 roused by a voice. 
 
 As to the nature of risen bodies we are told nothing. Enough 
 for us to know that this passage clearly shows it will he a resur- 
 rection of "bodies" as well as souls. It is those who are "in 
 the graves " that shall come forth. 
 
 JOHN Y. 30—39. 
 
 30 I can of mine own self do 
 notliing : as T hear, I judge : and 
 my judgment is just ; because I seek 
 not mine own will, but the wOl of 
 the Father which hath sent me. 
 
 31 If I bear witness of myself, 
 my witness is not true. 
 
 32 There is another that beareth 
 witness of me; and I know that 
 the witness which he witnesseth of 
 me is true. 
 
 33 Ye sent unto John, and he 
 bare witness unto the truth. 
 
 34 But I receive not testimony 
 from man ; but these tilings I say, 
 that ye might be saved. 
 
 35 He was a burning and a shin- 
 ing light : and ye were willing for 
 season to rejoice in his hght. 
 
 In these verses we see the proof of our Lord Jesus Christ 
 being the promised Messiah, set forth before the Jews in 
 one view. Four different witnesses are brought forward. 
 Four kinds of evidence are offered. His Father in heaven, 
 — His forerunner, John the Baptist, — the miraculous works 
 He had done, — the Scriptures, which the Jews professed 
 to honour, — each and all are named by our Lord, as testify- 
 ing that He was the Christ, the Son of God. Hard musi 
 
 36 But I have greater witness 
 than 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. 
 
 37 And the Father himself, 
 wliich hath sent me, hath borne 
 witness of me. Ye have neither 
 heard his voice at any time, nor 
 seen his shape. 
 
 38 And ye have not his word 
 abiding in you : for whom he hath 
 sent, him ye believe not. 
 
 39 Search the Scriptures ; for in 
 them ye think ye have eternal Hfe : 
 and they are they which testify of 
 me. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. V. 301 
 
 those hearts have been which could hear such testimony^ 
 and yet remain unmoved ! Bat it only proves the truth 
 of the old saying, — that unbelief does not arise so much 
 from want of evidence, as from want of will to believe. 
 
 Let us observe for one thing in this passage, the lionout 
 Christ puts on His faithful servants. See how He speaks 
 of John the Baptist. — *' He bare witness of the truth ;" — 
 " He was a burning and a shining light." — John had pro- 
 bably passed away from his earthly labours when these 
 words w^ere spoken. He had been persecuted, imprisoned, 
 and put to death by Herod, — none interfering, none trying 
 to prevent his murder. But this murdered disciple was 
 not forgotten by his Divine Master. If no one else remem- 
 bered him, Jesus did. He had honoured Christ, and Christ 
 honoured him. 
 
 These things ought not to be overlooked. They are 
 'vritten to teach us that Christ cares for all His believing 
 people, and never forgets them. Forgotten and despised 
 by the world, perhaps, they are never forgotten by their 
 Saviour. He knows where they dwell, and what their 
 trials are. A book of remembrance is written for them. 
 " Their tears are all in His bottle." (Psalm Ivi. 8.) Their 
 names are graven on the palms of His hands. He notices 
 all they do for Him in this evil world, though they think it 
 not worth notice, and He will confess it one day publicly, 
 before His Father and the holy angels. He that bore 
 witness to John the Baptist never changes. Let believers 
 remember this. In their worst estate they may boldly say 
 with David, — " I am poor and needy ; yet the Lord 
 thinketh upon me." (Psalm xl. 17.) 
 
 Let us observe, for another thing, the honour Christ 
 puts upon miracles^ as an evideiice of Sis being the 
 Messiah. He says, — " 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." 
 
302 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 The miracles of the Lord receive far less attention, in 
 the present day, as proofs of His Divine mission, than they 
 ought to do. Too many regard them with a silent incre- 
 dulity, as things which, not having seen, they cannot be 
 expected to care for. Not a few openly avow that they 
 do not believe in the possibility of such things as miracles, 
 and would fain strike them out of the Bible as weak stories, 
 which, like burdensome lumber, should be cast overboard, 
 to lighten the ship. 
 
 But, after all, there is no getting over the fact, that in 
 the days when our Lord was upon earth. His miracles 
 produced an immense effect on the minds of men. They 
 aroused attention to Him that worked them. They ex- 
 cited inquiry, if they did not convert. They were so 
 many, so public, and so incapable of being explained 
 away, that our Lord's enemies could only say that they 
 were done by satanic agency. That they were done they 
 could not deny. " This man," they said, " doeth many 
 miracles." (John xi. 47.) The facts which wise men 
 pretend to deny now, no one pretended to deny eighteen 
 hundred years ago. 
 
 Let the enemies of the Bible take our Lord's last and 
 greatest miracle — His own resurrection from the dead — 
 and disprove it if they can. When they have done that, 
 it will be time to consider what they say about miracles 
 in general. They have never answered the evidence of 
 it yet, and they never will. Let the friends of the Bible 
 not be moved by objections against miracles, until that 
 one miracle has been fairly disposed of. If that is 
 proved unassailable, they need not care much for quib- 
 bling arguments against other miracles. If Christ did 
 really rise from the dead by His own power, there is none 
 of His mighty works which man need hesitate to believe. 
 
 Let us observe, lastly, in these verses, the honour that 
 Christ piits upon the /Scriptures. He refers to them in 
 
803 
 
 concluding His list of evidences, as the great witnesses to 
 Hira. " Search the Scriptures," He says : " they are they 
 which testify of me." 
 
 The " Scriptures" of which our Lord speaks are of course 
 the Old Testament. And His words show the important 
 truth which too many are apt to overlook, — that every 
 part of our Bibles is meant to teach us about Christ. 
 Christ is not merely in the Gospels and Epistles. Christ is 
 to be found directly and indirectly in the Law, the Psalms, 
 and the Prophets. In the promises to Adam, Abraham, 
 Moses, and David, — in the types and emblems of the cere- 
 monial law, — in the predictions of Isaiah and the other 
 prophets, — Jesus, the Messiah, is everywhere to be found 
 in the Old Testament. 
 
 How is it that men see these things so little ? The 
 answer is plain. They do not " search the Scriptures." 
 They do not dig into that wondrous mine of wisdom and 
 knowledge, and seek to become acquainted with its con- 
 tents. Simple, regular reading of our Bibles is the grand 
 secret of establishment in the faith. Ignorance of the 
 Scriptures is the root of all error. 
 
 And now what will men believe, if they do not believe 
 the Divine mission of Christ? Great indeed is the 
 obstinacy of infidelity. A cloud of witnesses testify that 
 Jesus was the Son of God. To talk of wanting evidence 
 is childish folly. The plain truth is, that the chief seat of 
 unbelief is the heart. Many do not wish to believe, and 
 therefore remain unbelievers. 
 
 Notes. John Y. 30—39. 
 
 30. — [/ can of rkine own self etc.] This verse is perhaps one of 
 the most difficult in Scripture. I* is so because the subject of 
 it is that great mystery, — the unity of God the Father and God 
 the Son. Man has no language to express adequately the idea 
 that has to be conveyed. The general thought of the verse seems 
 to be aa follows : — 
 
304 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 " In consequence of the close relation between Me and the 
 Father, I cannot do anything independently and separately from 
 Him. 'I judge,' and decide, and speak on all points, in entire 
 harmony with the Father, as though I heard Him continually at 
 My side ; and so judging and speaking My judgment on all 
 points is always right. It is right now, and will be seen right 
 at the great account of the last day. For in all that I do I seek 
 not to do My Own will only, but the will of Him that sent Me, 
 since there is an entire harmony between My will and His." 
 
 Let it be carefully noted that at this part of His address our 
 Lord ceases to speak in the third person of Himself as " the 
 Son of man," and begins to use the first person, — "I can," "I 
 hear," " I judge," etc. 
 
 " Of mine own self" does not mean "unhelped and unas- 
 sisted," but "from myself," — ^from My own independent volition 
 and action. 
 
 Chrysostom remarks, — " Just as when we say, it is impossible 
 for God to do wrong, we do not impute to Him any weakness, 
 but confess in Him an unutterable power; so also when Christ 
 saith, ' I can of my own self do nothing,' the meaning is that it 
 is impossible, — my nature admits not, — that I should do any- 
 thing contrary to the Father." 
 
 " As I hear" is an expression adapted to man's comprehen- 
 sion, to convey the idea of the unity between the Father and 
 the Son. It is like verse 19th, where it is said, " The Son can do 
 nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do." It is also 
 like the words used of the Holy Grhost, — " He shall not speak of 
 himself, but whatsoever he shall Aear, that shall he speak." 
 (John xvi. 13.) 
 
 Chrysostom remarks, — " Just as when Christ said, ' we speak 
 that we do know, and testify that we have seen,' and John the 
 Baptist said, * that which he hath seen and heard he testifieth,' 
 (John iii, 11, 32,) both expressions are used concerning exact 
 knowledge, and not concerning mere 'seeing' and 'hearing;' — so 
 in this place, when Christ speaks of 'hearing,' He declares no- 
 thing else than that it is impossible for Him to desire anything 
 save what the Father desireth." 
 
 *' I judge" applies not only to all Christ's judgments and de- 
 cisions as Mediator when He was upon earth, but to His final 
 judgment at the last day. 
 
 '■ My judgment is just" would probably remind the Jews of 
 the prophecies about Messiah. (Isa. xi. 3 and Dan. vii. 13.) 
 
 " I seek not mine own will" must be inteipreted with special 
 reference to our Lord's Divine nature, as Son of God. Having 
 
JOHX, CHAP. Y. 305 
 
 as Q-od, one will with the Father, it was not possible for Him to 
 seek His own will independently of the Father. Hence the judg- 
 ment was not His only, but His Father's also. — As Son of man 
 He had a human will disiinct from His Divine will, aa when 
 He said, " Let this cup pass from me : neveriheiess not as I 
 will, but as thou wilt." (Matt. xxvi. 39.) But the will here 
 seems to be His Divine wilh 
 
 Chrysostom remarks, — '' What Christ implieth is of this kind : 
 — not that the will of the Father is one and His own another, 
 but that as one will in one mind, so is Mine own will and My 
 Father's." 
 
 Once more we must remember the extreme difficulty of han- 
 dling such a subject as the one before us. The distinction between 
 the Persons in the Trinity, and the Unity of their essence at 
 the same time, must always be a deep thing to man, hard to con- 
 ceive, and harder still to speak or write about. 
 
 31. — [7/" / hear witness of myself etc.] This verse must be in- 
 terpreted with caution and reasonable qualification. It would 
 be folly and blasphemy to say that our Lord's testimony about 
 Himself must be false. What the verse does appear to mean 
 is this : — " If I have no other testimony to bring forward in proof 
 of My Messiahship but My own word, my testimony would be 
 justly open to suspicion." — Our Lord knew that in any disputed 
 question a man's assertions in his own favour are worth little 
 or nothing. He tells the Jews that He did not want them to be- 
 heve Him merely because He said He was the Son of Grod. He 
 would show them that He had other witnesses, aud these wit- 
 nesses He next proceeds to bring forward. A comparison of 
 this verse with John viii. 14 shows at once that the meaning 
 of the words, " My witness is not true," must be qualified and 
 restrained, or else one place of Scripture would contradict the 
 other. 
 
 32. — [Tliere is another that heareth witness.] There are two dis- 
 tinct and diJBferent views of this expression. 
 
 (a.) Some, as Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthjmius, Light- 
 foot, Brentius, Grrotius, Ferus, Barradius, Quesnel, Whitby, 
 Doddridge, Grill, think that the "other witness" is John the 
 Baptist. 
 
 (&.) Some, as Cyril, Athanasius, Calvin, Beza, Gualter, Bacer, 
 Ecolampadius, Zwingle, Rnpertus, Flacius, Calovius, Cocceius, 
 Piscator, Musculus, Aretius, Toletus, Nifanius, Bollock, Poole, 
 Leigh, Diodati, Hammond, Trapp, Hutcheson, Henry, Buikitt, 
 Baxter, Bloomfield, Lampe, Bengel, Pearce, A. Clarke, Scott. 
 Barnes, St'er, Alford, Webster, think that *' the other witness,'* 
 is God the Father. 
 
806 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 I feel no doubt in my own mind that this last is the coi- 
 rect view. The use of the present tense, — " witnesseth,*' — is a 
 strong proof of it. John the Baptist's testimony was a thing 
 past and gone. — Our Lord declares that His Father had borne 
 distinct testimony to Him, and supphed abundant evidence, if 
 they, the Jews, would only receive it. And He adds, "his tes- 
 timony is true." He will never bear witness to a lie. — Then 
 having laid down this general proposition, He goes on to show 
 the threefold testimony which God had provided : — first, John 
 the Baptist; — secondly, the miracles which the Father had com- 
 missioned Him to work ; — and, thirdly, the Scriptures. 
 
 The expression, " I know," probably imphes the deep con- 
 sciousness which our Lord had, even in His humiUation, of His 
 Father's perfect righteousness and truthfulness. It means much 
 more than a mere man's " I know." " I know and have known 
 from all eternity that my Father's testimony is perfect truth." 
 
 33. — [Ye sent unto John, etc.] In this sentence the word "ye " must 
 be taken emphatically. It is " ye yourselves." The meaning of 
 the verse seems to be, — " My first witness is John the Baptist. 
 Now ye yourselves sent unto him at an early period of his min- 
 istry, and ye know that he told you One greater than himself was 
 coming, whose messenger he was, and that afterwards he said of 
 Me, ' Behold the Lamb of God.' You cannot deny that he was 
 a prophet indeed. Yet he bore faithful witness unto Me. He 
 told you the truth." 
 
 There can be no doubt that our Lord refers to the formal mission 
 of *' priests and Levites from Jerusalem " to John the Baptist, 
 described in John i. 19. 
 
 34. — [But Ireceive not testimony from man, efc] This sentence seems 
 meant to remind the Jews that they must not suppose our Lord 
 depended either solely or chiefly on man's testimony. "Not 
 that I would have you think I rest My claim to be received as 
 the Messiah on the witness of John the Baptist, or of any other 
 man. But I say these things about John and his witness to Me 
 in order to remind you of what you heard him say, and that 
 remembering his testimony to Me you may believe and be saved." 
 
 Here, as elsewhere, we should note how our Lord presses home 
 on the Jews the inconsistency of admitting John the Baptist to 
 be a prophet sent from God, while they refused to believe Him- 
 self as the Messiah. If they believed John they ought in consis- 
 tency to have believed Him. (See Matt. xxi. 23 — 27.) 
 
 35. — [He was a hu7ming.. .light] This is very high testimony to 
 John. Doubtless he was not " the light," as Christ was. But 
 still he was not an ordinary lamp lighted from above, as all true 
 believers are. He was pre-eminently " the lamp,'* a lamp of 
 
JOHN, CHAP. Y. 307 
 
 peculiar power and brilliancy, a *' burning " and a " shining" light 
 like a flaming beacon or light-house seen from afar. 
 
 I think the expression '' he was " shows that at the time when 
 our Lord spoke, John the Baptist was either in prison or dead. 
 At any rate his public ministry was ended. " He used to be a 
 light. He is burning and shining no longer." 
 
 Chrysostora remarks, — " He called John a torch or lamp, sig- 
 nifying that he had not light of himself, but by the grace of the 
 Spirit." 
 
 [ Ye were willing for a season to rejoice^ This refers to the ex- 
 traordinary popularity and acceptance of John the Baptist when 
 his ministry first began. " Then went out unto him Jerusalem 
 and all Judasa, and all the country round about Jordan." (Matt, 
 iii. 5.) " Many of the Pharisees and Sadducees came to his 
 baptism." (Matt. iii. 7.) It was an ignorant excitement that 
 brought many of John's hearers to him. They thought most pro- 
 bably, that the Messiah, of whom he spoke, and whose way he 
 came to prepare, would be a temporal king and conqueror, and 
 would give to Israel its old pre-eminence on earth. But be the 
 motives what they miglit, the fact remains that John's ministry 
 attracted immense attention, and awakened the curiosity of the 
 whole Jewish nation. "They willingly rejoiced in the light 
 which John lifted up," They seemed to take pleasure in coming 
 to him, hearing him, following him, and submitting to his bap- 
 tism. 
 
 The expression, *' for a season," seems purposely used to remind 
 the Jews of the very temporary and transitory nature of the im- 
 pressions which John's ministry produced on them. 
 
 Stier remarks, — "Man generally, even a prophet, can only give 
 light by burning, like a lighted candle, until he is burnt out, and 
 his mission on earth ceases. Thus did the Baptist burn, brightly 
 but rapidly." 
 
 Burkitt remarks, — " It has been an old practice among profes- 
 sors not to like their pastors long, though they have been never 
 such burning and shining lights, John was not changed, but his 
 hearers were changed. He did burn and shine in the candlestick 
 with equal zeal and lustre to the last, but they had changed their 
 thoughts of him," 
 
 3. — \^But I h-ave greater witness. ..John^ This means, " although 
 John the Baptist was a witness to My being the Messiah, and the 
 Son of God, his was not the only testimony I bid you receive. 
 There is testimony even more important than his, namely, that 
 My miracles." The Greek means literally, " the greater wit- 
 ness;" — " The witness tiiat I l^ve is greater." 
 
808 . EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Flacius suggests that our Lord here and in the preceding verse 
 reminds the Jews how willing they were at first to receive 
 John's ministry, and almost seemed to think he was the Messiah. 
 Yet all this time "John did no miracle." — But when the true 
 Messiah appeared, doing mighty " works," the Jews did not show 
 him even as much attention as they had shown to John. 
 
 l^Tlie worTcs... Father hath given, etc.] This is a distinct appeal to 
 miracles, as an important proof of our Lord's Messiahship and 
 Divinity. Four times in this Gospel we find the same appeal. 
 (John iii. 2; x. 25 ; xv. 24.) The evidence of miracles should 
 never be hghtly esteemed. We are apt to underrate their value 
 because they were wrought so long ago. But in the days when 
 they were wrought they were great facts, which demanded the 
 attention of all who saw them, and could not be evaded. Unless 
 the Jews could explain them away, they were bound, as honest 
 and reasonable men, to believe our Lord's Divine mission. That 
 they really were wrought the Jews never appear to have denied. 
 In fact they dared not attempt to deny them. What they did 
 do wjis to ascribe them to Satanic agency. All who attempt to 
 deny the reality of our Lord's miracles in the present d y, would 
 do well to remember that those who had the best opportunity 
 of judging, namely, the men who saw these miracles, and lived 
 within hearing of them, never disputed the fact that they were 
 wrought. If the enemies of our Lord could have proved that His 
 miracles were only tricks, legerdemain, and impostures, it stands 
 to reason they would have been only too glad to show it to the 
 world, and to silence Him for ever. 
 
 Five things should always be noted about our Lord's miracles. 
 (1.) Their number : they were not a few only, but very many 
 indeed. (2.) Their greatness : they were not little, but mighty 
 interferences with the ordinary course of nature. (3.) Their 
 puhlicity : they were generally not done in a corner, but in open 
 day, and before many witnesses, and often before enemies. (4.) 
 Their character : they were almost always works of love, mercy, 
 and compassion, helpful and beneficial to man, and not mere 
 barren exhibitions of power. (5.) Their direct appeal to mens 
 senses : they were visible, and would bear any examination. The 
 difference between them and the boasted miracles of the Church 
 of Rome, on all these points, is striking and instructive. 
 
 The iiianner in which our Lord speaks of His miracles is very 
 remarkable. He calls them, — " The worlds that the Father hath 
 given me that I should finish." He carefully avoids the appear- 
 ance of want of unity between the Father and Himself, even in 
 the working of miracles. They are not works which He did of 
 His own independent will, but " works which the Father hath 
 given me," works which it had been arranged in the eternal 
 
JOHN, CHAP. V. 809 
 
 counsels the Son should work, when He became man and dwelt 
 upon earth. Precisely the same expression is used elsewhere 
 about " the words " our Lord spake, as here about " the works:" 
 "I have given unto them the words which tliou gavest me." 
 (John xvii. 8.) 
 
 37. — [And the Father himself. ...witness of me^ There is undeniable 
 difficulty about these words. It is not clear to what " witness 
 of the Father " our Lord here refers. 
 
 (a..) Some, as Chrysostom, Brentius, Bullinger, Grualter, Ferus, 
 Toletus, Barradius, Cartwright, Chemnitius, Rollock, Jansenius, 
 Trapp, Baxter, Hammond, Burkitt, Lampe, Bengel, Henry, Scott, 
 Gill, think that our Lord refers to the audible testimony borne to 
 Him by the Father at His baptism, and at the transfiguration, 
 when He said, — "This is my beloved Son, hear him." (Matt. iii. 
 17 ; xvii. 5.) But it surely is a capital objection to this theory, 
 that this voice of the Father was in all probability heard by no- 
 body excepting John the Baptist at the baptism, and Peter, 
 James, and John at the transfiguration. At this rate it would 
 be entirely a private testimony, and of no avail to the general 
 body of the Jewish nation. 
 
 (b.) Some, as Theophylact, Euthymius, Eupertus, Calvin, Coc- 
 ceius, Pearce, Tholuck, Bloomfield, Tittman, A. Clark, D. Brown, 
 Alforcl, Burgon, think that our Lord refers to the testimony the 
 Father has borne to Him generally throughout the Old Testa- 
 ment Scriptures, and that the sentence before us should be taken 
 in close connection with the next verse but one, beginning, 
 " Search the Scriptures." In fact that expression would then 
 be the explanation of our Lord's meaning. 
 
 Of the two views I decidedly prefer the second one. It cer- 
 tainly seems the least difficult, and open to the fewest objections. 
 There is a third view, supported by Olshausen and Bucer, viz., 
 that the " witness " here means the inwarrd witness of the Spirit 
 in the hearts of believers. This, however, appears to me wholly 
 out of the question. It is a witness that would be useless to the 
 world at large. 
 
 Both here and elsewhere we must take care that we do not 
 attach the idea of " inferiority " to the expression '' sent '" by 
 the Father. Rollock remarks, — " It is quite possible that an 
 equal may send an equal to dib^harge some office." Cyril 
 remarks, — " Mission and obedience, being sent and obeying, 
 do not take away equality of power in the sender and the sent 
 one." 
 
 [ Ye have neither heard.... seen his shape.^ This appears to be a 
 parenthetical sentence, as well as the verse that follows. It 
 certainly seems to strengthen the view that when our Lord spoka 
 
310 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 of His Father •' bearing witness," He could not have meant the 
 audible witness of His voice at the baptism or transfiguration. 
 In fact the sentence seems purposely to preclude the notion. It 
 is as though our Lord said, " Do not suppose that I mean any 
 audible testimony of voice, or apparition, or vision, when I speak 
 of My Father bearing witness to me. I mean testimony of a 
 very different kind, even the testimony of His Word." 
 
 The expression " not seen His shape," teaches the same great 
 truth we find elsewhere, — viz., that the Father is invisible, and 
 has never been seen by mortal man. He who appeared to Abra- 
 ham was the Second Person of the Trinity, and not the Father. 
 St. Paul says distinctly of the Father, — " whom no man hath 
 seen, nor can see." (1 Tim. vi. 17.) The idea of artists and 
 painters, when they represent the Father as an aged man, is a 
 mere irreverent invention of their own brains, without the 
 slightest warrant of Scripture. 
 
 Rupertus and Ferus suggest that the latter part of this verso 
 was spoken to prevent the Jews thinking that our Lord spoke 
 of Joseph, His supposed father. This, however, seems a rather 
 improbable and fanciful idea. 
 
 38. — [And ye have not his word, Sc] This verse seems meant to 
 remind the Jews that with all their pretended reverence for Grod, 
 and affected zeal against blasphemies of Him, they were really 
 ignorant of God's mind. Their reverence for Him was only a 
 form. Their zeal for Him was a blind fanaticism. They knew 
 no more of His mind than of His shape or voice. They Avere 
 not acquainted with His Word. It did not dwell in their hearts 
 and guide their rehgion. They proved their own ignorance by 
 not believing Him whom the Father had sent. Had they really 
 been familiar with the writings of the Old Testament they would 
 have believed. 
 
 Our Lord evidently implies that real knowledge of God's Word 
 will always lead a man to faith in Christ. Where there is no 
 faith we may rightly assume the Bible is either not read, or read 
 in a wrong spirit. Ignorance and unbelief will go together. 
 
 Locke holds the curious opinion, that the " word" in this verse 
 means the " Personal Word," as at John i. 1. " Ye have not 
 Me, the Eternal Word, dwelling in your hearts." But Christ 
 nowhere calls Himself " the Word," and the idea does not har- 
 monize with the context. 
 
 Ecolampadius thinks that in this and the preceding verse there 
 is a reference to Deut. xviii. 15 — 19, where the Lord promised a 
 prophet to the Jews like unto Moses, because they had said, — • 
 " Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God, neither 
 let me see this great fire any more, that I die not." He thinks 
 
JOHX, CHAP. V. 311 
 
 ctir Lord reminds them of this. God had fulfilled His promise, 
 and sent them a prophet like unto Moses, and now they would 
 not believe on Him ! 
 
 69. — [Search the Scriptures.'] This famous sentence is interpreted 
 two different ways. 
 
 (a.) Some, as Cyril, Erasmus, Ecolampadins, Beza, Brentius, 
 Piscator, Camero, Poole, Toletus, Lightfoot, Lampe, Bengel, 
 Doddridge, Bloomfield, Tholuck, A. Clark, Scholefield, Barnes, 
 Burgon, D. Brown, Webster, think that our Lord spoke in the 
 indicative mood, simply making an assertion, — " Ye do search." 
 
 (&.) Some, as Chrysostom, Augustine, Theophylact, Euthy- 
 mius, Luther, Calvin, Cartwright, Gualter, Grotius, Rollock, 
 Ferus, Calovius, Jansenius, Cocceius, Barradius, Musculus, Nifa- 
 nius, Maldonatns, Cornehus ^ Lapide, Leigh, Whitby, Hammond, 
 Slier, Alford, Wordsworth, think that He spoke in the impe- 
 rative mood, giving a command, — " Search," — as our version 
 gives it. 
 
 I decidedly prefer this latter view. It is more forcible, and 
 more in keeping with our Lord's general style of address. Above 
 all it seems to me to agree far better with the context. Our 
 Lord had told the Jews that His Fatiier had borne witness of 
 Him, though not by audible voice, nor by visible apparition. 
 How then had He borne witness ? They would find it in His 
 Word. " Go and search your own Scriptures," our Lord seems 
 to say. " Examine them, and become really acquainted with 
 their contents; you will find that they testify clearly and dis- 
 tinctly of Me. If you wish to know God the Father's testimony 
 to Me, search the Scriptures." 
 
 The word rendered *' search" means " search minutely and 
 diligently." It appears to me intentionally used, to show thnt 
 the Jews should not be content with mere reading. The Sep- 
 tuagint version of Prov. ii. 4, has an expression like it. 
 
 Chrysostom remarks, — " When Christ referred the Jews to the 
 Scriptures, He sent them not to a mere reading, but to a careful 
 and considerate search. He said not, 'read,' but, 'search,' 
 Since the sayings about Him required great attention (for they 
 had been concealed from the beginning for the advantage of men 
 of that time). He bids them now dig down with care, that they 
 might discern what lay in the depths below. These saying'? were 
 not on the surface, nor were they cast forth to open view, but 
 lay like some treasure hidden very deep," 
 
 Some, who think the word "search" should be taken as an 
 indicative, ''ye search," maintain that our Lord spoke ironically, 
 and meant, " Ye pretend to make a minute investigation of 
 Scripture, and search into ths letter of it, but never get any 
 
812 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 further." I can see little ground for this view. The Tvord 
 " search" is never used in a bad sense in Scripture (1 Pet. i. 11.) 
 The chief argument in favour of the " indicative" side of the ques- 
 tion is the notorious Rabbinical custom of minutely scrutinizing 
 and reverencing every syllable of Scripture. To this custom of 
 honouring the letter of Scripture, while neglecting its spirit, 
 many advocates of the "indicative" here think that our Lord 
 referred. Brentius gives a full account of the length to which 
 the Jews went in their reverence for the letter of Scripture, 
 such as counting the letters of each book, etc., and thinks that 
 this was in our Lord's mind. I cannot however agree with this 
 view. 
 
 [In them ye think ye have eternal life.] In this sentence the 
 first " ye" must be taken emphatically, as in the 33rd verse. 
 " Think" does not imply that it was a doubtful point, or mere 
 matter of opinion. It is rather, " Ye yourselves think, and think 
 rightly, — it is one of the dogmas of your faith, — that ye have in 
 the Scriptures the way to eternal life pointed out." 
 
 Chemnitius remarks, — "The words 'ye think' mean that 
 common persuasion and opinion of all men concerning Scrip- 
 ture, which, like an axiom in science, is established, firm, and 
 certain." 
 
 Let it be noted that many Christians are just in the unsatis- 
 factory state of the Jews here described. Like them, they 
 " think," and hold it as a dogma of their creed, that they " have 
 eternal life in the Scriptures." But, like them, they never read, 
 mark, learn, and inwardly digest what Scripture contains. 
 
 Ecolampadius remarks, — "Scripture alone does not make a 
 man any the better, nor even preaching, by itself, except by 
 the Holy Grhost aiding. It is the peculiar otiice of the externa! 
 Word to supply testimony ; but it is the Spirit of God alone that 
 can make the heart of man assent." 
 
 [They are they which testify of me.] This sentence is a strong 
 and weighty declaration of the value of the Old Testament 
 Scriptures. It was to them exclusively, of course, that our Lord 
 referred. He says, "they testify of me." In direct prophecies, 
 in promises, in typical persons, in typical ceremonies, the Old 
 Testament Scripture all through testifies of Christ. We read 
 thein to very little purpose if we do not discern this. 
 
 Ferus remarks that there are three ways in which the Scrip- 
 tures testify of Christ. (1.) Generally: they are as it were the 
 voice of the uncreated Word, ever speaking to man in every 
 part of them. (2.) In figures: the paschal lamb, the brazen 
 . serpent, and all the sacrifices of the law were witnesses of Christ. 
 (3.) In direct proj.hecies. 
 
JOHN, CHAP. V. 
 
 813 
 
 Let us note in this verse the high honour which our Lord puts 
 on the Old Testament Scriptures. He distinctly endorses the 
 Jewish Canon of in^^pired writings. Those modern wrirers 
 who kbour to depreciate them, and bring them Into disrepute, 
 show very lit lie of Christ's mujd. Much infidelity begins with 
 an ignorant contempt of the Old Testament. Stier remarks, — 
 *' Israel, possessing still the Old Testament, will enter into the 
 kingdom, when the despisers of Scripture in the final unbelief 
 of Christendom will be judged and condemned," 
 
 Let us note further what a plain duty it is to read the Scrip- 
 tures. Men have no right to expect spiritual hght if they ne- 
 glect the great treasury of all light. If even of the Old Testa- 
 ment our Lord said, "Search," " it testifies of me," how much 
 more is it a duty to search the whole Bible I An idle neglect of 
 the Bible is one secret of the ignorant formal Christianity which 
 is so widely prevalent in these latter days. God's blessing on a 
 dihgent study of the Scripture is strikingly illustrated in the case 
 of the Bereans. (Acts xvii. 11.) 
 
 JOHN Y. 40— 47. 
 
 ■tO And ye will not come to me, 
 that je might have Ufe. 
 
 41 I receive not hoiKxir from 
 men. 
 
 42 But I know you, that ye have 
 not the love of God in you. 
 
 43 I am come in my Father's 
 name, and ye receive me not: if an- 
 other shall come in his own name, 
 hhn ye will receive. 
 
 44 How can ye believe, which 
 receive honour one of another, and 
 
 seek not the honour that cometh 
 from God only? 
 
 45 Do not think that I wiU ac- 
 cuse you to the Father : there is one 
 that accuseth you, even Moses, in 
 whom ye trust. 
 
 46 For had ye believed Moses, 
 ye would have believed me ; for he 
 wrote of me. 
 
 47 But if ye beheve not his writ- 
 ings, how shall ye believe my 
 words ? 
 
 This passage concludes our Lord Jesus Christ's wondrous 
 defence of His own divine mission. It is a conclusion 
 worthy of the defence, full of heart- searching appeals to 
 the consciences of His enemies, and rich in deep truths. 
 A mighty sermon is followed by a mighty application. 
 
 Let us mark, in this passage, the reaso7i why many souls 
 are lost. The Lord Jesus says to the unbelieving Jews, 
 — " Ye will not come to me that ye might have life." 
 
 14 
 
314 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 These words are a golden sentence, which ought to 
 be engraven in our memories, and treasured up in our 
 minds. It is want of will to come to Christ for salvation 
 that will be found, at last, to have shut the many out of 
 heaven, — It is not men's sins. All manner of sin may be 
 forgiven. — It is not any decree of God. We are not told 
 in the Bible of any whom God has only created to be de- 
 stroyed, — It is not any limit in Christ's work of redemp- 
 tion. He has paid a price suflScient for all mankind. — It is 
 something far more than this. It is man's own innate un- 
 willingness to come to Christ, repent, and believe. Either 
 from pride, or laziness, or love of sin, or love of the world, 
 the many have no mind, or wish, or heart, or desire to 
 seek life in Christ. " God has given to us eternal life, and 
 this life is in his Son." (1 John v. 11 >) But men stand 
 still, and will not stir hand or foot to get life. And this 
 is the whole reason why many of the lost are not saved. 
 
 This is a painful and solemn truth, but one that we can 
 never know too well. It contains a first principle in Chris- 
 tian theology. Thousands, in every age, are constantly 
 labouring to shift the blame of their condition from off 
 themselves. They talk of their inability to change. They 
 tell you complacently, that they cannot help being what 
 they are ! They know, forsooth, that they are wrong, but 
 they cannot be different ! — It will not do. Such talk will 
 not stand the test of the Word of Christ before us. The 
 unconverted are what they are because they have no will 
 to be better. *' Light is come into the world, and men 
 love darkness rather than light." (John iii. 19.) The 
 words of the Lord Jesus wUl silence many : " I would 
 have gathered you, and ye would not be gathered." 
 (Matt, xxiii. 37.) 
 
 Let us mark, secondly, in this passage, one pinncipal 
 cause of unbelief. The Lord Jesus says to the Jews, — 
 *'How can ve believe which receive honour one of 
 
JOHN, CHAP. V. 315 
 
 another, and seek not the honour that cometh of God 
 only?" He meant by that saying, that they were not 
 honest in their reh'gion. With all their apparent desire 
 to hear and learn, they cared more in reality for pleasing 
 man than God. In this state of mind they were never 
 likely to believe. 
 
 A deep principle is contained in this saying of our Lord's, 
 and one that deserves special attention. True faith does 
 not depend merely on the state of man's head and under- 
 standing, but on the state of his heart. His mind may be 
 convinced. His conscience may be pricked. But so long 
 as there is anything the man is secretly loving more than 
 God, there will be no true faith. The man himself may 
 be puzzled, and wonder why he does not believe. He 
 does not see that he is like a child sitting on the lid of 
 his box, and wishing to open it, but not considering that 
 his own weight keeps it shut. Let a man make sure that 
 he honestly and really desires first the praise of God. It is 
 the want of an honest heart which makes many stick fast 
 in their religion all their days, and die at length without 
 peace. Those who complain that they hear, and approve, 
 and assent, but make no progress, and cannot get any hold 
 on Christ, should ask themselves this simple question, 
 — " Am I honest ? — Am I sincere ? — Do I really desire 
 first the praise of God ?" 
 
 Let us mark, lastly, in this passage, the manner in 
 which Christ speaks of Moses. He says to the Jews, — 
 " Had ye believed Moses ye would have believed me : for 
 he wrote of me." 
 
 These words demand our special attention in these 
 latter days. That there really was such a person as 
 Moses, — ^that he really was the author of the writings 
 commonly ascribed to him, — on both these points our 
 Lord's testimony is distinct. " He wrote of me." Can 
 we suppose for a moment that our Lord was only accom- 
 
816 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 modating Himself to the prejudices and traditions of Hia 
 hearers, and that He spoke of Moses as a writer, though 
 He knew in His heart that Moses never wrote at all? 
 Such an idea is profane. It would make out our Lord 
 to have been dishonest. — Can we suppose for a moment 
 that our Lord was ignorant about Moses, and did not 
 know the wonderful discoveries which learned men, 
 falsely so called, have made in the nineteenth cen- 
 tury ? Such an idea is ridiculous blasphemy. To 
 imagine the Lord Jesus speaking ignorantly in such a 
 chapter as the one before us, is to strike at the root of 
 all Christianity. — There is but one conclusion about the 
 matter. There was such a person as Moses. The writings 
 commonly ascribed to him. were written by him. The 
 facts recorded in them are worthy of all credit. Our 
 Lord's testimony is an unanswerable argument. The 
 sceptical writers against Moses and the Pentateuch have 
 greatly erred. 
 
 Let us beware of handling the Old Testament irreve- 
 rently, and allowing our minds to doubt the truth of any 
 part of it, because of alleged difficulties. The simple fact 
 that the writers of the New Testament continually refer 
 to the Old Testament, and speak even of the most 
 miraculous events recorded in it as undoubtedly true, 
 should silence our doubts^ Is it at all likely, probable, 
 or credible, that we of the nineteenth century are better 
 informed about Moses than Jesus and His Apostles ? God 
 forbid that we should think so ! Then let us stand fast, 
 and not doubt that every word in the Old Testament, as 
 well as in the New, was given by inspiration of God. 
 
 Notes. John Y. 40 — il. 
 
 40. — [And ye will not come to me..Jife.] The connection between 
 this verse and the preceding one is not very clear. It is one of 
 those abrupt elliptical transitions which occur frequently in St, 
 
JOHN, CHAP. V. 817 
 
 John's writings. I conjecture tlie link must be soraeth.^og of this 
 kind : " Tlie Scriptures testify plainly of Me. A7-cd yet in the face 
 of this testimony ye have no will or inchnatioa to come to Ma 
 by faith, that ye may have eternal hfe through Me." 
 
 This verse evidently begins the third part of our Lord's address 
 to the Jews. He had declared the relation between Himself and 
 God the Father, He had brought forward the evidence of His 
 own Divine commission, and His claim to be received as tho 
 Messiah, And now He concludes by a most heart-piercing 
 appeal to the consciences of His enemies, in which He exposes 
 the true state of their hearts, and the real reasons why they did 
 not believe in Him. If ever men were plainly dealt with, and 
 received home- thrusts as to their own spiritual condition, it was 
 on this occasion. In reading the conclusion of this chapter, one 
 cannot but feel that a miraculous restraint must have been put 
 on our Lord's enemies. Otherwise it is difficult to understand 
 how they could have allowed Him to bring such cutting and truth- 
 ful charges against them. If ministers desire a warrant for deal- 
 ing plainly with their hearers, and addressing them directly and 
 personally about their sins, they have only to look at their Divine 
 blaster's words in this passage. 
 
 The opening charge that our Lord makes, " Ye will not come 
 to me," misses much of its force in the English language. It is 
 not the future tense of " come " that is used in the G-reek. Two 
 distinct verbs are employed. The right meaning is, " Ye do not 
 will to come," — " Ye have no heart, desire, or inclination to come 
 to Me." 
 
 Let it be noted here that (1.) we are all by nature dead in 
 sins; — that (2.) spiritual life is laid up for sinners in Christ alone ; 
 He is the fountain of life; — that (3.) in order to receive benefit 
 from Christ men must come to him by faith, and believe: be- 
 lieving is coming; — and, finally, (4.) that the real reasons why 
 men do not come to Christ, and consequently die in their sins, is 
 their want of will to come. 
 
 Let it be carefully noted, that both here and elsewhere the loss 
 of man's soul is always attributed in Scripture to man's own 
 want of will to be saved. It is not any decree of God. It is 
 not Grod's unwilhngness to receive. It is not any limitation of 
 Christ's redeeming work and atonement. It is not any want of 
 wid^, broad, fiee, full invitations to repent and beheve. It is 
 simply and entirely man's own fault. — his want of will. For 
 ever let us cleave to this doctrine. Man's salvation, if saved, is 
 entirely of God. Man's ruin, if lost, is entirely of himself. He 
 " loves darkness rather than hght." He will have his own way. 
 
 We should observe in this concluding part of our Lord's 
 address, Ihat He charges the Jews with four distinct sins: (1.) 
 
818 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 want of real w:Il to come to Him, (2.) want of real love to God, 
 (3.) undue desire of man's praise, (4.) want of real faith in Moses' 
 writings. 
 
 4.1. — [/ receive not honour from men.] The connection between 
 these words and the preceding verse is again not very clear. I 
 conjecture that it must be as follows : — " I do not say these things, 
 as if I desired the praise and honour of man. I do not complain 
 of your not coming to Me, as if I only came into the world to 
 seek man's praise. It is not on My own account that I mention 
 your unbelief, but on yours, because it shows the state of your 
 hearts. Do not suppose that I stand in need of followers, and 
 am covetous of man's favour." 
 
 42. — [But I know you.. .not the love of God, c&c] The sense and 
 connection here appear to be as follows : — " But the plain truth 
 is, that I know and have long known the state of your hearts, 
 and I know that you have no real love of God in you. You 
 profess to worship the one true God, and to give Him honour. 
 But you show by your conduct, that with all your profession you 
 do not really love God." 
 
 To a Jewish hearer this tremendous charge must have been 
 peculiarly galling. It was a charge that none but our Lord 
 could make with equal decision, because He read men's hearts, 
 and knew what was in them. 
 
 The word " I know " is literally " I have known." Alford 
 paraphrases the sentence, — " By long trial and bearing with your 
 manners these many generations, and personally also, I have 
 known, and do know you." 
 
 In another place we find our Lord naming this sin as one of 
 the special sins of the Pharisees. "Woe unto you, Pharisees I 
 for ye tithe mint and rue, and all manner of herbs, and pass over 
 judgment and the love of God." (Luke xi. 42.) 
 
 Ferus remarks that the increduhty of the Jews did not arise 
 from want of evidence, but want of love towards God. 
 
 43. — [7 am cono^ in my Father's name... receive me not] This sen- 
 tence contains a proof of the assertion made in the preceding 
 verse. " You show that you have no real love for God, by your 
 not receiving Me who have come in my Father's name, and de- 
 sire nothing so much as His honour. If you really loved and 
 honoured God as you professed to clo, you would gladly receive 
 and honour His Son." 
 
 [Tf another.. .in his own name, him ye will receive^ In this sen- 
 tence our Lord supposes a case, to show the corrupt and carnal 
 state of the Jews' hearts. " If another pubHc teacher shall appear, 
 giving himself out to be some great one, not seeking God's 
 
319 
 
 lionour, and doing all in God's name, but aiming to exalt him- 
 self, and g<it honour to himself, you will receive and believe him. 
 You reject Me the true Son of God. You are ready to receive 
 any false pretender who comes among you, though he may give 
 no honour to the God whom you profess to worship. It is true 
 then that you have no real love of God in you." 
 
 I beheve decidedly that our Lord spoke these words propheti- 
 cally. He had in view the many false Christs and false Messiahs 
 who arose within the first hundred years after His desith, and by 
 whom ?o many of the Jews were invariably deluded. Accord- 
 ing to Stier no less than sixty-four false Messiahs appeared to 
 them, and were more or less believed. 
 
 The readiness with which they believed these impostors is a 
 remarkable historical fact, and a striking fulfilment of the words 
 before us. They proved as forward to believe these pretenders 
 to a Divine mission who came in their own names, as they had 
 been backward to believe our Lord. 
 
 I may add, however, that I am one of those who doubt 
 whether the words of our Lord have even yet received their com- 
 plete fulfilment. I think it highly probable that the world may 
 yet see a personal Antichrist arise, who will succeed in obtain- 
 ing credence from a vast portion of the Jewish nation. Then, 
 and not till then, when Antichrist has appeared, this verse will 
 be completely accomphshed. Chrysostom, Cyril, Theophylact, 
 Euthymius, Alcuin, Heinsius, take this view. 
 
 Stier remarks, *' He of whom the Lord here prophecies, is 
 finally Antichrist, with his-open and avowed denial of God and 
 of Christ; with his most daring 'I,' before which all the proud 
 will humbly bow down, because they will find themselves in 
 him, and will honour him as their true God. As the Father 
 reveals Himself in Christ, so will Satan manifest himself in Anti- 
 christ, and give him all his work and witness, and his own 
 honour as the prince of this world ; and the wicked will yield 
 themselves to him, because through unbehef they have already 
 fallen into his nature, and fitly belong to him." 
 
 Wordsworth remarks, " The Fathers were generally of opinion, 
 grounded on this passage, that Antichrist would be received by 
 the Jews." 
 
 44. — [How can ye helieve, etc., etc.] This verse contains a very 
 important principle. The substance of the meaning seems to 
 be as follows : — Our Lord tells the Jews that they were not 
 likely to believe, so long as they cared more for the praise of 
 man than the praise of God. The true cause of their un- 
 belief was a want of honesty and godly sincerity. With all 
 their professed zeal for God, they did not really care so much 
 
320 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 for pleasing Him as for pleasing man. In this state of mind 
 they were never Hkely to have faith, or to come to the know- 
 ledge of the truth. " How can ye believe, receiving and seek- 
 ing honour from one another as ye do now?" It is not 
 possible that you can believe, until you cease from your pre- 
 sent earthly-mindedness, and honestly desire God's praise more 
 than man's. 
 
 The great principle contained in the verse is the close connec- 
 tion between the state of a man's heart and his possessing the 
 gift of faith. Believing or not believing, to have faith or not to 
 have faith, is not a thing that depends only on a man's head 
 being satisfied, and his intellect convinced. It depends far 
 more on the state of a man's heart. If a man is not tlioroughly 
 honest in his professed desire to find out the truth in religion, — 
 if he secretly cherishes any idol which he is resolved not to give 
 up, — if he privately cares for anything more than God's praise, 
 : — he wiU go on to the end of his days doubting, perplexed, dis- 
 satisfied, and restless, and will never find the way to peace. 
 His insincerity of heart is an insuperable barrier in the way of 
 his believing. There is a mine of wisdom in the expression, 
 "An honest and good heart." (Luke viii. 15.) For want of it 
 many a one complains that he cannot get comfort in religion, 
 and cannot see his way towards heaven, when the truth is that 
 his own dishonesty of heart is the cause. There is something he 
 loves more than God. The consequence is that he never feels 
 an honest will to believe. 
 
 The ''can" in this verse should be compared with the "will" 
 in the fortieth verse. " Ye cannot because ye will not." 
 
 [From God only.] This expression would be more literally 
 rendered, " from the only God," — the one true God, whom the 
 Jews boasted that they alone knew and worshipped. 
 
 Doddridge remarks that the whole verse " has much more 
 spirit in it, if we consider it as applied to the members of the 
 Sanhedrim, who had such distinguished titles of honour, than if 
 we only take it as spoken to a mixed multitude." If, as many 
 suppose, our Lord was making a formal defence of Himself and 
 His divine mission before the great Ecclesiastical Assembly of 
 the Jews, His words in this verse would come home to His 
 hearers with stinging power. 
 
 ib. — [Bo not think that J will accuse, etc.] We must not suppose 
 that our Lord literally meant that there was any real likelihood 
 of Moses or Himself standing up to make a formal accusation 
 ngainst the Jews. What He did mean was, that not to believe 
 Him was not to believe Moses. There was no need for Him to 
 accuse them of unbelief Moses himself, for whom they professed 
 such respect, might be thoir accuser, and prove them guilty. 
 
321 
 
 "Even now," He says, "Moses accuseth you. His writing's, 
 daily read in your synagogue, are a constant witness of your 
 unbelief." There may also, it is highly probable, be a reference 
 here to the Song of Moses, where he predicts the unbelief of the 
 people, and deshes the book of the law to be " put in the side 
 of the ark, that it may be there for a witness against thee.' 
 (Deut. xxxii. 26.) 
 
 Chemnitius remarks, ''What the Lord says to the Jews, la 
 exactly as if I were to say to the Papists, It is not I, but the 
 very Fathers whose authority ye allege in favour of your super- 
 stition, who will accuse you of impiety. Or as if we were to say 
 to the Pope, It is not we who accuse and condemn tliee, but 
 C.irist himself, whose vicar thou callest thyself; and Petir whose 
 successor thou wilt have thyself: and Paul whose sw( rd thou 
 pretendest to bear: they it is who will accuse thee." Btza 
 makes much the same remark, and observes, that none will be 
 more opposed to the Roman Catholics in the judgment-day than 
 the Virgin Mary and the saints in whom they profess to trust! 
 
 The notion of some Romanists that the expression "Moses in 
 whom ye trust," justifies the invocation of saints, and putting 
 confidence in them as mediators, is, as Chemnitius observes, too 
 weak and groundless to need refutation. 
 
 46. — [For had ye helieved Moses me.] These words are simply 
 
 an amplification of the idea in the preceding verse. If the Jews 
 had really believed Moses, they could not have helped believing 
 Christ. The witness of Moses to Christ, was so distinct, express, 
 and unmistakeable, that true belief in his writings must mevi- 
 tably have led them to belief in Christ. 
 
 [He wrote of me.] These words are very remarkable. In 
 what sense our Lord used them, we cannot exactly know. At 
 the very least we may conclude He meant that throughout the 
 five books of Mo^es, by direct prophecy, by typical peisons, by 
 typical ceremonies, in many ways, and in divers manner-, Mo.-ehi 
 had written of Him, There is probably a depth of meaning in 
 the Pentateuch that has never yet been fully fathomed. We 
 shall probably find at the last day that Christ was in many a 
 chapter and many a verse, and yet we knew it not. There is a 
 fulness in all Scripture far beyond our conception. 
 
 Let us note carefully that our Lord distinctly speaks of Moses 
 as a real person who, as a matter of history, lived and wrote 
 books, and of his writings as true genuine writings deserving of 
 all credit, and of undeniable authority. In the face of such an 
 expression as this, it is a mournful fact that nny man called a 
 Christian can throw doubt on the existence of Moses, or on the 
 authority of the books attributed to him. 
 
 To say, as son e have done, that our Lord was only acconurio* 
 14* 
 
322 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 dating Himself to the conventional language of the times, and 
 that He did not really mean to assert His own belief either in the 
 existence of Moses, or the autiiority of his writings, is to charge 
 Him with downright dishonesty. It represents Him as One 
 aiding and countenancing the dissemination of a he 1 
 
 To say, as some have done, that our Lord, born of a Jewish 
 woman, and brought up among Jews, was not above the igno- 
 rant prejudices of the Jews, ai:d did not really know that Moses 
 ever existed, and that his writings are full of mistakes, is to 
 talk downright blasphemy and nonsense. Fancy the eternal 
 Son of God at any time talking ignorantly I Fancy above all 
 that any trace of Jewish ignorance would be likely to be found 
 in this chapter of St. John's gospel, in which, above all other 
 chapters perhaps, our Lord's divine knowledge is most strikingly 
 brought out ! 
 
 47 — \If y& believe not his writings^ etc.] This verse is an extension 
 of the thought contained in the preceding one, and a solemn and 
 mournful conclusion of the whole address. There is evidently 
 an intentional contrast between "writings" and 'Svords," as if 
 our Lord would remind the Jews that " writings" are generally 
 more relied upon than "sayings." — "If you do not really believe 
 what your own honoured lawgiver Moses wrote, — and it is plain 
 that you do not, — it is not likely that you will believe what I 
 SAY. If you have no real faith in the things written in your 
 Scriptures by that very Moses, for whom you profess such rever- 
 ence, your favourite teacher and lawgiver, it is not to be wonder- 
 ed at that you have no faith in what I say, and that I speak to 
 you in vain." 
 
 The Greek word used here for "writings" is very remarkable. 
 It is generally translated "letters," as Luke xxiii. 38. In 2 
 Tim. iii. 15, it is rendered " Scriptures." To my mind it is a 
 strong indirect evidence in favour of the verbal inspiration of 
 Scripture. 
 
 There is a sense in which these words should ring painfully 
 in the ears of all the moiern assailants of the Mosaic writings. 
 It is just as true now, I firmly believe, as it was eighteen hundred 
 years ago. They cannot divide Moses and Christ. If they do 
 not believe the one, they will find sooner or later that they do 
 not believe the other. If they begin with casting oflf Moses and 
 not believing his writings, they will find in the end that to be 
 consistent they must cast off Christ. If they will not have the 
 Old Testament, they will discover at last that they cannot have 
 the New, The two are so linked together that they cannot be 
 separated. "What God hath joined together let no man put 
 asunder." 
 
 In concluding the notes on this wonderful chapter, one would 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 
 
 823 
 
 like to know how this marvellous address was received by those 
 who heard it. But here we meet with one of the peculiar 
 " silences " of Scripture. Not one word is written to tell us what 
 the Jews of Jerusalem thought of our Lord's argument, or what 
 effect it had upon them. Our own duty is clear. Let us take 
 heed that it has some effect on ourselves. 
 
 The amazing fulness of our Lord's teaching appears most 
 strikingly in the address contained in this chapter. Within the 
 short span of twenty-nine verses, we find no less than eleven 
 mighty subjects brought forward: (L) The intimate relation of 
 the Father and the Son (2.) The divine commission and dignity 
 of the Son. (3.) The privileges of the man who believes. (4.) 
 The quickening of the spiritually dead. (5.) The judgment. (6.) 
 The resurrection of the body. (7.) The value of miracles. (8.) 
 The Scriptures. (9.) The corruption of man's will the secret 
 of man's ruin. (10.) The love of man's praise the cause of 
 unbelief. (11.) The importance of the writings of Moses. 
 
 JOHN VL 1—14. 
 
 1 After these things Jesus went 
 ovei' the sea of G-alilee, which is 
 the sea of Tiberias. 
 
 2 And a great multitude fol- 
 lowed him because they saw his 
 miracles which he did on them that 
 were diseased. 
 
 3 And Jesus went up into a 
 mountain, and there he sat with his 
 disciples. 
 
 4 And the passover, a feast of 
 the Jews, was nigh, 
 
 5 When Jesus then lifted up 
 his eyes and saw a great company 
 come unto him, he saith unto Philip, 
 Whence shall we buy bread, that 
 these may eat ? 
 
 6 And this ho said to prove him ; 
 for he himself knew what he would 
 do. 
 
 7 Philip answered him, Two hun- 
 dred pennyworth of bread is not 
 Butficient for them, that every one 
 of them may take a little. 
 
 8 One of his disciples, Andrew, 
 Simon Peter's brother, saith unto 
 him, 
 
 a There is a lad here, which hath 
 
 five barley loaves, and two small 
 fishes : but what are they among so 
 many ? 
 
 10 And Jesus said, Make the 
 men sit down. New there was 
 much grass in the place. So the 
 men sat down, in number about 
 five thousand. 
 
 11 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 fishes 
 as much as they would. 
 
 12 When they were filled, he 
 said unto his disciples, G-ather up 
 the fragments that remain, that 
 nothing be lost. 
 
 13 Therefore they gathered them 
 together, and filled twelve baskets 
 with the fragments of the five 
 barley loaves which remained over 
 and above unto them that had 
 eaten. 
 
 14 Then those men when they 
 had seen the miracle that Jesus did, 
 said, This is of a truth that prophet 
 that should come into the world. 
 
324 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 These verses describe one of our Lord's most remarkabia 
 miracles. Of all the great works that He did, none was 
 done so publicly as this, and before so many witnesses. 
 Of all the miracles related in the Gospels, this is the 
 only one which all the four Gospel-writers alike record. 
 This fact alone (like the four times repeated account of 
 the crucifixion and resurrection) is enough to show that 
 it is a miracle demanding special attention. 
 
 We have, for one thing, in this miracle, a lesson about 
 Chrisfs almighty power. We see our Lord feeding five 
 thousand men with "five barley loaves and two small 
 fishes." We see clear proof that a miraculous event took 
 place in the "twelve baskets of fragments" that remain- 
 ed after all had eaten. Creative power was manifestly 
 exercised. Food was called into existence that did not 
 exist before. In healing the sick, and raising the dead, 
 something was amended or restored that had already 
 existed. In feeding five thousand men with five loaves, 
 something must have been created which before had no 
 existence. 
 
 Such a history as this ought to be specially instructive 
 and encouraging to all who endeavour to do good to 
 souls. It shows us the Lord Jesus " able to save to the 
 uttermost." He is One who has all power over dead hearts, 
 Kot only can He mend that which is broken, — build up 
 that which is ruined, — heal that which is sick, — strengthen 
 that which is weak. He can do even greater things than 
 these. He can call into being that which was not before, 
 and call it out of nothing. We must never despair of any 
 one being sayed. So long as there is life there is hope. 
 Beason and sense may say that some poor sinner is too 
 hardened, or too old to be converted. Faith will reply, — 
 *' Our Master can create as well as renew. With a Saviour 
 who, by His Spirit, can create a new hearty nothing is i^a- 
 possible." 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 325 
 
 We have, for another thing, in this miracle, a lesson 
 about the office of ■mi?iisters. We see the apostles receiving 
 the bread from our Lord's hands, after He had blessed it, 
 and distributing it to the multitude. It was not their 
 hands that made it increase and multiply, but their Mas- 
 ter's. It was His almighty power that provided an unfailing 
 supply. It was their work to receive humbly, and dis 
 tribute faithfully. 
 
 Now here is a lively emblem of the work which a true 
 minister of the New Testament is meant to do. He is not 
 a mediator between God and man. He has no power to 
 put away sin, or impart grace. His whole business is to 
 receive the br-ead of life Avhich his Master provides, and t« 
 distribute it among the souls among whom he labours. He 
 cannot make men value the bread, or receive it. He can- 
 not make it soul-saving, or life-giving, to any one. This is 
 not his work. For this he is not responsible. His whole 
 business is to be a faithful distributor of the food which 
 his Divine Master has provided ; and that done, his office 
 is discharged. 
 
 We have, lastly, in this miracle, a lesson about the suffi- 
 ciency of the Gospel for the wants of all mankind. We 
 see the Lord Jesus supplying the hunger of a huge multi- 
 tude of five thousand men. The provision seemed, at first 
 sight, utterly inadequate for the occasion. To satisfy so 
 many craving mouths with such scanty fare, in such a 
 wilderness, seemed impossible. But the event showed that 
 there was enough and to spare. There was not one who 
 could complain that he was not filled. 
 
 There can be no doubt that this was meant to teach the 
 adequacy of Christ's Gospel to supply the necessities of the 
 wliole world. Weak, and feeble, and foolish as it may seem 
 to man, the simple story of the Cross is enough for all the 
 children of Adam in every part of the globe. The tidings 
 of Christ's death for sinners, and the atonement made by 
 
326 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 that death, is able to meet the hearts and satisfy the con- 
 sciences of all nations, and peoples, and kindreds, and 
 tongues. Carried by faithful messengers, it feeds and sup- 
 plies all ranks and classes. " The preaching of tlie cross is 
 to them that perish foolishness, but to us who are saved it 
 is the power of God." (1 Cor. i. 18.) Five barley loaves 
 and two small fishes seemed scanty provision for a hungry 
 crowd. But blessed by Christ, and distributed by His 
 disciples, they were more than sufficient. 
 
 Let us never doubt for a moment, that the preaching of 
 Christ crucified, — the old story of His blood, and right- 
 eousness, and substitution, — is enough for all the spiritual 
 necessities of all mankind. It is not worn out. It is not 
 obsolete. It has not lost its power. We want nothing new, — 
 nothing more broad and kind, — nothing more intellectual, — 
 nothing more efficacious. We want nothing but the true 
 bread of life which Christ bestows, distributed faithfully 
 among starving souls. Let men sneer or ridicule as they 
 will, Nothing else can do good in this sinful world. No 
 other teaching can fill hungry consciences, and give them 
 peace. We are all in a wilderness. We must feed on Christ 
 crucified, and the atonement made by His death, or we shall 
 die in our sins. 
 
 Notes. John YI. 1 — 14. 
 
 1. — {After these things.'] The remark made in chapter v., 1st verse, 
 
 applies here. The expression denotes an interval of time having 
 elapsed between the end of the fifth chapter and the beginning 
 of the sixth. John pa?ses over all the events which happened at 
 the conclusion of our Lord's defence of Himself at Jerusalem. 
 In fact, if the feast spoken of at the beginning of the fifth 
 chapter was really the passover, almost an entire year of our 
 Lord's ministry is unnoticed by John. 
 
 The events in this chapter, we should remark, are the only events 
 in our Lord's ministry in G-aliTee described by St, John, except- 
 ing the miracle of turning the water into wine at Cana, and the 
 heaUng of the ruler's son. (Chapter ii. and iv.) 
 
 [Went over the sea of Galilee.... Tiherias.] This sea so-called 
 
327 
 
 was a fresh- water lake in Galilee, througli which the Jordan runs. 
 
 According to Thomson, one of the most recent and accurate 
 travellers in the Holy Land, it is about fourteen miles long, and 
 nine wide, at the widest part. It lies no less than six hundred 
 feet below the level of the sea, and is often agitated by sudden 
 and violent storms. 
 
 Tiberias was a town on the west side of the lake, built by 
 Herod about the time of our Lord's birth, and comparatively a 
 modern place in our Lord's time. In the days of Josephus, 
 forty years after our Lord's crucifixion, Tiberias had become an 
 important city. It was spared by the Romans, when Vespasian's 
 army destroyed almost every other city in Galilee, for its adherence 
 to the Roman cause, and was made capital of the province. 
 
 John is the only Gospel-writer who calls the lake the " sea of 
 Tiberias." His doing so is an incidental confirmation of the 
 opinion that he wrote much later than Matthew, Mark, and 
 Luke, and after the taking of Jerusalem. He naturally used 
 the name by which the lake was best known when he wrote, 
 and most familiar to the Gentile readers whom he had especially 
 in view. 
 
 The reason of our Lord going over the sea would appear to be 
 His desire to withdraw Himself from public notice (Mark vi. 31), 
 and perhaps from the persecution of Herod's party, after the death 
 of John the Baptist. Comparing John's account with that of 
 Matthew, Mark, and Luke, it seems most hkely that he " went 
 over the sea " from the west coast, and landed on the north-east 
 side of the lake, not far from Bethsaida. Luke tells us distinctly 
 that the miracle which John here records, was wrought in " a 
 desert place, belonging to the city, called Bethsaida." (Luke ix. 
 10.) Add to this the fact that no less than three of our Lord's 
 disciples were inhabitants of Bethsaida, viz., Philip, Andrew, and 
 Peter, and our Lord's retirement to this neighbourhood seems 
 natural and reasonable. — The notion held by many that there 
 were two Bethsaidas, one in Galilee, where Andrew, Peter, and 
 Philip lived, and one in Gaulanitis, where this miracle of feeding 
 the multitude was wrought, seems both groundless and needless. 
 Bethsaida was at the head of the lake, in GaUIee, near the point 
 where the river Jordan entered the lake, and the district belong- 
 ing to it extended most probably beyond the river into Gaulanitis. 
 Thomson shows this satisfactorily. 
 
 — [A great multitude followed.. ..diseased.] There seems no reason 
 to suppose that this multitude followed our Lord for any but low 
 motives. They "saw His miracles:" that was all. Some few, 
 perhaps, were in doubt and suspense, wondering whether He 
 who wrought such miracles could possibly be the Messiah. The 
 great majority probably " followed " from that vague, idle curiosity 
 
328 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 and love of excitement, which are the principles that gather nearly 
 every crowd in the world. 
 
 St. Mark says that " the people saw them departing, and many 
 knew him : and ran afoot thither out of all cities, and outwent 
 them, and came together unto him." (Mark vi. 33.) This they 
 might easily do by going round the head of the lake, to the 
 point where Bethsaida was. 
 
 3. — [Jesus went up into a mountain.'] The Greek here would be 
 more correctly rendered " into the mountain." Whether there is 
 any special reason for this we cannot tell. — It may be the one 
 mountain which stood there, in contradistinction to the more level 
 ground composing the district. Thomson, the American traveller, 
 expressly says that there is a "bold headland" here, with "a 
 smooth grassy spot " at the base, " capable of seating many 
 thousand people." — It may possibly be " that particular hill " to 
 which our Lord was in the habit of going when He visited the 
 district near Bethsaida. — It may be the " hill country " generally, 
 or mountainous district near Bethsaida. 
 
 [His disciples.] This expression includes not only the twelve 
 who had been chosen and set apart by our Lord by this time, but 
 many others who professed themselves His disciples. Many of 
 them, it would appear from this very chapter (verse 66), were 
 not really believers, and in course of time fell away. If Christ 
 Himself had many such disciples and followers, ministers now- 
 a-days (even the very best) must not be surprised to find the 
 same state of things among their people. 
 
 L'—[The passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh.] John's habit of 
 explainmg Jewish customs for the benefit of Gentile readers, 
 should here be noticed. 
 
 The approach of the passover feast is no doubt specially men- 
 tioned in order to show the suitableness of our Lord's discourse 
 in this chapter to the season of the year. The minds of His 
 haarers would doubtless be thinking of the passover lamb, and 
 its flesh about to be eaten and blood about to be sprinkled. Our 
 Lord takes occasion to speak of that "flesh and blood" which 
 must be eaten and drunk by all who would not perish in sin. It 
 is an instance of that divine wisdom with which our Master spoke 
 " words in season," and turned everything to account. 
 
 Let it be noted that our Lord did not keep this passover in 
 Jerusalem to all appearance, but remained in Galilee. Yet He 
 generally observed all the ordinances of the law of Moses most 
 strictly, and "fulfilled all righteousness." The reason evidently 
 is, as llollock remarks, that the enmity and persecution of the 
 leading Jews at Jerusalem made it impossible for Him to go there. 
 It would have cut short His ministry and brought on His death 
 
329 
 
 befcre the time. May we not also learn here that the use of 
 outward orlinances and ceremonies is not so absolutely neces- 
 sary that they can never be dispensed with ? Grace, and repen- 
 tance, and faith are absolutely needful to salvation. Sacraments 
 and ordinances are not. 
 
 The near approach of the passover may possibly account in 
 part for the crowds who were assembled on this occasion. Not 
 a few of the people perhaps were on their way to Jerusalem, to 
 keep the passover feast, and were drawn out of their road by 
 hearing of our Lord's miracles. 
 
 5. — [ TT'^en Jesus then lifted up His eyes and saw a great company!] 
 "We must not conclude from these expressions, that our Lord was 
 suddenly surprised by the appearance of a great crowd. On the 
 contrary, Matthew and Mark both tell us that before He wrought 
 the miracle which we are about to read of, He had felt com- 
 passion for the multitude, because they were " as sheep not having 
 a shepherd," and had " taught them m-any things." (Mark vi. 34.) 
 — When this teaching was over, He seems to have taken a survey 
 of the crowd before Him, and seeing how large it was, proceeded 
 to show His tender concern for the wants of men's bodies as well 
 as of their souls. A great crowd is always an impressive and 
 solemn sight. It is an interesting thought that the same eyes 
 which looked compassionately on the crowd here, are still look- 
 ing at every crowd, and especially at every crowd of persons 
 assembled in Grod's name. 
 
 \He saWi unto Philip, whence.... huy.... eat] Our Lord's reason 
 for asking this question is given in the next verse. But it is 
 worth notice that there was a certain propriety in asking Phihp 
 this question, because Philip "was of Bethsaida," the very town 
 near which they were all assembled. (John i. 44.) Our Lord 
 tl \erefore might reasonably appeal to Philip, as one most likely 
 and able to answer His question, whether it were possible to 
 buy bread for such a multitude. He would of course know the 
 capabilities of the neighbourhood. The idea, maintained by 
 Chrysostom, Burgon, and others, that Philip was a disciple pecu- 
 liarly slow to recognize Christ's Godhead, and therefore requiring 
 special appeals, seems to me a far less satisfactory solution. 
 
 G. — [77iis He said to prove him.] "We find the s3me kind of pro- 
 cedure on other occasions. When our Lord appeared to the 
 two disciples at Emmaus, we read that after His discourse "with 
 them, "He made as though He would have gone further." 
 (Luke xxi. 28.) This was " to prove" whether they really wished 
 for more of His company. — When on another occasion He came 
 to the disciples walking on the sea, St. Mark says, " He would 
 have passed by them." (Mark vi. 48.) When in this very 
 chapter He would draw forth an expression of faith from His dii- 
 
830 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 cifles, He says, "Will ye also go away?" (John vi. 67.) Our 
 Lord kuows the sluggishness and coldness of our hearts, and He 
 sees it good to stir our spiritual senses, and draw forth our 
 spiritual desires by such a mode of dealing with us. 
 
 Explanatory observations like this, made by the Gospel-writer 
 himself, are more frequent in St. John's Gospel than in any of the 
 other three. 
 
 [He himself knew... would do.] This would be rendered more 
 hterally " what He was about to do." Our Lord's foreknowledge 
 of the miracle He was about to do should be noted. The words 
 He used in the last chapter should be remembered. They were 
 not works which were done by chance and accidentally, in conse- 
 quence of unforeseen circumstances, but- foreseen and pre- 
 determined. They were "the works which the Father had 
 given him to finish." (John v. 36.) 
 
 7. — [Philip answered Him, Two hundred penny worth, etc.] What 
 quantity of bread this sum would have procured we have no 
 accurate means of knowing. But we may remember that the 
 Roman " denarius," or penny, represented a very much larger 
 sum than a penny does among ourselves. We must remember 
 also that bread was much cheaper then than it is now. The 
 quantity Philip named was probably much larger than we sup- 
 pose. 
 
 Burgon thinks that the sum named by Philip was the whole 
 " store of money contained in their common purse," — viz., about 
 six or seven pounds. But this cannot be proved. 
 
 8. — [One of Ms disciples, Andrew, etc.] Let it be noted here that 
 Andrew, as well as Philip, was a native of the district of Beth- 
 saida, where all these things happened. There is a propriety 
 therefore in his speaking and giving information on the present 
 occasion. 
 
 9. — [There is a lad...five barley loaves and two small fishes.] We 
 should note in this verse how small were the provisions which 
 our Lord miraculously multiplied. The fact that one " httle 
 boy" (for this is the meaning of the word we render "lad") 
 could carry all the supply that Andrew mentions, is a plain proof 
 that the " loaves " could not have been large, nor the " fish " of 
 great size. 
 
 The " fishes " were probably small dried fish, such as are not 
 uncommonly used as food now in hot countries, and near the 
 sea of Galilee would be of course common. 
 
 Bailey was regarded, according to the Talmud, as a coarse 
 food, only fit for horses and asses. 
 
 [ What are they among so many.] This expression of Andrew's 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 831 
 
 is purposely reported, no doubt, in. order to show how strong 
 was the conviction of our Lord's disciples that they had not suf- 
 ficient provision to feed the multitude, and then to bring out 
 into clearer light the greatness of the miracie which our Lord 
 wrought. It also helps to prove that the wonderful feehng of 
 the multitude was not a preconcerted and prepared thing, ar- 
 ranged by our Lord and His disciples. Even His own immedi- 
 ate followers were taken by surprise. 
 
 10. — [Jesus said, make the men sit down.] This arrangement pre- 
 vented confusion and preserved order, points of vast importance 
 when any large assembly of people is gathered together. More- 
 over, it made it less easy to practise any imposition or deceit in 
 the feeding of the multitude. When every man was sitting 
 steadily in his appointed place, no one could be passed over in 
 the distribution of food, without it being observed. St. Mark 
 tells us that they "sat down in ranks, by hundreds and by fif- 
 ties." (Mark vi. 40.) 
 
 [There was much grass in the place.] The time of the year 
 when these things happened would be the very time when there 
 was most " grass." It was in the spring-time, just before the 
 passover, when the winter was gone, and the parching heat of 
 summer had not begun, Thomson, the American traveller, re- 
 ports that at this very day there is an open space of green gras3 
 at the foot of a hill, at the very place where in all probabihty 
 this miracle took place. 
 
 Let us note our Lord's consideration for the bodily comfort of 
 His followers. He chooses a place where there was " much grass" 
 to sit down on. 
 
 [So the men sat down.. .Jive thousand.] The word " men " here 
 is probably emphatic, in contradistinction to the "women and 
 children," whom Matthew expressly mentions as having been 
 present beside the five thousand men. In the Greek the word 
 is not the same as that rendered "men" in the first clause of 
 this verse. 
 
 II. — [Jesus took the loave8...given thanks.] The expression here 
 seems rather to imply a solemn action of prayer and blessing, as 
 well as of giving thanks, as the first preliminary to the mighty 
 miracle about to follow. In fact St. Luke says, " He took the 
 five loaves and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven He 
 blessed them, and brake, and gave," etc. (Luke ix. IQ.) This 
 also seems implied in St. John's subsequent reference to this 
 miracle, where He speaks of " the place where they did eat 
 bread after that the Lord had given thanks." (John vi.23.) The 
 Greek word here used is precisely the same that is used in the 
 account of the institution of the Lord's Supper given by St. 
 Matthew St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. Paul. St. Matthew and 
 
832 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 St. Mark say that our Lord " gave thanks " when He took " the 
 cup." St. Luke and St. Paul say that He also did it when He 
 took "the bread." So here we can hardly doubt that blessing 
 and giving thanks went together. The Greek word is the ono 
 which we have borrowed and transferred to our own language 
 in the expression " Eucharist." 
 
 [He distributed to the disciples^ etc.] I think there can be no 
 doubt that this was the point at which the mighty miracle her© 
 wrought by our Lord came in. As fast as He broke the loaves 
 and the disciples carried them away to distribute them, so fast 
 did the loaves multiply under His hands. It was in the act of 
 breaking and distributing to the disciples that the miraculous 
 multiplication took place. In fact there was a continual act of 
 creation going on. Bread was continually called into existence 
 which did not exist before. The greatness of this miracle is per- 
 haps not sufficiently realized. One loaf and less than half a fish 
 to every thousand men ! It is evident there could not have been 
 more than a small morsel for each one without a miraculous in- 
 crease of the food. 
 
 Bishop Hall remarks, " He could as well have multiplied the 
 
 loaves whole ; why would He rather do it in the breaking ? 
 
 Was it not to teach us that in the distribution of our goods we 
 
 ^should expect His blessing, not in their entireness and reserva- 
 
 * tion ? There is that scattereth and yet increaseth." 
 
 12. — [When they were filled.] That expression deserves notice. It 
 is one of the strongest proofs of the reality of the miracle we are 
 reading. It would be impossible to convince five thousand hun- 
 gry men in a wilderness that they were really filled, if they were 
 not. A few enthusiasts and fanatics might possibly have been 
 found who might have fancied they had eaten when they had 
 not. But it is absurd to suppose that so strong a bodily sensa- 
 tion as hunger could possibly be relieved in five thousand men, 
 if there had not been a real supply of food, and real eating of it. 
 
 [He said unto his disciples, Gather up the fragments, etc.] In 
 this little circumstance again we have a proof that real food waa 
 supphed, and in sufficient quantity for all. There was not merely 
 a morsel for each man, but an abundant supply, enough and to 
 spare. Our Lord's care for little things, and dislike of waste and 
 extravagance, appear strongly in this sentence. It would be well 
 if the principle contained in the words was more remembered by 
 Christians, — ^'Let nothing be lost." It is a deep principle of 
 v^ry wide application. Time, money, and opportunities of show- 
 ing kindness and doing good are specially to be remembered in 
 applying the principle. 
 
 It admits of question whether the " disciples" who distributed 
 
833 
 
 the breaii on this occasion, and afterwards gathered the frag- 
 ment?, did not include other helpers beside the twelve apostles. 
 The time necessary for the distribution of bread among five thou- 
 sand people, if only twelve pairs of hands were employed, would 
 prove on calculation to be very great. 
 
 13. — {TJierefore they gathered....filled twelve baskets^ etc.] This simple 
 fa jt is enough to prove that a mighty miracle had been wrought. 
 Our common sense can tell us that five loaves and two fishes 
 alone could not have filled a single basket. Now if the frag- 
 ments left after the meal were enough to fill "twelve baskets," 
 there must evidently have been a miraculous multiplication of 
 the food at some stage of the proceedings. The fragments alone 
 were probably fifty times more bulky than the original supply of 
 food with which the meal began. The identity between the 
 number of the baskets filled, and the number of the apostles, will 
 of course strike any reader. One might think that each apostle 
 had a basket. 
 
 St. Mark mentions that there were fragments of "nshes " put 
 into the baskets as well as loaves, so that the fishes also were 
 miraculously multiplied as well as the bread. 
 
 Some early writers, not without justice, call this the greatest 
 miracle that our Lord ever wrought. Perhaps we are poor 
 judges of such points, and little able to make comparisons. But 
 it is certain that on no other occasion did our Lord manifest so 
 clearly His creative power. No doubt it was as easy to Him to 
 cause bread to be, as to say " let there be light," or to make the 
 earth bring forth herbs and corn at the creation of the world. 
 But the miracle was clearly intended to be one which Christians 
 should hold in special remembrance. It is at any rate note- 
 worthy that this is the only passage in Christ's hfe which all the 
 four Gospel-writers aUke record. In this respect the miracle 
 stands alone. 
 
 The attempts of Neologians to explain away this miracle are 
 simply contemptible and ridiculous. It requires more faith to 
 believe their explanations than to believe the miracle and take it 
 as we find it. None but a person determined to disbelieve all 
 miracles, and cast them out of the Sacred narrative, would ever 
 try to make out (as some actually have tried) that the four times 
 repeated story of the miraculous feeding which we have consi- 
 dered, only meant that the multitude brought out the hidden 
 stores, of provisions which they had carried with them, and 
 shared them with one another I 
 
 14. — [^Then those men.] This probably means the whole crowd and 
 multitude which had been fed on this occasion. 
 
 * When they had seen the miracle.] Signs and wonders were ex^ 
 
834 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 pected to accompany the appearance of any prophet or messen- 
 ger from God. Here was a mighty miracle, and at once tha 
 minds of all who saw it were excited. 
 
 \This is of a truth that prophet, etc.] This meant that " pro- 
 phet like unto Moses," whom all welj-instructed Jews expected 
 to appear, and for whose speedy appearing the ministry of John 
 the Baptist had prepared the minds of all the dwellers in Pales- 
 tine. 
 
 " Of a truth " would be more Hterally rendered " truly," — ». e., 
 really and indeed. 
 
 ''That prophet" would be more literally "the prophet." 
 
 JOHN YI. 15—21. 
 
 15 When Jesus therefore per- 
 ceived that they would come and 
 take him by force, to make him a 
 king, he departed again into a moun- 
 tain himself alone. 
 
 16 And when even was now 
 come, his disciples went down unto 
 the sea, 
 
 17 And entered into a ship, 
 and went over the sea toward 
 Capernaum. And it was now 
 dark, and Jesus was not come to 
 them. 
 
 18 And the sea arose by reason 
 of a great wind that blew. 
 
 19 So when they had rowed 
 about five and twenty or thirty fur- 
 longs, they see Jesus walking on 
 the sea, and drawing nigh unto the 
 ship ; and they were afraid. 
 
 20 But he saith unto them. It is 
 I ; be not afraid. 
 
 21 Then they willingly received 
 him into the ship : and immediately 
 the ship was at the land whither 
 they went. 
 
 We should notice, in these verses, our Lord Jesus ChrlsPs 
 humility. We are told that, after feeding the multitude, 
 He "perceived that they would come and take him by 
 force to make him a king." At once He departed, and 
 left them. He wanted no such honours as these. He 
 had come, " not to be ministered unto, but to minister 
 and to give his life a ransom for many." (Matt. xx. 28.) 
 
 We see the same spirit and frame of mind all througli 
 our Lord's earthly ministry. From His cradle to His grave 
 He was " clothed with humility." (1 Pet. v. 5.) He was 
 born of a poor woman, and spent the first thirty years 
 of His life in a carpenter's house at Nazareth. He was 
 
335 
 
 followed by poor companions, — many of them no belter 
 than fishermen. He was poor in his manner of living : 
 "The foxes had holes, and the birds of the air their nests: 
 but the Son of man had not where to lay his head.'* 
 (Matt. viii. 20.) When He went on the Sea of Galilee, 
 it was in a borrowed boat. When He rode into Jerusalem, 
 it was on a borrowed ass. When He was buried, it was 
 in a borrowed tomb. " Though he was rich, yet for our 
 sakes he became poor." (2 Cor. viii. 9.) 
 
 The example is one which ought to be far more 
 remembered than it is. How common are pride, and 
 ambition, and high-mindedness ! How rare are humility 
 and lowly-mindedness ! How few ever refuse greatness 
 when offered to them ! How many are continually 
 seeking great things for themselves, and forgetting the 
 injunction, — " Seek them not ! " (Jer. xlv. 5.) Surely 
 it was not for nothing that our Lord, after washing the 
 disciples' feet, said, — " I have given you an example that 
 ye should do as I have done." (John xiii. 15.) There is 
 little, it may be feared, of that feet-washing spirit among 
 Christians. But whether men will hear or forbear, humi- 
 lity is the queen of the graces. " Tell me," it has been 
 said, " how much humility a man has, and I will tell you 
 how much religion he has." Humility is the first step 
 toward heaven, and the true way to honour. " He that 
 humbleth himself shall be exalted." (Luke xviii. 14.) 
 
 We should notice, secondly, in these verses, the trials 
 through which Chrisfs disciples had to pass. We are 
 told that they were sent over the lake by themselves, while 
 their Master tarried behind. And then we see them alone 
 in a dark night, tossed about by a great wind on stormy 
 waters, and, worst of all, Christ not with them. It 
 was a strange transition. From witnessing a mighty 
 miracle, and helping it instrumentally, amidst an admir- 
 ing crowd, to solitude, darkness, winds, waves, storm, 
 
836 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 anxiety, and danger, the change was very great ! But 
 Christ knew it, and Christ appointed it, and it was 
 working for their good. 
 
 Trial, we must distinctly understand, is part of the diet 
 which all true Christians must expect. It is one of the 
 means by which their grace is proved, and by which they 
 find out what there is in themselves. Winter as well as 
 summer, — cold as well as heat, — clouds as well as sun- 
 shine, — are all necessary to bring the fruit of the Spirit to 
 ripeness and maturity. We do not naturally like this. 
 We would rather cross the lake with calm weather and 
 favourable winds, with Christ always by our side, and the 
 sun shining down on our faces. But it may not be. It i? 
 not in this way that God's children are made "partakers 
 of His holiness." (Heb. xii. 10.) Abraham, and Jacob, 
 and Moses, and David, and Job were all men of many 
 trials. Let us be content to walk in their footsteps, and 
 to drink of their cup. In our darkest hours we may seem 
 to be left, — but we are never really alone. 
 
 Let us notice, in the last place, our Lord Jesus Chrisfa 
 power over the waves of the sea. He came to His disciples as 
 they were rowing on the stormy lake, " walking on " the 
 waters. He walked on them as easily as we walk on dry 
 land. They bore Him as firmly as the pavement of the 
 Temple, or the hills around Nazareth. That which is 
 contrary to all natural reason was perfectly possible to 
 Christ. 
 
 The Lord Jesus, we must remember, is not only the 
 Lord, but the Maker of all creation. "All things were 
 made by him; and without him was not anything made 
 that was made." (John i. 3.) It was just as easy for Him 
 to walk on the sea as to form the sea at the beginning, — 
 just as easy to suspend the common laws of nature, as they 
 are called, as to injpose those laws at the first. Learned 
 men talk solemn nonsense sometimes about the eternal 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 337 
 
 fixity of the " laws of nature," as if they were above God 
 Himself, and could never be suspended. It is well to be 
 reminded sometimes by such miracles as that before us, 
 that these so-called " laws of nature " are neither immu- 
 table nor eternal. They had a beginning, and will one 
 day have an end. 
 
 Let all true Christians take comfort in the thought that 
 their Saviour is Lord of waves and winds, of storms and 
 tempests, and can come to them in the darkest hour, 
 *' walking upon the sea." There are waves of trouble far 
 heavier than any on the Lake of Galilee. There are days 
 of darkness which try the faith of the holiest Christian. 
 But let us never despair if Christ is our Friend. He can 
 come to our aid in an hour when we think not, and m 
 ways that we did not expect. And when He comes, all 
 will be calm. 
 
 Notes. John VI. 15—21. 
 
 15. — [ When Jesus therefore perceived.] This would be more lite- 
 rally rendered, " Jesus knowing-, or having known." It seems to 
 imply Divine knowledge of the multitude's secret intentions. 
 Jesus knew men's hearts and thoughts. 
 
 [That they ivould come.] This would be more literally, " that 
 they are about to come." 
 
 [TaJce him by force to make Mm a king.] The intention or wish 
 was probably to place Him at their head, and proclaim Him 
 their king, with or without His consent, and then to hurry Him 
 away to Jerusalem, so as to arrive there at the passover feast, 
 and announce Him as a Deliverer to the crowd assembled at 
 that time. — The idea evidently in their mind was, that one who 
 could work such a mighty mirade must be a mighty temporal 
 Redeemer, raised up, like the Judges of old, to break the bonds 
 of the Romish government, and restore the old independence 
 and kingdom to Israel. There is no reason to suppose that there 
 was any more spiritual feeling in the minds of the multitude. 
 Of sense of spiritual need, and of faith in our Lord as a Saviour 
 from sin, there is n© trace. Popularity and the good opinion of 
 excited crowds are both worthless and temporary things. 
 
 Rollock remarks that the Jews were very sensitive about the 
 15 
 
338 EXFOSITORr THOUGHTS. 
 
 tyranny and dominion of the Eomans, while they did not feel 
 the far greater tyranny and dominion of sin. lie points out 
 that we who are expecting the second advent of Chi st in the 
 present day should take care that we increasingly feel the burden 
 and yoke of sin, from which Christ's second advent will deliver 
 the creation. Otherwise Christ's second advent will do us no 
 more good than his first advent did to the Jews. 
 
 [He departed again into a mountain... .alone.] This would be 
 more literally rendered, " the mountain," as at verse 3. 
 
 St. Matthew and St. Mark both mention another reason why 
 our Lord withdrew to the mountain, beside His desire to avoid 
 the intention of the multitude. Tliey tell us that He " sent the 
 multitude away and departed to pray." (Matt. xiv. 23; Mark 
 ix. 46.) 
 
 Some think that a miracle must have been wrought when our 
 Lord withdrew Himself from the multitude, and that He must 
 have passed through them invisibly, as after the miracle at Be- 
 thesda, and at Nazareth. Yet it seems hardly necessary to sup- 
 pose this. 
 
 It is worth noticing that after St. Luke's account of this mira- 
 cle, he immediately relates that our Lord asked the disciples, 
 "Whom say the people that I am?" (Luke ix. 18.) It does not 
 however follow that He asked immediatel}^, but after an interval 
 of some days. But the wish of the multitude here related may 
 have occasioned the question. 
 
 16. — Whe7i even.. ..disciples^ went down unto the sea.] St. Matthew 
 and St. Mark both say that our Lord " constrained " them to 
 embark in the ship and depart. He " obhged " or " compelled " 
 them. He probably saw that in their ignorance of the spiritual 
 nature of His kingdom they were ready to fall in with the wishes 
 of the multitude, and to proclaim Him a king. 
 
 17, — [Entered into a ship.] This would be more literally " the 
 ship." It seems to mean that particular vessel or fishing-boat 
 which our Lord and His disciples always used on the lake of 
 Galilee, and which probably was lent for His use by the relatives 
 of those of His disciples who were fishermen, if not by the four 
 themselves, — viz., James, John, Andrew, and Peter. There is 
 no necessity for supposing that when they left their calling to 
 become disciples they gave up their boats so entirely as to have 
 no more use of them when they wished. The last chapter of 
 this very Gospel seems to prove the contrary. When Peter said, 
 *' I go a fishing," there was " the boat" ready for them at once, 
 (John xxi. 3.) 
 
 [ Went over the sea.... Capernaum.] This would be more literally 
 "were going," "were in the act of going." Capernaum lay on 
 
 I 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 339 
 
 the norfh-west shore of the lake of Galilee, and the point where 
 the disciples embarked was on the noith-east shore. To reach 
 Capernaum they would pass the point where the Jordan ran into 
 che lake, and leave that point and the town of Bethsaida on their 
 fight hand. The place where the miracle was wrought was not 
 at Bethsaida itself, we must remember, but in the desert coun- 
 try and district lying to the east of Bethsaida. St. Luke specially 
 mentions this (Luke ix. 10), and unless we keep it in mind we 
 shall not understand St. Mark's words, that our Lord made His 
 disciples " go to the other side before unto Bethsaida." To go 
 to Capernaum they must need go "in the direction of" Beth- 
 saida, though they would leave it on the right as they passed. 
 Thomson, in the " Land and the Book," maintains this view, and 
 Rollock, 250 years ago, held the same opinion. 
 
 I repeat the opinion that I see no necessity for the theory of 
 Alford and other commentators that there were two Bethsaidas. 
 
 Capernaum was the city where our Lord passed more time, 
 and probably worked more miracles, than He did in any other 
 place during His ministry. This is probably the reason why 
 our Lord speaks of it as " exalted unto heaven." (Matt. xi. 23.) 
 No city had such privileges and saw so much of the Son of God 
 while He was manifest in the flesh. 
 
 [/i{ was now darJCj and Jesus was not come.] The Greek word 
 for " dark " is always rendered " darkness " in other places, except 
 John XX. 1. The simple circumstance of the disciples being alone 
 in the boat, on the sea, and in darkness, has been felt in every 
 age to be an instructive emblem of the position of the Church 
 of Christ between the first and second advents. Like them, the 
 Church is on a sea of trouble, and separate from its Head. In 
 estimating, however, the position and feelings of the disciples, 
 we must not forget that four of them at least were fishermen, 
 and familiar from their youth with the management of boat;?, 
 and all the dangers of the lake. We nmst not therefore think of 
 them as inexperienced landsmen, or as little children unable to 
 take care of themselves. 
 
 "We learn to know the value of Christ's company, when we 
 have it, by the discomfort we experience when we have it not. 
 
 18. — [And the sea arose... .great wind that blew.] The Greek word 
 rendered " arose " would be more literally rendered " was being 
 raised or stirred." 
 
 A.t first sight it may seem surprising that the waters of an 
 inland lake, like the sea of Gahlee, could be so much agitated. 
 But it is remarkable that the testimony of travellers in modem 
 times is distinct, ihat this lake is peculiarly liable to be visited 
 by vi jlent squalls of wind, and to become very rough while they 
 
340 EXPOSITOKY THOUGHTS. 
 
 last. Thomson, the American traveller, says, — "My experienca 
 in this region enabled me to sympathize with the disciples in 
 their long night's contest with the wind. — I have seen the face 
 of the lake like a huge boiling caldron. The wind howled down 
 the valleys from the north-east and east with such fury that no 
 efforts of rowers could have brought a boat to shore at any point 
 along that coast. — To understand the causes of these sudden and 
 violent tempests we must remember the lake lies low, — six 
 hundred feet lower than the ocean, — that water-courses have cut 
 out profound ravines and wild gorges, converging to the head 
 of the lake, and that these act like gigantic funnels to draw down 
 the cold winds from the mountains. On the occasion referred to 
 w«^ pitclied our tents on the shore, and remained for three days 
 and nights exposed to this tremendous wind. We had to dou- 
 ble-pin all the tent-ropes, and frequently were obliged to hang 
 with our whole weight upon them, to keep the quivering taber- 
 nacle from being carried up bodily into the air. No wonder the 
 disciples toiled and rowed hard all that night." In another 
 place he says, — " Small as the lake is, and placid in general as a 
 molten mirror, I have repeatedly seen it quiver, and leap, and 
 boil like a caldron, when driven by fierce winds." — Thomson's 
 " Land and the Book." 
 
 Burkitt remirks that the position of the disciples, immediately 
 tempest-tossed after witnessing and partaking in a mighty mira- 
 cle, IS an instructive type of the common experience of believers. 
 After seasons of peculiar privileges there often come sharp trials 
 of faith and patience. 
 
 Tliis sudden trial of faith by danger was no doubt intended to 
 be a lesson to the disciples as to what they must expect in the 
 exercise of their ministry. Affliction and crosses are the grind- 
 stones on which God is constantly sharpening those instruments 
 which He uses most. 
 
 19. — [So when...rowed about Jive and twenty or thirty furlongs i] We 
 might gather from the disciples " rowing," and not sailing, that 
 the wind was again t them, and we are expressly told, both by 
 St. Mattliew and St. Mark, that " the wind was contrary." From 
 the distance they had rowed, and the known width of the lake, 
 at tliat particular part of it, they were probably now about the 
 middle of their passage. St. Matthew says, — they were '' in the 
 midst of the sea." (Matt. xiv. 24.) This M'ould make them at 
 lea t two or three miles from shore, a fact which should be care- 
 f\illy noted with re'^erence to what follows. 
 
 Let the expression " twenty-five or thirty'' be noted. It is 
 not necessary to define to a hair's breadth distances and quantities 
 in narrating an event. Even an inspired writer does not. He 
 uses the cc mmon language of men, and such language as those 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 841 
 
 present on the occasion would have used. In a dark niofht they 
 could not possibly have spoken with precise accuracy. John waa 
 there himself, and knew that excessive accuracy is sometiiies 
 suspicious, and looks like a made-up story. John ii, 6 is a simi- 
 lar expression. 
 
 Bengel says, " The Holy Spirit knew, and oould have told 
 John precisely how many furlongs there were. But in Scripture 
 he imitates popular modes of expression." 
 
 ^ [They see Jesus walking on the sea, etc., etc.] This was undoubt- 
 edly as great a miracle as any that our Lord wrought. 
 
 " Moses," says Theophylact, " as a servant, by the power of 
 God divided the sea. But Christ, the Lord of all, by His own 
 power walked on the sea." 
 
 For a sohd body to walk on the face of the water as on dry 
 land, is an entire suspension of what are called the laws of nature. 
 It was, of course, as easy for Him by whom the waters were 
 first created to walk upon them as to create them. But the 
 whole proceeding was so entirely supernatural, that we can tho- 
 roughly understand the disciples being " afraid." Nothing is 
 found to alarm human nature so much as being suddenly brought 
 into contact with anything apparently supernatural and belonging 
 to another world, and especially in the night. The feelings called 
 forth on such occasions, even in ungodly and irreligious men, are 
 one of the strongest indirect proofs, that all men's consciences 
 recognize an unseen world. 
 
 That a mighty miracle really was wrought upon this occasion 
 is the only reasonable account that can be given of the fact that 
 we are told. St. Mark adds to St. John's account, that when 
 Jesus came near the ship, " He would have passed by them." 
 (Mark vi. 48.) St. Matthew adds another fact of even greater 
 importance. He tells us that Peter said, " Lord, if it be thou, 
 bid me come unto thee on the wa^er. And he said, Come. And 
 when Peter was come down out of the ship, he walked on the 
 water to go to Jesas." (Matt. xiv. 28, 29.) Such a fict as this 
 cannot possibly be explained away. Not only did our Lord walk 
 on the water Himself, but He also gave one of His twelve 
 apostles power to do the same. 
 
 To say in the face of such facts as these, that there was in 
 reality no miracle, — that the disciples were mistaken, — that our 
 Lord was only walking on the shore near the vessel, — that tha 
 superstitious fear of the disciples made them fancy that He was 
 walking on the sea, — that they finally put to shore, and took 
 Him on board, — to say such things as these pleases some persons 
 who profess not to believe any miracles at all ! But such views 
 cannot possibly be reconciled with the account of what really 
 
842 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 happened, given by two witnesses, Matthew and John, who 
 were actually present on the occasion, and by another writer, — 
 viz., Mark, who was intimate with that very Peter who walked 
 on the water himself. 
 
 If tlie disciples were " in the midst of the sea," and two or 
 three miles from shore, how could they possibly have seen our 
 Lord walking on the shore ? 
 
 If it Avas " dark " when these things happened, it stands to 
 reason that they could not distinguish anyone on shore, even 
 supposing that they were not two miles oflf. 
 
 If there was a heavy gale blowing, and the waves were rough, 
 it is absurd to suppose that they could hold a conversation with 
 anyone walking on shore. 
 
 The plain truth is that it requires far more faith to accept such 
 improbable and preposterous explanations as these, than to take 
 the whole account simply as we find it, and to believe that a real 
 mighty miracle was wrought. — Unless men are prepared to say 
 that Matthew, Mark, and John, wrote accounts of the events of 
 this night, which are incorrect, and not trustworthy, it is impos- 
 sible for any honest and unprejudiced person to avoid the con- 
 clusion, that a miracle took place. — Of course, if Matthew, Mark, 
 and John give incorrect accounts, and are not to be trusted here, 
 they are not to be trusted anywhere, and all their records of our 
 Lord's doings and sayings become utterly worthless. This 
 unhappily is the very result to which many would be glad to 
 lead us. From denying all miracles to downright infidehty is 
 nothing but a regular succession of steps. If a man begins with 
 throwing overboard the miracles, he cannot stop logically till he 
 has given up the Bible and Christianity. 
 
 20. — [But he saith, It is I; he not afraid.'] Our Lord's tenderness 
 for His disciples' feelings appears beautifully here. No sooner 
 does He see lear than He proceeds to calm it. He assures them 
 that the figure they see walking on the deep is no spirit or ghost, 
 — no enemy or object of dread. It is their own beloved Master. 
 His voice, well-known as it must have been, would, of course, 
 help to calm their fears. Yet even that was not enough tiU 
 Peter had said, " If it be thou, bid me come to thee." 
 
 The practical remark has often been made, that many of the 
 things which now frighten Chrislians and fill them with anxiety, 
 would cease to frighten them if they would endeavour to see the 
 Lord Jesus in all, ordering every providence, and overruling 
 everything, so that not a hair falls to the giound without Him. 
 They are happy who can hear His voice through the thickest 
 clouds and darkness, and above the loudest winds and storms, 
 saying, " It is I ; be not afraid." 
 
vr. 343 
 
 It has been thought by some that the words, " It is I," might 
 be more literally rendered, "I am," and that they are intended 
 to refer to the name of God, so familiar to Jews, " I am." But 
 I doubt the correctness of the idea. It is a pious thought, but 
 hardly in keeping with the context and the circumstances of the 
 occurrence. Our Lord desired first to relieve the fears of His 
 disciples by showing them who it was that they feared ; and tha 
 Greek words for " It is I," are the only words that He could 
 well have used. 
 
 It may be noted here that there seems to be no feehng or 
 passion to which Christians are so liable as "fear." There is 
 none, certainly, against which our Lord so ofcen exhorts His 
 disciples. "Fear not: — be not afraid: — let not your heart be 
 troubled :" are very common sayings of His. 
 
 21. — [Then they willingly received... ship.] This would be rendered 
 more literally : " Then they were willing," " they were glad, and 
 wished." — It evidently imphes, that at first the disciples were 
 afraid of our Lord. But as soon as they recognized Him, their 
 fears departed; and so far from wishing to be rid of the figure 
 they had seen walking on the sea, their great desire now was to 
 receive Him on board. 
 
 [Immediately the ship was at the land whither they went.] This 
 sentence either means that shortly after our Lord joined the dis- 
 ciples in the boat they reached their destination, or that imme- 
 diately, by miraculous agency, they arrived at the shore. There 
 is, perhaps, no occasion to suppose any other miracle. Both 
 Matthew and Mark distinctly say that " the wind ceased," as 
 soon as our Lord entered the boat. The storm, according to the 
 custom of storms on the lake, suddenly ceased, and the disciples 
 consequently had no trouble in rowing to the shore. The wind 
 was no longer against them; and the sea, in so small a compass 
 as the Lake of Galilee, would naturally soon go down. 
 
 The old practical lesson still remains to be remembered. 
 Christ's Church is now a tossed ship, in the midst of a stormy sea. 
 The great Master has gone up into heaven to intercede for His 
 people, left alone for awhile, and to return. When Jesus returns 
 again to His tossed and afflicted Church, at the second advent, 
 their troubles will soon be over. They will soon be in harbour. 
 His voice, which will fill the wicked with terror, will fill His 
 people with joy. 
 
 The place where they landed was evidently Capernaum, or 
 close to it. The disccurse which follows was at any rate finii^hed 
 (wherever it may have begun) in "the synagogue at Capernaum," 
 and folic ws in unbrok(m succession after the events we have now 
 been considering. The statement of St. Matthew and St. Mark, 
 
844 
 
 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS, 
 
 tljat our Lord and His disciples reached the shore in ' the land 
 of Genesaret," is quite reconcileable with St. John's account. 
 The " land of Genesaret" was a plain, on the north-west coast 
 of the Lake of Galilee, extending from Magdala at the south, to 
 Capernaum at the north. 
 
 In leaving this passage, I call the reader's attention to tho 
 very marked and peculiar position which the two miracles 
 recorded by St. John in this chapter occupy. They immediately 
 precede that wonderful discourse in the synagogue of Capernaum, 
 in which our Lord proclaims Himself to be " the living bread 
 which came down from heaven and giveth life to the world," 
 and declares that " except we eat His flesh and drink His blood 
 we have no life in us." — I believe that the two miracles were 
 intended to prepare the minds of the disciples to receive the 
 mighty truths which the discourse contained. Did they stumble 
 at the announcement that He was the ''bread of God," and 
 " gave life to the world " ? It would surely help their weak faith 
 to remember that the very day before they liad seen Him sud- 
 denly supply the wants of a mighty multitude with five loaves 
 and two fishes. — Did they stumble at the doctrine, that " His 
 flesh was meat indeed and his blood drink indeed " ? It would 
 surely assist their feeble spiritual apprehension to remember 
 that the very night before they had seen that body walking on 
 the face of the sea. They had had ocular proof that there was a 
 deep mystery about our Lord's human nature, and that although 
 He was real and true man, there was at the same time some- 
 thing about Him far above man. These things I believe are 
 worth noticing. The connection between our Lord's miracles 
 and His teaching is often far closer than at first sight appears. 
 
 JOHN VL 22—27. 
 
 22 The day following, when the 
 people which stood on the other 
 side of the sea saw that there was 
 none other boat there, save that one 
 whereiuto his disciples were enter- 
 ed, and that Jesus went not with 
 his disciples into the boat, but that 
 his disciples were gone away 
 alone ; 
 
 23 (Howbeit there came other 
 boats from Tiberias nigh unto the 
 place where they did eat bread, 
 after that the Lord had given 
 thanks:) 
 
 24 When the people therefore 
 saw that Jesus was not there, 
 neither his disciples, they also took 
 shipping, and came to Capernaum, 
 seeking for Jesus. 
 
 25 And when they had found 
 him on the other side of tho sea, 
 they said unto him. Rabbi, w)»ca 
 earnest thou hither ? 
 
 2G Jesus answered them and 
 said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, 
 Ye seek me, not because ye saw the 
 miracles, but because ye did eat of 
 the loaves, and wcfe filled. 
 
2 7 Labou r not for the meat which 
 perieheth, but for that meat which 
 eiidureth unto everlastinoc Ufe, 
 
 345 
 
 which the Son of man shall give 
 unto you: for him hath (xod the 
 Father sealed. 
 
 We should mark first, in this passage, icJiat Jcjiowledge 
 of niaji's heart our Lord Jesus Christ possesses. We see 
 Him exposing the fiilse motives of those who followed 
 Him for the sake of the loaves and fishes. They had fol- 
 lowed Him across the Lake of Galilee. They seemed at 
 first sight ready to believe in Him, and do Him honour. 
 But He knew the inward springs of their conduct, and 
 was not deceived. " Ye seek me," He said, " not because 
 ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, 
 and were filled." 
 
 The Lord Jesus, we should never forget, is still the 
 same. He never changes. He reads the secret motives 
 of all who profess and call themselves Christians. He 
 knows exactly why they do all they do in their religion. 
 The reasons why they go to Church, and why they receive 
 the sacrament, — why they attend family prayers, and why 
 they keep Sunday holy, — all are naked and opened to the 
 eyes of the great Head of the Church. By Him actions 
 are weighed as well as seen. " Man looketh on the out 
 ward appearance, but the Lord looketh at the heart." (1 
 Sam. xvi. 7.) 
 
 Let us be real, true, and sincere in our religion, what- 
 ever else we are. The sinfulness of hypocrisy is very great, 
 but its folly is greater still It is not hard to deceive minis- 
 ters, relatives, and friends.. A little decent outward profes- 
 sion will often go a long way. But it is impossible to deceive 
 Christ. " His eyes are as a flame of fire." (Rev. i. 14.) 
 He sees us through and through. Happy are those who 
 can say,—" Thou, Lord, who knowest all things, knowest 
 that we love thee." (John xxi. 17.) 
 
 We should mark, secondly, in this passage, lohat Christ 
 forbids. He told the crowds who followed Him so dili 
 
 15* 
 
346 EXPOSITOKY THOUGHTS. 
 
 gently for the loaves and fishes, " not to labour for the 
 meat that perisheth." It was a remarkable sayhig, and 
 demands explanation. 
 
 Our Lord, we may be sure, did not mean to encourage 
 idleness. It would be a great mistake to suppose this 
 Labour was the appointed lot of Adam in Paradise. 
 Labour was ordained to be man's occupation after the 
 fall. Labour is honourable in all men. No one need be 
 ashamed of belonging to *' the working classes." Our 
 Lord himself worked in the carpenter's shop at Naza- 
 reth. St. Paul wrought as a tent-maker with his own hands. 
 
 What our Lord did mean to rebuke was, that excessive 
 attention to labour for the body, while the soul is neglected, 
 which prevails everywhere in the world. What He re- 
 proved was, the common habit of labouring only for the 
 things of time, and letting alone the things of eternity 
 — of minding only the life that now is, and disregarding 
 the life to come. Against this habit He delivers a solemn 
 warning. 
 
 Surely, we must all feel our Lord did not say the words 
 before us without good cause. They are a startling cau- 
 tion which should ring in the ears of many in these latter 
 days. How many in every rank of life are doing the very 
 thing against which Jesus warns us ! They are labouring 
 night and day for " the meat that perisheth," and doing 
 nothing for their immortal souls. Happy are those who 
 learn betimes the respective value of soul and body, and 
 give the first and best place in their thoughts to salvation. 
 One thing is needful. He that seeks first the kingdom of 
 God, will never fail to find *' all other things added to him." 
 (Matt. vi. 33.) 
 
 We should mark, thirdly, in this passage, what Christ 
 advises. He tells us to " labour for the meat that endureth 
 to everlasting life." He would have us take pains to find 
 food and satisfaction for our souls. That food is provided 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 347 
 
 in rich abundance in Him. But he that would have it 
 must diligently seek it. 
 
 How are we to labour ? There is but one answer. We 
 must labour in the use of all appointed means. "We must 
 read our Bibles, like men digging for hidden treasure. We 
 must wrestle earnestly in prayer, like men contending with 
 a deadly enemy for life. We must take our whole heart 
 to the house of God, and worship and hear like those who 
 listen to the reading of a will. We must fight daily against 
 sin, the world, and the devil, like those who fight for 
 liberty, and must conquer, or be slaves. These are the 
 ways we must walk in if we would find Christ, and be 
 found of Him. This is "labouring." .This is the secret 
 of getting on about our souls. 
 
 Labour like this no doubt is very uncommon. In carry- 
 ing it on we shall have little encouragement from man, and 
 shall often be told that we are " extreme," and go too far. 
 Strange and absurd as it is, the natural man is always 
 fancying that we may take too much thought about reli- 
 gion, and refusing to see that we are far more likely to 
 take too much thought about the world. But whatever 
 man may say, the soul will never get spiritual food without 
 labour. We must "strive," we must "run," we must 
 "fight," we must throw our whole heart into our soul's 
 affairs. It is " the violent" who take the kingdom. (Matt, 
 xi. 12.) 
 
 We should mark, lastly, in this passage, ichat a promise 
 Christ holds out. He tells us that He himself will give 
 eternal food to all who seek it : " The Son of man shall 
 give you the meat that endureth unto everlasting life." 
 
 How gracious and enconyaging these words are ! What- 
 ever we need for the relief of our hungering souls, Christ 
 is ready and willing to bestow. Whatever mercy, grace, 
 peace, strength we require, the Son of man will give freely, 
 immediiately^ ajbu^dantly, and eternally. He is " sealed," 
 
348 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 and api^ointed, and commissioned by God tlie Father for 
 this very purpose. Like Joseph in the Egyptian famine, it 
 is His office to be the Friend, and Almoner, and Reliever 
 of a sinful world. He is far more willing to give than man 
 is to receive. The more sinners apply to Him, the better 
 ]Ie is pleased. 
 
 And now, as we leave this rich passage, let us ask our- 
 selves, what use we make of it ? For what are we labour- 
 ing ourselves ? What do we know of lasting food and 
 satisfaction for our inward man? Never let us rest till 
 we have eaten of the meat which Christ alone can give. 
 They that are content with any other spiritual food will 
 sooner or later "lie down in sorrow." (Isa. 1. 11.) 
 
 Notes. John YI. 22—27. 
 
 22. — {The day following, etc^ In this, and the three following 
 verses, we have an instance of the extreme minuteness with 
 whicli St. John describes all the particulars connected with any 
 of the miracles of our Lord which he records, — Here, for exam- 
 ple, he tells us that our Lord's remaining behind, and not accom- 
 panying His disciples when they went into the boat, was 
 observed by the multitude; and that nevertheless they could 
 not find our Lord the next morning, and were puzzled to account 
 for His being found at Capernaum when they got there. — All 
 these little things help to prove that the circumstances of our 
 Lord's joining the disciples was something miraculous, and c n- 
 not be explained away, as some rationalists pretend to say. In 
 particular^ the question, " When camest thou hither? " (ver. 25) 
 is plain evidence that the multitude did not think it possible for 
 our Lord to have walked along the shore, as some modern writ- 
 ers suggest, and did not understand how He got to Capernaum 
 except in a boat. 
 
 In each of the seven great miracles recorded by St. John, this 
 fulness and minuteness is very noticeable. Had he been inspired 
 to relate as many miracles as we find in Matthew and Mark, his 
 Gospel would have been fifty chapters, instead of twenty-one. 
 Writing long after the other Gospel writers, and at a time when 
 many who witnessed our Lord's miracles were dead, there was a 
 fitness and wisdom in his supplying the abundant particulars 
 which characterize his descriptions. 
 
 \^The people luhich stood on the other side of the sea.] Thia 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 849 
 
 means the multitude, or some of them, whom Jesus had fed on 
 tlie north-east shore of the lake, and whom the disciples had 
 L ft standing near the banks when they embarked, belore our 
 Lord sent them away. Matthew and Mark both mention that 
 our Lord first made the disciples embark, and then sent the mul- 
 titude away, and retired to the mountain to pray. 
 
 20. — [Howheit there came other boats, etc.] This verse either means 
 that other boats came froai Tiberias the morning after the mira- 
 cle of feeding the multitude, which were not there the evening 
 that the disciples embarked ; or else it means that there were 
 other boats from Tiberias not far from the place where the mini- 
 cle was worked, though there were none actually at the spot 
 where the disciples embarked, except their one boat. The 
 verse is carefully inserted parenthetically, in order to account 
 for the multitude following our Lord to Capernaum. Had 
 it not been inserted, the infidel would have asked us tri- 
 umphantly, to exp'ain how the people could have followed 
 our Lord, when they had no boats ! We need not doubt that 
 every apparent discrepancy and difficulty in the Gospel narrative 
 would equally admit of explanation, if we only knew how to 
 fill up the 
 
 [After that the Lord had given thanks.] This is purposely 
 inserted to remind us that it was no common eating of bread 
 that had taken place, but an eating of food miraculously multi- 
 plied after our Lord had blessed it. 
 
 24. — [ When the people.] There is no occasion to suppose that this 
 expression means the whole five thousand, whom our Lord 
 had fed. Eor one thing, we are distinctly told that our Lord 
 *' sent them away," and the greater part probably dispeised, and 
 went their way to their homes, or to Jerusalem to the passover. 
 For another thing, it is absurd to suppose that so large a multi- 
 tude could find boats enough to convey them across the lake. 
 It evidently means the remaining portion of the multitude, and 
 probably included many who followed our Lord about from 
 place to place wherever He went in Gralilee, without any spiritual 
 feehng, from a vague love of excitement, and in the hope of 
 ultimately getting something by it. 
 
 [They also took shipping.] This means that they embarked 
 in the boats which came from Tiberias, and cros-ed over the 
 lake, 
 211. — [And when they found Him on the other side of the sea.] The 
 place where they found our Lord was on the north-west side of 
 the lake of Galilee, on the opposite side from that where the 
 miracle of feeding the multitude was wrought. The precise 
 spot however where they found Him is a point which it is not 
 very easy to decide.— Of course if we read the discourse which 
 
850 EXPOSITOKY THOUGHTS. 
 
 follows as one unbroken discourse, all spoken at one time with- 
 out breaks or pauses, except such as arise from the remarks of the 
 people who heard our Lord, there can be no doubt where our 
 Lord was. The fiflj-ninth verse settles the question. '' These 
 things said he in the synagogue as he taught in Capernaum.'' — 
 But if we suppose a break at the foriieth verse, where the Jews 
 begin " to murmur," and a short interval before the d'scourse 
 was resumed, it seems highly probable that the crowd found 
 our Lord at the landing-place at Capernaum, or just outside the 
 city, — that the discourse began there and continued up to the 
 fortieth verse, — and that then after a short pause it was resumed 
 " in the synagogue of Capernaum." It certainly does seem 
 rather abrupt and unnatural to suppose the crowd landing at 
 Capernaum, going up to the synagoi^ue, and there beginning tlie 
 conversation with the question, " When camest thou hither ? " 
 
 [When camest thou hither f] The question evidently implies 
 surprise at finding our Lord, and inability to understand how 
 He could possibly have got to Capernaum, if He did not go in 
 the boat with His disciples. It is a question, be it remarked, to 
 which our Lord returned no answer. He knew the state of 
 mind of those who asked it, and knew that it would be of no 
 use to tell them when He had come, or how. 
 
 Wordsworth's idea that there is a mystical reference in this 
 question to the manner and time of Christ's presence in the 
 Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, appears to me very fanciful and 
 far-fetched. 
 
 2G. — [Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say.] This solemn expression, 
 as usual in St. John's Gospel, introduces a series of sayings of 
 the deepest importance. The very first was a sharp and cutting 
 rebuke of the carnal-mindedness of those whom our Lord 
 addressed. 
 
 [Ye seek me. ..not..miracles...eat... filled.'] This was a severe say- 
 ing, and one which He, who knew all hearts and read all secret 
 motives, could say with peculiar power. It is a sad exposure of 
 the true reason why many followed our Lord, both 0:1 this occa- 
 sion and on others. It was not now even desire to see miracle^ 
 performed, as it nad been the day before (see verse 2). These, 
 after a time, when the novelty was passed, would cease to asto- 
 nisli and attract. It was a lower and more carnal motive still. It 
 was the mere wish to be fed again with loaves and fishes. They 
 wanted to get something more out of our Lord. They had been 
 fed oi.ce, and they would like to be fed again. 
 
 The poor, and mean, and carnal mot'' res which induce men to 
 irnke some religious profession, are painfully exhibited here. 
 Perhaps we have but a faint notion how little the reasons of 
 many for coming to public worship or communion would bear 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 851 
 
 sifting and examination. We may be sure that all is not gold 
 that glittei.-J, and that many a professor is rotten at heart. It 
 was so even under our Lord's ministry, and much more now. 
 Augustine remarks how seldom " Jesus is sought for the sake 
 of Jesus." 
 
 Our Lord's perfect knowledge of the S3cret springs of men's 
 actions is strikingly exhibited here. We cannot deceive Him 
 even if we deceive man ; and our true characters will be exposed 
 in the day of judgment, if they are not found out before we die. 
 Whatever we are in religion, let us be honest and true. 
 
 To follow Christ for the sake of a few loaves and fishes seems 
 miserable work. To some who know nothing of poverty, it may 
 appear almost incredible that a crowd of people should have 
 done it. Perhaps those only can thoroughly understand it who 
 have seen much of the poor in pauperized rural parishes. They 
 can understand the immense importance which a poor man 
 attaches to having his belly flllefl, and getting a dinner or a sup- 
 per. Mosti of our Lord's followers in Galilee were probably 
 very poor. 
 
 To deal plainly witli people about their spiritual condition 
 and faithfully expose their false motives, if we know them, is the 
 positive duty of ministers and teachers. It is no kindness or 
 charity to flatter professing Christians, and tell them they are 
 children of God, and going to heaven, if we know that they only 
 make a religious profession for the sake of what they can get. 
 
 Wisdom and discrimination in giving temporal relief to the 
 poor are very necessary things in ministers, and indeed in all 
 Christians. Unless we take heed what we do in such matters, 
 we do more harm than good. To be always feeding the poor 
 and giving money to those who make some profession of religion, 
 is the surest way to train up a generation of hypocrites, and to 
 inflict lasting injury on souls. 
 
 27. — [Labour not, etc... sealed.] This verse is peculiarly full of in- 
 structive lessons. (1.) There is something forbidden. We are 
 not to labour exclusively, or excessively, for the satisfaction of 
 our bodily wants, for that food which only perishes in the using, 
 and only does us a little temporary good. (2.) There is something 
 commanded. We ought to work hard and strive for that spiritual 
 food, — that supply for the wants of our souls, which once obtained 
 is an everlasting possession. (3.) There is something promised. 
 The Son of man, even Jesus Christ, is ready to give to every one 
 who desires to have it, that spiritual food which endures for ever. 
 (4.) There is something declared. The Son of man, Jesus Christ, 
 has been designated and appointed by God the Father for this 
 very purpose, to be the dispenser of thi? spiritual food to all who 
 desire it. 
 
352 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 The whole verse is a strong proof that however carnal and 
 wicked men may be, we should never hesitate to offer to them 
 freely and fully the salvation of the Gospel. Bad as the motives 
 of these Jews were, we see our Lord, in the same breath, first 
 exposing their sin, and then showing them their remedy. 
 
 The figure of speech used by our Lord, which supplies the 
 key-note to the whole subsequent di^^course, is a beautiful in- 
 stance of that divine wisdom with which He suited His language 
 to the mental condition of those He spoke to. He saw the 
 crowd coming to Him for food. He seizes the idea, and bids 
 them labour not for bodily but spiritual food. Just so when He 
 saw the rich young man come to Him, He bade him " sell all and 
 give to the poor." — Just so when the Samaritan woman met Him 
 at the well, as she came to draw water. He told her of living 
 water. — Just so when Nicodemus came to Him, proud of hia 
 Jewish birth, He tells him of a new birth which he needed. 
 
 When our Lord said, " labour not for the meat that perisheth," 
 we must not for a moment suppose that He meant to encourage 
 idleness, and the neglect of all lawful means in order to get our 
 living. It is a kind of expression which is not uncommon in 
 the Bible, when two things are put in comparison. Thus, when 
 our Lord says " If any man come after me, and hate not his father 
 and mother and wife and children, etc., he cannot be my disciple," 
 we see at a glance that these words cannot be taken literally. 
 They only mean " if any man does not love me more than fxther," 
 etc. (Luke xiv. 26.) So here the simple meaning is that we 
 ought to take far more pains about the supply of the wants of 
 our souls than of our bodies. See also 1 Cor. vii. 29 ; 2 Cor. iv, 
 18 ; 1 Sam. viii. 7 ; John xii. 44. 
 
 When our Lord says, " labour for the meat that eodureth," 
 etc., I think He teaches very plainly that it is the duty of every 
 one to use every means, and endeavour in every way to promote 
 the welfiire of his soul. In the use of prayer, the Bible, and 
 the public preaching of God's Word we are specially to labour. 
 Our responsibility and accountableness, the duty of effort and 
 exertion, appear to me to stand out unmistakeably in the 
 expression. It is like the commands " Strive, Repent, Believe, 
 Be converted, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. 
 Awake, Arise, Come, Pray." It is nothing less than wicked to 
 stand still, splitting hairs, raising difficulties, and pretending 
 inability, in the face of such expressions as these. What God 
 commands man must always try to obey. Whatever language 
 Christ uses, ministers and teachers must never shrink from 
 using likewise. 
 
 The " meat that endureth to everlasting life," must doubtless 
 mean that satisfaction of the cravings of soul and consciencoj 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VT. 353 
 
 which is the grand want of human nature. Mercy and grace, 
 pardon of sin and a new heart, are the two great gifts which 
 alone can fill the soul, and once given are never taken away, but 
 endure for ever. Both here and in many other places, we must 
 always remember, that " meat ' did n^t mean exclusively " flesh" 
 in the days when the Bible was translated, as it does now. The 
 Greek word rendered " meat " here means simply " food " of any 
 kind. 
 
 When our Lord says, " The Son of man shall give you the 
 meat that endureth to everlasting life," He appears to me to 
 make one of the widest and most general offers to unconverted 
 sinners that we have anywhere in the Bible. The men to 
 whom He was speaking were, beyond question, carnal-minded 
 and unconverted men. Yet even to them Jesus says, " The Son 
 of man shall give unto you." To me it seems an unmistakeable 
 statement of Christ's willingness and readiness to give pardon 
 and grace to any sinner. It seems to me to warrant ministers 
 in proclaiming Christ's readiness to save any one, and in offering 
 salvation to any one, if he will only repent and believe the Gos- 
 pel. The favourite notion of some, that Christ is to be offered 
 only to the elect, — that grace and pardon are to be exhibited but 
 not offered to a congregation, — that we ought not to say broadly 
 and fully to all whom we preach to, Christ is ready and willing 
 to save you, — such notions, I say, appear to me entirely irrecon- 
 cileable with the language of our Lord. Election, no doubt, 
 is a mighty truth and a precious privilege. Complete and full 
 redemption no doubt is the possession of none but the elect. 
 But how easy it is, in holding these glorious truths, to become 
 more systematic than the Bible, and to spoil the Gospel by 
 cramping and limiting it! 
 
 When our Lord says, " Him hath God the Father sealed," He 
 probably refers to the custom of setting apart for any specific 
 purpose, and marking for any peculiar use by a seal. So also 
 deeds and public documents were sealed to testify their execution 
 and validity, and give them authority. So it is said in Esther : 
 " The writing that is written in the king's name, and sealed with 
 the king's ring, may no man reverse." (Esther viii. 8.) The 
 expression applied to our Lord in this place certainly stands 
 alone, but I think there can be little doubt as to its meaning. It 
 signifies that in the eternal counsels of God the Father, He has 
 sealed, commissioned, designated, and appointed the Son of mm, 
 the Incarnate Word, to be the Giver of everlasting life to man. 
 It is an ofl&ce for which He has been solemnly set apart by the 
 Father. 
 
 Parkhurst thinks that the word means " Him hath God the 
 Father authorized with sufficient evidence, particularly by the 
 voice from heaven ;" and he refers the sealing entirely to the 
 
354 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 testimony which the Father had borne to the Son's MessiaLship. 
 This also is Suicer's view, and Alford's. 
 
 Stier remarks, " This seahng is not to be understood merely of 
 miracles, but of the stamp of divinity which was impressed upon 
 His wliole hfe and teaching." This is Poole's view, and 
 Hutcheson's. 
 
 It has been thought by some that there is a tacit reference 
 here to the history of Joseph ; and that our Lord meant that aa 
 Joseph was appointed to be the great almoner and rehever of 
 the Egyptians by the king of Egypt, so He is appointed by the 
 King of kings to reheve the spiritual famine of mankind. At 
 any rate it is an apt and suitable illustration. 
 
 The idea of Hilary and some others that the expression 
 "sealed" refers to our Lord being the "express image of the 
 Father's presence," appears to me far-fetched and without foun- 
 dation. 
 
 The last words of the verse should be rendered more literally, 
 " Him hath the Father sealed, even God." It almost suggests 
 the idea that our Lord desired to prevent His hearers supposing 
 that He referred to Joseph as His Father. It is as if He said, 
 " the Father I mean, remember, is not an earthly father, but 
 God." -^ ' 
 
 Rollock remarks on this verse, that our Lord does not confine 
 Himself to showing the folly of only seeking " the meat that 
 perisheth," but is careful to show the true food of the soul, and 
 to point out who alone can give it. He observes that this is 
 an example to us in teaching man the Gospel. The remedy 
 must be as plainly taught and hfted up as the disease. He 
 observes truly that none can speak better of the vanity of 
 earthly things and the glory of heaven, than many Papists do. 
 But it is when they come to the feeding of man's soul that 
 they fail. They try to feed him with man's merits, the inter- 
 cession of saints, purgatory, and the like, and do not show him 
 Christ. 
 
 It is note-worthy that it was the remembrance of this verse 
 which made Henry Martyn persevere in preaching to poor 
 Hindoos at Dinapore in India. He had found they only came 
 for temporal relief, and cared nothing for his preaching, and 
 he was on the point of giving up in despair. But this verse 
 came across his mind. '• If the Lord Jesus was not ashamed 
 to prear^h to mere bread-seekers," he thought, " who am I, that 
 I should give over in disgust ?" 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 
 
 355 
 
 JOHN YI. 28—34. 
 
 28 Then said they unto him, 
 What shall we do, that "we might 
 work the works of Grod? 
 
 29 Jesus answered and said unto 
 them. This is the work of God, that 
 ye believe on him whom he hath 
 Bent. 
 
 30 They said therefore unto him, 
 "What sign showest thou then, that 
 we may see, and beUeve thee? 
 what dost thou work ? 
 
 31 Our fathers did eat manna in 
 
 the desert; as it is wr.tten, He 
 gave them bread from heaven to eat. 
 
 32 Then Jesus said unto them. 
 Verily, verily, I say unto you, 
 Moses gave you not that bread 
 from heaven ; but my Father giveth 
 you the true bread from heaven. 
 
 33 For the bread of God is he 
 which Cometh down from heaven, 
 and giveth Hfe unto the word. 
 
 34 Then said they unto him, 
 Lord, evermore give us this bread. 
 
 These verses form the beginning of one of the most 
 remarkable passages in the Gospels. None, perhaps, of 
 our Lord's discourses has occasioned more controversy, 
 and been more misunderstood, than that which we find 
 in the Sixth Chapter of John. 
 
 We should observe, for one thing, in these verses, the 
 spiritual ignorance and vnhelief of the natural man. 
 Twice over we see this brought out and exemplified. 
 When our Lord bade his hearers " labour for the meat 
 "which endureth to eternal life," they immediately began to 
 think of works to be done, and a goodness of their own to 
 be established. " What shall we do that we might work 
 the works of God ?" Doing, doing, doing, was their only 
 idea of the way to heaven. — Again, when our Lord spoke 
 of Himself as One sent of God, and the need of believing 
 on Him at once, they turn round with the question, — 
 " What sign showest thou ? what dost thou work ?" 
 Fresh from the mighty miracle of the loaves and fishes, one 
 might have thought they had had a sign sufficient to con- 
 vince them. Taught by our Lord Jesus Christ himself, 
 one might have expected a greater readiness to believe. 
 But alas! there are no limits to man's dulness, prejudice, 
 and unbelief in spiritual matters. It is a striking fact that 
 the only thing which our Lord is said to have "marvelled" 
 
856 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 at during His earthly ministry, was man's "unbelief." 
 (Mark vi. 6.) 
 
 We shall do well to i emember this, if we ever try to do 
 good to others in the matter of religion. We must not be 
 cast down because our words are not believed, and our 
 efforts seem thrown away. We must not complain of it 
 as a strange thing, and suppose that the people we have to 
 deal with are peculiarly stubborn and hard. We must re- 
 collect that this is the very cup of which our Lord had to 
 drink, and like Him we must patiently work on. If even 
 He, so perfect and so plain a Teacher, was not believed, 
 what right have we to wonder if men do not believe us ? 
 Happy are the ministers, and missionaries, and teachers 
 who keep these things in mind ! It will save them much 
 bitter disappointment. In working for God, it is of first 
 importance to understand what we must expect in man. 
 Few things are so little realized as the extent of human 
 unbelief. 
 
 We should observe, for another thing, in these verses, 
 the high honour Christ puts on faith in Himself. The 
 Jews had asked Him, — " What shall we do, that we might 
 work the works of God ?" In rejDly He says, — " This is 
 the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath 
 sent." A truly striking and remarkable expression ! If 
 any two things are put in strong contrast, in the N'ew 
 Testament, they are faith and works. Not working, but 
 believing, — not of works, but through faith, — are words 
 familiar to all careful Bible-readers. Yet here the great 
 Head of the Church declares that believing on Him is the 
 highest and greatest of all " works ! " It is " the work of 
 God." 
 
 Doubtless our Lord did not mean that there is anything 
 meritorioLis in believing. Man's faith, at the very best, is 
 feeble and defective. Regarded as a "work," it cannot 
 stand the severity of God's judgment, deserve pardon, or 
 
^JOHN, CHAP. VI. 357 
 
 purchase heaven. Bui jOur Lord did mean that faith in 
 Himself, as the onljr.jSayiour, is the first act of the soul 
 which God requires^J^t A sinner's hands. Till a man believes 
 on Jesus, and rests on Je«us as a lost sinner, he is nothing. 
 — Our Lord did mean that faith in Himself is that act of 
 the soul which specially pleases God. When the Father 
 sees a sinner casting aside his own righteousness, and 
 simply trusting in His dear Son, He is well pleased. 
 Without such faith it is impossible to please God. — Our 
 Lord did mean that faith in Himself is the root of all sav- 
 ing religion. There is no life in a man till he believes. — 
 Above all, our Lord did mean that faith in Himself is the 
 hardest of all spiritual acts to the natural man. Did the 
 Jews want something to do in religion ? Let them know 
 ihat the greatest thing they had to do was, to cast aside 
 their pride, confess their guilt and need, and humbly 
 believe. 
 
 Let all who know anything of true faith thank God and 
 rejoice. Blessed are they that believe ! It is an attain- 
 ment which many of the wise of this world have never yet 
 reached. We may feel ourselves poor, weak sinners. But 
 do we believe? — ^We may fail and come short in many 
 things. But do we believe ? — He that has learned to feel 
 his sins, and to trust Christ as a Saviour, has learned the 
 two hardest and greatest lessons in Christianity. He has 
 been in the best of schools. He has been taught by the 
 Holy Ghost. 
 
 We shall observe, lastly, in these verses, the far greater 
 privileges of Chrisfs hearers than of those who lived in 
 the times of Moses. Wonderful and miraculous as the 
 manna was which fell from heaven, it was nothing in com- 
 parison to the true bread which Christ had to bestow on 
 His disciples. He himself was the bread of God, who had 
 come down from heaven to give life to the world. — The 
 bread which fell in the days of Moses could only feed and 
 
358 EXPOSITORY THOtJGHTS. 
 
 satisfy the body. The Son of man :^iad come to feed the 
 soul. — The bread which fell in the (iij^tof Moses was only 
 for the benefit of Israel. The Son of 'man had come to 
 offer eternal life to the world. — ^Those Who ate the manna 
 died and were buried, and many of them were lost for 
 ever. But those who ate the bread which the Son of man 
 provided, would be eternally saved. 
 
 And now let us take heed to ourselves, and make sure " 
 that we are among those who eat the bread of God and 
 live. Let us not be content with lazy waiting, but let 
 us actually come to Christ, and eat the bread of life, and 
 believe to the saving of our souls. The Jews could say, 
 — " Evermore give us this bread." But it may be feared 
 they went no further. Let us never rest till, by faith, we 
 have eaten this bread, and can say, " Christ is mine. I 
 have tasted that the Lord is gracious. I know and feel 
 that I am His." 
 
 ISToTES. John YI. 28—34. 
 
 28. — [Then said they unto him.] These words begin one of the 
 most important of our Lord's discourses, and one about which 
 the widest dififerences of opinion prevail. These differences it 
 will be time enough to consider, when we come to the passage 
 out of which they arise. In the mean time let us remember 
 that the speakers before us were men whom our Lord had 
 miraculously fed the day before, and on whom He bad just 
 urged the paramount importance of seeking food and satisfaction 
 for their souls. For anything we can see they were Jews in a 
 state of great spiiitual ignorance and darkness. Yet even with 
 them our Lord patiently condescends to hold a long conversation. 
 Teachers \vho desire to walk in Christ's steps must aim at thia 
 kind of patienc?, and be willing to talk with and teach the 
 darkest and most ignorant men. It needs wisdom, iailh, and 
 patience. 
 
 [What shall we do...worhs of God?] This question is the 
 language of men who were someAvhat aroused and impi-essed, 
 but still totally in the dark about the way to heaven. They 
 feel that they are in the wrong road, and that they ought to do 
 some'.hing. But they are utterly ignorant what to do, and their 
 only notion is the old self-righteous one of the natural man, — 
 
359 
 
 "1 must do something, I must perform some works to pler^se 
 God and buy admission to heaven." — This seems to me the 
 leading idea of the question before us. "Your command to 
 labour or work for the meat that endureth pricks our conscience. 
 AVe admit that we ought to do something. Tell us what we 
 must do, and we will try to do it." — It is a case of a conscience 
 partially aroused and put on its defence, groping after light. It 
 is like the rich young man who came running to our Lord and 
 saying, "What good thing shall I do." (Matt. xix. 16.) 
 
 The expression " what shall we do ? " would be more literally 
 rendered, "what do we?" or "what must we do?" or "what 
 are we to do ?" 
 
 The expression " that we might wc>rk," might have been 
 rendered " that we might labour." It is the same Greek word 
 that is translated in the previous verse "labour." The expres- 
 sion, " the works of God," cannot of course mean " the same 
 works thit God works." It means "the works that please God, 
 that are agreeable to God's mind, and in accordance with God's 
 will." Thus 1 Cor. xv. 58, and xvi. 10. This is the view of 
 Glassius. 
 
 This question, "what shall we do?" we must remember, 
 ought never to be despised. Though it may often be the lazy 
 expression of languid religious feeling, just half awakened, it is 
 at any rate much better than having no feeling at all. The 
 worst part of many persons' spiritual condition lies heie, that 
 they are quite indifferent about their salvation; they never 
 ask "what shall we do?" — Many no doubt content themselves 
 with saying "what shall we do?" and like those of whom we 
 are reading, never get any further. But, on the other liand, 
 in many cases, "what shall I do?" is the beginning of eternal 
 life, the first step toward heaven, the first breath of grace, the 
 first spiritual pulsation. The Jews on the day of pentecost 
 said, " what must we do ?" Saul, when the Lord met him near 
 Damascus, said, " Lord, what wilt thou have me to do ?" The 
 Philippian jailor said, " What must I do to be saved ?" When- 
 ever therefore we hear a person ask the question about his soul, 
 " what shall I do ?" we must try to help him and put him in 
 the right way. We never know what it may lead to. It may 
 perhaps end in nothing, and prove a mere temporary feeling. 
 But it may also come to something, and end in the conversion 
 of a soul. 
 
 29. — {Jesus ansivered.. .this. ...worJcMUeve... sent] In this verse our 
 Lord takes hold of the expression used by the Jews about 
 " work," and answers them according to their state of mind, 
 Did they ask what work they should do ? Let them know that 
 the first thing God called them to do, was to believe in His Son, 
 
360 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 the Messiah whom He had sent, and whom they saw before 
 them. 
 
 When our Lord calls faith " the work of God," we must not 
 suppose He means here, that it is the work of His Spirit, and 
 His gift. This is undoubtedly true, but not the truth of the text. 
 He only means that believing is '' the work that pleases God," 
 and is most agreeable to God's will and mind. 
 
 Of course every well-instructed Bible-reader will remember, 
 that, strictly speaking, believing is so far from being a " work," 
 that it is the very opposite of workiag. '' To him that worketh 
 not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is 
 counted to him for righteousness." (Eom. iv. 5.) But it is evi- 
 dent that our Lord accommodates His manner of speaking to the 
 ignorant minds with which He had to deal. Thus St. Paul calls 
 the doctrine of faith the '' law of faith," (Eom. iii. 27.) It is 
 much the same as if we said to an ignorant but awakened inquirer 
 after salvation, Avho fancies he can do great things for his soul, — 
 " You talk of doing. But know that the first thing to be done, 
 is to believe on Christ. This is the first step toward heaven. 
 You have done nothing until you believe. This is the thing that 
 pleases God most. Without faith it is impossible to please 
 Him. This is the hardest thing after all. Nothing will test 
 the reality of your feelings so much as a wilKngness to believe 
 on Christ, and cease from your own works. Begin therefore by 
 believing." The very attempt to believe, in such a case, might 
 prove useful. 
 
 Let us note in this verse the marvellous wisdom with which 
 our Lord suited His language to the minds of those He spoke to. 
 It should be the constant aim of a religious teacher, not merely 
 to teach truth, but to teach truth wisely and with tact, so as to 
 arrest the attention of those he teaches. Half the religious 
 teaching in the churches and schools of our day, is entirely 
 thrown away for want of tact and power of adaptation in impart- 
 ing it. To profess truth is one thing : to be able to impart it 
 wisely, quite another. 
 
 Let us note in this verse the high honour our Lord puts upon 
 faith in Himself. He makes it the root of all religion, the foun- 
 dation-stone of His kingdom, the very first step toward heave... 
 Christians sometimes talk ignorantly about faith and works, ag 
 if they were things that could be compared with one another as 
 equals, or opposed to one another as enemies. But let them 
 observe here that fiiitli in Christ is so immeasurably the first 
 tiling in Christianity, that in a certain sense it is the great work 
 of works. In a certain sense it is the seed and root of all reli- 
 gion, and we can do nothing until we believe. In short the 
 right answer to '' what must 1 do ?" is " believe.' 
 
361 
 
 30. — {They said tlierefore unto him.] The secret unbelief of the 
 Jews begins to come out in this verse. Nothing so thoroughly 
 reveals the hearts of men as a summons to believe on Chri.^t. 
 Exhortations to work excite no prejudice and enmity. It is the 
 exhortation to believe that offends. 
 
 [What sign showest thou then.] The word "thou," in this sen- 
 tence is^emphatic in the Greek. It is as though the Jews said, 
 " Who art thou indeed to talk in this way?" " What miraculous 
 evidence of thy Messiahship hast thou got to show ?" There is 
 an evident sneer or sarcasm in the question. 
 
 [That we may see and believe thee.] This seems to mean, " that 
 we may see in the miracle wrought unanswerable proof that 
 Thou art the Messiah, and seeing the miracle may thus be able 
 to believe Thee." This is the common language of many uncon- 
 verted hearts. They Avant to see first, and then to believe. But 
 this is inverting God's order. Faith must come first, and sight 
 will follow. 
 
 There is a difference that ought to be marked between the 
 ''believing thee" of this verse, and the "believing on him whom 
 he hath sent," of the preceding verse. "Believing on" is saving 
 faith. " Believing " alone, is merely believing a person to speak 
 the truth. The devils " believe Christ," but do not believe 
 " on Christ." We beheve John, but do not believe " on him." 
 
 f What dost thou worh] It seems at first most extraordinary 
 that men who had seen such a miracle as that of feeding the five 
 thousand with five loaves, and had been themselves of the nuai- 
 ber fed, and this only tw^enty-four hours before, could ask such a 
 question as this ! Our first thought is, that no greater sign or 
 miracle could have been shown. But th^j speak as if it was 
 forgotten ! Surely when we see such proofs of the extreme dul- 
 ness and deadness of man's heart, we have no reason to be sur- 
 prised at what we see among professing Christians. 
 
 Bucer and Grotius suggest, that the speakers here can hardly 
 be those who were witnesses of the miracle of feeding the five 
 thousand. But I see no need for the suggestion, when we look 
 round us and observe what human nature is capable of, or even 
 look at the book of Exodus, and see how soon Israel in the wil- 
 derness forgot the miracles they had seen. 
 
 Let us remember that this demand for " a sign," or great mira- 
 cle, was common during our Lord's ministry. It seems to have 
 been a habit of mind among the Jews. St. Paul says, " The 
 Jews require a sign." (1 Cor. i. 22.) They were always deceiv- 
 ing themselves with the idea, that they wanted more evidence, 
 and pretending that if they had this evidence they would believe. 
 Thousands in every age do just the same. They five on waiting 
 
 16 
 
362 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 for something to convince them, and fancying that if they were 
 convinced, they would be different men in reliorion. The plain 
 truth is, that it is want of heart, not want of evidence, that keeps 
 people back from Christ. The Jews had signs, and evidences, 
 and proofs of Christ's Messiahship in abundance, but they would 
 not see them. Just so, many a professed unbeliever of our day 
 has plenty of evidence around him, but he will neither look at it 
 nor examine it. So true it is that " none are so blind as those 
 that will not see." 
 
 Quesnel remarks, " The atheist is still seeking after proofs of 
 a Deity, though he walks every day amidst apparent miracles." 
 
 We should observe that the Jews were willing enough to 
 honour Christ as " a prophet." It was the doctrine of faith in 
 Him that they could not receive. Christ the "teacher," is 
 always more popular than Christ the " sacrifice and substitute." 
 
 31. — [Our fathers... .manna....iuriUen.... to eat] The intention of the 
 Jews in saying what they do in this verse is plain. They evi- 
 dently implied a disparaging comparison between our Lord and 
 Moses, and our Lord's miracle of feeding the multitude, and the 
 feeding of Israel with manna. It is as though they said, 
 "Although Thou didst work a miracle yesterday. Thou hast 
 done nothing greater than the thing that happened in the days 
 when our fathers were fed with manna in the wilderness. The 
 sign Thou hast given is not so great a sign as that which Moses 
 gave our fathers when he gave them bread from heaven to eat. 
 Why then should we be called on to beheve Thee ? What proof 
 have we that Thou art a prophet greater than Moses ?" 
 
 The word " manna " would have been more correctly rendered 
 " the manna," i. e., " the well-known and famous manna." 
 
 Let us note in this verse how prone men are to refer back at 
 once to things done in the days of their " fathers," when saving 
 religion is pressed home on their consciences. The woman of 
 Samaria began talking about "our father Jacob." — "Art thou 
 greater than our father Jacob ?" (John iv. 12.) The Pharisees 
 "built the sepulchres of the prophets." (Luke xi. 47.) Dead 
 teachers have always more authority than hving ones. 
 
 Let U9 mark that the miraculous feeding of Israel in the wil- 
 derness with manna is spoken of by the Jews as a notorious 
 historical fact. Our Lord moreover in the following verse en- 
 tirely assumes the truth of the miracle. The modern attempts 
 to deny or explain away the miraculous facts recorded in tl^ Old 
 Testament, are here, as well as elsewhere, entirely irreconcile- 
 able with the manner in which they are always spoken of in the 
 New Testament. He that denies old Testament miracles, is 
 a&saulting the knowledge and veracity of Christ and the Apos- 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 363 
 
 lies. They believed them, and spoke of tnem, as historical facts. 
 We never need be ashamed of being on their side. 
 
 Let us observe the acquaintance with Scripture which the 
 Jews exhibit. They quote the seventy-eighth Psalm (ver. 24, 
 25), as a sujBQcient proof of tfhe fact they had just mentioned. 
 A certain knowledge of Scripture, unhappily, may often be found 
 in a very unbelieving heart. Knowledge of the letter of Scrip- 
 ture at any rate seems to have been very common among the 
 Jews. (See Deut. vi. 6, 7.) 
 
 Whether or not they apphed the sentence they quoted to 
 Moses, rather than God, 1 think, admits of a question. Our 
 Lord's words, in the following verse, would rather lead one to 
 think that they meant that "Moses gave them bread from 
 heaven." 
 
 32. — l^Then Jesns....verily.. ..Moses gave you not that hreadi] The 
 object of our Lord in this verse is very plain. He replies to 
 the argument of the Jews, that the miracle of the manna was 
 a greater miracle than any He had come into the world to work, 
 and that Moses w^as consequently a greater prophet than He was. 
 Yet in the words he uses, it is not very easy to settle where the 
 stress should be laid, and what is the precise word on which the 
 point of the answer rests. 
 
 (a.) Some think that it means, — " It was not Moses who gave 
 you the bread from heaven, but God." They lay the stress on 
 Moses. 
 
 (b.) Some think that it means, — "Moses did not give you 
 bread from the real heaven of heavens, where God the Father 
 dwells, but only a material food from the upper part of that 
 atmosphere which surrounds this earth." They lay the stress 
 on heaven. 
 
 (c.) Some think that it means, — '' Moses did not give the true 
 spiritual bread from heaven, though he gave you bread." They 
 lay the stress on " that bread." 
 
 The second of these opinions seems to me quite inadmissible. 
 The distinction between the heaven where God dwells and the 
 upper region of our atmosphere was not, I beheve, in our Lord's 
 mind, when He used the language He uses here. Moreover it 
 cannot be denied that the manna, though only material food, 
 was heavenly food, i. e., food supplied by God's miraculous inter- 
 position. 
 
 The true view seems to me to be contained in the first and 
 third opinions taken together. The Greek bears it out by put- 
 ting the word " not" in the very forefront of the sentence. "It 
 was not Moses who gave you that bread from heaven, and even 
 
J 
 
 1 
 
 864 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 the bread that was given you was not that true bread which 
 endures to everlasting hfe." 
 
 [Bui my Father giveth you the true hread from heaven.'] The 
 use of the present tense should be noticed in this sentence. The 
 idea seems to be, '' What Moses could not give you, even the 
 true bread which feeds the soul, my Father does givTi you, 
 and is actually giving you at this moment, in that He gives yoi: 
 myself." 
 
 The expression, " giveth you," must not be supposed to im^' 
 ply actual reception on the part of the Jews. It rather means 
 "giving" in the sense of "offering" for acceptance a thing 
 which those to whom it is offered may not receive. — It is a very 
 remarkable saying, and one of those which seems to me to prove 
 unanswerably that Christ is Grod's gift to the whole world, — that 
 His redemption was made for all mankind, — that He died for all, 
 — and is offered to all. It is like the famous texts, " God so 
 loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son " (John iii. 
 16) ; and, "' God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in 
 his Son." (1 John v. 11.) It is a gift no doubt which is utterly 
 thrown away, like many other gifts of God to man, and is profit- 
 able to none but those that beheve. But that God nevertheless 
 does in a certain sense actually " give " His Son, as the true bread 
 from heaven, even to the wicked and unbelieving, appears to me 
 incontrovertibly proved by the words before us. It is a remark- 
 able fact that Erskine, the famous Scotch seceder, based his right 
 to offer Christ to all, on these very words, and defended himself 
 before the General Assembly of the Kirk of Scotland on the 
 strength of them. He asked the Moderator to tell him what 
 Christ meant when He said, " My Father giveth you the true 
 bread from heaven," — and* got no answer. The truth is, I ven- 
 ture to think, that the text cannot be answered by the advocates 
 of an extreme view of particular redemption. Fairly inter- 
 preted, the words mean that in some sense or another the Father 
 does actually " give " the Son to those who are not believers. 
 They warrant preachers and teachers in making a wide, broad, 
 full, free, unlimited offer >f Christ to all mankind without ex- 
 ception. 
 
 Even Hutcheson, the Scotch divine, though a strong advocate 
 of particular redemption, remai-ks, — " Even such as are, at pre- 
 sent, but carnal and unsound, are not secluded from the offer of 
 Christ ; but upon right terms may expect that He will be gifted 
 to them." 
 
 The expression " true," in this place, when applied to bread, 
 means " true " as opposed to that which is only typical, emble- 
 matical, and temporal. The manna was undoubtedly real true 
 food for tl e body. But it was a type of a iar better food, and 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 365 
 
 was itself a thing which could not bene£t the soul. Christ waa 
 the true spiritual food of which the manna was the type. Ex- 
 amples of " true " in this sense may be seen in John i. 9 ; xv. 1 ; 
 Heb. viii. 2 ; ix. 24. 
 
 33. — [The hreacl of God is that, etc.] At first sigiit, this verse seems 
 to mean, that '' Ciirist coming down from heaven, and giving life 
 unto the world, is the true bread of God, — the Divine food of 
 man's soul." But it may well be doubted whether this is the 
 precise meaning of tlie Greek words. I thin]?: with Rollock, 
 Bengel, Scholefield, Alford, and others, they would be more cor- 
 rectly rendered, — " The bread of God is that bread which cometh 
 down from heaven." 
 
 (a.) For one thing, the Jews do not appear to have under- 
 stood our Lord as yet to speak directly of Himself, or of any 
 person. Else why should they have said, — " Lord, give us this 
 bread." Moreover, they did not CQurmur, when they heard these 
 words. 
 
 (&.) For anoth-er thing, our Lord does not appear as yet to re- 
 veal fully that He was the bread of God. He reserves this till 
 the thirty-fifth verse, and then declares it. At present He only 
 gives a general intimation of a certain Divine fife-giving bread. 
 
 (c.) For another thing, it is more in keeping with the gradual 
 unfolding of truth, — which appears so strikingly in this chapter, 
 — to suppose that our Lord begins with a general statement, than 
 to suppose that He speaks at once of Himself personally. First, 
 (1.) the bread generally, — then, (2.) I am the bread, — then, (3.) 
 the bread is My flesh, — then, (4.) except ye eat the flesh, and 
 drink the blood, no life, etc.,— such seem the gradual steps by 
 which our Lord leads on His hearers in this wonderful chapter. 
 I freely admit that the point is doubtful. Happily, whether we 
 read, *^ the bread of God is He," or " the bread of God iis that 
 bread," the doctrine is sound, and Scriptural, and edifying. 
 
 The expression, " the bread of God," seems equivalent to the 
 expression of the preceding verse, "the true bread." It is that 
 real satisfying food for the soul which God has provided. 
 
 The expression, which " cometh down from heaven," is an as- 
 sertion of the Divine origin of that spiritual food which God had 
 provided. Like the manna, it came down from heaven, but in a 
 iar higher, fuller, and deeper sense, than the manna did. It waa 
 '' that personal bread," of which they would soon hear more dis- 
 tinctly. 
 
 The expression, " giveth fife to the world " implies a contrast 
 between the "bread of God," and the manna. The manna only 
 supplied the hunger of the twelve tribes of Israel, — viz., 600,000 
 men and their families. The bread of God was for the whole 
 
366 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 world, and provided eternal life for every member of Adaiil*a 
 family who would eat of it, whether Jew or Gentile. 
 
 We should mark, again, what a strong argumenf these worda 
 supply in favour of the doctrine of Christ being God's gift to alL 
 That all the world has not life from Christ, and does not believe 
 in Him, is undoubtedly true. But that life is provided in Christ, 
 and salvation sufiBcient for all the world, appears to be the natu- 
 ral interpretation of the text. 
 ♦ 
 24, — [Then said they. ..Lord... give us this bread.] There is a striking 
 resemblance between the thought expressed in this verse, and 
 the thought of the Samaritan woman, when she heard of the 
 living water that Christ could give : — " Sir, give me this water, 
 that I thirst not, neither conae hither to draw." (John iv. 15.) In 
 both cases we see desire called forth and excited by our Lord's 
 words. There is a vague sense of something great and good 
 being close at hand, and a vague wish expressed to have it. In 
 the case of the Samaritan woman, the wish proved the first 
 spark in a thorough conversion to God. In the case of the Jews 
 before us, the wish seems to have been nothing more than the 
 " desire of the slothful," and to have gone no further. Wishing 
 and admiring are not conversion. 
 
 Let us note, carefully, that there is nothing hitherto to show 
 that the Jews understood our Lord to call Simself the "bread of 
 God," or " the true bread." That there was such a thing as the 
 true and satisfying bread, — that it must be the same as that 
 *' meat which endureth to everlasting life," they seem to have 
 concluded; — and that it was something which our Lord could 
 give, they inferred. But there is not a word to make us think 
 they saw it at present to mean Christ himself This is a weighty 
 argument in favour of that view of the preceding verse which I 
 have tried to support, viz., — that it ought to be translated " the 
 bread of God is that bread," not " He." 
 
 There is some probabihty in Lightfoot's remark, that our Lord's 
 hearers, like most Jews, had their minds stuffed with foolish and 
 superstitious notions about great banquets and feasts, which 
 they expected Messiah to give them, whenever He appeared. 
 They had a tradition that Leviathan and Behemoth were to be 
 slain, and their flesh made into a great feast for Israel when 
 Mtssiah came. Our Lord, possibly, had this tradition in His 
 mind, and desired to turn the minds of the Jews to the true food 
 vhich Messiah had come to give. 
 
JOHN. CHAP. VI. 367 
 
 JOHN VI. 35—40. 
 
 35 And J 3SUS said unto them, I 
 am the bread of life : he that cometh 
 to me shall never hunger ; and he 
 that beheveth on me shall never 
 thirst. 
 
 36 But I said unto you, That ye 
 also have seen me, and believe not. 
 
 37 All that the Father giveth me 
 shall come to me; and him that 
 cometh to me I will in no wise cast 
 out. 
 
 38 Por I came down from heaven, 
 
 not to do mine own will, but the 
 will of liim that sent me. 
 
 39 And this is the Father's will 
 which hath sent me, that of all 
 which he hath given me I should 
 lose nothing, but should raise it up 
 again at the last day. 
 
 40 And this^is 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. 
 
 Three of our Lord Jesus Christ's great sayings are 
 strung together, like pearls, in this passage. Each of them 
 ought to be precious to every true Christian. All taken 
 together, they form a mine of truth, into which he that 
 searches need never search in vain. 
 
 We have, first, in these verses, a saying of Christ about 
 Himself. We read that Jesus said, — " I am the bread of 
 life : he that cometh to me shall never hunger, and he that 
 believeth on me shall never thirst." 
 
 Our Lord would have us know that He himself is the 
 appointed food of man's soul. The soul of every man is 
 naturally starving and famishing through sin. Christ is 
 given by God the Father, to be the Satisfier, the Reliever, 
 and the Physician of man's spiritual need. In Him and 
 His mediatorial office, — in Him and His atoning death, — 
 in Him and His priesthood, — in Him and His grace, love, 
 and power, — in Him alone will empty souls find their 
 wants supplied. In Him there is life. He is " the bread 
 of life." 
 
 With what divine and perfect wisdom this name ia 
 chosen ! Bread is necessary food. We can manage tole- 
 rably well without many things on our table, but not with- 
 out bread. So is it with Christ. We must have Christ, 
 or die in our own sins. — Bread is food that suits all. Some 
 cannot eat meat, and some cannot eat vegetables. But all 
 
368 EXPOSITOKY THOUGHTS. 
 
 like bread. It is food both for the Queen and the paujier. 
 So is it with Christ. He is just the Saviour that meets the 
 wants of every class. — Bread is food that we need daily. 
 Other kinds of food we take, perhaps, only occasionally. 
 But we want bread every morning and evening in our lives. 
 So is it with Christ. There is no day in our lives but w^e 
 need His blood. His righteousness, His intercession, and 
 His grace. — Well may He be called, " The bread of life !" 
 
 Do we know anything of spiritual hunger? Do we 
 feel anything of craving and emptiness in conscience, 
 heart, and affections ? Let us distinctly understand that 
 Christ alone can relieve and supply us, and that it is His 
 office to relieve. We must come to Him by faith. We 
 must believe on Him, and commit our souls into His 
 hands. So coming. He pledges His royal word we shall 
 find lasting satisfaction both for time and eternity. — It is 
 Avritten, — " He that cometh unto me shall never hunger, 
 and he that believeth on me shall never thirst." 
 
 We have, secondly, in these verses, a saying of Christ 
 about those loho come to Him. We read that Jesus said, 
 — " Hira that cometh to me I will in nowise cast out." 
 
 What does "coming" mean? It means that movement 
 of the soul which takes place when a man, feeling his 
 sins, and finding out that he cannot save himself, hears 
 of Christ, applies to Christ, trusts in Christ, lays hold on 
 Christ, and leans all his weight on Christ for salvation. 
 When this happens, a man is said, in Scripture language, 
 to " come" to Christ. 
 
 What did our Lord mean by saying, — " I will in no- 
 wise cast him out"? He meant that He will not refuse 
 to save any on6 who comes to Hira, no matter what he 
 may have been. His past sins may have been very 
 great. His present weakness and infirmity may be very 
 great. But does he come to Christ by faith ? Then 
 Christ ^^'ill receive him graciously, pardon him freely, 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 869 
 
 place him in the number of His dear children, and give 
 him everlasting life. 
 
 These are golden words indeed ! They have smoothed 
 down many a dying pillow, and calmed many a troubled 
 conscience. Let them sink down deeply into our memo- 
 ries, and abide there continually. A day w^ill come when 
 flesh and heart shall fail, and the world can help us no 
 more. Happy shall we be in that day, if the Spirit wit- 
 nesses with our spirit that we have really come to Christ ! 
 
 We have, lastly, in these verses, a saying of Christ 
 about the will of Sis Father. Twice over come the 
 solemn words, — "This is the will of him that sent me." 
 Once we are told it is His will, " that every one that seeth 
 the Son may have everlasting life." Once we are told it 
 is His will that, " of all which he hath given to Christ he 
 shall lose nothing." 
 
 We are taught by these words that Christ has brought 
 into the world a salvation open and free to every one. 
 Our Lord draws a picture of it, from the story of the 
 brazen serpent, by which bitten Israelites in the wilder-, 
 ness were healed. Every one that chose to " look " at the 
 brazen serpent might live. Just in the same w^ay, every 
 one who desires eternal life may "look" at Christ by 
 faith, and have it freely. There is no barrier, no limit, no 
 restriction. The terms of the Gospel are wide and simple. 
 Every one may " look and live." 
 
 We are taught, furthermore, that Christ will never 
 allow any soul that is committed to Him to be lost and 
 cast away. He will keep it safe, from grace to glory, in 
 epite of the world, the flesh, and the devil. Not one 
 bone of His mystical body shall ever be broken. "tsTot 
 one lamb of His flock shall ever be left behind in the 
 wilderness. He will raise to glory, in the last day, the 
 whole flock entrusted to His charge, and not one shall be 
 found missing. 
 
 16* 
 

 370 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Let the true Christian feed on the truths contained in 
 this passage, and thank God for them. Christ the Bread 
 of life, — Christ the Receiver of all who come to Him, — 
 Christ the Preserver of all believers, — Christ is for every 
 man who is willing to believe on Him, and Christ is the 
 eternal possession of all who so believe. Surely this is 
 glad tidings and good news! 
 
 Notes. John VI. 35 — 40. 
 
 35. — [Jesus said...! am the bread of life.] In this verse our Lord 
 begins to speak in the first person. Henceforth in this discourse 
 we hear directly of " I " and " Me " no less than thirty-five times. 
 He drops aU further reserve as to His meaning, and tells the 
 Jews plainly, " I am the bread of life," — the true bread from 
 heaven, — the bread of God which, coming down from heaven, 
 giveth life to the world. 
 
 The " bread of life " means that spiritual bread which conveys 
 hfe to the soul, — that living bread which does not merely feed the 
 body, like common bread, but supplies eternal sustenance and 
 nourishment to the eternal soul. It is like "the water of life" 
 (Rev. xxii. 17), and " hving water." (John iv. 10.) 
 
 The reasons why Christ calls Himself " bread," appear to be 
 such as these. He is intended to be to the soul what bread is 
 to the body, — its food. — Bread is necessary food : when men can 
 afford to eat nothing else, they eat bread. — It is food that all 
 need : the king and the pauper both eat bread. — It is food that 
 suits all : old and young, weak and strong, all like bread, — It is 
 the most nourishing kind of food: nothing does so much good, 
 and is so indispensable to bodily health, as bread. — It is food 
 that we need daily and are never tired of: morning and night 
 we go on all our lives eating bread. — The application of these 
 various points to Christ is too plain to need any explanation. 
 
 One great general lesson is doubtless intended to be drawn 
 from Christ's selection of "bread" as an emblem of Himself. 
 He is given to be the great supply of all the wants of men's 
 souls, "\yhatever our spiritual necessity may be, however starv- 
 ing, famished, weak, and desperate our condition, there is enough 
 in Christ, and to spare. — He is " bread." 
 
 Bollock remarks, that as soon as the slightest spiritual desire 
 is manifested by any one, however ignorant and weak, he should 
 be at once directed to Christ. It is what our Lord himself did. 
 As scon as the Jews said, — "Lord, evermore give us this bread," 
 
371 
 
 He cried, — " I am the bread of life." He never " quenched the 
 smoking flax." 
 
 [He that Cometh... hunger. ..helieveth... thirst] The words "coming" 
 and " beheving" in this sentence, appear to mean very nearly one 
 and the same thing. To "come" to Christ is to "beheve" on 
 Him, and to " believe " on Him is to " come" to Him, — both ex- 
 pressions mean that act of the soul whereby, under a sense of its 
 sins and necessity, it apphes to Christj lays hold on Christ, trusts 
 itself to Christ, casts itself on Christ. — " Coming," is the soufs 
 movement towards Christ. " Believing," is the soul's venture on 
 Christ. — If there is any difference, it is that "coming" is the first 
 act of the soul when it is taught by the Holy Q-host, and that 
 "believing" is a continued act or habit which never ends. No 
 man "comes" who does not believe; and all who come go on 
 believing. 
 
 When our Lord says " shall never hunger," and " shall never 
 thirst," He does not mean that a believer on Christ shall no longer 
 feel any want, or emptiness, or deficiency within him. This 
 would not be correct. The best of believers will often cry, like 
 Sr. Paul, " Oh, wretched man that I am!" (Rom. vii. 24.) The 
 man who "hungers and thirsts after righteousness," is blessed. 
 (Matt. V. 6.) — What our Lord does mean is, that faith in Christ 
 shall supply a man's soul with a peace and satisfaction that shall 
 never be entirely taken from him, — that shall endure for ever. 
 The man who eats and drinks material food shall soon be hungry 
 and thirsty as ever. But the man who comes to Christ by faith, 
 gets hold of something that is an everlasting possession. He 
 shall never die of spiritual famine, and perish for want of soul 
 nouri^ment. He may have his low feelings at seasons. He 
 may even lose his sense of pardon, and his enjoyment of rehgion 
 But once in Christ by faith, he shall never be cast away and 
 starved in hell. He shall never die in his sins. 
 
 (a.) Let us note in this verse how simple are the figures by 
 which our Lord brings His own sufficiency within the reach of 
 man's understanding. He calls himself "bread." It was an idea 
 that even the poorest hearer could understand. He that would 
 do good to the poor, need never be ashamed of using the simplest 
 and most familiar illustrations. 
 
 (6.) Let us note that faith is a movement of the soul. Its first 
 action is "coming to Christ." Its subsequent life is a constant 
 daily repetition of its first action. To tell people to " sit still and 
 wait," is poor theology. We should bid them arise and come. 
 
 (c.) Let us note that coming to Christ is the true secret of 
 obtaining soul satisfaction and inward peace. Until we take that 
 step oiu' consciences are never easy. We " hunger and thirst," 
 and find no relief. 
 
372 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 (d.) Le: UF! note that true believers sliall never be altogether 
 cast off and forsaken of God. The man that comes to Christ 
 shall " never hunger nor thirst." The text is one among many 
 proofs of the perseverance of the saints. 
 
 (e.) Let us note, finally, liow simple are the terms of the 
 Go.-^pel. It is but coming and believing that Christ asks at oui 
 hands. The most ignorant, the most sinful, the most hardened, 
 need not despair. They have but to " come and believe." 
 
 Luther, quoted by Besser, remarks on this verse: — "These 
 are indeed dear and precious words, which it is not enough for 
 us merely to know. We must turn them to account, and say, 
 Upon these words I will go to sleep at night and get up in the 
 morning ; leaning upon them will I sleep and wake, and work 
 and trav\?l. For though everything were to go to ruin, and 
 though father and mother, emperor and pope, princes and lords, 
 all forsook nie, though even Moses could not help me, and I had 
 only Christ to look to, yet He will help me. For His words are 
 sure, and He says ' Hold fast by me : come thou to me, and thou 
 shalt live.' The meaning of these words is, that whoever can 
 believe on that one Man who is called Jesus Christ, shall be 
 satisfied, and cannot suffer either hunger or thirst." 
 
 3G. — [But I said.. ..ye also have seen Me and leJieve not] It is not 
 quite clear to what our Lord refers in this verse, when He says, 
 — " I said." Some think that He is referring specially to His 
 own words in the 26th verse, — " Ye seek me, not because ye 
 saw the miracles," etc. Others think that He refers generally 
 to the testimony He had frequently borne against the unbe'ief 
 of the Jewish people, in almost every [)lace where He preached. 
 
 It seems to me most natural to connect the verse with the 
 saying of the Jews, in the 30th verse. They had there said, — 
 " What sign showest thou then, that we may see and believe 
 thoe?" Why should we not suppose our Lord in this verse to 
 take up that saying and reply, — " You talk of seeing and believ- 
 ing ; I tell you again, and have long told you, that ye have seen 
 me, and yet do not beheve " ? 
 
 The connecting link with the preceding verse, appears to be 
 something of this kind: — "I am quite aware that I speak in 
 vain to many of you of the bread of life and of believing. For 
 I have said often, and now say it again, that many of yon have 
 both seen me and my miracles, and yet do not believe. Never- 
 theless, I am not discouraged. I know, in spite of your unbe- 
 lief, that some will be saved." 
 
 The unbelief of human nature is painfully exhibited in thia 
 verse. Some could even see and hear Christ liimself, while Ho 
 was on earth, and yet remain unbelieving I Surely we have no 
 
VI. 373 
 
 right to be surprised if we find like unbelief now. Men may 
 actually see Christ with their bodily eyes and have no faith. 
 
 37.— [All that the Father giveth me shall come to me.] The con- 
 nection of this verse with the preceding one seems to be this : 
 " Your unbelief does not move me or surprise me. I foresaw it, 
 and have been aware of it. Nevertheless, your unbelief will 
 not prevent God's purposes taking eflfect. Some will believe 
 though you remain unbelieving. Everything that the Father 
 gives me will come unto me in due time; believe, and be saved. 
 In spite of your unbelief, all my sheep shall sooner or later come 
 to me by faith, and be gathered within my fold. I see your 
 unbelief with sorrow, but not with anxiety and surprise. I am 
 prepared for it. I know that you cannot alter God's purposes: 
 and in accordance with those purposes, a people will come to 
 me, though you do not." 
 
 Luther, quoted by Besser, supposes our Lord to say, "This 
 sei'mon shall not on your account be of none effect, and remain 
 without fruit. If you will not, another will; if you do not 
 believe, yet another does." 
 
 The English language fails to give the full sense of the Greek 
 in this sentence. The literal meaning of the Greek is, not " all 
 persons whom the Father giveth shall come," but " everything, 
 — the whole thing." It is not a masculine plural, but a neuter 
 singular. The idea is either " that whole mystical body, the 
 company of my believing people, shall come to me," or else 
 " every single part or jot or member of my mystical body shall 
 come to me, and not one be found missing at last," 
 
 "We learn from these words the great and deep truth of God's 
 election and appointment to eternal life of a people out of this 
 world. The Father from all eternity has given to the Son a 
 people to be His own peculiar people. The saints are given to 
 Christ by the Father as a flock, which Christ undertakes to save 
 completely, and to present complete at the last day. (See John 
 xvii. 2, 6, 9, 11, 12; and xviii. 9.) However wicked men may 
 abuse this doctrine, it is full of comfort to a humble believer. 
 He did not begin the work of his salvation. He was given to 
 Christ by the Father, by an everlasting covenant. 
 
 We learn from these words the great mark of God's elect, 
 whom He has given to Christ. They all come to Christ by faith. 
 It is useless for any one to boast of his election unless he comes 
 to Chri-;t by faith. Until a man comes humbly to Jesus, and 
 commits his soul to him as a believer, we have no dependable 
 evidence of the r,ian's election, 
 
 Bcza remarks, "Faith in Christ is a certain testimony of our 
 election, and consequently of our future glorificatiou." 
 
374 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 Ferus says, " Cleaving to Christ by faith, thou art sure of thy 
 predestination." 
 
 We learn fom these words the irresistible power of God's 
 electing grace. All who are given to Christ shall come to Him. 
 No obstacle, no difficulty, no power of the world, the flesh, and 
 the devil, can prevent them. Sooner or later they will break 
 through all, and surmount all. If "given," they will "come.' 
 To ministers the words are full of comfort. 
 
 [Bim that cometh unto me IwiU in no wise cast out.] These 
 words declare Christ's willingness to save every one that comer 
 to Him. There is an infinite readiness in Christ to receive, pardon, 
 justify, and glorify sinners. The expression " I will in no wise 
 cast out," implies this. It is a very powerful form of negation. 
 " So far from casting out the man that comes to me, I v/ill receive 
 him with joy when he comes. I will not refuse him on account 
 of past sins. I wUl not cast him off again because of present 
 weaknesses and infirmities. I will keep him to the end by my 
 grace. I will confess him before my Father in the judgment- 
 day, and glorify him for ever. In short, I will do the very opposite 
 of casting him out." 
 
 The distinction between the language of this clause of the text 
 and that of the former clause, should be carefuUy noticed. They 
 who " shall come to Christ," are " that whole thing " which the 
 Father gives. But it is " each individual man" that comes, of 
 whom Jesus says "I will in no wise cast him out." 
 
 To " cast out of the synagogue," — to " cut off from the con- 
 gregation of Israel," — to "shut out of the camp," as the leper 
 was shut out (Lev. xiii. 46), were ideas with which all Jews were 
 familiar. Our Lord seems to say, " I will do the very opposite 
 of all this." 
 
 A. Clarke thinks that the idea is that of a poor person coming 
 to a rich man's house for shelter and relief, who is kindly treated 
 and not " cast out." But may we not suppose after all that the 
 latent thought is that of the man fleeing to the city of refuge, 
 according to the law of Moses, who, once admitted, is safe and 
 not "cast out"? (Num. xxxv. 11, 12.) 
 
 We learn from these words that the one point we should look 
 to is, "whether we do really come to Christ." Our past lives 
 may have been very bad. Oar present faith may be very weak. 
 Our repentance and prayers may be very imperfect and poor. Our 
 knowledge of religion may be very scanty. But do we come to 
 Christ? That is the question. If so, tlie promise belongs to us. 
 Christ will not cast us out. We may remind Him boldly of His 
 own word. 
 
 We learn from these words, that Christ's offers to sinners are 
 
875 
 
 wido, broad, free, unlimited, and unconditional. We must take 
 care that we do not spoil and hamper them by narrow statements. 
 God's election must never be thrust nakedly at unconverted sin- 
 ners, in preaching the Gospel. It is a point with Avhich at present 
 they have nothing to do. No doubt it is true that none will come 
 to Christ but those who are given to Him by the Father. But 
 who those are that are so given we cannot tell, and must not 
 attempt to define. All we have to do is to invite every one, 
 without exception, to come to Christ, and to tell men that every 
 one who does come to Christ shall be received and saved. To 
 this point we must carefully stick. 
 
 Rollock observes, how close this glorious promise stands to our 
 Lord's words about God's election and predestination. Election 
 should never be stated nakedly and baldly, without reminding 
 those who hear it of Christ's infinite willingness to receive and 
 save all. 
 
 Hutcheson remarks, " Saints do indeed ofttimes complain of 
 casting off; but they are the words of sense and not of faith* 
 they may seem to be cast off when really it is not so." 
 
 38. — [For I came down... .not mine own will, etc.] The meaning of 
 this verse appears to be as follows. " I did not become man and 
 enter this world to do anything of my own independent will and 
 volition, and without reference to the will of my Father. On 
 the contrary, I have come to carry out His will. As God, my 
 will is in entire harmony and unity with my Father's will, because 
 I and my Father are one. As man, I have no other will and 
 desire than to do that which is in entire accordance with the will 
 of Him who has sent me to be the Mediator and Friend of sin- 
 ners." — What the Father's will about man is, our Lord goes on 
 immediately to state in the two following verses. One part of 
 the Father's will is, that nothing should be lost that He has given 
 to the Son. That " will " Christ came to carry out and accom- 
 plish. — Another part of the Father's will is, that every one who 
 trusts in Christ, may be saved. That "will" again Christ came 
 to carry out and accomplish. — The verse before us and the two 
 following are closely connected, and should be looked at as one 
 great thought. It was the Father's " will " that free salvation by 
 Christ should be brought near and within the reach of every one, 
 and it was also His " will " that every believer in Christ should 
 be completely and finally saved. To work out and accomplish 
 this will of His Father was Christ's object in coming into the 
 world. 
 
 The expression, "I came down from heaven," is a strong 
 proof of the pre-existence of Christ. It could not possibly be said 
 of any prophet or apostle, that he " came down from heaven." 
 It is a heavy blow at the Socinian theory that Christ was nothing 
 more than a man. 
 
37(3 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 39. — l^TMs is the Father's luill ivliich hath sent me.] In this versa' 
 and the following, Christ explains fully what was the Father's 
 will concerning the Son's mission into the world. It was that 
 He should receive all and lose none, that any one might come 
 to Him, and that no comer should be lost. It is a cheering and 
 pleasant thought, that free and full salvation, and the final per- 
 severance of behevers, should be so expressly declared to be *' the 
 wiU of the Father." 
 
 [Of all... given. ..lose nothing.] Here again there is the same 
 form' of speech as in the thirty-seventh verse. Literally rendered, 
 the sentence would be, — " that of the whole thing which He 
 has given me, I should not lose anything out of it." The 
 ' ' losing" must necessarily mean, that " I should let nothing be 
 taken away by the power of Satan, and allow nothing to come 
 to ruin by its own inherent weakness." The general sense of 
 the sentence must be, " that I should allow no member of my 
 mystical body to be lost." 
 
 We have in these words the doctrine of the final perseverance 
 of true believers. It seems hard to imagine stronger words than 
 these to express the doctrine. It is the Father's will that no 
 one whom He has given to Christ should be lost. His will must 
 surely take effect. True behevers may err and fail in many 
 things, but they shall never finally be cast away. The will of 
 God the Father, and the power of Christ the Son, are both 
 engaged on their side. 
 
 We have in these words abundant comfort for all fearful and 
 faint-hearted behevers. Let such remember tl^at if they " come" 
 to Christ by faith, they have been " given " to Christ by the 
 Father ; and if given by the Father to Christ, it is the Father's 
 will that they should never be cast away. Let them lean back 
 on this thought, when cast down and disquieted; — "It is the 
 Father's wiU that I should not be lost." 
 
 [Should raise it up again at the last day.] We have in these 
 words the Father's will that all Christ's members shall have a 
 glorious resurrection. They shall not only not be lost and cast 
 away while they live : they shall be raised again to glory after 
 they die. Christ will not only justify and pardon, keep and 
 sanctify. He will do even more. He will raise them up at the 
 last day to a life of glory. It is the Father's will that He should 
 do so. ^'he bodies of the saints are provided for no less than 
 their souls. 
 
 The idea of some writers, which Bullinger mentions with some 
 favour, that the " last day" means the day of each believer's 
 death, and the " raising" his translation in the hour of death to 
 paradise, seems to me utterly destitute of foundation. 
 
877 
 
 The words before us are a strong argument for the ' first 
 resurrection," as a peculiar privilege of believers. It is said here 
 that believers shall be "raised again/' as a special honour and 
 mercy conferred upon them. Yet it is no less clearly said in the 
 5th chapter, verse 29, that "all that are in the graves shall 
 Come forth,'^ both good and bad. It follows, therefore, that there 
 is a resurrection of which saints alone are to be the partakers, 
 distinct from the resurrection of the wicked. What can this be 
 but the first resurrection ? (Rev. xx. 5.) — It must however in 
 fairness be remembered that resurrection is sometimes spoken of 
 in Scripture as if it was the peculiar privilege of believers, and a 
 thing in which the wicked have no part. In the famous chapter 
 in Corinthians, it is clear that the resurrection of the saints is 
 the only thing in St. Paul's mind. (1 Cor. xv.) That the wicked 
 will be raised again, as well as the righteous, is clearly asserted 
 in several places. But it is sometimes a thing kept in the back- 
 ground. 
 
 40. — [This is the will of him that sent me.'] These words are 
 repeated in this verse, to show that it is no less the Father's 
 will that Christ should receive sinners, than that Christ should 
 preserve saints. Both things are alike the purpose and intention 
 of God. 
 
 [Every onetuhich seeth the Son and believeth...life.] These words 
 mean that " every one, without exception, who by faith looks to 
 Christ and trusts in Him for salvation, is allowed by Grod the 
 Father's appointment to have part in the salvation Christ has 
 provided." There is no barrier, difficulty, or objection. " Every 
 one," is the expression. jSTo one can say he is excluded. — " Seeing 
 and believing,"' are the only things required. No one can say 
 that the terms are too hard. Does he see and beheve ? Then 
 .e may have everlasting life. 
 
 The expression " seeth the Son," in this sentence, must evi- 
 dently mean more than mere seeing with the bodily eyes. It is 
 the looking with faith at Christ. (See John xii. 45, where the 
 same Greek word is used.) It is such a look as that of the 
 Israelites, who looked at the brazen serpent, and, looking, were 
 healed. (See John iii. 14, 15, and Num. xxi. 9.) I believe that 
 this was in our Lord's mind when He spake the words of this 
 verse. Just as every serpent-bitten Israelite might look at the 
 brazen serpent — and, as soon as he looked, was cured, so every 
 sin-stricken man may look to Christ and be saved. 
 
 [J luill raise Mm up at the last day.] These words are repeated, 
 I believe, in order to make it sure that a glorious resurrection 
 shall be Ihe portion of every one that only "looks" at Christ and 
 believes, as weB as of those who enjoy the " assurance" that 
 they are given to Christ and shall never be cast away. The 
 
878 
 
 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 humblest believer shall be raised again by Christ at the first resur- 
 rection, and eternally glorified, just as certainly as the oldest 
 saint in the family of God. 
 
 Stier remarks, " This raising up at the last day, twice empha- 
 tically affirmed, points out to us the final goal of salvation, and 
 preserving power; after the attainment of which there is no 
 more danger of perishing, or losing again that eternal life, which 
 is now, the body being raised, consummate." 
 
 Let us mark what abundant comfort there is in this verse for 
 all doubting, trembhng sinners, who feel their sins and yet fancy 
 there is no hope for them. Let such observe that it is the will 
 of God the Father, that " every one " who looks at Christ by faith 
 may have everlasting life. It would be impossible to open a 
 wider door. Let men look and live. The will of God is on their 
 side. 
 
 Calvin remarks on this verse, " The way to obtain salvation is 
 to obey the Gospel of Christ. If it is the will of God that those 
 whom He have elected shall be saved, and if in this manner He 
 ratifies and executes His eternal decrees, whoever he be that is 
 not satisfied with Christ, but indulges in curious inquiries about 
 eternal predestination, such a person desires to be saved contrary 
 to the purposes of God. They are madmen who seek their own 
 salvation, or that of others, in the whirlpool of predestination, 
 not keeping the way of salvation which is exhibited to them," — 
 *' To every man, therefore, his faith is a sufficient attestation of 
 the eternal predestination of God." 
 
 JOHN VI. 41—51. 
 
 41 The Jews then murmured at 
 him, because he said, I am the bread 
 which came down from heaven. 
 
 42 And they said, Is not this Je- 
 sus, the son of Joseph, whose father 
 and mother we know? how is it 
 then that he saith, I came down 
 from heaven ? 
 
 43 Jesus therefore answered and 
 said unto them, Murmur not among 
 yourselves. 
 
 44 No man can come to me, ex- 
 cept the Father which hath sent me 
 draw liim : and I will raise him up 
 at the last day. 
 
 45 It is written in the Prophets, 
 And they shall be all taught of God. 
 Everyman therefore that hath heard, 
 and hath learned of the Father, 
 Cometh unto me. 
 
 46 Not that any man hath seen 
 the Father, save he which is of God, 
 he hath seen the Father. 
 
 47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, 
 He that believeth on me hath ever- 
 lasting life. 
 
 48 I am that bread of life. 
 
 49 Your fathers did eat manna in 
 the wilderness, aid are dead. 
 
 50 This is the bread which com* 
 
379 
 
 eth down from heaven, that a man 
 may eat thereof, and not die. 
 
 51 I am the hving bread which 
 came down from heaven : if any man 
 
 eat of this bread, he shall live for 
 ever : and the bread that I will give 
 is my flesh, which I will give for the 
 life of the world. 
 
 Truths cf the weightiest importance follow each other 
 in rapid succession in the chapter we are now reading 
 There are probably very few parts of the Bible which 
 contain so many " deep things " as the Sixth Chapter of 
 St. John. Of this the passage before us is a signal 
 example. 
 
 We learn, for one thing, from this passage, that Chrisfs 
 lowly condition^ when He was upon earth, is a stumbling- 
 hlocJc to the natural man. We read that " the Jews 
 murmured, because Jesus said, I am the bread that came 
 down from heaven. And they said. Is not this Jesus, the 
 son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know ? How 
 is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven ?" — Had 
 our Lord come as a conquering king, with wealth and 
 honours to bestow on His followers, and mighty armies in 
 His train, they would have been willing enough to receive 
 Him. But a poor, and lowly, and suffering Messiah was 
 an offence to them. Their pride refused to believe that 
 such an one was sent from God. 
 
 There is nothing that need surprise us in this. It is 
 human nature showing itself in its true colours. We see 
 the same thing in the days of the Apostles. Christ 
 crucified was " to the Jews a stumbling-block, and to the 
 Greeks foolishness." (l Cor. i. 23.) The cross was an 
 offence to many wherever the Gospel was preached. — We 
 may see the same thing in our own times. There are 
 thousands around us who loathe the distinctive doctrines 
 of the Gospel on account of their humbling character. 
 They cannot away with the atonement, and the sacrifice, 
 and the substitution of Christ. His moral teaching they 
 approve. His example and self-denial they admire. But 
 speak to them of Christ's blood, — of Christ being made sin 
 
880 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 for us, — of Christ's death being the corner-stone of our 
 hope, — of Christ's poverty being our riches, — and you will, 
 find they hate these things with a deadly hatred. Tiuly 
 the offence of the cross is not yet ceased ! 
 
 We learn, for another thing, from this passage, man's 
 natural helplessness and inability to repent or believe. We 
 find our Lord saying, — " No man can come unto me, 
 except the Father which hath sent me draw him." Until 
 the Father draws the heart of man by His grace, man will 
 not believe. 
 
 The solemn truth contained in these words is one that 
 needs careful weighing. It is vain to deny that without 
 the grace of God no one ever can become a true Chris- 
 tian. We are spiritually dead, and have no power to 
 give ourselves life. We need a new principle put in us 
 from above. Facts prove it. Preachers see it. The 
 Tenth Ai-ticle of our own Church expressly declares it : 
 *'The condition of man after the fall of Adam is such 
 that he cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own 
 natural strength and good works, to faith and calling 
 upon Grod." This witness is true. 
 
 But after all, of what does this inability of man con- 
 sist? In what part of our inward nature does this 
 impotence reside ? Here is a point on which many mis- 
 takes arise. For ever let us remember that the will of 
 man is the part of him which is in fault. His inability is 
 not physical, but moral. It would not be true to say that 
 a man has a real wish and desire to come to Christ, but no 
 pfewcr to come. It would be far more true to say that a 
 man has no power to come because he has no desire or 
 wisli. — It is not true that he would come if he could. It 
 is true that he could come if he would. — The corrupt will, 
 — the seci-ct disinclination, — the want of heart, are the 
 real causes of unbelief. It is here the mischief lies. 
 The power that we want is a new will. It is pre* 
 
JOHN, CHAP. yi. 381 
 
 cisely at this point that we need the " drawing " of the 
 Father. 
 
 These things, no d( ubt, are deej^ and mysterious. By 
 truths like these God proves the faith and patience of His 
 people. Can they believe Him? Can they wait for a 
 fuller explanation at the last day ? What they see not 
 now they shall see hereafter. One thing at any rate is 
 abundantly clear, and that is man's responsibility for his 
 ow^n soul. His inability to come to Christ does not make 
 an end of his accountableness. Both things are equally 
 true. If lost at last, it wUl prove to have been his own 
 fault. His blood wdll be on his own head. Christ w^ould 
 have saved him, but he would not be saved. He would 
 not come to Christ, that he might have life. 
 
 We learn, lastly, in this passage, that the salvation of 
 a believer is a present thing. Our Lord Jesus Christ says, 
 • — " Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that believeth on 
 me hath everlasting life." Life, we should observe, is 
 a present possession. It is not said that he shall have 
 it at last, in the judgment day. It is now, even now, in 
 this world, his property. He hath it the very day that 
 he believes. 
 
 The subject is one which it much concerns our peace to 
 understand, and one about which errors abound. How 
 many seem to think that forgiveness and acceptance with 
 God are things which we cannot attain in this life, — that 
 they are things which are to be earned by a long course 
 of repentance and faith and holiness, — things which we 
 may receive at the bar of God at last, but must never 
 pretend to touch while we are in this world I It is a com- 
 plete mistake to think so. The very moment a sinner 
 believes on Christ he is justified and accepted. There is 
 no condemnation for him. He has peace with God, and 
 that immediately and without delay. His name is in the 
 book of life, however little he may be aware of it. He 
 
382 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 has a title to heaven, which death and hell and Satan can- 
 not overthrow. Happy are they that know this truth ! 
 It is an essential part of the good news of the Gospel. 
 
 After all, the great point we have to consider is whether 
 we believe. What shall it profit ns that Christ has died 
 for sinners, if we do not believe on Him ? " 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." (John iii. 36.) 
 
 Notes. John YI. 41 — 51. 
 
 41. — [The Jews then murmured at him.] The verb is here in the 
 imperfect tense. It seems to mean " the Jews were then mur- 
 muring, or beginning to murmur about Him," It was a mur- 
 muring that went on among themselves concerning our Lord, 
 and was not openly expressed. "At Him," would be more 
 literally rendered " about Him." 
 
 I venture to think there is a break, pause, or slight interval 
 implied at this point of the conversation. The speakers called 
 here " the Jews," do not appear to be the same who followed 
 our Lord over the lake after being fed with the loaves and 
 fishes, and began the conversation by saying, " Wlien earnest 
 thou hither ?" (Verse 25.) They would rather appear to be 
 the principal people, or leaders, in the synagogue at Caper- 
 naum. They had probably heard our Lord's M'ords to the people 
 who had followed Him over the lake, and were murmuring at 
 them. — To my own mind it is by no means clear that there was 
 not at this point a change in the pJace where the conversation 
 was carried on. Up to this point it looks as if the conversation 
 was carried on in the open air. At this point our Lord may 
 have gone into the synagogue, and the rulers of it may have 
 taken up the subject and been murmuring about it when He 
 went in. — I throw out this theory with diffidence. It must at 
 least be conceded, that the e:xpressions at verse 25, ''when they 
 had found him at the other side of the sea,. ...when camest thou 
 hither ?" can hardly be supposed to mean that our Lord was 
 then in the synagogue. On the other hand, it is perfectly clear 
 from verse 59, that the latter part of His discourse, at any rale, 
 was spoken " in the synagogue at Capernaum." Whore, then, 
 I ask, does the slight break come in, which is necessary to 
 reconcile these beginning and ending statements ? I reply that 
 it seems to me to come in here, at this very 41st verse. The 
 language, I think, implies a slight pause in time, and a change 
 
VI. 883 
 
 in the speake- Stier, I am a^Yare, calls this idea "highly arti- 
 ficial" But I cannot see any force in the objection, and 1 see 
 much difficulty in any other view. 
 
 Cyril remarks that a readiness to murmur seemed to be here- 
 ditary with the Jews. From the days when they murmured in 
 the wilderness, it was always the same. 
 
 [Because he said I am the bread.... heaven.] It does not appear 
 that our Lord had actually used these words. We must there- 
 fore suppose that the Jews constructed the saying out of three 
 things that our Lord had said. One was, " I am the bread of 
 life;" — another, "I came down from heaven;" — and another, 
 "The bread of God is he (or it) which cometh down from 
 heaven." 
 
 i2. — [Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph ?] The word " this," in 
 the Greek, has a latent sneer of contempt about it, which our 
 English version cannot fully convey. It is as if they said, " Is 
 not this fellow," etc. 
 
 The expression " the son of Joseph," shows what was the 
 impression that the Jews commonly had about our Lord's birth. 
 They believed Him to be the naturally begotten son of Joseph 
 the husband of Mary. The annunciation by the angel Gabriel, 
 the miraculous conception, the miraculous birth of our Lord, 
 are matters of which the Jews apparently had not any know- 
 ledge. Throughout the whole of our Lord's ministry, we never 
 find them mentioned. For some wise reason a total silence was 
 observed about them until after our Lord's death, resurrection, 
 and ascension. It was not probably till after the death of the 
 Virgin Mary and all her family, that this great and deep subject 
 was allowed to be much brought forward in the Church. We 
 can easily see that an unhallowed curiosity might have arisen on 
 questions connected with the incarnation, which would only 
 have done harm. 
 
 [ Whose father and mother we know.] These words seem to 
 show that Joseph was still living at this time. They could 
 hardly have been used if Joseph was dead. They also show 
 that Joseph and Mary were known at Capernaum, where this 
 conversation was held. They had either removed there from 
 Nazareth, or else were so connected with Capernaum and such 
 frequent visitors there, that the inhabitants knew them. 
 
 [JIow is it then that he saith.] The^e words would have been 
 more Hterally rendered, "How then does this fellow say?" 
 Again, like the beginning of the verse, there is something scorn- 
 ful in the phrase. 
 
 [/ came down from heaven.] The thing that seems to have 
 vexeil and angered the Jews was that our Lord should so openly 
 
88-i EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 declare His divine origin, by talking of " coming down trom 
 heaven." They were oflended at the idea of one so lowly in 
 dress, and circumstances, and position, taking on Himse'f to say, 
 that He was one who had " come down from heaven." Here, 
 as elsewhere, Christ's humiliation -was the great stumbling-block. 
 Human nature would not so much object to a conquering Christ, 
 — a Christ with a crown and an army, — a Christ with wealth to 
 shower on aU His foUowc-rs. But a Christ in poverty, — a Christ 
 preaching nothing but heart religiofi, — a Chiist followed by 
 none but poor fishermen and publicans, — a Christ coming to 
 suffer and die and not to reign, — such a Christ was always an 
 offence to many in this world, and always will be. 
 
 Rollock remarks with great truth, that with many persons, 
 " reasoning " (so called) is the grand obstacle to conversion. 
 
 i3. — [Jesus answered and said.] This phrase is almost the same as 
 that used in chapter v, verse 19, when our Lord legan what 
 many think was His formal defence of Himself before the San- 
 hedrim. It leads me to think, as I have already said, that there 
 is a slight break at this point of the chapter, and a slight pause, 
 if only of a few hours in time. Our Lord knew by His divine 
 knowledge that the Jews w^ere murmuring and saying contemp- 
 tuous things about Him, and He therefore took up their thoughts, 
 and made a reply to them. 
 
 [Murmur not among yourselves!] This seems a mild hint that 
 they need not waste their time in murmuring. It neither sur- 
 prised our Lord, nor discouraged Him. It is as though He said, 
 " Your muriimring is only what I am prepared to expect. I 
 know what human nature is. I am not moved by it. Think 
 not that your unbelief will shake my confidence in my divine 
 mission, or prevent my saying what I do. I know that you 
 cannot naturally understand- such things as I am speaking of, and 
 I will proceed to tell you why. But cease from these useless 
 murmurings, which neither surprise nor stop me." 
 
 Webster thinks that the idea is /the same as that in John iii. 
 7—12, " I have harder things still to say." (See v. 28.) 
 
 44. — [No man can come...except the Father draw him.] The con- 
 nection between this verse and the preceding one is not clear. 
 Like many passages in St. John's writings, the language is ellipti- 
 cal and the hnk must be supplied. But the precise link in the 
 present case is not very evident. I believe it is something of this 
 sort: — "You are murmuring among yourselves because I speak 
 of coming down from heaven ; and you are making njy apparently 
 low origin an excuse for not believing on me. But all the timo 
 the fault is not in my sayings, but in your want of grace, and 
 yuur unbelief. There is a deeper and more solemn truth, to 
 
JOHN. CHAP. VI. 385 
 
 wliicli you seem totally blind : and that is, man's need of God's 
 grace in order to believe on me. You are never likely to believe 
 until you acknowledge your ovrn corruption, and ask for grace 
 to draw your souls to me. I am aware that it needs something 
 more than argument and reasoning to make any one believe in 
 me. Your unbelief and murmuring do not surprise me or dis- 
 courage me. I neither expect to see you or any one else believe 
 until you are drawn by my Father." — This, or something like it 
 seems to me the connecting link. One thing at any rate is cer- 
 tain. Our Lord did not mean to excuse the unbehef of His 
 hearers. He rather desired to magnify their danger and guilt, 
 and to make them see that faith in Him was not so easy an affair 
 as they supposed. It was not knowledge of His origin alone, 
 but the drawing grace of God the Father which they needed. 
 Let them awake to see that, and cry for grace before it was too 
 late. 
 
 The general lesson of the sentence, apart from the connection, 
 is one of vast importance. Our Lord lays down the great prin- 
 ciple, — " That no man whatsoever can come to Christ by faith, 
 and really believe in Him, unless God the Father draws him so 
 to come, and inclines his will to believe." The nature of man 
 since the fall is so corrupt and depraved, that even when Christ 
 is made known and preached to him, he will not come to Him 
 and believe in Him without the special grace of God inclining 
 his will, and giving him a disposition to come. Moral suasion 
 and advice alone will not bring him. He must be " drawn." 
 
 This is no doubt a very humbling truth, and one which in 
 every age has called forth the hatred and opposition of man. 
 The favourite notion of man is that he can do what he likes, re- 
 pent or not repent, believe or not believe, come to Christ or not 
 come, — entirely at his own discretion. Li fact man likes to think 
 that his salvation is in his own power. Such notions are flatly 
 contradictory to the text before us. The words of our Lord here 
 are clear and unmi^takeable, and cannot be explained away. 
 
 (a.) This doctrine of human impotence, whether man likes 
 it or not, is the uniform teaching of the Bible. The natural 
 man is dead, and must be born again, and brought to life. 
 (Ephesians ii. 1.) He has neither knowledge, nor faith, nor 
 inclination toward Christ, until grace comes into his heart, 
 Man never of himself begins with God. God must first begin 
 with man. And this beginning is just the " drawing " of the 
 text. 
 
 (&.) It is the doctrine of the Church of England, as shown 
 in the 10th Article, and of every Protestant confession of faith 
 which dates from the 16th and 17th centuries. 
 
 ir 
 
^86 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 (c.) Last, but not least, it is the doctrine of experience. The 
 longer ministers of the GTospel live, the more do they find that 
 theie is something to be done in every heart which neither 
 preaching, teaching, arguing, exhorting, or means of grace can 
 do. When all has been done, God must " draw," or there is no 
 iTuit. — The more the holiest Christians are examined, the more 
 general is their testimony found, that without grace they never 
 would have been converted, and that God "drew" them, or else 
 they never would have come to Christ. And it is a curious fact, 
 moreover, that ms ;y who profess to deny man's impotence in 
 theory, often confess it in their prayers and praises, almost in 
 spite of themselves. Many people are very low Arminians in 
 print or in the pulpit, but excellent Calvinists on their knees. 
 
 When our Lord says, " No man can come unto me," we must 
 carefully remember that it is moral inabihty and not physical 
 inability that he speaks of. We are, not to suppose that any 
 man can have a sincere and hearty wish to come to Christ, and 
 yet be prevented by some mysterious impotence. The impo- 
 tence lies in man's will. He cannot come because he will not 
 come. — There is an Old Testament sentence which throws mnch 
 Ight on the expression before us. It is said of Joseph's 
 brethren, that " they hated him, and could not speak peaceably 
 ur.to him." (Genesis xxxvii. 4.) Any one must see at a glance 
 what this "could not" means. They " could not" because they 
 would not. 
 
 When our Lord says, "Except the Father draw him," we 
 roust not suppose that the " drawing " means such a violent 
 drawing, as the drawing of a prisoner to a jail, or of an ox to 
 the slaughterhouse, a "drawing" in short against a man's will. 
 It is a drawing which a Father effects through the man's own 
 will, by creating a new principle within him. By the unseen 
 agency of the Holy Ghost, He works on the man's heart, witli- 
 out the man himself knowing it at the time, inclines him to 
 think, induces him to feel, shows him his sinfulness, and so 
 leads him at length to Christ. Every one that comes to Christ 
 is so drawn. 
 
 Scott remarks, " The Father as it were cures the fever of the 
 soul; He creates the appetite; He sets the provisions before the 
 sinner ; He convinces him that they are wholesome and pleasant, 
 and that he is welcome ; and thus the man is drawn to come and 
 eat and live for ever." 
 
 The well-known quotation from Augustine, which seems so 
 great a favourite with many commentators on this text, appears 
 to me defective. He argues that God's drawing of men to Christ 
 is so entirely a drawing through man's will, that it is like draw- 
 ing the sheep by offering to it food, — like drawing and alluring 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 887 
 
 a child by offering him nuts. — But there is this wide differ- 
 ence, that both the sheep and the child have a natural taste and 
 inclination for the thing offered. Man, on the contrary, has 
 none at all. God's first act is to give man a will to come to 
 Christ. As the 10th Article of the Church of England says, we 
 need '' the grace of Christ preventing us, that we may have a 
 good will, and working with us when we have that good will." 
 
 The theory that all members of the Church and all baptized 
 people are " drawn by God," appears to me a most baseless 
 theory, and practically a most mischievous one. It would re- 
 duce the " drawing" to nothing, and make it a thing which the 
 majority of Christians resist. I beheve the drawing is a thing 
 that belongs to none but God's elect, and is a part of the pro- 
 cedure by which their salvation is effected. They are chosen in 
 Christ from all eternity, and then drawn to Christ in time. 
 
 There are several very important principles of theology con- 
 nected with this remarkable sentence, which it may be useful 
 to put down together, before we leave the passage. 
 
 (a.) We must never suppose that the doctrine of this verse 
 takes away man's responsibility and accountableness to God for 
 his soul. On the contrary, the Bible always distinctly declares 
 that if any man is lost, it is his own fault. He " loses his own 
 soul." (Mark viii. 36.) If we cannot reconcile God's sovereignty 
 and man's responsibility now, we need not doubt that it will 
 be all plain at the last day. 
 
 (b.) We must not allow the doctrine of this verse to make 
 us limit or narrow the offer of salvation to sinners. On the 
 contrary, we must hold firmly that pardon and peace are to be 
 offered freely through Christ to every man and woman without 
 exception. We never know who they are that God will draw, 
 and have nothing to do with it. Our duty is to invite all, and 
 leave it to God to choose the vessels of mercy. 
 
 (c.) We must not suppose that we, or anybody else, are 
 drawn, unless we come to Christ by faith. Tliis is the grand 
 mark and evidence of any one being the subject of the Father's 
 drawing work. If " drawn," he comes to Christ, believes, and 
 loves. Where there is no faith and love, there may be talk, self- 
 conceit, and high profession. But there is no " drawing" of the 
 Father. 
 
 (d.) We must always remember that God ordinarily works 
 by means, and specially by such means as He himself has 
 appointed. iSTo doubt He acts as a Sovereign in drawing souls 
 to Christ. We cannot pretend to explain why some aie diawn 
 and others are not drawn. Nevertheless, we must carefully 
 maintain the great principle that God ordinarily draws through 
 
888 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 the instrumentality of His Word. The man that neglects the 
 public preaching and private reading of God's Word, has no 
 right to expect that God will draw him. The thing is possible, 
 but highly improbable. 
 
 (e.) We must never allow ourselves or others to waste time 
 in trying to find out, as a firsD question in religion, whether we 
 are drawn of God the Father, elect, chosen, and the like. The 
 first and indeed the main question we have to do with is, 
 whether we have come to Christ by faith. If we have, let us 
 take comfort and be thankful. None come to Him unless they 
 are drawn. o 
 
 Augustine remarks : " If thou dost not desire to err, do not 
 seek to determine whom God draws, and whom He does not 
 draw ; nor why He draws one man and not another. But if thou 
 thyself art not drawn by God, pray to Him that thou mayest be 
 drawn." 
 
 The words of the 17th Article of the Church of England are 
 weighty and wise: — "We must receive God's promises in such 
 wise as they are generally set forth to us in Holy Scripture : and 
 in our doings, that will of God is to be followed which we have 
 expressly declared unto us in the Word of God." 
 
 Whether the "drawing" of God the Father is irresistible or 
 not, is a point on which good men differ greatly. My own 
 opinion is decided that it is irresistible. Those Avhom the 
 Father draws and calls, always " obey the calling." (See 17th 
 Article of the Church of England.) As Rollock truly remarks, 
 there is often a great fight and struggle when the drawing grace 
 of God first begins to work on the soul, and the consequence is 
 great distress and depression. But when grace once begins it 
 always wins the victory at last. 
 
 [/ will raise him up at the last day.] This is the same sen- 
 tence that we have had twice already, and shall have once 
 again. Whosoever does come to Christ, and has the great mark 
 of faith, shall be raised by Christ to a life of eternal glory at the 
 last day. None come but those who are "drawn;" but all who 
 do come shall be raised. 
 
 45. — [It is written.. .prophets. ..taught of God.] Our Lord here 
 confirms the doctrine of the necessity of divines teaching, by 
 reference to the Scriptures. He had told the Jews nothing but 
 wr.at their own Scriptures taught, and what they ought to have 
 known themselves. It is not quite clear whether our Lord 
 referred to one particular quotation, or to the general testimony 
 of the prophetical Scriptures. The words of Isaiah (hv. 13) are 
 most like the sentence before us : — " All thy children shall be 
 taught of God." The Greek of the Septuagint version of that 
 
389 
 
 text rather favours the idea that our Lord referred to it. On the 
 whole, however, I inchne to the opinion that no one particular 
 text is referred to. It was the general doctrine of the prophets 
 that in the days of the Gospel men should have the direct teach- 
 ing of God. 
 
 The words do not mean that under the Gospel all mankind, 
 or all members of the professing Christian Church, shall be 
 " taught of God." It rather means that all who are God's chil- 
 dren, and come to Christ under the Gospel, shall be taught 
 of God. It is like " this is the true light that lighteth every 
 man," (John i. 9,) where it does not mean that all are lighted, 
 but that such as are lighted are lighted by Christ. 
 
 [Every man...heard...learned of the Father, cometh unto me.] 
 The meaning of this sentence seems to.be — "Everyman that 
 comes to me has first heard and learned of the Father." It is 
 useless to talk of being taught by God, and of God being our 
 Father, if we do not come to Christ for salvation. 
 
 Bishop Hooper remarks, "Many men understand the words, 
 ' except the Father draws him,' in a wrong sense, as though God 
 did require in a reasonable man no more than in a dead post, 
 and do not mark the words that follow, ' every man that hath 
 heard Christ,' God draweth with His Word and the Holy Ghost. 
 Man's duty is to hear and learn : that is to say, receive the grace 
 oflfered, consent unto the promises, and not refuse the God that 
 calleth." — Hooper on Ten Commandments. 
 
 46. — [Not that any man hath seen the Father.'] This sentence 
 seems put in, by way of parenthesis, to prevent mistakes in the 
 minds of our Lord's hearers, both as to the kind of teaching He 
 meant, and the person He intended when He spake of the 
 Father. The Father was the eternal God whom no man had 
 seen nor could see. The teaching was that inward teaching of 
 the heart which the Father gave by His Spirit. 
 
 \He which is of God, he hath seen the Father^ Our Lord 
 plainly means Himself in this verse. It is like John i.l8. "No 
 man hath seen God at any time ; the only begotten Son, which 
 is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." 
 
 I cannot but think that one object our Lord has in view, both 
 here and in ch. v. 37, is to impress on the Jews' minds, that all 
 the appearances of God which are recorded in the Old Testament, 
 were appearances not of the First Person in the Trinity but of 
 the Second. His object in both places, I suspect, was to prepare 
 their minds for the great truth which as yet they were unable to 
 receive, that, however unbelieving they now were, Christ who 
 was now with them, was that very Person who had appeared to 
 Abr&^ham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and Moses. 
 
890 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS, 
 
 47. — [VeHIy, verily. ..He that helieveth on me...N/e.] In this vers* 
 our Lord returns to the main tliread of his discourse, which 
 had been interrupted at the 40th verse. He now speaks out 
 much more clearly and plainly about Himself, dropping all 
 reserve, and revealing Himself as the object of faith, openly 
 and without figure. It is one of those great, broad, simple 
 declarations of the Gospel way of salvation, which we can never 
 know too welL 
 
 He that would have his sins pardoned and his soul saved must 
 go to Christ for it. It is to " me," says Christ, that he must 
 apply. — What are the terms held out ? He must simply trust, 
 lean back, rest on Christ, and commit his soul to His hand. In 
 a word, he must "believe." What shall such a man get by 
 beheving? He "hath everlasting life." The very moment he 
 beheves, life and peace with God are his own. — (a.) Faith, (b.) 
 the great object of faith, (c.) the present privileges to which faith 
 admits a man, are three subjects which, however often repeated 
 in the Gospel, ought never to weary the Christian's ear. 
 
 The frequent repetition of this doctrine of "believing," is a 
 strong proof of its great necessity and importance, and of man's 
 infinite backwardness to see, understand, and receive it. " We 
 must believe, — we must believe," says RoUock, "is a truth that 
 needs constant repetition." 
 
 48. — [Tarn that Iread of life.] Here our Lord distinctly proclaims 
 to the Jews, that He himself is that "bread of Hfe," that 
 soul-satisfying food, the true bread, the bread of God, of which 
 He had spoken generally in the earher part of His discourse. 
 He had awakened their curiosity by speaking of that bread as 
 a real thing, and a thing worth their attention. He now unveils 
 the whole truth to them, and tells them plainly, " I am that 
 bread." — " If you ask what it is, and where it is, you have only 
 to look at me." 
 
 49. — [Your fathers did eat manna... dead.] In this verse our Lord 
 points out the inferiority of the manna which the Jews ate in the 
 wilderness, to the bread which He himself offered. Tha manna 
 not only could do nothing for the soul, but was unable to pre- 
 serve from death those who ate it. 
 
 Here, as before, we shonld observe how our Lord speaks of 
 the miraculous feeding of Israel in the wilderness, as an un- 
 doubted historical fact. 
 
 Piscator remarks, that our Lord here says emphatically, " your 
 fathers," and not " our fathers." — He thinks it was intentionally 
 done to remind the Jews how little lasting good their fathera 
 got from the manna, and how unbeheving they were even while 
 
891 
 
 they ate of it; for they all died in the wilderness. It was a 
 tacit caution to beware of doing like them. 
 
 50. — [This is the hread...heaven...eat..Mnd not die.'] The object of 
 this verse is to show the superiority of the " true bread from 
 heaven " to the manna. It is as though our Lord said, — " This 
 bread that cometh down from heaven is bread of such a nature, 
 that he that eateth of it shall never die. His soul shall not be 
 hurt by the second death, and his body shall have a glorious 
 resurrection." 
 
 I am not without doubt whether our Lord did not point to 
 Himself in speaking the words of this verse : — " This person 
 who now stands before you is that bread which came down from 
 heaven, that any one eating of it should not die." But I 
 throw out the conjecture with much diffidence. Lampe seems 
 to favour the idea, — saying, "the pronoun ' this ' is here demon- 
 strative and pointed to Himself." Trapp and Beza also take 
 this view. 
 
 51. — [I am the living dread.. .heaven.] This sentence is a repetition 
 of the idea that has been already given out in the 50th and 49th 
 verses. The thought is repeated in order to impress it on the 
 minds of the Jews, and make it impossible for them to mis- 
 understand our Lord's meaning. 
 
 We must never be ashamed of repetition in religious 
 teaching. 
 
 [If any man eat of this dread he shall live for ever.] The 
 thought here is only an expansion of the one contained in the 
 35th verse. There it is said, '• He that comes to Christ shall never 
 hunger." Here it is " The eater of the bread of life shall live 
 for ever." The meaning is that the soul of the man who feeds 
 on Christ by faith, shall never die and be cast away in hell. 
 There is no condemnation for him. His sins are put away. 
 He shall not be hurt by the second death. 
 
 [The hread...give is my flesh.] In these words our Lord goes 
 e^ven further than he has gone yet, in explaining the great 
 theme of His discourse. When He speaks of " my flesh," I 
 beheve he means, " my body offered up in sacrifice on the cross, 
 as an atonement for man's sins." It is our Lord's death that is 
 specially meant. It is not merely His human nature. His 
 incarnation, that feeds souls. It is His death as our substitute, 
 bearing our sins and carrying our transgressions* 
 
 [ Which I ivill give for the life of the world.] These words 
 appear to me to make it certain that the Lord meant " His ])ody 
 offered in sacrifice as an atonement for sin," when He said 
 "my flesh is the bread." For He does not say, "I have 
 given," or, "I do give," but "I will give." That use of the 
 
392 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 future tense seems to me a conclusive proof that " my flesh " 
 cannot mean only " my incarnation." The " giving " was about 
 to take place, but had not taken place yet. It could only be 
 His death. 
 
 When our Lord says, "I will give my flesh," it appears to me 
 that He can only mean, " I will give it to die, to suller, to be 
 offered up on the cross, as a sacrifice for sin." 
 
 When our Lord says, " I will give my flesh for the life of the 
 world," I believe He means, " I will give my body to death, on 
 account of, for the sake of, to procure, purchase, and obtain the 
 life of the world." I will give my death to procure the world's 
 life. My death shall be the ransom, the payment, and the re- 
 demption-money, by which eternal life shall be purchased for a 
 world of sinners " 
 
 I hold strongly that the idea of substitution is contained in 
 these words of our Lor J, and that the great doctrine of his vica- 
 rious death, which is so directly stated elsewhere (Rom v. 6 — 8) 
 is indirectly implied in this sentence. 
 
 When our Lord says, " I will give my fle^h for the life of the 
 world," I can only see one meaning in the word " world." It 
 means all mankind. And the idea contained, I believe, is the 
 same as we have elsewhere, — viz., that Christ died for all man- 
 kind, not for the elect only, but for all mankind. (See John i. 
 29, and iii. 16, and my notes on each text.) That all the world 
 is not saved is perfectly certain. That many die in unbelief and 
 get no benefit from Christ's death is certain. But that Christ's 
 death was enough for all mankind, and that when He died He 
 made sufficient atonement for all the world, are truths which, 
 both in this text and others hke it, appear to my mind incontro- 
 vertible. 
 
 Let us note in this verse what a full and broad offer Christ 
 holds out to sinners. He says, — " If any man, no matter who 
 or what he may have been, if any man eat of this bread, he 
 shall live for ever." Happy would it be for many, whose whole 
 hearts are set on eating and drinking, and feasting their poor 
 perishable bodies, if they would only look at these words I It 
 is only those who eat this bread who shall hve for ever. 
 
 Let us remember how impossible it is for any one to explain 
 the end of this verse wlio denies the sacrificial character of 
 Christ's death. Once grant that Christ is only a great teacher 
 and example, and that His death is only a great pattern of seif- 
 denial, and what sense or meaning can be got out of the end of 
 this verse ? "I will give my flesh for the life of the woiid " 1 
 I unhesitatingly say that the words are unintelligible nonsense 
 if wo receive the teaching of many modern divines about 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 
 
 Christ's ieath, and that nothinc? can make them intelligible and 
 instructive but the doctrine of Christ's vicarious death, and satis- 
 feiction on the cross as our Substitute. 
 
 JOHN VL 52—59 
 
 drink eth my blood, dwelleth in me 
 and I in him. 
 
 57 As the living Father hath 
 sent me, and I hve by the Father : 
 so he that eateth me, even he shall 
 live by me. 
 
 58 This is that bread which 
 came down from heaven: not as 
 your fathers did eat manna, and are 
 dead : he that eateth of this bread 
 shall hve for ever. 
 
 59 These things said he in the 
 synagogue, as he taught in Caper- 
 naum. 
 
 52 The Jews therefore strove 
 among themselves, saying, How can 
 this man give us Ms flesh to eat ? 
 
 53 Then Jesus said unto them, 
 Yerily, verily, I say unto you, Ex- 
 cept ye eat the flesh of the Son of 
 man, and drink His blood, ye have 
 no life in you. 
 
 54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and 
 drinketh my blood, hath eternal 
 life ; and I will raise him up at the 
 last day. 
 
 55 For my flesh is meat indeed, 
 and my blood is drink indeed. 
 
 56 He that eateth my flesh, and 
 
 Few passages of Scripture have been so painfully wrested 
 and perverted as that which we have now read. The Jews 
 are not the only people who have striven about its mean- 
 ing. A sense has been put upon it, which it was never in- 
 tended to bear. Fallen man, in interpreting the Bible, has 
 an unhappy aptitude for turning meat into poison. The 
 things that were written for his benefit, he often makes an 
 occasion for falling. 
 
 Let us first consider carefully, what these verses do not 
 mean. The " eating and drinking " of which Christ speaks 
 do not mean any literal eating and drinking. Above all, 
 the words were not spoken with any reference to the Sa- 
 crament of the Lord's Supper. We may eat the Lord's 
 Supper, and yet not eat and drink Christ's body and blood. 
 We may eat and drink Christ's body and blood, and yet 
 not eat the Lord's Supper. Let this never be forgotten. 
 
 The oj^inion here expressed may startle some who have 
 
 17* 
 
894 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 not looked closely into the subject. But it is an opinion 
 which is supported by three weighty reasons. — For one 
 thing, a literal " eating and drinking " of Christ's body 
 and blood would have been an idea utterly revolting to all 
 Jews, and flatly contradictory to an often-repeated precept 
 of their law. — For another thing, to take a literal view of 
 " eating and drinking," is to interpose a bodily act between 
 the soul of man and salvation. This is a thing for which 
 there is no precedent in Scripture. The only things with- 
 out which we cannot be saved are repentance ^nd faith. — 
 Last, but not least, to take a literal view of " eating and 
 drinking," would involve most blasphemous and profane 
 consequences. It would shut out of heaven the penitent 
 thief. He died long after these words were spoken, with- 
 out any literal eating and drinking. Will any dare to say 
 he had "no life" in Him? — It would admit to heaven 
 thousands of ignorant, godless communicants in the pre- 
 sent day. They literally eat and drink, no doubt I But 
 they have no eternal life, and will not be raised to glory at 
 the last day. Let these reasons be carefully pondered. 
 
 The plain truth is, there is a morbid anxiety in fallen 
 man to put a carnal sense on Scriptural expressions, 
 wherever he possibly can. He struggles hard to make 
 religion a matter of forms and ceremonies, — ^^of doing and 
 performing, — of sacraments and ordinances, — of sense and 
 of sight. He secretly dislikes that system of Christianity 
 which makes the state of the heart the principal thing, and 
 labours to keep sacraments and ordinances in the second 
 place. Happy is that Christian who remembers these 
 things, and stands on his guard ! Baptism and the Lord's 
 supper, no doubt, are holy sacraments, and mighty bless- 
 ings, when rightly used. But it is worse than useless to 
 drag them in everywhere, and to see them everywhere in 
 God's Word. 
 
 Let us next consider carefully, what these verses do mean. 
 
895 
 
 Ihe expressions they contain are, no doubt, very re- 
 markable. Let lis try to get some clear notion of their 
 meaning.- 
 
 The "flesh and blood of the Son of man" mean 
 that sacrifice of His own body, which Christ offered up on 
 the cross, when He died for sinners. The atonement made 
 by His death, the satisfaction made by his sufferings, as 
 our Substitute, the redemption effected by His enduring 
 the penalty of our sins in His own body on the tree, — this 
 seems to be the true idea that we should set before our 
 minds. 
 
 The " eating and drinking," without which there is no 
 life in us, means that reception of Christ's sacrifice which 
 takes place when a man believes on Christ crucified for 
 salvation. It is an inward and spiritual act of the heart, 
 and has nothing to do with the body. Whenever a man, 
 feeling his own guilt and sinfulness, lays hold on Christ, 
 and trusts in the atonement made for him by Christ's 
 death, at once he "eats the flesh of the Son of man, and 
 drinks His blood." His soul feeds on Christ's sacrifice, by 
 faith, just as his body would feed on bread. Believing, he 
 is said to " eat." Believing, he is said to " drink." And 
 the special thing that he eats, and drinks, and gets benefit 
 from, is the atonement made for his sins by Christ's death 
 for him on Calvary. 
 
 The practical lessons which may be gathered from the 
 whole passage are weighty and important. The point 
 being once settled, that " the flesh and blood " in these 
 verses means Christ's atonement, and the " eating and 
 drinking " mean faith, we may find in these verses great 
 principles of truth, which lie at the very root of Chris- 
 tianity. 
 
 We may learn, that faith in Christ's atonement is a thing 
 of absolute necessity to salvation. Just as there was no 
 srifety for the Israelite in Egypt who did not eat the pass- 
 
S96 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 over-lamb, in the night when the first-born were slain, so 
 there is no life for the sinner who does not eat the flesh of 
 Christ and drink His blood. 
 
 We may learn that faith in Christ's atonement unites us 
 by the closest possible bonds to our Saviour, and entitles 
 us to the highest privileges. Our souls shall find full satis- 
 faction for all their wants : — " His flesh is meat indeed, and 
 His blood is drink indeed." All things are secured to us 
 that we can need for time and eternity : — " Whoso eateth 
 my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life, and I 
 will raise him up at the last day." 
 
 Last, but not least, we may learn that faith in Christ's 
 atonement is a personal act, a daily act, and an act that 
 can be felt. No one can eat and drink for us, and no one, 
 in like manner, can believe for us. — We need food every 
 day, and not once a week or once a month, — and, in like 
 manner, we need to employ faith every day. — We feel 
 benefit when we have eaten and drunk, we feel strength- 
 ened, nourished, and refreshed ; and, in like manner, if we 
 believe truly, we shall feel the better for it, by sensible 
 hope and peace in our inward man. 
 
 Let us take heed that we use these truths, as well as 
 know them. The food of this world, for which so many 
 take thought, will perish in the using, and not feed our 
 Bouls. He only that eats of " the bread that came down 
 from heaven " shall live for ever. 
 
 Notes. John VI. 52—59. 
 
 52. — [The Jews therefore strove among themselves.] — This expression 
 shows an increasingly strong feehng among the Jews. When 
 our Lord tnlked of "coming down from heaven" they "mur- 
 mured." — When He speaks of giving His "flesh to ent" they 
 "strove." — It is the word rendered "ye fight," in James iv. 2. 
 In what way the Jews strove it is not very clear to see. Wo 
 cannot suppose that there were two contending parties, — one 
 favourable to our Lord, and one opposed to Him. It probably 
 weans thftt tU&y began to reason and argue among themselves in 
 
397 
 
 an angry, violent, and excited manner, such as St. Paul forbida 
 when he says, " The servant of the Lord must not strive." 
 (2 Tim. ii. 24.) The same word is used there as here. 
 
 [How can this man give.. .flesh to eat] The likeness should be 
 observed between this question and that of Nicodemur, (John iii. 
 4), and that of the Samaritan woman. (John iv. 11.) 
 
 There is an implied scornful sense about the expression " this 
 man." 
 
 Cyril in commenting on this verse, points out the unreason- 
 ableness and inconsistency of the Jews, above all men, in raising 
 difficulties and denying the possibihty of things, because they are 
 hard to explain and preternatural. He summons the Jews to ex- 
 plain the miracles in Egypt, and those in the wilderness, and 
 He concludes, — " There are innumerable things, in which if thou 
 inquirest 'how' they can be, thou must overthrow the whole 
 Scripture, and despise Moses and the Prophets." 
 
 63. — [Jesus said... Verily, verily, I say.] We come now to one of the 
 most solemn and important sayings that ever fell from our Lord's 
 lips. Having brought the Jews step by step up to this point, He 
 now declares to them the highest and most startling doctrine of 
 the (jospel. 
 
 [Except ye eat the flesh... drink his blood.. .no life in you.] When 
 our Lord uses this phrase " except" at the beginning of a sen- 
 tence, we generally find something of more than ordinary import- 
 ance in it. Thus, " Except a man be born again," — " Except ye 
 be converted and become as little children," — "Except ye re- 
 pent," (John iii. 3, Matt, xviii, 3, Luke xiii. 3.) Here He tells 
 the Jews that they " have no life," — no spiritual life, no title to 
 eternal Hfe, — that they are in fact dead, legally dead, spiritually 
 dead, and on the way to the second death, if they do not "eat 
 the flesh and drink the blood" of the Son of man, — that is, of 
 Himself In a word. He lays down the principle that eating His 
 flesh and drinking His blood is a thing not only possible but abso- 
 lutely necessary to salvation — is a thing without which no man 
 can go to heaven. 
 
 Considering that the Jewish passover was nigh at hand, and 
 that many of our Lord's hearers were probably on their way to 
 Jerusalem to attend it, it seems highly probable that our Lord 
 desired to direct the minds of those He addressed to Himself as 
 the true passover and sacrifice for sin. 
 
 The latent idea of the sentence, I firmly believe, is that first 
 passover in the land of Egypt, which was kept on the night when 
 the first-born was slain. The flesh and blood of the lamb slain 
 that night were the means of life, safety, and deliverance to the 
 Is^raelitcs. In like manner, I believCj our Lord meant the Jewa 
 
398 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 to understand that His flesh and blood were to be the means of 
 life and deliverance from the wrath to come to smners. To a 
 Jewish ear therefore there would be nothing so entirely new and 
 strange in the sentence as at first S'gbt may appear to us. The 
 thing that would startle them no doubt would be our Lord's 
 assertion that eating His flesh and drinking His blood could be 
 the means of hfe to their souls, as the flesh and blood of the pass- 
 over lamb had been to their fathers the salvation of their bodies. 
 
 But what did our Lord mean when He spoke of " eating his 
 flesh and drinking his blood," as things indispensably necessary 
 to life ? This is a point on which wide differences of opinion 
 prevail, have prevailed in every age of the Church, and probably 
 will prevail as long as the world stands. 
 
 (a.) Some think that our Lord meant a literal " eating and 
 drinking " with the mouth of our bodies, and that the " flesh and 
 blood " mean the bread and wine in the sacrament of the Lord's 
 supper. This is the opinion of almost all the Fathers, though 
 occasional passages may be pointed out in the w^ritings of some, 
 which seem irreconcileable with it. It is the opinion of most 
 Roman Catholic waiters, but certainly not of all. It is the opinion 
 of some modern English divines, such as Wordsworth and 
 Burgon. 
 
 (&.) Some think that the ''eating and drinking" here mean 
 the eating and drinking of heart and soul by faith, not of the 
 body, — and that the "flesh and blood" mean Christ's vicarious 
 sacrifice of His body on the cross. They deny entirely that 
 there is any reference whatever to the Lord's supper in the words. 
 They consider that our Lord meant to teach the absolute neces- 
 sity of feeding by faith on His atonement for sin on the cross. 
 Except a man's soul lays hold by faith on Christ's sacrifice of 
 His body and blood as the only hope of his Salvation, he has 
 no title to or part in eternal hfe. This is the opinion of Luther, 
 Melancthon, Zvvingle, Calvin, Ecolampadius, Brentius, Gualter, 
 Bulhnger, Pellican, Beza, Musculus, Flacius, Calovius, Cocceius, 
 Gomarus, Nifanius, Poole, Cartwright, Hammond, Rollock, 
 Hutcheson, Lightfoot, Henry, Burkitt, Whitby, Leigh, Pearce, 
 Lampe, Gifl, Tittraan, A. Clarke, Barnes, and most modern 
 divines. 
 
 Among Romanist writers, this opinion is held by Cardinal 
 Cajetan, Ferus, and Jansenius of Ghent. Even Toletus, one of 
 the ablest Romanist commentators on John, admits that the 
 opinions of writers are not unanimous. 
 
 (c.) Some Ihink that our Lord did not mean any literal eating 
 and drir.king, and that He did not refer directly to the Lord's 
 supper when He spake of His flesh and blood. But they do 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. Bd^ 
 
 think that our Lord had the sacrament in view and prcispect, 
 when He spoke these words, and that He did tacitly refer to that 
 pecuhar communion with His flesh and blood, which He after- 
 wards appointed the Lord's supper to be the means of imparting 
 to beheving communicants. Tins is the opinion, apparently, of 
 Trapp, Doddridge, Olshausen, Tholuck, Slier, Bengel, Besser, 
 Scott, Alford, and some others. 
 
 I decidedly agree with those who hold the second of these 
 opinions. I beheve that our Lord, botli in this text and all 
 through this chapter, did not, either directly or indirectly, refer 
 to the Lord's supper, — that by His flesh and blood He did not 
 mean the bread and wine, — that by eating and drinking He did 
 not mean any bodily act. I believe, that by "flesh and blood" 
 He meant the sacrifice of His own body for us, when He offered 
 it up as our Substitute on Calvary. I believe that by " eating 
 and drinking," He meant that communion and participation of 
 the benefits of His sacrifice which faith, and faith only, conveys 
 to the soul. I believe His meaning to be,— " Except ye believe 
 on me as the one sacrifice for sin, and by faith receive into your 
 hearts the redemption purchased by my blood, ye have no 
 spiritual life, and will not be saved." The atonement of Christ, 
 His vicarious death and sacrifice, and faith in it, — these things 
 are the key to the whole passage. I beheve this must be kept 
 steadily in view. 
 
 It is easy to call the opinion to which I adhere ZwingKan, 
 and low, and irreverent. Hard words are not arguments. It 
 is easier to make such assertions than to prove them. I have 
 already shown that many writers, wholly unconnected with 
 Zwingle or Zwinglianism, maintain the opinion. But I submit 
 that the following reasons are weighty and unanswerable : — 
 
 (1.) To say that our Lord meant the Lord's supper in this text 
 is a most cruel and uncharitable opinion. It cuts off from eternal 
 life all who do not receive the communion. At this rate all who 
 die in infancy and childhood, — all who die of full age without 
 conring to the communion, — the whole body of the Quakers in 
 modern times, — the penitent thief on the cross, all — all are lost 
 for ever in hell 1 Our Lord's words are stringent and exclusive. 
 Such an opinion is too monstrous to be true. In fact, it was to 
 avoid this pamful conclusion that many early Christians, in 
 Cyprian's time, held the doctrine of infant communion. 
 
 Ferus, the Roman Catholic commentator, who considers the 
 eating and drinking here to be only spiritual, and not to refer 
 to the sacrament, sees this objection clearly and puts it strongh^ 
 
 (2.) To ?ay that our Lord meant the Lord's supper in this 
 text, opens a wide door to formalism and superstition. Thou- 
 sands would wish nothing better than to hear, — " He that eateth 
 
400 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 my flesh and drinketh my blood, — that is, eats the sacrjimenta' 
 bread and drinks the sacramental wine, — has eternal life." Here 
 is precisely what the natural heart of man likes ! He likes to 
 go to heaven by formally using ordinances. This is the very 
 way in w^iich millions in the Romish Church have made and are 
 making shipwreck of their souls. 
 
 (3.) To say that our Lord meant the Lord's supper in the text, 
 is to make a thing absolutely necessary to salvation which Christ 
 never intended to be so. Our Lord commanded us to use the 
 Lord's supper, but He never said that all who did use it would 
 be saved, and all who did not use it would be lost. How many 
 hundreds repent and are converted on their death-beds, far away 
 from ministers and sacraments, and never receive the Lord's sup- 
 per ! And will any one dare to say they are all lost ? A new 
 heart and an interest in Christ's cleansing blood are the two 
 things needful to salvation. We must have the Blood and the 
 Spirit, or we have no life in us. Without them no heaven I 
 But the Scripture never puts between a sinner and salvation an 
 outward ordinance, over which the poor sinner may have no 
 control, and may be unable to receive it, without any fault of his 
 own. 
 
 Archbishop Cranmer remarks, in his " Defence of the True 
 Doctrine of the Sacrament," — "The Romanists say that good 
 men eat the body of Christ and drink His blood, only at that 
 time when they receive the sacrament : we say that they eat, 
 drink, and feed on Christ continually, so long as they are mem- 
 bers of His body. — They say that the body of Christ which is in 
 the sacrament, hath its own proper form and quantity; we say 
 that Christ is there sacramentally and spiritually without form 
 or quantity, — They say that the fathers and prophets of the Old 
 Testament did not eat the body nor drink the blood of Christ ; 
 we say that they did eat His body and drink His blood, although 
 He was not yet born or incarnate." 
 
 Ferus says, — " We must take hold of Christ's flesh and blood, 
 not with our hands, but with our faith. He therefore that be- 
 lieves that Christ has given up His body for us, and has shed 
 His blood for the remission of our sins, and through this places 
 all his hope and confidence in Christ crucified, that man really 
 eats the body and blood of Christ." 
 
 Cardinal Cajetan, quoted by Ford, says,— "To eat the flesh 
 of Christ and to drink His blood is faith in the death of Jesus 
 Christ. So that the sense is this : if ye use not the death of the 
 Son of God, as meat and drink, ye have not the life of the Spirit 
 in you." 
 
 The opinion which many hold, that although our Lord did not 
 directly mean the Lord's supper in this text. He did refer to 
 
401 
 
 it iniirectly, and had it in view, seems to me very vague and 
 unsatisfactory, and only calculated to confuse our minds.— Our 
 Lord is speaking of something which He says is absolutely and 
 indispensably necessary to eternal life. Where is the use of 
 dragging in an ordinance wliich is not absolutely necessary, and 
 insisting that He had it in view ? — The truth of the matter, I 
 believe, lies precisely in the opposite direction. I believe that 
 afterwards, when our Lord appointed the Lord's supper, He had 
 in view the doctrine of this text, and used words intended to 
 remind the disciples of the doctrine. But here, I believe, He 
 was speaking of something far higher and greater than the Lord's 
 supper. — When He spoke of the lesser thing, I have no doubt 
 that He intended to refer to the greater, and to turn the dis- 
 ciples' minds back to it. But when He spoke as He did here of 
 the greater thing, I am quite unable to believe that He intended 
 to refer to the lesser* 
 
 If our Lord did really refer to the Lord's supper when He 
 spake of eating His flesh and drinking His blood, it seems im- 
 possible to understand how Roman Catholics can deny the cup 
 to the laity. " Drinking Christ's blood " is distinctly said to be 
 as necessary to eternal life as " eating Christ's body." Yet the 
 Eomish Church will not allow the laity to drink Christ's blood I 
 It is evidently the pressure of this argument which makes some 
 Roman Catholic writers deny that this passage refers to the 
 sacrament. It is a mistake to suppose that they are unanimous 
 on the point. 
 
 Rollock starts the question, why our Lord did not plainly tell 
 His hearers that by eating and drinking He meant not a bodily 
 but a spiritual act, — viz., believing. He replies, that in this as 
 in every case, our Lord did not strive so much to make men 
 understand words, as to beget feeling and experimental acquaint- 
 ance with things. When the heart really begins to feel, words 
 are soon understood. 
 
 The distinction that Alford and some others draw between 
 the ''flesh" and "blood" in this text, appears to me very doubt- 
 ful. They think that " eating the flesh " refers generally to 
 participation in the benefits of Christ's incarnation and ascen- 
 sion with a human body into heaven ; and that " drinking the 
 blood " refers specially to an interest in the benefits purchased 
 by His death. — I am not satisfied that this is correct. At the 
 57th verse, our Lord, speaking briefly of the truth just before 
 enunciated, only says, "He that eateth me, even he shall live 
 by me." Surely "eating" there stands for participation in the 
 benefits of Christ's death as well as life ! 
 
 My own impression is that both " flesh and blood " are men- 
 tioned here by our Lord to make it certain to the Jews that He 
 
402 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 spoke of His death, and of the oflfering of His whole body in 
 sacrifice on the cross. The body of the sin-offering was just aa 
 essential a part of the sacrifice as the blood. (See Lev. iv. 1 — 12.) 
 So also the body of the passover Iamb had to be eaten, as well aa 
 the blood sprinkled. The " flesh and blood " are both mentioned 
 here because our Lord had in view the oflering of Himself as a 
 sin-offering, — and because he would make it sure that He meant 
 the " death " of His body to be the hfe of man's soul. It is not 
 Christ incarnate merely, but Christ crucifiied as our atonement 
 and sin-offering, that man must feed upon if he would have 
 life. 
 
 54. — {^Whoso €ateih...drm]ceth... eternal life.] This verse is just the 
 converse of the preceding one. As it had been said that with- 
 out eating and drinking there was no hfe, so it is now said that 
 he who eats and drinks has life. These words, as I have already 
 remarked, appear to me to make it impossible to interpret the 
 passage of the Lord's supper. Myriads are Communicants who 
 have no spiritual hfe whatever. Every one, on the other hand, 
 who by faith feeds his soul on Christ's sacrifice for sin, has even 
 now everlasting hfe. " He that beheveth on Him is not con- 
 demned." — "He that believeth on me hath everlasting life." 
 (John iii. 18 ; vi. 47.) 
 
 The word " whoso " would have been more simply and literally 
 rendered " he that." 
 
 The " presentness " of a true Christian's privileges should be 
 remarked here again : — '' He hath eternal life." 
 
 The Greek word for " eateth," in this verse and 56th, is quite 
 a different word from that used in the 53rd verse. The reason 
 of the difference is not very clear, and no commentator has 
 hitherto explained it. Leigh, Parkhurst, and Schleusner, all 
 agree that the G-reek word used in this verse ordinarily denotes 
 the eating of an animal, in contradistinction to that of a man. 
 Leigh ob'Eerves that the word "noteth a continuance of eating, 
 as brute beasts will eat all day, and some part of the night." I 
 venture to suggest that the word is purposely used, in order to 
 show that our Lord meant the habit of continually feeding on 
 Him all day long by faith. He did not mean the occasional eat- 
 ing of material food in an ordinance. 
 
 The word is only used in this and the 56th, 57th, and 58th 
 verses, and in Matt. xxiv. 38, and John xiii. 18. 
 
 [I will raise him up at the last day.] These words are a fourth 
 time repeated, and purposely, in my judgment, to show who they 
 are of whom Christ is speaking. He is not speaking of all who 
 receive the Lord's supper, but of those persons who are " given 
 to him by the Father," — " who see the Son and believe on him," 
 
403 
 
 — who " are drawn by the Father and come to Christ." (John vi. 
 39, 40, 4i.) These are the same persons who eat His flesh and 
 drink His blood by faith. To them belongs the privilege of a part 
 in that first and glorious resurrection, when Christ shall call aU His 
 people from the grave at His second coming. 
 
 55. — [For my flesh is meat indeed, and my hlood is drink indeed.'] The 
 word "indeed " here would be more literally rendered "truly ; " 
 and the word " meat" answers to our word "food." The mean- 
 ing is, " My flesh is more truly food, and my blood is more truly 
 drink, than any other food and drink can be. It is food and drink 
 in the highest, fullest, noblest sense, — food and drink for the soul, 
 food and drink that satisfies, food and drink that endures to ever- 
 lasting life." (See 35th verse.) 
 
 Rollock remarks, that the best way to understand this verse is 
 to make trial of Christ, and to feed on Him by faith. We shall 
 soon discover how true the words are. 
 
 Ferus suggests, that there may be a latent reference here to the 
 forbidden fruit which Satan promised should be " meat and drink 
 indeed " to Adam and Eve. This stands out in contrast to that 
 food. By eating the food Satan held out, came sin and death. 
 By eating the food Christ holds out, comes life and heaven. 
 
 56. — [He that eateth my flesh and drinJceth my hlood.] — These words 
 are precisely the same as those at the beginning of the 54th 
 verse ; and there is no reason why " whoso " there, should not 
 have been "he that," as here. In the one case, the man who 
 eats and drinks Christ's flesh and blood, is said to possess eternal 
 life, and in the other, to be intimately joined to Christ. But it 
 is the same person. 
 
 [Dwelleth in me and I in him.] This expression is meant to 
 convey to our minds the close and intimate union that there is 
 between Christ and a true Christian. Such a man is said to 
 dwell, or abide in Christ, and Christ to dwell, or abide in him. 
 Christ is the house, or home, or hiding-place, within which the 
 believer's soul, as it were, resides ; — and Christ dwells in the 
 believer's heart by His Spirit, comforting, nourishing, and 
 strengthening him. (See 1 John iii. 24, and iv. 15, 16.) See also 
 John XV. 4, where " Abide in me and I in you," might have been 
 equally well rendered, " dwell in me and I in you." 
 
 Just as " food and drink " received into a man's body become 
 part of the man's self, and are incorporated into his system, 
 and add to his health, comfort, and strength, — so when a man 
 by faith feeds his soul on Christ's sacrifice for his sins, Christ 
 becomes as it were part of himself, and he becomes part of 
 Christ. In a word, there is as intimate an union between Christ 
 
404 EXPOSITOKY THOUGHTS. 
 
 and the believer's soul, as there is between a man's food and it 
 man's body. 
 
 57. — [As the living Father, etc.] This verse explains the intimate 
 union between Christ and the true believer, by a far higher and 
 more mysterious figure than that of the union of our food and 
 our body. The illustration used, is drawn from that unspeak- 
 able and inexplicable union which exists between the Two First 
 Persons in the Trinity — Grod the Father and God the Son. — It 
 is as though our Lord said, " Just as the Father sent me into 
 the world, to be born of a woman, and take the manhood into 
 God, and yet, though I am among you as man, I live in the 
 closest union and communion with God, — even so the man that 
 by faith feeds his soul on my sacrifice for sin, shall live in the 
 closest union and communion with me." — In a word, the union 
 between Christ and the true Christian, is as real and true and 
 close and inseparable as the union between God the Father and 
 God the Son. — While the Son was in the world, the carnal eye 
 discerned little or nothing of His union with the Father. Yet 
 it was a true thing and existed. Just so the carnal eye may see 
 little or nothing of the union between Christ and tlie man who 
 feeds by faith on Christ. Yet it is a real true union, — Just aa 
 the Son, though equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, 
 does live, in an ineffable and inscrutable way, through and by 
 the Father, the Son never being without the Father nor the 
 Father without the Son, — so in like manner the man that feeds 
 on Christ enjoys spiritual life, only through and by Christ. Is 
 not this St. Paul's thought: — "I live, yet not I, but Christ 
 liveth in me."—" To me to live is Christ." (Gal. ii. 20. Phil. i. 
 21.) 
 
 Whether our Lord is here speaking of His human nature or 
 of His Divine nature, is not quite clear. I incline to think with 
 Cyril and Chrysostom, that it is the Divine nature. 
 
 RoUock" remarks, that we have three hving Ones spoken of 
 here. (1.) The living Father. (2.) The hving Son. (3.) The 
 living believer. As we are sure of the life of the Father, so we 
 may be sure of the life of the believer. The three lives are 
 linked together. 
 
 Hutchcson remarks, " Christ's living by the Father, is not 
 only a pledge of our life, but our life holds also some proportion 
 cr similitude to His. For as He hath life communicated by 
 eternal generation, so by regeneration we are made partakers of 
 the Divine nature." 
 
 Winer remarks, that the Greek preposition rend(.'red " by " in 
 this verse, means literally " on account of; " and that the sen- 
 tence m^ans, strictly and properly, *'I live owing to the Father: " 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 405 
 
 that is, " I live because the Father hves." Schleusner and Park- 
 hurst say much the same. 
 
 The ^' hring- Father " is a remarkable phrase. It is hke th6 
 "Uving God." (John vi. 69. Acts xiv. 15. Rom. ix. 26. 2 
 Cor. xxxiii. 6, 9. 1 Thess. i. 9. 1 Tim. vi. 17 ) It must mean 
 the Futher who is the source of life, who '* hath life in himself." 
 (John V. 26.) 
 i» f^. — [I his is that Iread, etc.] Here our Lord sums up the whole 
 discourse. He reverts to the saying with which the Jews had 
 begun, about the fathers eating manna in the wilderness, and 
 repeats the main points He would have His hearers carry away. 
 These points were as follows : — (1.) That He himself was the 
 true bread which had come down from heaven, to feed the world 
 by the sacrifice of Himself. (2.) That they must not cling to the 
 idea that their fathers had ever eaten this true bread, for they all 
 died in the wilderness, and their souls received no benefit from 
 the manna. (3.) And that those, on the contrary, who would 
 eat of the bread He had come down to give, should live for ever, 
 have everlasting life, and their souls never die. — It is as though 
 He said, — " This sacrifice of Myself is the true bread from 
 heaven, of which I spoke at the beginning. The eaters of this 
 bread are in far better circumstances than your fathers when 
 they ate manna in the wilderness. Your fathers died in spite 
 of the manna, and beside that received from it no spiritual 
 benefit whatever. He, on the contrary, who by faith eats the 
 bread of my sacrifice for sin, shall have everlasting life, and his 
 soul shall never die." — All the expressions in the verse, we should 
 remark, have been used frequently in the discourse, and now all 
 are grouped together, and presented in one view. 
 
 59. — [These things said.. .synagogue.. .Capernaum.'] This verse is 
 not sufficiently noticed, I venture to think. I ask any one to 
 compare it with the beginning of the discourse in this chapter, 
 at the 25th verse, — "When they had found him on the other 
 side of the sea, they said," etc. Are we to suppose that they 
 fjund Him in the synagogue ? I cannot think it. To me it 
 seems that there must have been a shght break or pause in the 
 discourse. It began at the landing-place, or outside the city. 
 It was resumed after a short interval, of a few hours perhaps, in 
 the synagogue. And as I have said before, the break appears 
 to me to be at verse 41. 
 
 Both the discourse of this chapter, and that of the preceding 
 one, have this point in common, that they seem to have been 
 delivered before formal assemblies of Jews. 
 
 In concluding the notes on this very important passage, T take 
 occasion to express my entire dissenfr from the common opinion 
 held by many, that the sixth chapter of John was inteuded to 
 
406 
 
 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 teach the true doctrine of the Lord's supper, as the third was 
 intended to teach, the truth about baptism. — My own opinion 
 is flatly contrary. I hoM that in neither chapter are the sacra- 
 ments referred to at all. I beheve that the third chapter was 
 intended to counteract erroneous views about baptism, by teach- 
 ing the far higher truth of spiritual regeneration ; and I believe 
 that the sixth chapter was intended to counteract erroneous 
 views about the Lord's supper, by teaching the far higher truth 
 of the necessity of feeding on Christ's sacrifice by faith. — In 
 fact, the true antidote to wrong views of baptism and the Lord's 
 supper, is a right understanding of the 3d and 6th chapters of 
 St. John's Gospel, and the whole of St. John's first Epistle. 
 Writing, as St. John did, the last of all the inspired writers, I 
 believe he was divinely inspired to record things which the 
 Church of Christ needed most to know. And I regard it as a 
 most striking fact, that while he altogether omits to describe the 
 institution of the Lord's supper, and says little or nothing about 
 baptism in the G-ospel, he dwells at the same time most strongly 
 on these two mighty truths, which he foresaw were in danger 
 of being forgotten, — viz. : the new bu-th, and faith in the Atone- 
 ment.— Surely it is possible to honour baptism and the Lord's 
 supper, without thrusting them in everywhere in our interpreta- 
 tion of Scripture. 
 
 JOHN YL 60—65. 
 
 60 Many therefore of his disci- 
 ples, when they had heard this, said, 
 This is an hard saying; who can 
 hear it ? 
 
 61 "When Jesus knew in himself 
 that his disciples murmured at it, 
 he said unto them. Doth this oflfend 
 you? 
 
 62 What and if ye shall see the 
 Son of man ascend up where he 
 was before ? 
 
 63 It is the Spirit that quicken- 
 
 eth ; the flesh profiteth nothing: the 
 words that I speak unto you, they 
 are spirit, and they are life. 
 
 64 But there are some of you 
 that believe not. For Jesus knew 
 from the beginning who they were 
 that beUeved not, and who should 
 betray him. 
 
 65 And he said. Therefore said I 
 unto you, that no man can come 
 unto me, except it were given unto 
 him of my Father. 
 
 We learn from these verses that some of ChrisVs sayings 
 seem hard to flesh and blood. We arc told that " many " 
 who had followed our Lord for a season, were offended 
 when He spoke of " eating his flesh and drinking his 
 blood." They murmured and said " This is an hard say- 
 ing ; who can hear it ?" 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 407 
 
 Murmurs and complaints of this kind are very common. 
 It must never surprise us to hear them. They have been, 
 they are, they will be as long as the world stands. To 
 some Christ's sayings appear hard to understand. To 
 others, as in the present case, they appear hard to believe, 
 and harder still to obey. It is just one of the many ways 
 in which the natural corruption of man shows itself. So 
 long as the heart is naturally proud, worldly, unbelieving, 
 and fond of self-indulgence, if not of sin, so long there will 
 never be wanting people who Avill say of Christian doc- 
 trines and precepts, " These are hard sayings ; w^ho can 
 hear them ?" 
 
 Humihty is the frame of mind which we should labour 
 and pray for, if we would not be offended. If we find 
 any of Christ's sayings hard to understand, w^e should 
 humbly remember our present ignorance, and believe that 
 we shall know more by and bye. If we find any of His 
 sayings difficult to obey, we should humbly recollect that 
 He will never require of us impossibilities, and that what 
 He bids us do, He will give us grace to perform. 
 
 We learn, secondly, from these verses, that we must 
 beware of putting a carnal Tneaning on spiritual loords. 
 We read that our Lord said to the murmuring Jews who 
 stumbled at the idea of eating His flesh and drinking His 
 blood, " It is the Spirit that quickeneth ; the flesh profiteth 
 nothing : the w^ords that I speak unto you, they are spirit 
 and they are life." 
 
 It is useless to deny that this verse is full of difficulties. 
 It contains expressions " hard to be understood." It i3 
 far more easy to have a general impression of the meaning 
 of the whole sentence, than to explain it word by word. 
 Some things nevertheless we can see clearly and grasp 
 firmly. Let us consider what they are. 
 
 Our Lord says, "It is the Spirit that quickeneth." By 
 this He means that it is the Holy Ghost who is the special 
 
408 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 autlioi* of spiritual life in man's souL By His agency it is 
 fir&t imparted, and afterwards sustained and kept up. If 
 the Jews thought He meant that man could have spiritual 
 life by bodily eating or drinking, they were greatly mis- 
 taken. 
 
 Our Lord says, " The flesh profiteth nothing." By this 
 He means that neither His flesh nor any other flesh, lite- 
 rally eaten, can do good to the soul. Spiritual benefit is 
 not to be had through the mouth, but through the heart. 
 The soul is not a material thing, and cannot therefore be 
 nourished by material food. 
 
 Our Lord says, "the words that I speak unto you, they 
 are spirit and they are life." By this He signifies that His 
 words and teachings, applied to the heart by the Holy- 
 Ghost, are the true means of producing spiritual influence 
 and conveying spiritual life. By words thoughts are be- 
 gotten and aroused. By words mind and conscience are 
 stirred. And Christ's words especially are spirit-stirring 
 and life-giving. 
 
 The principle contained in this verse, however faintly 
 we may grasp its full meaning, deserves peculiar attention 
 in these times. There is a tendency in many minds to 
 attach an excessive importance to the outward and visible 
 or " doing " part of religion. They seem to think that the 
 sum and substance of Christianity consists in Baptism and 
 the Supper of the Lord, in public ceremonies and forms, in 
 appeals to the eye and ear and bodily excitement. Surely 
 they forget that it is " the Spirit that quickeneth," and that 
 the "flesh profiteth nothing." It is not so much by noisy 
 public demonstrations as by the still quiet work of the Holy 
 Ghost on hearts that God's cause prospers. It is Christ's 
 words entering into consciences, which " are spirit and 
 life." 
 
 We learn, lastly, from these verses, that Christ has a 
 perfect hnowledge of the hearts of men. We read tkat 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 409 
 
 " He knew from the beginning who they were that believed 
 not, and who should betray him." 
 
 Sentences like this are found so frequently in tlie Gospels 
 that we are apt to underrate their importance. Yet there 
 are few truths which we shall find it so good for our souls 
 to remember as tlint which is contained in the sentence 
 before us. The Saviour with whom we have to do is one 
 who knows all things I 
 
 What light this throws on the marvellous patience of the 
 Lord Jesus in the days of His earthly ministry ! He knew 
 the sorrow and humiliation befoi'e Him, and the manner 
 of His death. He knew the unbelief and treachery of some 
 who professed to be His familiar friends. But " for the 
 joy that was set before Him" he endured it all. (Heb. 
 xii. 2.) 
 
 What light this throws on the folly of hypocrisy and 
 false profession in religion ! Let those who are guilty of 
 it recollect that they cannot deceive Christ. He sees 
 them, knows them, and will expose them at the last day, 
 except they repent. Whatever we are as Christians, and 
 however weak, let us be real, true, and sincere. 
 
 Finally, what light this throws on the daily pilgrimage 
 of all true Christians ! Let them take comfort in the 
 thought that their Master knows them. However much 
 unknown and misunderstood by the world, their Master 
 knows their hearts, and will comfort them at the last day. 
 Happy is he who, in spite of many infirmities, can say 
 with Peter : *' Lord, thou knovvest all things ; thou 
 knowest that I love thee." (John xxi. 1*7.) 
 
 Notes, John VI. 60—65. 
 
 60. — [Many, therefore of his disciples.] It is plain that tliese were 
 not true believers. Many who followed our Lord about, and 
 were called His " disciples," had no real pfrace in their hearts, 
 and followed Him from carnal motives. We must expect to see 
 the same thing in every age. Not all who come to church, nor 
 
 18 
 
410 EXPOSITORS THOUGHTS. 
 
 all who profess to admire and follow popular preachers, are real 
 Christians. This is far too much forgotten. 
 
 [This is an hard saying.] This does not mean "hard" in 
 the sense of being " difficult to understand." It is not so much 
 " h;ird to the comprehension," as " hard to the feelings." Park- 
 hurst defines it as " shocking to the mind." It is the same word 
 that is used in the parable of the talents: "Thou art an hard 
 man " (Matt. xxv. 24) : and in the Epistle of Jude : " the hard 
 speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him." 
 (Jude 15.) 
 
 Some think that the " hard saying " means the whole dis- 
 course. My own opinion is, that it refers specially to our Lord's 
 concluding words about eating His flesh and drinking Hi^ 
 blood, 
 
 [ Who can hear it ? ] The " hearing " here is evidently th 
 hearing so as to beheve, receive, and obey. " Who can behev; 
 receive, and obey such a saying as this ? " (See John v. 24 ; 
 viii. 43; x. 3, 16, 27; xviii. 37; 1 John iv. 6.) 
 
 61. — [JesUrS knew in himself.] This means, that He knew by that 
 divine knowledge, through which He always " knew what was 
 in man." (John ii. 25.) 
 
 [Ris disciples murmured at it] This would be more literally 
 rendered " His disciples are murmuring about this." He spoko 
 at the very moment of their murmuring. 
 
 [Doth this offend you f ] This means, " Is this saying of 
 mine a stumbling-block to you ? Is the doctrine of eating my 
 flesh and drinking my blood, too humbling a doctrine for your 
 hearts to receive ? " 
 
 62. — [ What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend.] This means, 
 " What will ye think and say of my ascension into heaven ? " 
 " What will your feelings be, if you behold this body of mine 
 going up to that heaven from whence I came down ? Will 
 you not be much more offended ? " (See John iii. 12.) 
 
 The first thing, we must remember, that the Jews " nmr- 
 mured " about, was our Lord's saying that He " came down from 
 heaven." The second thing was, His saying that He would 
 ."give them His flesh to eat." Both times our Lord's human 
 body was the subject. — Here our Lord asks them what they 
 would think, if they saw that same body " ascending up " into 
 heaven. Even then, after his ascension, they would have to 
 " eat His flesh, and drink His blood," if they desired eternal life. 
 What would they think of that ? Would they not find it even 
 more difiicult to receive and believe ? 
 
 [Where He was before.] This is an expression which no 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 411 
 
 Socinian can explain. It is a clear assertion of the " pre-exist- 
 ence " of Christ. 
 
 Some think, as Oishausen and Tholuck, that our Lord only 
 means generally, ''If you are offended and unbelieving, ever, 
 now, while I am with you, how much more will ye be, when I 
 go away." But this is a frigid and unsatisfactory interpretation. 
 
 It is fair to say that Stier thinks, with Chrysostom, Cyril, 
 Theophylact, and others, that our Lord did not mean that His 
 ascension would be a greater difficulty to His disciples, but that, 
 on the contrary, it would remove their doubts and weaken the 
 oflfence which they now felt. Hutcheson and Alford seem to 
 agree with this. But I cannot see it. Stier thinks our Lord 
 implied, " Then, after my ascension, it will be disclosed to 
 you how, and in what way, my human corporeity, become 
 heavenly and glorified, may be given to be eaten, and to be 
 drunk." (Compare John viii. 28.) 
 
 63. — [It is the Spirit, &c.] This text is, perhaps, one of the most 
 difficult in the Grospel of St. John. It is easy to slur it over, 
 and be satisfied with a vague impression that it means " We 
 are to put a spiritual sense on our Lord's words." That, no 
 doubt, is a true idea. But when we come to a close examina- 
 tion of the words which compose the verse, I think no one can 
 be satisfied with such a loose interpretation of Scripture. That 
 our Lord's words " are to be taken spiritually," may be very 
 true. But to say so is not to explain the verse. 
 
 What is meant by the expression, "It is the Spirit that 
 quickeneth " ? 
 
 (a.) Some think that " the Spirit " here means, " the divine 
 nature of Christ " (as Rom. i. 4 ; 1 Pet. iii. 18), in contradis- 
 tinction to His human nature, here called, His " flesh." (See 
 1 Cor. XV. 45.) They consider our Lord to mean, "It is my 
 divine nature, as Grod, which is the means of communicating 
 spiritual benefit to men. My human nature, as flesh, could of 
 itself do no good to souls. It is not, therefore, any carnal 
 eating of my flesh, that could be of use to you, and I did not 
 mean any such eating." 
 
 This is the opinion of Cyril, Cartwright, Poole, Bishop Hall, 
 Trapp, Toletus, Eollock, Hutcheson, Leigh, Burkitt, Qaesnel, 
 Burgon, and Wordsworth. 
 
 (&.) Some think that " the Spirit " here means " the Holy 
 Spirit," the Third Person of the Trinity. They consider our 
 Lord to mean, "It is the Holy Spirit who alone can convey 
 spiritual fife to the soul of man. The mere eating of flesh, 
 whether my flesh, or any other flesh, cannot do good to the 
 inner man. When, therefore, I spoke of ' eating my flesh,' I did 
 
4:12 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 not mean the bodily act of eating any literal flesh, but a ver;y 
 different kind of eating, and a very different sort of flesh." This 
 IS the opinion of Zwing'e, Melaiicthon, Calvin, Bucer, Ecolampa- 
 dius, Pellican, Flacius, Bullinger, ('occeius, Diodati. Piscator, Mus- 
 cuius, Baxt'jr, Lampe, Henry, Scott, Stier, Besser, Alford. 
 
 (c.) Some think that " the Spirit" here means, "the sp'rituai 
 doctrine, or sense," as opposed to 'Hbe letter," or literal sense of 
 scriptural language. (2 Cor. iii. 6.) They consider the sentence 
 to mean, " It is the spiritual sense of my words, and not the lite- 
 ral, wliich is quickening, or liie-giving to the soul. When I 
 spoke of ' my flesh,' I did not mean my flesh literally, but my 
 fle^h in a spiritual sense. My flesh literally could be of no use to 
 any one." This seems to be the opinion of Chrysostom, Tiieo- 
 phylact, Euthymius, Brentius, Beza, Ferus, Cornelius ^ Lapide, 
 Schotrgen, Pearce, Parkhu; st, A. Clarke, Faber, Barnes, Webster. 
 But it is not easy to make out clearly, in every instance, what is 
 the precise meaning put on the words, " the Spirit," by the in- 
 terpreters who take this third view. There are not a few shades 
 of variety in their opinions. 
 
 I must acknowledge, that I find it d fficult to give a decided 
 opinion on the comparative merits of these three views of the 
 expression before us. Tliere is ^oraething to be said for each of 
 the three. On the whole, I think the second and third are more 
 satisfactory than the first ; and I incline to prefer the second to 
 the third. But I say this with much hesitation. 
 
 Rollock, who holds strongly that " the Spirit " means Christ'a 
 divine nature, maintains, that " the flesh," means the whole 
 human nature of Christ. He thinks that the meaning of " the 
 flesh profiteth nothing " is, that all the works of our Lord's bodr, 
 whether in life or death. His fulfilling the law, His sufferings on 
 the cross, derive their whole efficacy from the union of the two 
 natures — " It is the divine nature that is life-giving. The human 
 nature, alone and separate from the divine, is useless and unpro- 
 fitable." — He holds, therefore, that to eat the human nature of 
 Christ alone, i. e.. His flesh, could do us no good ; as, unless we 
 could eat His divine nature also, it would be unprofitable. He 
 concludes, therefore, that the only eating of Christ that can be 
 useful to the soul, must, of necessity, be the spiritual eating of 
 faith, and not any car; al eatin- of the Lord's Supper. Hutche- 
 son agrees with this view. 
 
 The expression, " the words that I speak imto 5''0u, they are 
 spirit and they are life," is jusc as difficult as the former part of 
 the text. The word "spirit,'' hei'e, at any rate, caimot mean the 
 divine nature of Christ. IC it were so taken, the sentence would 
 be unmeaning. — The word Spirits must either mean the " Holy 
 Spirit," or " the spiritual sense," as opposed to the letter. The 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 413 
 
 Bentence then might be paraphrased in either of the following 
 ways : — (1.) " The words that I speak to you, received into your 
 hearts and beheved, are the Spirit's influence, the ministration of 
 the Spirit, and the Spirit's means of giving you hfe." This ia 
 RoUock's view. Or else, (2.) " The words that I speak unto you, 
 are to be taken m a spiritual sense ; or, are spiritual words, and, 
 taken in that sense, are Ufe-giving to the soul." — Tiiis is Augus- 
 tine's view. 
 
 I must honestly confess that neither of these explanations ia 
 quite satisfactory ; but they are the nearest approach I can see 
 to a satisfactory interpretation. The sentence is evidently a con- 
 cise elliptical one, and it seems impossible to convey it in English, 
 without a paraphrase. 
 
 Alford paraphrases the sentence thus : " The words that I have 
 spoken, viz., the words 'my flesh and blood,' are spirit and life, 
 • — spirit, not flesh only, — living food, not carnal and perishable." 
 I venture to think, that this explanation is not more precise, or 
 satisfactory, than either of those I have suggested. 
 
 The expression "the words that I speak unto you," must pro- 
 bably be confined to the words our Lord had spoken about eat- 
 ing His flesh and drinking His blood, and not referred to the 
 whole discourse. 
 
 After all, however difficult and elhptical the sentence before us 
 may be, there is a truth which throws light on it, with which 
 every true Christian must be familiar. It is the words of Christ 
 brought home to the hearts of men by the Spirit, which are the 
 great agents employed in quickening and giving spiritual life to 
 men. The Spirit impresses Christ's words on a man's conscience. 
 These words become the parent of thoughts and convictions in 
 the man's mind. From these thoughts springs all the man's 
 spiritual life. The soul is not benefited by bodily actions, such 
 as eating or drinking, but by spiritual impressions, which the 
 Holy Spirit alone can produce. In producing these spiritual 
 impressions the Spirit specially employs the agency of Christ's 
 " words," and hence comes the great principle, that '' His words 
 are spirit and life." 
 
 64. — [I here are some of you that believe not.] The connection of 
 this sentence with the preceding verses seems to be this: — " The 
 true account of your murmuring and thinking my sayings 'hard' 
 is your want of faith. You do not reaUy believe me to be 
 the Messiah, though you have followed me and professed your- 
 selves my disciples. And not really believing in me, you are 
 ofiended at the idea of eating my flesh and drinking my blood." 
 
 [Jesus knew from the beginning who...beIieved not] This is one 
 of the many places which declare our Lord's Divine knowledge 
 
iU 
 
 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 of all hearts and characters. He was never deceived by crowds 
 and apparent popularity, as His ministers often are. When it 
 says " from the be^^inning," it pi-obably means "from the begin- 
 ning of His ministry, and from the time when the unbelieving 
 ^ many ' before Him first professed to be His disciples." Of course 
 our Lord, as God, knew all things "from the beginning" of the 
 world. But it does not seem necessary to suppose that this is 
 meant here. 
 
 Rollock remarks our Lord's example of patient teaching and 
 preaching to all without exception, though He knew that many 
 did not and would not beUeve. He poinis out what a pattern it 
 is to ministers. Christ knew exactly who would beUeve. Minis- 
 ters do not know. 
 
 [ WJio should hetray him.] We should not fail to notice in this 
 expression our Lord's marvellous patience in allowing one whom 
 He knew to be about to betray Him to be one of His Apostles. 
 It was doubtless meant to teach us that false profession must be 
 expected everywhere, and must not surprise us. How much we 
 ought to tolerate and put up wit^h, if our Lord tolerated Judas 
 near him ! The pain and sorrow which the foreknowledge of 
 the conduct of Judas must have caused to our Lord's heart, is a 
 circumstance in our Lord's sufferings which ought not to be 
 forgotten. 
 65. — [And he said. Therefore said I, etc., etc.] The connection of 
 this verse seems to be as follows : — " There are some of you that 
 believe not, and that is the reason why I said to you, that no 
 man can come to me unless the Father gives him grace to come, 
 and draws his heart to me. The Father has not given you grace, 
 and drawn you to me, and therefore you do not believe." 
 
 JOHN YL 66— n. 
 
 66 From that time many of his 
 disciples went back, and walked no 
 more with him. 
 
 67 Tlieu said Jesus unto the 
 twelve, Will ye also go away ? 
 
 08 Tlien Simon Peter answered 
 him, Lord, to whom shall we go ? 
 thou hast the words of eternal Ufe. 
 
 69 And we believe and are sure 
 
 that thou art that Christ, the Son 
 of the living God. 
 
 10 Jesus answered them, Have 
 not I chosen you twelve, and one 
 of you is a devil ? 
 
 11 He spake of Judas Iscariot, 
 the son of Simon : for he it was that 
 should betray him, being one of 
 the twelve. 
 
 These verses form a sorrowful conclusion to the famous 
 discourse of Christ which occupies the greater part of the 
 
JOHN, CHAP. VI. 415 
 
 Bixth chapter. They supply a melancholy proof of the 
 hardness and corruption of man's heart. Even when the 
 Son of God was the preacher, many seem to have heard in 
 vain. 
 
 Let us mark in this passage what an old sin hacksliding 
 is. We read that when our Lord had explained what He 
 meant by " eating and drinking his flesh and blood," — 
 *' From that time many went back and walked no more 
 with him." 
 
 The true grace of God no doubt is an everlasting 
 possession. From this men never fall away entirely, when 
 they have once received it. "The foundation of God 
 standeth sure." " My sheep shall never perish." (2 Tim. ii. 
 19 ; John x. 28.) But there is counterfeit grace and un- 
 real religion in the Church, wherever there is true ; and 
 from counterfeit grace thousands may and" do fall away. 
 Like the stony ground hearers, in the parable of the sower, 
 many " have no root in themselves, and so in time of temp- 
 tation fall away." All is not gold that glitters. All 
 blossoms do not come to fruit. All are not Israel which 
 are called Israel. Men may have feelings, desires, convic- 
 tions, resolutions, hopes, joys, sorrows in religion, and yet 
 never have the grace of God. They may run well for a 
 Beason, and bid fair to reach heaven, and yet break down 
 entirely after a time, go back to the world, and end like 
 Demas, Judas Iscariot, and Lot's wife. 
 
 It must never surprise us to see and hear of such cases 
 in our own days. If it happened in our Lord's time and 
 under our Lord's teaching, much more may we expect it 
 to happen now. Above all, it must never shake our faith 
 and discourage us in our course. On the contrary, we 
 must make up our minds that there will be backsliders in 
 the Church as long as the world stands. The sneering in- 
 fidel, who defends his unbelief by pointing at them, must 
 find some better argument than their example. He forgets 
 
416 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 that there will always be counterfeit coin wheie there is 
 true money. 
 
 Let us mark, secondly, in this passage, the noble declara' 
 Hon of faith which the Apostle Peter made. Our Lord 
 had said to the twelve, when many went back, " Will ye 
 also go away ?" At once Peter replied, with character- 
 istic zeal and fervour, " Lord, to whom shall we go ? thou 
 hast the words of eternal life. And we believe and art 
 sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living 
 God." 
 
 The confession contained in these words is a very re- 
 markable one. Living in a professedly Christian land, and 
 surrounded by Christian privileges, we can hardly form an 
 adequate idea of its real value. For a humble Jew to say 
 of one whom Scribes, and Pharisees, and Sadducees agreed 
 in rejecting, "Thou hast the words of eternal life; thou 
 art the Christ," was an act of mighty faith. No wonder 
 that our Lord said, in another place, " Blessed art thou, 
 Simon Bar-jona : for flesh and blood hath not revealed it 
 unto thee, but my Father wkich is in heaven." (Matt, 
 xvi. 18.) 
 
 But the question with which Peter begins, is just as re- 
 markable as his confession. " To whom shall we go ?" said 
 the noble-hearted Apostle. " Whom shall we follow ? To 
 what teacher shall we betake ourselves ? Where shall we 
 find any guide to heaven to compare with thee ? What 
 shall we gain by forsaking thee? What Scribe, what 
 Pharisee, what Sadducee, what Priest, what Rabbi 
 can show us such words of eternal life as thou showest ?" 
 
 The question is one which every true Christian may 
 boldly ask, when urged and tempted to give up his reli- 
 gion, and go back to the world. It is easy for those who 
 hate religion to pick holes in our conduct, to make objec- 
 tions to our doctrines, to find fault with our practices. It 
 may be hard sometimes to give them any answer. But 
 
JOHN", CHAP. VI. 417 
 
 after all, " To whom shall we go," if we give up our reli- 
 gion ? Where shall we find such peace, and hope, and 
 solid comfort as in serving Christ, however poorly we 
 serve Him ? Can we better ourselves by turning our back- 
 on Christ, and going back to our old ways ? "We cannot. 
 Then let us hold on our way and persevere. 
 
 Let us mark, lastly, in this passage, what little benefit 
 some men get from religious privileges. We read that 
 our Lord said, " Have not I chosen you twelve, and one 
 of you is a devil." And it goes on, "He spake of Judas 
 Iscariot, the son of Simon." 
 
 If ever there was a man who had great privileges and 
 opportunities, that man was Judas Iscariot. A chosen dis- 
 ciple, a constant companion of Christ, a witness of His 
 miracles, a hearer of His sermons, a commissioned preach- 
 er of His kingdom, a fellow and friend of Peter, James, 
 and John, — it would be impossible to imagine a more fa- 
 vourable position for a man's soul. Yet if anyone ever fell 
 hopelessly into hell, and made shipwreck at last for eter- 
 nity, that man was Judas Iscariot. The character of that 
 man must have been black indeed, of whom our Lord could 
 say he is " a devil." 
 
 Let us settle it firmly in our minds, that the possession 
 of religious privileges alone is not enough to save our souls. 
 It is neither place, nor light, nor company, nor opportuni- 
 ties, but grace that man needs to make him a Christian. 
 With grace we may serve God in the most difficult posi- 
 tion, — like Daniel in Babylon, Obadiah in Ahab's court, 
 and the saints in Nero's household. Without grace we 
 may live in the full sunshine of Christ's countenance, and 
 yet, like Judas, be miserably cast away. Then let us never 
 rest till we have grace reigning in our souls. Grace is to 
 be had for the asking. There is One sitting at the right 
 hand of God who has said, — " Ask, and it shall be given 
 you." (Matt. vii. V.) The Lord Jesus is more willing to 
 
 18* 
 
ilS EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 give grace than man is to seek it. If men have it not, it is 
 because they do not ask it. 
 
 Notes. JoHxN YI. 66—71. 
 
 66. — [From that time.] It is doubtful whether the Greek words 
 here might not have been better translated, "Upon this," — 
 " After this conversation." 
 
 [Many of his disciples.] This expression shows that the num- 
 ber of persons who followed our Lord about, and professed them- 
 selves His disciples, must have been large. 
 
 [ Went hackward.] Thie is a metaphorical expression, signifying 
 "retreat, desertion, forsaking a position once occupied." It is 
 the same that is rendered in the account of the Jews coming to 
 take our Lord in the garden, " they went backward, and fell to 
 the ground." (John xviii. 6.) 
 
 [ Walked no more with him^ The simplest view of this expres- 
 sion is, that these deserters from our Lord walked no longer in His 
 company as He went about teaching, as they had done, but re- 
 turned to their own homes. No minister of the Gospel should 
 feel surprised if the same thing happens to him. 
 
 Not a few of these very " disciples," probably, had been for- 
 ward in wishing to make our Lord a " king," the day before. 
 Such is popularity, here to-day and gone to-morrow ! 
 
 67. — [Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?] We 
 cannot suppose that our Lord asked this, as if He did not know 
 what the Apostles were going to do. We may be sure that He 
 who " knew from the beginning who they were that beheved 
 not" (verse 64), knew the hearts of His Apostles. The question 
 was evidently asked to prove His chosen followers, and to draw 
 forth from them an expression of feehng. (See John vi. 6.) 
 
 The word "will" here, would be more accurately rendered. 
 " Do you wish ?" " Have you a will?" 
 
 We should note that this is the first time St. John speaks 
 of "the twelve." We know from the other Gospels, that "the 
 twelve " were em[)loyed in distributing the loaves and fishes to 
 the five thousand. (Luke ix. 12, 17.) 
 
 C8. — [Then Simon Peter answered him.] The fervour and impetu- 
 osity of Peter's character come out here, as in other places in the 
 Gospels. He is the first to speak, and to speak for his brethren 
 as Avell as himself. Only the night before this very scene, he had 
 been the first, in the storm on the lake, to say, " Lord, if it be 
 thoii, bid me to come unto thee on the water." (^fatt. xiv. 28.) 
 And here, in like manner, he is the first to profess loudly his 
 determination not to go away, and his faith in Christ. 
 
419 
 
 [To whom slidll we go ?] This question is a strong burst of 
 feeling " To wliat teacher, to what master, to what leader shall 
 we go, if we leave thee ? Where are we to find any one like 
 thee ? What could we gain by leaving thee ?" The question 
 was one which might well be asked, when we remember the 
 state of the Jewish nation, and the universal prevalence of Pha- 
 risaism or Sadduceeism. But this is not all. It may always 
 be asked by true Christian men, when tempted to give up Christ's 
 service. True Christianity undoubtedly has its cross. It entails 
 trial and persecution. But to whom shall we go, if we give up 
 Christ? WiU Infidelity, Deism, Socinianism, Romanism, For- 
 malism, Rationalism, or Worldliness give us anything better? 
 There is but one answer 1 They cannot. 
 
 [Thou hast the words of eternal life.] This would be more 
 literally rendered, " thou hast words of eternal life." " Thou 
 possessest instruction about everlasting life, such as we can hear 
 nowhere else, aud such as we find soul-comforting and edifying. 
 The sayings that fall continually from thy lips, about eternal 
 life, are such as we cannot leave." Our Lord's expression should 
 be remembered, " I have given unto them the words which thou 
 gavest me." (John xvii. 8.) 
 
 69. — [And lue believe and are surei] This would be more literally 
 rendered, " we have beheved and have known." Moreover, the 
 " we" is emphatic. — " Whatever others may please to think, 
 however many may go away and forsake thee, after following 
 thee for a little, it is not so with us. We have beheved and 
 known, and do beheve and know." 
 
 [Thou art that Christy the son of the living Godi] This might 
 equally well have been rendered, *' Thou art the Clirist." The 
 sentence is a noble confession, when we remember the time in 
 which it was made, and the universal unbelief of the leaders of 
 the Jewish nation. We may remember, that it is precisely the 
 same confession that is recorded to have been made by Peter, 
 after our Lord said to him, " Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona, for 
 flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father 
 which is in heaven," (Matt. xvi. 17.) 
 
 We must not, however, misunderstand the extent of Peter's 
 confession. He declared his faith that our Lord was the Anointed 
 Messiah, the Son of the living God. The Messiahship and 
 divinity of Christ, were the points on which he and the other 
 apostles laid firm hold. But the sacrifice and death of Christ, 
 and His substitution for us on the cross, were not things 
 which he either saw or understood at present. (See Matt. xvi. 
 22, 23.) 
 
 (a.) We should notice, that a man's heart may be right to- 
 wards God, while he remains very ignorant of some great doc- 
 
420 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 trines of tlie Christian faith. It certainly was so with Peter and 
 the apostles, at this time. 
 
 (b.) We should also notice, that there is nothing man is so 
 backward to see, as the sacrifice of the death of Christ, the sub- 
 stitution, and the atonement. It is possible to be right about 
 Christ's divinity and Messiahship, and yet be in the dark about 
 His death. 
 
 (c.) We should notice how ignorant Christians often are of 
 the state of others' souls. Peter never suspected any one of the 
 twelve to be a false apostle. It is a fearful proof that Judas must 
 have been, in all outward demeanour and profession, just hke the 
 rest of the apostles. 
 
 70. — [Have not I chosen you twelve?] I do not think that the 
 *' choosing" here spoken of, means anything more than selec- 
 tion for office. The word is evidently used in this simple sense, 
 in Luke vi. 13, — "Of them he chose twelve, whom he called 
 apostles;" Acts vi. 5, — "They chose Stephen, a man full of 
 faith ; " Acts xv. 22, — " It pleased the apostles, — to send 
 chosen men of their own company to Antioch." I say confi- 
 dently, that in each one of these cases, the Greek word rendered 
 " chosen," the very same word that is used here, can mean no- 
 thing more than "chosen or selected for an office." This I 
 believe, with Poole. Henry, and Hutcheson, is the meaning 
 here. 
 
 I disagree with AHbrd's remark, that "the selection of the 
 twelve, was the consequence of the giving of them to Him 
 by the Father," and that Christ's " selecting, and the Father's 
 giving, and the Father's giving and drawing, do not exclude 
 final falUng away." — This remark is built on the gratuitous 
 assumption, that Christ's " choosing " here spoken of is the 
 same as that " choosing unto salvation," which is the special 
 privilege of believers. Of that " choosing unto salvation," 
 our Lord speaks in another place, where He carefully draws 
 the distinction between the true disciples and the false : — " I 
 speak not of you all : I know whom I have chosen." (John 
 xiii. 18.) Of that choosing unto salvation, Judas was not a 
 partaker. Of the other choosing unto office, as in the verse 
 before us, undoubtedly he was a partaker. 
 
 Burgon, and many others, agree with Alford, and dwell on 
 tlie expression before us, as an apparent proof, that men 
 "chosen to salvation" may fall away. But "their reasoning 
 appears to me inconclusive. 
 
 Even Quesnel, the Eomanist commentator, remarks, " The 
 being duly called to the ecclesiastical office is not sufficient, if 
 a man live tot suitably to that holy vocation." Toletus, the 
 Spanish Jesuit, says much the same. 
 
421 
 
 [One of you is a devil] This is a singularly strong expres- 
 sion, and gives an awfully vivid impression of the wickedness 
 of Judas. Of course, lie was not literally and really " a devil," 
 but a man. The meaning is, "one out of your number is so 
 completely under the influence of the devil, such a servant ol 
 the devil, that he deserves to be called nothing less than a 
 devil." Our Lord, in another place, says of the wicked Jews, 
 " Ye are of your father, the devil." (John viii. 44.) So Si". 
 Paul says to Elymas, "Thou child of the devil." (Acts xiii. 10.) 
 When we read at a later period, ''The devH having now put 
 into the heart of Judas Iscariot, to betray him" (John xiii. 2), 
 it must mean the final working out of a wicked purpose, which, 
 under the influence of the devil^ Judas had long had in his heart. 
 
 Let us note, that even now, Judas is called " a devil," long 
 before our Lord's betrayal and crucifixion. This helps to show 
 that he never was a faithful disciple, even from the first. 
 
 Let us note, that the only other expression of our Lord's, 
 which at all approaches the one before us in strength is the one 
 which, on another occasion, our Lord applies to His zealous 
 apostle Peter, — " Get thee behind me, Satan." (Matt. xvi. 23.) 
 While we condemn the wickedness of Judas, let us not fotget 
 that even a true-hearted apostle may so far err and be mistaken, 
 that he needs to be sharply rebuked and called " Satan." A tho- 
 roughly bad man is "a devil;" but even a good man may need to 
 be called "Satan I" 
 
 Rollock observes, that Jesus never used so strong an expres- 
 sion about His open enemies who went about to slay Him. It 
 was a hypocrite and a false apostle, whom he called " a devil." 
 Nothing is so wicked as false profession. 
 
 7L — [Ue spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon.] The word 
 " Iscariot," according to some, means " a man of Kerioth." Ke- 
 rioth was a town of Judah. (Josh. xv. 25.) — According to others, 
 it means "a man oflssachar." — According to Lampe, and others, 
 it is a Syriac word, meaning "the bearer of the purse." — We are 
 told that "He had the bag." (John xiii. 29.) 
 
 It is remarkable, that St. John, four times in his Gospel, calls 
 Judas " the son of Simon." We do not exactly know why, un- 
 less it is that Simon was a person well-known by name, or that 
 St. John wished to make it quite clear, that Judas Iscariot was 
 not St. Jude, the faithful apostle and cousin of Christ, by naming 
 his father. There is no proof whatever, that Judas was the son 
 of " Simon the Ganaanite," the apostle; though it is somewhat 
 curious, that in the list of apostles given by Matthew and Mark, 
 Simon and Judas Iscariot are named in close juxta-position. 
 (Matt. X. 4; Mark. iii. 18.) 
 
 [He it was that should betray him.] This would be more lite- 
 
i22 EXPOSITORY THOUGHTS. 
 
 rally rendered, " He was about to betray Him." The expression 
 seems to imply, that to betray such a master as Chris*, Avas so 
 eminently a work of the devil, that the betrayer ought to be 
 spoken of as " a devil." 
 
 The frequency of our Lord's warning=! and hints, addressed to 
 Judas Iscariot, is very remarkable. Rollock observes, what an 
 awful proof it is of the hardness of the heart, that a man bo 
 WfiFUed should not be conscience-stricken and repent. 
 
Date Due 
 
 MR 2 155 
 
 
 
 
 
 I8» 
 
 
 
 EBSSSS^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 !'■ 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 MAY ♦ t 19? 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 mmmm^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 #